In general we all experience most of the same things. This has always been true and we experience good and bad, pain and comfort, sadness and joy. Some have either been given or earned greater material success and might have more comfort and other amenities, but stubbing your toe is going to hurt pretty much the same no matter who you are.
Understanding that is essential to the human condition. Famously we have heard the all you need is love and that money can't buy you love and the love you share is equal to the love you get. While these are song lyrics they contain a lot of truth.
We all need to understand that everyone else is very much like us.
Treating others as if they are evil or bad is unfortunately way too common.
As famously said by John Maynard Keynes "In the long run we are all dead".
We are at best short term caretakers who need to make things better. Of course how to do that can be a source of disagreement, but when you take an us versus them attitude, you have created a scenario where someone has to lose.
We need to create, not destroy, accept, not reject, include, not exclude since at the bottom we are all brothers and sisters to each other.
Yes, there are people who consider us enemies, who will try to destroy or disrupt our lives, but letting them distort your character to a hateful one means they have succeeded.
Embrace your humanity it is who we are. You might hate the act, but don't hate the person.
Wednesday, August 31, 2016
Tuesday, August 30, 2016
Where's the Beef
Making accusations is easy, proving that something illegal or even wrong was done is much harder.
Take an event like the tragedy in Benghazi that admittedly is ultimately the responsibility of the leadership and accuse them of being incompetent, and then accuse them of covering something up.
The question that should be asked is knowing what was the situation before the event were actions not taken that should have been. This does not mean action that could have been taken, since there are obvious restrictions and uncertainties in balancing limited resources across multiple risk areas. It is also wrong to think that because something happened in Benghazi that we should have know something was going to happen.
Congress doesn't provide any executive agency with an unlimited budget and the security of our embassies is mostly provided by the host nations. After all the hearings and testimony, the various committees run by partisan opponents of Ms. Clinton have really uncovered nothing of significance. Hopefully some new risk calculations might be adopted to help deploy resources to avoid future tragedies but the State Department probably was doing that anyways.
The focus has therefore shifted to entirely different issues related to what Ms. Clinton said or didn't say to the families of the victims and by pure happenstance the fact that she used her own e-mail server.
Its very unlikely that anything was said to the families related to the reasons or causes of the events in Benghazi because in all honesty that wouldn't be protocol. Perhaps in response to a question there was some vague response such as "maybe" or "we don't know" but clearly what happens in those unfortunate scenarios is an attempt to comfort the families.
Even stranger is the dispute over the e-mail server. Whatever server was used, it would be the actual e-mails sent that matter not the server used, unless, unrelated to Benghazi it resulted in a breech of security. No such breech seems to have occurred and while the FBI director threw the committee a bone by saying the behavior was reckless, in all honesty our Government e-mail systems aren't really that secure in the first place.
Now we get to the Clinton foundation and whether it was a means of funneling funds for access. Now lets be clear, the foundation is well documented as being a valid charitable organization that provides some wonderful services. So the accusation is along the lines of provide money to reduce AIDs and the secretary will meet with you. The money hasn't been diverted for political purposes and in general the number of meeting was really insignificant, despite the misleading AP statistic. There is no smoking gun since even in the cherry picked AP sample, half the meetings were with non donors. If donors and non-donors had equal access, there is no favoritism. It should be noted that the people with significant funds probably donate to many such foundations and since it has come out that even the current Republican candidate donated, it is hardly an issue.
What might be incriminating and which has not been demonstrated at all is someone who requested a meeting who was told the price of admission was a donation.
Now, despite the fact that there is no documented wrong doing we are faced with the current Fox news culture where accusations are made purely on speculation. If someone can imagine a possible scenario that looks bad they are free to promote it. If they don't have any real evidence its because they are experts at covering it up. Millions of dollars later and hundreds if not dozens of witnesses later, still no real evidence but dig more and maybe it can be found.
Its pretty absurd really. The issue is that we haven't as a society really adjusted to this. So where so many accusations are made, people tend to think that with so much smoke there must be some fire. Of course the smoke is created by the smoke bombs being flung all over the place but well there is a lot of smoke.
There is so much that this really only skims the surface of the accusations. However, we need to ask the simple question after all the years of public service and constant attacks and examinations,
WHERE"S THE BEEF?
Take an event like the tragedy in Benghazi that admittedly is ultimately the responsibility of the leadership and accuse them of being incompetent, and then accuse them of covering something up.
The question that should be asked is knowing what was the situation before the event were actions not taken that should have been. This does not mean action that could have been taken, since there are obvious restrictions and uncertainties in balancing limited resources across multiple risk areas. It is also wrong to think that because something happened in Benghazi that we should have know something was going to happen.
Congress doesn't provide any executive agency with an unlimited budget and the security of our embassies is mostly provided by the host nations. After all the hearings and testimony, the various committees run by partisan opponents of Ms. Clinton have really uncovered nothing of significance. Hopefully some new risk calculations might be adopted to help deploy resources to avoid future tragedies but the State Department probably was doing that anyways.
The focus has therefore shifted to entirely different issues related to what Ms. Clinton said or didn't say to the families of the victims and by pure happenstance the fact that she used her own e-mail server.
Its very unlikely that anything was said to the families related to the reasons or causes of the events in Benghazi because in all honesty that wouldn't be protocol. Perhaps in response to a question there was some vague response such as "maybe" or "we don't know" but clearly what happens in those unfortunate scenarios is an attempt to comfort the families.
Even stranger is the dispute over the e-mail server. Whatever server was used, it would be the actual e-mails sent that matter not the server used, unless, unrelated to Benghazi it resulted in a breech of security. No such breech seems to have occurred and while the FBI director threw the committee a bone by saying the behavior was reckless, in all honesty our Government e-mail systems aren't really that secure in the first place.
Now we get to the Clinton foundation and whether it was a means of funneling funds for access. Now lets be clear, the foundation is well documented as being a valid charitable organization that provides some wonderful services. So the accusation is along the lines of provide money to reduce AIDs and the secretary will meet with you. The money hasn't been diverted for political purposes and in general the number of meeting was really insignificant, despite the misleading AP statistic. There is no smoking gun since even in the cherry picked AP sample, half the meetings were with non donors. If donors and non-donors had equal access, there is no favoritism. It should be noted that the people with significant funds probably donate to many such foundations and since it has come out that even the current Republican candidate donated, it is hardly an issue.
What might be incriminating and which has not been demonstrated at all is someone who requested a meeting who was told the price of admission was a donation.
Now, despite the fact that there is no documented wrong doing we are faced with the current Fox news culture where accusations are made purely on speculation. If someone can imagine a possible scenario that looks bad they are free to promote it. If they don't have any real evidence its because they are experts at covering it up. Millions of dollars later and hundreds if not dozens of witnesses later, still no real evidence but dig more and maybe it can be found.
Its pretty absurd really. The issue is that we haven't as a society really adjusted to this. So where so many accusations are made, people tend to think that with so much smoke there must be some fire. Of course the smoke is created by the smoke bombs being flung all over the place but well there is a lot of smoke.
There is so much that this really only skims the surface of the accusations. However, we need to ask the simple question after all the years of public service and constant attacks and examinations,
WHERE"S THE BEEF?
Monday, August 29, 2016
Con Games
When you walk around New York or any big city you will get approached at times by strangers with a proposition that seems too good to be true. Now as a young boy I was warned about con men and other things, but there is a certain appeal to what they offer.
Everything is great and you are guaranteed to win. The watch is really worth thousands but he needs $50 immediately so he has to part with it. Watch the plant pick out the right card each time, and see how easy it is.
The fact is that human nature being what it is, we think we can outsmart the con. We can't. Not that they are smarter than us, but they do it all the time compared to our once or twice.
Now, they had to make money doing these things or they would have stopped after a while. Of course a lot of this has moved to the internet and once again, the idea that a Nigerian Prince has picked your name out or you have won a foreign raffle you didn't enter is sort of ludicrous but we as a people want to hope and trust and look at all that money.
Its all a con and the faster you realize that the safer you are.
Now we have a candidate who is giving the same sort of spiel that every big city hustler always has. You are guaranteed to win, trust him, its going to be great, the other guy will pay, the product is real. What do you have to lose.
If it smells like a duck, and walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, its probably a duck.
Everything is great and you are guaranteed to win. The watch is really worth thousands but he needs $50 immediately so he has to part with it. Watch the plant pick out the right card each time, and see how easy it is.
The fact is that human nature being what it is, we think we can outsmart the con. We can't. Not that they are smarter than us, but they do it all the time compared to our once or twice.
Now, they had to make money doing these things or they would have stopped after a while. Of course a lot of this has moved to the internet and once again, the idea that a Nigerian Prince has picked your name out or you have won a foreign raffle you didn't enter is sort of ludicrous but we as a people want to hope and trust and look at all that money.
Its all a con and the faster you realize that the safer you are.
Now we have a candidate who is giving the same sort of spiel that every big city hustler always has. You are guaranteed to win, trust him, its going to be great, the other guy will pay, the product is real. What do you have to lose.
If it smells like a duck, and walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, its probably a duck.
Sunday, August 28, 2016
The power of Disease
Throughout history, we have been subject to various epidemics and pandemics that have caused empires to crumble, continents to open up and civilizations to retreat. Of course this might have been just as prevalent in prehistoric times but the evidence is of course less conclusive.
Most of us are aware of how European diseases decimated the native populations of the Americas making conquest and colonization much easier than it otherwise might have been.
There are many other examples of how infectious diseases impacted civilization and the course of world history, some more controversial than others, but I don't have time here to detail all or even many of them, but there are plenty of sources for those interested.
It is extremely likely that we will see another such outbreak, at some point. While in many ways we have increased our ability to combat diseases and awareness of what causes them and how to prevent them we are playing a losing hand in our fight against nature and the evolution of deadly microbes.
We see movies and books that treat this horrific scenario as, well horror, but its not a fictional problem.
The dangers are real and from a humans point of view, maybe the most serious threat we face. While war, terrorism and crime are issues, note that the flu killed more people worldwide in two years then World War I did in four, and it wasn't really close.
Failure to understand this and provide funding to combat potentially deadly diseases is really criminal, especially if its because of petty political reasons.
Outbreaks in the past were both deadly and indiscriminate, not caring who you were, how rich you were or generally your nationality.
I know that research and prevention are the only real weapons we have and if our politicians won't use them we need new ones.
Most of us are aware of how European diseases decimated the native populations of the Americas making conquest and colonization much easier than it otherwise might have been.
There are many other examples of how infectious diseases impacted civilization and the course of world history, some more controversial than others, but I don't have time here to detail all or even many of them, but there are plenty of sources for those interested.
It is extremely likely that we will see another such outbreak, at some point. While in many ways we have increased our ability to combat diseases and awareness of what causes them and how to prevent them we are playing a losing hand in our fight against nature and the evolution of deadly microbes.
We see movies and books that treat this horrific scenario as, well horror, but its not a fictional problem.
The dangers are real and from a humans point of view, maybe the most serious threat we face. While war, terrorism and crime are issues, note that the flu killed more people worldwide in two years then World War I did in four, and it wasn't really close.
Failure to understand this and provide funding to combat potentially deadly diseases is really criminal, especially if its because of petty political reasons.
Outbreaks in the past were both deadly and indiscriminate, not caring who you were, how rich you were or generally your nationality.
I know that research and prevention are the only real weapons we have and if our politicians won't use them we need new ones.
Saturday, August 27, 2016
Saturday Thoughts
America is not falling apart and the current generation is doing just fine.
The old days weren't better, we were just younger.
Live the best you can and treat others with respect.
If you let a rabble rouser get you excited, it makes you rabble.
We really need to take care of the world we are in, don't have any others.
We only get to use it for a time before we have to give it to the next generation.
If someone came into your house and released a bunch of noxious fumes, you would be pretty pissed off.
Bad things happen to good people, its not their fault.
Remember, news is not the whole story, just report mostly bad things.
Don't worry about what everyone else is doing, do all the good you can.
We all live in a world that we create, make it a good one.
Have some fun.
The old days weren't better, we were just younger.
Live the best you can and treat others with respect.
If you let a rabble rouser get you excited, it makes you rabble.
We really need to take care of the world we are in, don't have any others.
We only get to use it for a time before we have to give it to the next generation.
If someone came into your house and released a bunch of noxious fumes, you would be pretty pissed off.
Bad things happen to good people, its not their fault.
Remember, news is not the whole story, just report mostly bad things.
Don't worry about what everyone else is doing, do all the good you can.
We all live in a world that we create, make it a good one.
Have some fun.
Friday, August 26, 2016
Lying with Statistics
If the statistics don't tell the story you want, you can probably find a way to make them fit it.
Take the recent AP stat that half of Clinton's meetings were with donors to the Clinton foundation. Well no, it was half of the meetings after the vast majority of meetings were excluded as being "job" related.
Even then, half the meetings were to people who didn't donate so it sort of makes the pay to play idea inaccurate.
So AP twisted the statistics to create a story, not the first time and not the only organization.
We see statistics used like this all the time and it is generally accepted at face value by the majority of people.
In many cases the underlying story gives the actual facts and if you read the AP story, nothing wrong was actually reported. Some innuendo and misinformation but nothing factual.
Just modern yellow journalism I guess.
Pity.
Take the recent AP stat that half of Clinton's meetings were with donors to the Clinton foundation. Well no, it was half of the meetings after the vast majority of meetings were excluded as being "job" related.
Even then, half the meetings were to people who didn't donate so it sort of makes the pay to play idea inaccurate.
So AP twisted the statistics to create a story, not the first time and not the only organization.
We see statistics used like this all the time and it is generally accepted at face value by the majority of people.
In many cases the underlying story gives the actual facts and if you read the AP story, nothing wrong was actually reported. Some innuendo and misinformation but nothing factual.
Just modern yellow journalism I guess.
Pity.
Thursday, August 25, 2016
Dig you must
There is a general feeling among many Americans that the Clinton's have done something wrong and got away with it.
Now we know that Bill had a well publicized incident with a White House intern and lied about it. Its also likely that he had other extra-marital affairs. However, besides this, the accusations fly constantly about people disappearing, dying, getting lied too, being given special treatment etc. etc. etc.
What we have factually comes down to that Mrs Clinton used a private e-mail server while Secretary of State and that some donors to the Clinton Foundation had some access to certain aides and the Secretary.
Use of the private e-mail server was not criminal and there is no allegation that information was leaked or even hacked, although that possibility existed. When asked to turn over official Government e-mails, she deleted the ones that weren't official which immediately sets off our conspiracy people. Of course saying there is a cover up doesn't mean there is one, and the real question is what they think she is covering up? Some equate what she did with the e-mails at the DNC which indicated some frustration that Sanders didn't drop out of the race when it was clear what the outcome was, and while they shouldn't have been sent it is of course perfectly OK for candidate Clinton to express that view, so its not about her.
The accusations that large donors had better access to the Secretary than other people, to some extent, is what we call the American political system. It should be noted that despite intense efforts, no actual favors have been found that were related to her official position and these were all people who were influential and generally rich. Even in the somewhat questionable AP analysis, half of the contacts of non-Government and non-Foreign donors were people who had not donated to the foundation. The AP needed to twist the statistics to get a headline, but if donation was a requirement who were the people who didn't donate? Maybe if you call or e-mail the State Department requesting a meeting they respond to you regardless.
No one denies the Clinton Foundation does some great things and no evidence has come to light showing it did anything illegal or inappropriate.
In all honesty, based on the amount of digging and the number of people doing it, it seems that Ms Clinton is one of the most honest and trustworthy people in the country. Keep digging.
Now we know that Bill had a well publicized incident with a White House intern and lied about it. Its also likely that he had other extra-marital affairs. However, besides this, the accusations fly constantly about people disappearing, dying, getting lied too, being given special treatment etc. etc. etc.
What we have factually comes down to that Mrs Clinton used a private e-mail server while Secretary of State and that some donors to the Clinton Foundation had some access to certain aides and the Secretary.
Use of the private e-mail server was not criminal and there is no allegation that information was leaked or even hacked, although that possibility existed. When asked to turn over official Government e-mails, she deleted the ones that weren't official which immediately sets off our conspiracy people. Of course saying there is a cover up doesn't mean there is one, and the real question is what they think she is covering up? Some equate what she did with the e-mails at the DNC which indicated some frustration that Sanders didn't drop out of the race when it was clear what the outcome was, and while they shouldn't have been sent it is of course perfectly OK for candidate Clinton to express that view, so its not about her.
The accusations that large donors had better access to the Secretary than other people, to some extent, is what we call the American political system. It should be noted that despite intense efforts, no actual favors have been found that were related to her official position and these were all people who were influential and generally rich. Even in the somewhat questionable AP analysis, half of the contacts of non-Government and non-Foreign donors were people who had not donated to the foundation. The AP needed to twist the statistics to get a headline, but if donation was a requirement who were the people who didn't donate? Maybe if you call or e-mail the State Department requesting a meeting they respond to you regardless.
No one denies the Clinton Foundation does some great things and no evidence has come to light showing it did anything illegal or inappropriate.
In all honesty, based on the amount of digging and the number of people doing it, it seems that Ms Clinton is one of the most honest and trustworthy people in the country. Keep digging.
Freedom of the Press
One of the things that is great about America is the freedom we guarantee the press. Of course on of the things that is troubling about America is the fact that so many published or broadcast items are simply not true or at least not the whole truth.
It is the responsibility of the public to determine what is a reliable vs unreliable source and try to determine the truth. Unfortunately, most of us don't have the time to do this and rely on sources that are in many cases entertaining but not comprehensive.
All the press whatever their political leanings or lack thereof has to "sell" their product. In the current era this is generally selling advertising space of spots in order to go on. The amount that you can get is dependent on the number of readers or viewers or hits you have. If you simply report lots of boring items you won't have much of an audience, so you have to find something that can be turned into a headline to grab people's attention.
Quoting people who make outlandish claims is always a good way to report something attention grabbing without actually promoting a false story.
Now the press or media is able to uncover things that we should know about but a lot of exposes' aren't particularly informative. They are trying to find something that will grab our attention and get us to read, watch or listen to the story they are promoting in order to make money.
Freedom of the press is a great thing and while it allows a lot of misinformation to get posted it is far better than censorship.
It is the responsibility of the public to determine what is a reliable vs unreliable source and try to determine the truth. Unfortunately, most of us don't have the time to do this and rely on sources that are in many cases entertaining but not comprehensive.
All the press whatever their political leanings or lack thereof has to "sell" their product. In the current era this is generally selling advertising space of spots in order to go on. The amount that you can get is dependent on the number of readers or viewers or hits you have. If you simply report lots of boring items you won't have much of an audience, so you have to find something that can be turned into a headline to grab people's attention.
Quoting people who make outlandish claims is always a good way to report something attention grabbing without actually promoting a false story.
Now the press or media is able to uncover things that we should know about but a lot of exposes' aren't particularly informative. They are trying to find something that will grab our attention and get us to read, watch or listen to the story they are promoting in order to make money.
Freedom of the press is a great thing and while it allows a lot of misinformation to get posted it is far better than censorship.
Tuesday, August 23, 2016
American Values 3
One of the rights we have is the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Like all our rights this is designed to protect us from the Government oppressing us. The only problem with this is that the right only exists if you are alive and we currently see too many examples of suspects not making it that far.
It is also obvious that the suspects in most danger are often young and black. There are a number of reasons for this, one of which has to be a certain degree of racism. I don't believe that most police officers are racist, but I do think that the police have a bias against young black men because experience tells them they are more likely to be dangerous.
Now clearly not all are and I don't pretend to know the percentages. There are a whole lot of economic and social factors that impact young men without opportunities added to the fact that this age group tends to have some underdeveloped judgement skills, no matter what ethic background.
Human nature being what it is the reactions are more drastic based on the perceived danger. This has led to some incidents that are tragic and in some cases hard to fathom.
I certainly don't want to attack the police who have a terribly difficult and dangerous job and who obviously have the right to protect themselves. However, there have clearly been some instances caught on camera where the reactions are excessive and inappropriate.
Every person has the right to life. We also are presumed innocent until found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of our peers. Apprehending suspects who resist is clearly a dangerous situation with an uncertain outcome.
We need well trained police who can protect all the people effectively. We should support them but not accept blatant racist or criminal behavior by anyone in an official capacity.
If the police operate as an occupying force then they are not serving the public. If the policeman or woman feels that the people they are supposed to protect are actually the enemy we have a formula for tragedy. Certainly all lives do matter, but the ones frequently at risk are black ones, so I see nothing wrong with reminding everyone that they matter too.
It is also obvious that the suspects in most danger are often young and black. There are a number of reasons for this, one of which has to be a certain degree of racism. I don't believe that most police officers are racist, but I do think that the police have a bias against young black men because experience tells them they are more likely to be dangerous.
Now clearly not all are and I don't pretend to know the percentages. There are a whole lot of economic and social factors that impact young men without opportunities added to the fact that this age group tends to have some underdeveloped judgement skills, no matter what ethic background.
Human nature being what it is the reactions are more drastic based on the perceived danger. This has led to some incidents that are tragic and in some cases hard to fathom.
I certainly don't want to attack the police who have a terribly difficult and dangerous job and who obviously have the right to protect themselves. However, there have clearly been some instances caught on camera where the reactions are excessive and inappropriate.
Every person has the right to life. We also are presumed innocent until found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of our peers. Apprehending suspects who resist is clearly a dangerous situation with an uncertain outcome.
We need well trained police who can protect all the people effectively. We should support them but not accept blatant racist or criminal behavior by anyone in an official capacity.
If the police operate as an occupying force then they are not serving the public. If the policeman or woman feels that the people they are supposed to protect are actually the enemy we have a formula for tragedy. Certainly all lives do matter, but the ones frequently at risk are black ones, so I see nothing wrong with reminding everyone that they matter too.
Monday, August 22, 2016
Whats Going Well
There are a lot of people and news channels focused on whats wrong with America and we certainly have some problems, but there are an awful lot of things going really well.
Our Auto Industry has rebounded and is competitive.
We have developed lots of domestic energy sources.
The price of energy has come down dramatically.
The amount of renewable energy being used keeps increasing.
Access to the power of the internet has become normal.
Unemployment is near historic lows.
Consumer spending has rebounded.
We in general are more accepting of alternate lifestyles.
We have increased health coverage although still not to everyones.
Stocks are near historic highs.
And so much more.
Now some people would and might respond to each of these items with whats not going well, and I agree there are challenges we need to face and fix but we need to appreciate what we do have from time to time.
Our Auto Industry has rebounded and is competitive.
We have developed lots of domestic energy sources.
The price of energy has come down dramatically.
The amount of renewable energy being used keeps increasing.
Access to the power of the internet has become normal.
Unemployment is near historic lows.
Consumer spending has rebounded.
We in general are more accepting of alternate lifestyles.
We have increased health coverage although still not to everyones.
Stocks are near historic highs.
And so much more.
Now some people would and might respond to each of these items with whats not going well, and I agree there are challenges we need to face and fix but we need to appreciate what we do have from time to time.
Saturday, August 20, 2016
Saturday Thoughts
Generally most people have few interactions with the Federal Government, if you exclude getting mail, which most of us take for granted. Why is everyone so agitated?
Don't believe everything you hear.
People are just people.
Calling a group "those people" says more about you than it does about them.
Too many people are willing to send other people's children into danger.
Its always easy to decide what went wrong after something did.
Killing anybody is problematic, even if they really deserve it.
Trend data is often the most unreliable so if someone uses it, make sure you know how.
The Earth is getting warmer, we put a lot of trapped carbon back into the atmosphere.
People are better at solving problems than the Government is.
If you decide to do the wrong thing because everyone else is, you are still doing the wrong thing.
If you find a couple of aberrations in a large sample, that's normal.
Every dominant power before America has met there downfall. Might want to remember that.
Friday, August 19, 2016
Attention Span
Despite all the achievements and glory during the Olympics it's probably going to be remembered as the fake robbery story Olympics. Maybe not but everything else seemed to follow script mostly so I'm not sure where there is a story that will be remembered more.
We live in an age of self indulgence. We only care about the things that are immediate to our experience and everything else competes for attention. What was once famously described as fifteen minutes of fame is now probably down to a minute.
We certainly have the ability to focus on things, just look at the Pokemon GO people, but we selectively focus and things that aren't part of that focus circle need to compete for our attention.
Once again this isn't new, and it is probably related to the amount of free time we have divided by the number of things competing for that time. The limitation there is of course the amount of time we have available.
We also suffer from a situation where our news has become in many cases biased. Sometimes the bias is actually the attempt to not seem biased, other times its more blatant. Famously, many Americans used to let the evening news or the evening newspaper provide them with facts and opinions. Now we have a million sources, many of which are simply irresponsible, that compete for that role.
The easiest target is normally the Government and so it is attacked the most. Now I keep seeing polls that show the American people don't trust the Government. This seems to be true at all levels of Government. Of course despite that mistrust we still use the services to pay our taxes, get social security benefits, get passports, collect economic data, etc. etc
The Government that isn't trusted is the Government portrayed in our information sources. There is clearly issues with Government, there are issues with everything really, but the general belief that the Government is either corrupt, evil or influenced by specific groups is not really supported by the day to day operations. It may be true to a larger extent of our elected officials, but of course we have no one to blame but ourselves for that.
Despite recent claims that the system is rigged, it isn't. If you know the rules and help set them you can do better than someone who doesn't. So like everything else, put in the time and effort if you want to succeed. If you expect to get the reward without the work you probably will be disappointed.
We live in an age of self indulgence. We only care about the things that are immediate to our experience and everything else competes for attention. What was once famously described as fifteen minutes of fame is now probably down to a minute.
We certainly have the ability to focus on things, just look at the Pokemon GO people, but we selectively focus and things that aren't part of that focus circle need to compete for our attention.
Once again this isn't new, and it is probably related to the amount of free time we have divided by the number of things competing for that time. The limitation there is of course the amount of time we have available.
We also suffer from a situation where our news has become in many cases biased. Sometimes the bias is actually the attempt to not seem biased, other times its more blatant. Famously, many Americans used to let the evening news or the evening newspaper provide them with facts and opinions. Now we have a million sources, many of which are simply irresponsible, that compete for that role.
The easiest target is normally the Government and so it is attacked the most. Now I keep seeing polls that show the American people don't trust the Government. This seems to be true at all levels of Government. Of course despite that mistrust we still use the services to pay our taxes, get social security benefits, get passports, collect economic data, etc. etc
The Government that isn't trusted is the Government portrayed in our information sources. There is clearly issues with Government, there are issues with everything really, but the general belief that the Government is either corrupt, evil or influenced by specific groups is not really supported by the day to day operations. It may be true to a larger extent of our elected officials, but of course we have no one to blame but ourselves for that.
Despite recent claims that the system is rigged, it isn't. If you know the rules and help set them you can do better than someone who doesn't. So like everything else, put in the time and effort if you want to succeed. If you expect to get the reward without the work you probably will be disappointed.
Thursday, August 18, 2016
More Random Stuff
Sometimes people make up stories to explain things that don't need to be explained until the lie comes out. This thing in Rio should have been nothing, now its something.
We all tend to think the universe revolves around us, it doesn't.
People who repeat lies are really just as guilty as the original liar.
Everybody is posting on their expensive cell phones over social media from their expensive coffee shops just how bad things are.
Most unemployed people today don't have the skills they need. Solution, go get some skills,
The idea that some people deserve our help and others don't is both elitist and non-christian. Think it also violates every other religion but not an expert.
Our founders talked about the rights of the people not the rights of the citizen. Lets not misquote them.
Statistics don't lie, the people who interpret them might.
Some things are simply not crimes, even if we don't like them.
No one is right all the time, so if you blindly support a side you are wrong some times.
I would recommend walking a mile is the other person's shoes, except most of us never walk a mile.
Americans have more in common with other Americans than we do with any other nationality.
There are people who would kill people for disrespecting the flag. Really?
If you carry a gun and shoot someone, understand there will be consequences. You can't punch someone in the face either.
We all tend to think the universe revolves around us, it doesn't.
People who repeat lies are really just as guilty as the original liar.
Everybody is posting on their expensive cell phones over social media from their expensive coffee shops just how bad things are.
Most unemployed people today don't have the skills they need. Solution, go get some skills,
The idea that some people deserve our help and others don't is both elitist and non-christian. Think it also violates every other religion but not an expert.
Our founders talked about the rights of the people not the rights of the citizen. Lets not misquote them.
Statistics don't lie, the people who interpret them might.
Some things are simply not crimes, even if we don't like them.
No one is right all the time, so if you blindly support a side you are wrong some times.
I would recommend walking a mile is the other person's shoes, except most of us never walk a mile.
Americans have more in common with other Americans than we do with any other nationality.
There are people who would kill people for disrespecting the flag. Really?
If you carry a gun and shoot someone, understand there will be consequences. You can't punch someone in the face either.
Wednesday, August 17, 2016
More Random Thoughts
It seems like we have a lot more gullible people in our society than ever before although I don't know if we have any official gullibility statistics available.
There is an obvious bias in a fact checking group since if they say everything is correct no one will read them.
I think this is the first political campaign where one of the candidates is more concerned about ratings than winning. I envision his group checking the overnights every morning.
I actually can't figure out what the Republicans are for anymore. They like to say what they are against and maybe they are in favor of smaller Government, but whatever in is the party platform is not being well communicated. I guess I could read it but why should I have to?
I don't understand why so many people seem convinced that we have prominent people trying to destroy our country. I suspect Fox News is behind it but those people are clearly like the Onion News group, not to be taken seriously.
The tactic that is at least a little clever is to be totally obstructionist, avoid getting anything accomplished and then say both sides are equally at fault.
It is clear that our primary system is broken, mainly because it allows a small fringe group more influence than they should have. How do you get more participation is the issue so the views actually reflect the party in question.
Why are independents allowed to vote in any party primaries? Sort of dilutes the point of political parties.
Money has too much influence in elections, but the spending is good for the economy so not the worst thing.
Owning guns is protected by the second amendment but misusing them isn't.
People who ask me to share a post to support {fill in the blank} should explain to me how that does anything at all.
There are a bunch of ads now that claim to be short but which take forever to get past the intro (usually a hand drawing stuff). I just don't have the patience for them and can't believe they actually work.
There is an obvious bias in a fact checking group since if they say everything is correct no one will read them.
I think this is the first political campaign where one of the candidates is more concerned about ratings than winning. I envision his group checking the overnights every morning.
I actually can't figure out what the Republicans are for anymore. They like to say what they are against and maybe they are in favor of smaller Government, but whatever in is the party platform is not being well communicated. I guess I could read it but why should I have to?
I don't understand why so many people seem convinced that we have prominent people trying to destroy our country. I suspect Fox News is behind it but those people are clearly like the Onion News group, not to be taken seriously.
The tactic that is at least a little clever is to be totally obstructionist, avoid getting anything accomplished and then say both sides are equally at fault.
It is clear that our primary system is broken, mainly because it allows a small fringe group more influence than they should have. How do you get more participation is the issue so the views actually reflect the party in question.
Why are independents allowed to vote in any party primaries? Sort of dilutes the point of political parties.
Money has too much influence in elections, but the spending is good for the economy so not the worst thing.
Owning guns is protected by the second amendment but misusing them isn't.
People who ask me to share a post to support {fill in the blank} should explain to me how that does anything at all.
There are a bunch of ads now that claim to be short but which take forever to get past the intro (usually a hand drawing stuff). I just don't have the patience for them and can't believe they actually work.
Tuesday, August 16, 2016
Economic Reality
By any objective measure most Americans are doing pretty well in today's economy. They could of course be doing better, but considering how everything almost collapsed during the financial crisis we should be at least a little thankful.
Now while this is going on we are in the midst of a number of social economic changes that impact certain people more than others. The country has been moving to a service economy for quite a few years now. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but any change like that has winners and losers.
If you are in the group that doesn't have the right skills to succeed in the new reality, you may get bitter. You want to blame somebody. Its no comfort to be told that you are an unfortunate victim of a global phenomenon that ultimately benefits the great majority with more efficient economies.
Losing a high paying manufacturing job and having to work in a lower paying service job is clearly not a good experience and might make you feel that the economy has collapsed. Well your economy has collapsed because of two factors. Globalization and training.
If you have the right skills for the current economy you can do very well. If you don't you won't. Of course this is no different than manufacturing with the biggest difference being that those displaced form good paying manufacturing jobs are not ready to take entry level service jobs.
Well the jobs are not coming back and if you expect the Government to fix this you are clearly looking for a handout. Its not the Governments fault or the Governments responsibility to fix it, anymore than it ever was.
The jobs left because the business owners determined it was more profitable to automate and use the cheaper labor available in foreign countries. Purely an economic decision and an outgrowth of our capitalistic system. Yes, trade agreements facilitated some of this but the trade agreements were not the cause. The price differential is normally so great that the jobs were going anyway. Further these products are sold globally so having import duties increases the cost to us and makes our products and services harder to sell.
Its not nice being the victim is an economic or social transformation, but the forces at work are not going to go away or reverse themselves.
Now while this is going on we are in the midst of a number of social economic changes that impact certain people more than others. The country has been moving to a service economy for quite a few years now. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but any change like that has winners and losers.
If you are in the group that doesn't have the right skills to succeed in the new reality, you may get bitter. You want to blame somebody. Its no comfort to be told that you are an unfortunate victim of a global phenomenon that ultimately benefits the great majority with more efficient economies.
Losing a high paying manufacturing job and having to work in a lower paying service job is clearly not a good experience and might make you feel that the economy has collapsed. Well your economy has collapsed because of two factors. Globalization and training.
If you have the right skills for the current economy you can do very well. If you don't you won't. Of course this is no different than manufacturing with the biggest difference being that those displaced form good paying manufacturing jobs are not ready to take entry level service jobs.
Well the jobs are not coming back and if you expect the Government to fix this you are clearly looking for a handout. Its not the Governments fault or the Governments responsibility to fix it, anymore than it ever was.
The jobs left because the business owners determined it was more profitable to automate and use the cheaper labor available in foreign countries. Purely an economic decision and an outgrowth of our capitalistic system. Yes, trade agreements facilitated some of this but the trade agreements were not the cause. The price differential is normally so great that the jobs were going anyway. Further these products are sold globally so having import duties increases the cost to us and makes our products and services harder to sell.
Its not nice being the victim is an economic or social transformation, but the forces at work are not going to go away or reverse themselves.
Monday, August 15, 2016
More Thoughts
Its been very hot in much of the country and we have terrible floods in Louisiana. I note that people who like to proclaim cold weather disproves Global Warming don't react to these sort of things. Of course what is happening is just weather and doesn't by itself show anything, just like the cold didn't, but seems like they are inconsistent.
Based on news reports we are going to hear from the Republican candidate today that we should work with anyone who is fighting a common enemy and stop "Nation Building". Of course I still believe we are a beacon to the rest of the world supporting American values and should oppose oppression where ever it exists. This type of policy simply is immoral.
You have to feel a little sorry for the vice presidential candidate who actually comes across as sane. However considering his oppressive and bigoted policies I can't really feel that way.
Americans who try to tell others how they should live their lives because it doesn't meet their own sense of what is right should look at why so many colonists came here. The good news is that this type of thinking is almost non existent in our young people. Freedom is not subjective.
History shows us that nations can give up their liberty and freedom in return for promised safety. Its always ended up being a hollow promise because once the freedom is gone, you are no longer safe from Government oppression.
Some people feel the election is just about over. If you feel that you don't need to vote, whatever side you support, you are wrong. Participation is the most important aspect of a Democracy.
For those people who think the economy is terrible and things have gotten worse, you need to stop watching fox news and get some actual data.
People accuse the Democratic candidate of so many things and then again nothing. Of course we have self fulfilling hatred since failure to prove her wrongdoings only proves how sneaky she really is. Shes been in the public eye and hated so long its time to realize their in nothing actually there.
With all the sources of information we have available now, why we have so many people accept obvious falsehoods is hard to understand. Do a little research folks.
Based on news reports we are going to hear from the Republican candidate today that we should work with anyone who is fighting a common enemy and stop "Nation Building". Of course I still believe we are a beacon to the rest of the world supporting American values and should oppose oppression where ever it exists. This type of policy simply is immoral.
You have to feel a little sorry for the vice presidential candidate who actually comes across as sane. However considering his oppressive and bigoted policies I can't really feel that way.
Americans who try to tell others how they should live their lives because it doesn't meet their own sense of what is right should look at why so many colonists came here. The good news is that this type of thinking is almost non existent in our young people. Freedom is not subjective.
History shows us that nations can give up their liberty and freedom in return for promised safety. Its always ended up being a hollow promise because once the freedom is gone, you are no longer safe from Government oppression.
Some people feel the election is just about over. If you feel that you don't need to vote, whatever side you support, you are wrong. Participation is the most important aspect of a Democracy.
For those people who think the economy is terrible and things have gotten worse, you need to stop watching fox news and get some actual data.
People accuse the Democratic candidate of so many things and then again nothing. Of course we have self fulfilling hatred since failure to prove her wrongdoings only proves how sneaky she really is. Shes been in the public eye and hated so long its time to realize their in nothing actually there.
With all the sources of information we have available now, why we have so many people accept obvious falsehoods is hard to understand. Do a little research folks.
Sunday, August 14, 2016
American Value - Fairness
Generally most people I know have a certain sense of what they think is fair. This is a value that is taught us to us at an early age. We like to think that we treat others fairly and would want to be treated fairly by others.
The point is that fairness is something that doesn't actually exist in the natural world. Animals hunting for food don't care about being fair.
There is also no fairness on the battlefield. Ultimately when people are trying to kill each other neither one is willing to die for fairness. The best tactic is to apply overwhelming force using the element of surprise.
This carries forward to the business world. Here of course some fairness is imposed by outside forces, but remove that and we would see true ruthlessness.
Fairness only exists where it is imposed by an authority, parents, referees and umpires, and Government agencies. Even then it is only at best unequally imposed. From the day of our birth some are fortunate, living in comfortable homes, going to good schools and having a support network while others are raised in substandard conditions, eating irregularly and going to sub par schools.
A recent study showed that the best indicator of what are adult status would be is the status of our parents. Yes some overcome their humble beginnings and some descend the social ladder, but these are by no means the norms and require some extraordinary motivation or talent.
We pretend opportunity exists for all and point to the few success stories as examples, but statistically the number that overcome there beginnings is not the norm, it is the rare exception.
This is such an ingrained issue in our society that I'm not sure it is solvable in the conventional sense, but I do know that ignoring it is not the answer.
The point is that fairness is something that doesn't actually exist in the natural world. Animals hunting for food don't care about being fair.
There is also no fairness on the battlefield. Ultimately when people are trying to kill each other neither one is willing to die for fairness. The best tactic is to apply overwhelming force using the element of surprise.
This carries forward to the business world. Here of course some fairness is imposed by outside forces, but remove that and we would see true ruthlessness.
Fairness only exists where it is imposed by an authority, parents, referees and umpires, and Government agencies. Even then it is only at best unequally imposed. From the day of our birth some are fortunate, living in comfortable homes, going to good schools and having a support network while others are raised in substandard conditions, eating irregularly and going to sub par schools.
A recent study showed that the best indicator of what are adult status would be is the status of our parents. Yes some overcome their humble beginnings and some descend the social ladder, but these are by no means the norms and require some extraordinary motivation or talent.
We pretend opportunity exists for all and point to the few success stories as examples, but statistically the number that overcome there beginnings is not the norm, it is the rare exception.
This is such an ingrained issue in our society that I'm not sure it is solvable in the conventional sense, but I do know that ignoring it is not the answer.
Saturday, August 13, 2016
American Values 2
The Bill of Rights guarantees us Freedom of Speech. This is not absolute since we still have laws against slander and libel, but everyone has the right to express their opinion.
Of course it should be pointed out that the Bill of Rights only limits the Government, not other people so if you express an unpopular opinion you may very well suffer social consequences.
In the not so distant past, getting your opinions heard outside of your soapbox range was sometimes difficult and required press coverage or possibly widespread word of mouth. Now of course we have social media and there a chance that something will "go viral" and spread like, well a virus.
This is both good and bad. In the past we had some filters on what we were exposed to. Possibly the filters were bad but in general the media followed certain rules related to integrity. There has always been some media that didn't follow those rules and regularly reported space alien abductions, but we knew what those publications were and while some were faithful and believing readers it was pretty clearly a fringe group.
However we now have so much bad information available that the only real filter is self imposed. I'm not the first to say this but not everything posted on the internet is true. Just finding some story that alleges some outrageous accusation doesn't mean the person actually did anything.
There are ways to check, fact checking and urban legend web sites help, but I see so much misinformation repeated without any "filter" that I don't think the sites are used as much as they should be.
Every freedom has a corresponding responsibility that requires us to use our freedom wisely. In the rise of many dictators going back to ancient Rome and probably before, it was the strong leader who promised to restore public morals and greatness that ended up taking freedoms away from everybody.
Our freedoms are precious and we need to respect them, not abuse them.
Of course it should be pointed out that the Bill of Rights only limits the Government, not other people so if you express an unpopular opinion you may very well suffer social consequences.
In the not so distant past, getting your opinions heard outside of your soapbox range was sometimes difficult and required press coverage or possibly widespread word of mouth. Now of course we have social media and there a chance that something will "go viral" and spread like, well a virus.
This is both good and bad. In the past we had some filters on what we were exposed to. Possibly the filters were bad but in general the media followed certain rules related to integrity. There has always been some media that didn't follow those rules and regularly reported space alien abductions, but we knew what those publications were and while some were faithful and believing readers it was pretty clearly a fringe group.
However we now have so much bad information available that the only real filter is self imposed. I'm not the first to say this but not everything posted on the internet is true. Just finding some story that alleges some outrageous accusation doesn't mean the person actually did anything.
There are ways to check, fact checking and urban legend web sites help, but I see so much misinformation repeated without any "filter" that I don't think the sites are used as much as they should be.
Every freedom has a corresponding responsibility that requires us to use our freedom wisely. In the rise of many dictators going back to ancient Rome and probably before, it was the strong leader who promised to restore public morals and greatness that ended up taking freedoms away from everybody.
Our freedoms are precious and we need to respect them, not abuse them.
Thursday, August 11, 2016
America's Values
In the Bill of Rights we spell out the rights each person is entitled to in our great nation. Note the use of the word person, not citizen, so those who think it only applies to citizens are already trying to change its very nature.
The rights of the people includes all the people. Of course in the first 70 years we excluded slaves and so it wasn't as inclusive as it should have been, but the language is inclusive.
These are the first 10 amendments to the constitution and we have added additional ones since then to expand and clarify the constitution.
Fundamentally the rights are fairly simple, Most of us take them for granted although far too many ignore them in practice.
Freedom of religion is guaranteed, not just religions the majority approve of.
I see so many attacks on Islam and Muslims simply because of the religion they follow and the assumption that because political terrorists in many cases grew up in that religion, the religion promotes terrorism.
For a bunch of complex reasons, many people in nations in the middle east where Islam is the predominant religion feel that America is the enemy. This is partly because of our support of Israel, our military presence, our support for certain regimes or lack thereof and partly because we represent Western Culture which they view as evil. They become terrorists because of these political motivations not because of their religion.
Irish terrorists were primarily Catholic, but Catholicism doesn't promote or condone terrorism.
Confusing religion with politics is common but wrong. Sometimes the same religion can argue opposing points of view i.e. white and black protestants during the civil rights era.
This is only the first right mentioned in the first Amendment and I would certainly encourage all those people so fond of the second amendment to brush up on the entire document.
The rights of the people includes all the people. Of course in the first 70 years we excluded slaves and so it wasn't as inclusive as it should have been, but the language is inclusive.
These are the first 10 amendments to the constitution and we have added additional ones since then to expand and clarify the constitution.
Fundamentally the rights are fairly simple, Most of us take them for granted although far too many ignore them in practice.
Freedom of religion is guaranteed, not just religions the majority approve of.
I see so many attacks on Islam and Muslims simply because of the religion they follow and the assumption that because political terrorists in many cases grew up in that religion, the religion promotes terrorism.
For a bunch of complex reasons, many people in nations in the middle east where Islam is the predominant religion feel that America is the enemy. This is partly because of our support of Israel, our military presence, our support for certain regimes or lack thereof and partly because we represent Western Culture which they view as evil. They become terrorists because of these political motivations not because of their religion.
Irish terrorists were primarily Catholic, but Catholicism doesn't promote or condone terrorism.
Confusing religion with politics is common but wrong. Sometimes the same religion can argue opposing points of view i.e. white and black protestants during the civil rights era.
This is only the first right mentioned in the first Amendment and I would certainly encourage all those people so fond of the second amendment to brush up on the entire document.
Wednesday, August 10, 2016
America's Greatness
What makes America great?
Its not the symbols. The flag, the National Anthem, the other symbols of America might reflect its greatness but they certainly don't make it great.
Its not the climate or location, We have wonderful natural resources here but I don't think they have made us great. It not our language, other countries speak it.
The thing that is the greatness of America is its promise.
You can call it the American Dream although I think American Dreams might be more appropriate. The simple idea that you can achieve your desires and live life the way you want to is the true essence of it.
Throughout our existence we have been the lure for immigrants who couldn't improve themselves or live life the way they wanted. Land of opportunity, land of freedom and land of hope.
If we lose those we will lost the essence of America and we will no longer be great. We don't need to be great again, we need to continue to be great.
Since our very early days we have been a hodgepodge of nations and people who were outcasts in their own countries. Whether voluntarily or involuntarily we had English, Africans, Dutch, Swedes, French and Spanish residents as well as, of course Native Americans.
We had a big open country and everyone who find a way to get here was basically welcome and we had waves of immigrants, first from Western Europe and Africa, then Eastern Europe and Asia. As we expanded we acquired additional French and Spanish residents via purchase or conquest.
Not everyone was treated equally, and some were treated as less than human but we had one great equalizer, the ability to move somewhere else where things might be better. We expanded and filled up the Ohio territories, the Louisiana purchase, Texas and the southwest at breakneck speed considering, chasing opportunity and freedom. We endured hardships and inflicted hardships in doing so and for many it didn't turn out well, but we pursued these opportunities and chased them, not just with immigrants but also with our native born citizens.
This has never stopped, there have been large movements of people in every age from farm to city, from city to suburb,from the south to the industrialized north, from the rust belt to the sun belt and always movement to California.
It is what unified us to some extent as a people and allowed us to be great because of this ongoing diversity and churn. In each period we had people resisting the continued influx of immigrants and even the internal movement of our own citizens. However it continued and it has led to this great country.
It is why we are a beacon of hope to the world and to try and stop it is, well, Un-American.
Its not the symbols. The flag, the National Anthem, the other symbols of America might reflect its greatness but they certainly don't make it great.
Its not the climate or location, We have wonderful natural resources here but I don't think they have made us great. It not our language, other countries speak it.
The thing that is the greatness of America is its promise.
You can call it the American Dream although I think American Dreams might be more appropriate. The simple idea that you can achieve your desires and live life the way you want to is the true essence of it.
Throughout our existence we have been the lure for immigrants who couldn't improve themselves or live life the way they wanted. Land of opportunity, land of freedom and land of hope.
If we lose those we will lost the essence of America and we will no longer be great. We don't need to be great again, we need to continue to be great.
Since our very early days we have been a hodgepodge of nations and people who were outcasts in their own countries. Whether voluntarily or involuntarily we had English, Africans, Dutch, Swedes, French and Spanish residents as well as, of course Native Americans.
We had a big open country and everyone who find a way to get here was basically welcome and we had waves of immigrants, first from Western Europe and Africa, then Eastern Europe and Asia. As we expanded we acquired additional French and Spanish residents via purchase or conquest.
Not everyone was treated equally, and some were treated as less than human but we had one great equalizer, the ability to move somewhere else where things might be better. We expanded and filled up the Ohio territories, the Louisiana purchase, Texas and the southwest at breakneck speed considering, chasing opportunity and freedom. We endured hardships and inflicted hardships in doing so and for many it didn't turn out well, but we pursued these opportunities and chased them, not just with immigrants but also with our native born citizens.
This has never stopped, there have been large movements of people in every age from farm to city, from city to suburb,from the south to the industrialized north, from the rust belt to the sun belt and always movement to California.
It is what unified us to some extent as a people and allowed us to be great because of this ongoing diversity and churn. In each period we had people resisting the continued influx of immigrants and even the internal movement of our own citizens. However it continued and it has led to this great country.
It is why we are a beacon of hope to the world and to try and stop it is, well, Un-American.
Tuesday, August 9, 2016
Responsibility
As a society we seem to have a lot of trouble with deciding who is responsible for things. In fact we seem determined to blame someone else when something goes wrong even if it most likely it was no ones fault except our own.
Maybe it was always like this and the only difference is that we hear more and more about the frivolous stuff because there is so much more instant coverage. I can't be sure, it just seems that we spend eternities trying to place blame to the net result that most of our public figures get smeared at some point of another.
Certainly people who are responsible should own up to it, but there are so many things that happen that may be because of a particular policy or a particular prior event which are not really caused by the policy or event, simply and outgrowth of it, maybe. Take gun ownership. Our gun policies put more guns in circulation. However people who use these guns to commit crimes or commit suicide did it for other reasons. The guns were the instrument they used and whether we should increase background checks or not is really unrelated. However if it is your gun that was used, even if it was stolen, the responsibility falls on you for failing to safeguard it.
Of course some things are clearly related like increased greenhouse gases and climate change. That is clearly demonstrated by science but of course we have people unwilling to accept science reality. Who is responsible is another question but I would like to point out that just because someone else also generates dangerous pollutants doesn't make it OK for me to do so.
Deciding someone else is responsible for the ills that befall you is a symptom of failure to recognize or accept responsibility. Take smokers who have had plenty of warnings over the years about the dangers of smoking. Yes we continued to allow these dangerous products to be grown, produced and sold because of special interests but there's been plenty of warnings about the effects. Deciding to roll the dice and smoke ultimately makes you responsible not anyone else. Similarly, failing to prepare yourself for the future and having little or no retirement savings is ultimately your fault. I do understand that certain people had little or no disposable income so they may have had not options, but all of those who spent money on indulgent things could have saved more.
Ultimately we seem to want to place blame in someone else, often the Government for our individual failures. Remember in this country we get to vote so the Government is what we make it.
Maybe it was always like this and the only difference is that we hear more and more about the frivolous stuff because there is so much more instant coverage. I can't be sure, it just seems that we spend eternities trying to place blame to the net result that most of our public figures get smeared at some point of another.
Certainly people who are responsible should own up to it, but there are so many things that happen that may be because of a particular policy or a particular prior event which are not really caused by the policy or event, simply and outgrowth of it, maybe. Take gun ownership. Our gun policies put more guns in circulation. However people who use these guns to commit crimes or commit suicide did it for other reasons. The guns were the instrument they used and whether we should increase background checks or not is really unrelated. However if it is your gun that was used, even if it was stolen, the responsibility falls on you for failing to safeguard it.
Of course some things are clearly related like increased greenhouse gases and climate change. That is clearly demonstrated by science but of course we have people unwilling to accept science reality. Who is responsible is another question but I would like to point out that just because someone else also generates dangerous pollutants doesn't make it OK for me to do so.
Deciding someone else is responsible for the ills that befall you is a symptom of failure to recognize or accept responsibility. Take smokers who have had plenty of warnings over the years about the dangers of smoking. Yes we continued to allow these dangerous products to be grown, produced and sold because of special interests but there's been plenty of warnings about the effects. Deciding to roll the dice and smoke ultimately makes you responsible not anyone else. Similarly, failing to prepare yourself for the future and having little or no retirement savings is ultimately your fault. I do understand that certain people had little or no disposable income so they may have had not options, but all of those who spent money on indulgent things could have saved more.
Ultimately we seem to want to place blame in someone else, often the Government for our individual failures. Remember in this country we get to vote so the Government is what we make it.
Monday, August 8, 2016
Reality
I talked about promises and empty promises in my last post and while we live in a world where information is at everyone's fingertips it sometimes seems that we don't have a clear grasp of reality, or at least many of us don't.
Now, reality is not a relative thing, meaning its the same for everybody even if we feel differently about it. For example, getting shot if a real event. How it happened and who's at fault is another matter but even so there is a real sequence of events that can be determined. In fact our criminal justice system relies on us being able to determine that beyond a reasonable doubt. Obviously its not always possible but ultimately whether we find it or not, it is there.
Reality takes a back seat all too often to political and social motivations. For example, relatively modest proposals to do additional background checks related to the purchase of assault weapons immediately becomes an effort to take all guns away. A couple of immigrants commit crimes and all immigrants are criminals. There is the reality and then there is the exaggeration. This is so insidious there are times we don't even need a reality to have the exaggeration.
Look at the birther "controversy" that we had and to some extent still have about Obama's birthplace. It had no basis in reality but the exaggeration took on a life of its own. We always had rumors and misinformation, it just seems we have so much more nowadays, maybe because of social media and irresponsible journalism.
Sadly I do believe that the majority of Americans share certain common values and beliefs. However its hard to see that in the phony realities that exist.
Now, reality is not a relative thing, meaning its the same for everybody even if we feel differently about it. For example, getting shot if a real event. How it happened and who's at fault is another matter but even so there is a real sequence of events that can be determined. In fact our criminal justice system relies on us being able to determine that beyond a reasonable doubt. Obviously its not always possible but ultimately whether we find it or not, it is there.
Reality takes a back seat all too often to political and social motivations. For example, relatively modest proposals to do additional background checks related to the purchase of assault weapons immediately becomes an effort to take all guns away. A couple of immigrants commit crimes and all immigrants are criminals. There is the reality and then there is the exaggeration. This is so insidious there are times we don't even need a reality to have the exaggeration.
Look at the birther "controversy" that we had and to some extent still have about Obama's birthplace. It had no basis in reality but the exaggeration took on a life of its own. We always had rumors and misinformation, it just seems we have so much more nowadays, maybe because of social media and irresponsible journalism.
Sadly I do believe that the majority of Americans share certain common values and beliefs. However its hard to see that in the phony realities that exist.
Saturday, August 6, 2016
Promises
Making promises is easy, delivering on those promises can be hard.
Politicians make promises, its what they do to quote a current commercial. Being able to deliver is quite another thing. This is true for all politicians and while you clearly want to elect the one that promises the things you want as opposed to one who promises things you don't want, its also important to understand if they are real or empty promises.
In politics two things are required to deliver on a promise in this country. The desire and power to do it. One of the things that has led to the current distrust of Government are all the promises made by candidates that they couldn't deliver on, mostly because they didn't have the power, but sometimes they didn't have the desire either.
It is an infrequent event when one party has enough support in both houses of Congress to make fundamental changes One such scenario was after the election of 2008 when the Democrats were able to pass the Affordable Care Act. An act that is attacked so very much but which has done so much good.
But that is a rare event since the senate rules require a majority of 60 to push through legislation. Few remember that because we lost a senate sear the only way to pass the Affordable Care Act in the Senate was to accept the latest House version without revisions since the Democrats had only 59 votes. A few known issues had to be left in.
However, making promises you can't keep is a time honored political tradition and one that shows no sign of ending. Media coverage really tends to fail here since they repeat the promises without the proper analysis. To the extent the promises simply represent goals to be pursued that's fine, but certain people actually believe these promises. When the promises aren't delivered its because the Government is corrupt or untrustworthy.
I don't know if its always been this way. It seems to me that we used to understand that campaign promises were goals and not guaranteed. I think a lot of us still do understand that but sadly, it seems that when I talk to people, or see what they post on social media, they buy in to the idea that politicians are corrupt and untrustworthy. Of course some are, but the vast majority on both sides aren't. Maybe its the fact that everything is now instantaneous. Further, we live in an age where irresponsible reporting is rampant. Look at how much media was spent on where Obama was born when it wasn't even really an issue. Partisan politics is actually tame compared to the partisan media we now have, but that is another topic.
I wish we could see more facts and less empty promises in our elections, but I'd also like to win the lottery.
Politicians make promises, its what they do to quote a current commercial. Being able to deliver is quite another thing. This is true for all politicians and while you clearly want to elect the one that promises the things you want as opposed to one who promises things you don't want, its also important to understand if they are real or empty promises.
In politics two things are required to deliver on a promise in this country. The desire and power to do it. One of the things that has led to the current distrust of Government are all the promises made by candidates that they couldn't deliver on, mostly because they didn't have the power, but sometimes they didn't have the desire either.
It is an infrequent event when one party has enough support in both houses of Congress to make fundamental changes One such scenario was after the election of 2008 when the Democrats were able to pass the Affordable Care Act. An act that is attacked so very much but which has done so much good.
But that is a rare event since the senate rules require a majority of 60 to push through legislation. Few remember that because we lost a senate sear the only way to pass the Affordable Care Act in the Senate was to accept the latest House version without revisions since the Democrats had only 59 votes. A few known issues had to be left in.
However, making promises you can't keep is a time honored political tradition and one that shows no sign of ending. Media coverage really tends to fail here since they repeat the promises without the proper analysis. To the extent the promises simply represent goals to be pursued that's fine, but certain people actually believe these promises. When the promises aren't delivered its because the Government is corrupt or untrustworthy.
I don't know if its always been this way. It seems to me that we used to understand that campaign promises were goals and not guaranteed. I think a lot of us still do understand that but sadly, it seems that when I talk to people, or see what they post on social media, they buy in to the idea that politicians are corrupt and untrustworthy. Of course some are, but the vast majority on both sides aren't. Maybe its the fact that everything is now instantaneous. Further, we live in an age where irresponsible reporting is rampant. Look at how much media was spent on where Obama was born when it wasn't even really an issue. Partisan politics is actually tame compared to the partisan media we now have, but that is another topic.
I wish we could see more facts and less empty promises in our elections, but I'd also like to win the lottery.
Friday, August 5, 2016
The American Way
Many of us grew up watching a TV show where the superhero stood for Truth, Justice and the American way. What was of course left undefined was what is the American way.
I was probably naive but it didn't seem like there was much disagreement that it represented the values om the books and movies we had, values like work hard, give everyone a fair shake, stand up for the little guy, do your part and support the country. However if I had to pick one work that I equate with the American way its would be winners.
This was the era after the great depression and World War 2 where the President was the General who had led us to victory and we had a clear enemy in communism. We had won every war (Korea was sort of ignored as a police action) and we were the best in pretty much everything, thanks in large part to the fact that most of our competitors had been devastated by the war.
Yes this was the America of winners that I and many of my compatriots grew up with, even if there were racial and economic problems beneath the surface that were getting ready to erupt. It was an era where we faced nuclear elimination constantly but pretty much ignored it except when there was a crisis. We had all those new suburban houses, everyone had a car, everyone had a job and life was as good as it gets, although of course it wasn't except on TV shows.
If you were to ask most of the Trump supporters this is when America was great and what they think he will bring back. Its an empty promise since the world is a very different place and we have so much history since then, Vietnam, imported products, terrorism, computers and technology and the diversification of America, both socially and by nationality.
By almost any objective standard the world is better than it was back then. More people have been lifted out of poverty, more countries are democracies, we have instant information at our fingertips and we have developed technologies that allow us to provide food (the green revolution) for everybody. However as I pointed out this has not included the people who lived a privileged existence when American products dominated the world and good paying, union jobs were widely available.
There is no going back to that, no matter what vague promises are made. You can't put humpty dumpty together again, time to enjoy the omelette.
I was probably naive but it didn't seem like there was much disagreement that it represented the values om the books and movies we had, values like work hard, give everyone a fair shake, stand up for the little guy, do your part and support the country. However if I had to pick one work that I equate with the American way its would be winners.
This was the era after the great depression and World War 2 where the President was the General who had led us to victory and we had a clear enemy in communism. We had won every war (Korea was sort of ignored as a police action) and we were the best in pretty much everything, thanks in large part to the fact that most of our competitors had been devastated by the war.
Yes this was the America of winners that I and many of my compatriots grew up with, even if there were racial and economic problems beneath the surface that were getting ready to erupt. It was an era where we faced nuclear elimination constantly but pretty much ignored it except when there was a crisis. We had all those new suburban houses, everyone had a car, everyone had a job and life was as good as it gets, although of course it wasn't except on TV shows.
If you were to ask most of the Trump supporters this is when America was great and what they think he will bring back. Its an empty promise since the world is a very different place and we have so much history since then, Vietnam, imported products, terrorism, computers and technology and the diversification of America, both socially and by nationality.
By almost any objective standard the world is better than it was back then. More people have been lifted out of poverty, more countries are democracies, we have instant information at our fingertips and we have developed technologies that allow us to provide food (the green revolution) for everybody. However as I pointed out this has not included the people who lived a privileged existence when American products dominated the world and good paying, union jobs were widely available.
There is no going back to that, no matter what vague promises are made. You can't put humpty dumpty together again, time to enjoy the omelette.
Thursday, August 4, 2016
Fairness
If you have been reading these, thanks, but today I want to continue more or less where I left off yesterday.
Jobs that used to be available to "working class" Americans have been disappearing. To a certain extent this is because they have moved overseas as economic reality forces the management to reduce production costs. Those who want to bring those jobs back and restore America to what it once was could only achieve that by effectively taxing consumers with increased costs and giving that money to the working class, or hidden welfare. This wouldn't be the only example of this, we subsidize farmers and prop up food prices and of course we already provide tax breaks to many industries to promote jobs.
Whether these policies are good or bad is probably a whole different discussion. The topic today is fairness and the fact that capitalists have made the most from this movement of jobs is viewed as unfair by many who want them to bring the jobs back. To do this they demand the Government intervene even while decrying big Government. They argue this movement of jobs has been unfair to them, since they did what they were told they needed to do, finish high school, serve in the military, work hard, raise a family, and find themselves on the short end of the stick. Of course they also defend rugged individualism while failing to be those rugged individuals themselves, failing to prepare themselves for this future.
I would also like to point out that the loss of jobs is also related to improved technology, not just movement. Even had all the manufacturing stayed in this country there would be less jobs and those jobs would require a higher skill level. It is fairly common that companies have trouble filling the jobs they do have because the available applicants lack the right skills.
Once again viewed as unfair by many. There may actually be a point to be made there since the productivity gains primarily benefited the owners and managers and not the displaced workers. Its a bit ironic that the only organizations likely to argue for workers sharing in these gains are unions which have become less and less popular since they are viewed as causing job loses by driving up costs. This leaves the working class more unrepresented and resentful because, well, it just isn't fair.
Capitalism by its nature is fair but cruel. Similar to nature, the strong survive and the weak perish. While it might be unfair to get a head start because your parents were successful, its in the long run simply a predictable outcome. If we want to level the playing field we have to adopt policies that are social in nature, like free education, health care, unemployment insurance, etc. etc. Everyone accepts the idea that we provide public education through high school which at one time was enough, but were not ready to do the same for college. This of course requires Government intervention and we have a large group of people convinced that Government intervention is always a bad thing. Of course the people who benefit from that happen to be the people who already have the money and don't want to share it.
You have to give them credit for the scam. Big Government has made us move your jobs overseas by signing trade deals. Therefore big Government is bad and look they give things to undeserving people and make deserving people pay taxes. Reduce Government interference, let us run our businesses and everything will get better. PT Barnum would be proud.
Jobs that used to be available to "working class" Americans have been disappearing. To a certain extent this is because they have moved overseas as economic reality forces the management to reduce production costs. Those who want to bring those jobs back and restore America to what it once was could only achieve that by effectively taxing consumers with increased costs and giving that money to the working class, or hidden welfare. This wouldn't be the only example of this, we subsidize farmers and prop up food prices and of course we already provide tax breaks to many industries to promote jobs.
Whether these policies are good or bad is probably a whole different discussion. The topic today is fairness and the fact that capitalists have made the most from this movement of jobs is viewed as unfair by many who want them to bring the jobs back. To do this they demand the Government intervene even while decrying big Government. They argue this movement of jobs has been unfair to them, since they did what they were told they needed to do, finish high school, serve in the military, work hard, raise a family, and find themselves on the short end of the stick. Of course they also defend rugged individualism while failing to be those rugged individuals themselves, failing to prepare themselves for this future.
I would also like to point out that the loss of jobs is also related to improved technology, not just movement. Even had all the manufacturing stayed in this country there would be less jobs and those jobs would require a higher skill level. It is fairly common that companies have trouble filling the jobs they do have because the available applicants lack the right skills.
Once again viewed as unfair by many. There may actually be a point to be made there since the productivity gains primarily benefited the owners and managers and not the displaced workers. Its a bit ironic that the only organizations likely to argue for workers sharing in these gains are unions which have become less and less popular since they are viewed as causing job loses by driving up costs. This leaves the working class more unrepresented and resentful because, well, it just isn't fair.
Capitalism by its nature is fair but cruel. Similar to nature, the strong survive and the weak perish. While it might be unfair to get a head start because your parents were successful, its in the long run simply a predictable outcome. If we want to level the playing field we have to adopt policies that are social in nature, like free education, health care, unemployment insurance, etc. etc. Everyone accepts the idea that we provide public education through high school which at one time was enough, but were not ready to do the same for college. This of course requires Government intervention and we have a large group of people convinced that Government intervention is always a bad thing. Of course the people who benefit from that happen to be the people who already have the money and don't want to share it.
You have to give them credit for the scam. Big Government has made us move your jobs overseas by signing trade deals. Therefore big Government is bad and look they give things to undeserving people and make deserving people pay taxes. Reduce Government interference, let us run our businesses and everything will get better. PT Barnum would be proud.
Wednesday, August 3, 2016
Direction
All politics are local is a pretty famous truism. The logic behind this is that voters are always aware of things that actually impact them and are, like most humans, pretty sure their experience is the most valid experience. So as I discussed the other day, you may have a single issue that you believe has to be fixed above all else (abortion, jobs, taxes, housing) because it has a direct impact on you (physically or emotionally). To the extent the electorate is experiencing the same things they will tend to vote the same. So in a farm district issues important to farmers will often dominate and since those districts tend to be church going, god fearing districts they even agree for the most part on social issues. Since the people who grow up in those districts with contrary life styles or beliefs are likely to move away it is self perpetuating. Similarly in a urban center with diverse populations, life styles, opportunities and beliefs, we are likely to have a completely different outcome in an election. You can predict the majority of congressional districts pretty reliably, at least when it comes to national elections.
Now I have found that most Americans except the general idea that America has shared values. However, what they think those shared values are is somewhat different, if not at the top level then in the way to achieve it. For example, look at National Defense. You can support it by wanting to be involved globally combating threats in the places they originate while trying to internationalize the concepts in our constitution or you can say keep our troops and money home, build a defense that no one will ever try to attack and let the rest of the world take care of itself. Both of those positions support a strong defense with probably the only common ground being a strong military.
Issue after issue follows the same pattern, a strong economy, education, immigration, health care, etc. etc. There is no way to really prove what works better, although there are plenty of examples, they are either inconclusive or they weren't implemented fully. Take international trade agreements. They are supposed to improve the overall world economy thereby lifting each nations economy in the process. However, while that may be true it does it by making the global economy more efficient. So if it is more efficient to do manual labor (manufacturing) in a foreign country while providing complex services here, it leads to many displaced workers who have antiquated skill sets. Yes goods get cheaper overall and maybe the total number of jobs is the same or better but the nature of those jobs is different and the impacted individuals are the victims.
This is not the first time we've had an experience like this, and it will work itself out over time, but a displaced factory worker who is making half of what he/she used to and who sees the products they used to make with a made in someplace else label on them feels betrayed. They worked hard, made good products and the company they worked for was profitable, so what happened?
Well what happened is the management of the company needed to stay competitive and to stay competitive they had to relocate production. As famously said in well known movies, it's just business.
Of course this seems like something that can be reversed, if things could just go back to the way they were.
More to follow.
Now I have found that most Americans except the general idea that America has shared values. However, what they think those shared values are is somewhat different, if not at the top level then in the way to achieve it. For example, look at National Defense. You can support it by wanting to be involved globally combating threats in the places they originate while trying to internationalize the concepts in our constitution or you can say keep our troops and money home, build a defense that no one will ever try to attack and let the rest of the world take care of itself. Both of those positions support a strong defense with probably the only common ground being a strong military.
Issue after issue follows the same pattern, a strong economy, education, immigration, health care, etc. etc. There is no way to really prove what works better, although there are plenty of examples, they are either inconclusive or they weren't implemented fully. Take international trade agreements. They are supposed to improve the overall world economy thereby lifting each nations economy in the process. However, while that may be true it does it by making the global economy more efficient. So if it is more efficient to do manual labor (manufacturing) in a foreign country while providing complex services here, it leads to many displaced workers who have antiquated skill sets. Yes goods get cheaper overall and maybe the total number of jobs is the same or better but the nature of those jobs is different and the impacted individuals are the victims.
This is not the first time we've had an experience like this, and it will work itself out over time, but a displaced factory worker who is making half of what he/she used to and who sees the products they used to make with a made in someplace else label on them feels betrayed. They worked hard, made good products and the company they worked for was profitable, so what happened?
Well what happened is the management of the company needed to stay competitive and to stay competitive they had to relocate production. As famously said in well known movies, it's just business.
Of course this seems like something that can be reversed, if things could just go back to the way they were.
More to follow.
Tuesday, August 2, 2016
More Meandering
Yesterday I was discussing how the parties have become more and more polarized as they respond to the fringe elements in their base. This is because so many Americans don't vote, either in the regular election or even more so in the primaries. The candidates who argued that the system was rigged were correct in a certain way, but it is really rigged in the favor of fringe candidates.
Number of people who voted in the primaries is being reported as 9% of all voting age Americans. This number could actually be representative if it was actually a valid sample of all voters. However it isn't, the ones who vote the most are those with a cause who want to express their point of view. If you are fairly content with things with a busy life, voting is a chore that you decide isn't worth it, especially in primaries.
The only way to fix this would be to make voting easier and rewarding. Unfortunately, having more people vote is not in the self interest of many of our elected officials who got elected by one or more of these fringe elements, especially at the local and state level. Consider the math. If you are in a state or district that always votes for one party you simply have to win that party's primary to get elected. So few people vote in primaries that you need to appeal to one or two fringe groups who will get out and vote for you. This path to success has been followed by many who have to maintain support by catering to the base that supported them and by keeping voting levels low.
In the Republican primaries none of the mainstream candidates lasted very long. Remember that Ted Cruz is by no means mainstream, he got elected by the tea party and evangelical fringe groups. Donald Trump is clearly not mainstream, and in fact has upset the party because he has created a whole new fringe group, angry people.
Are most Americans angry? I don't think so, but some are very angry as they lost high paying jobs in manufacturing or mining. They see an America that is becoming more inclusive which they view as curtailing their prior privileged position (it doesn't). They voted for prior candidates who made promises they couldn't keep even if they meant them and they feel betrayed.
How big is this group? I really don't know but its sizable and when energized can dominate primaries where so few people actually vote. Its not just Republicans, the angry Democrats have different issues, student debt, worthless college degrees, banks that are too big to fail but they are also angry. They made an impact and had the Sanders campaign got organized earlier we could be faced with a Trump vs Sanders general election.
As it is we have Trump vs Clinton. Republicans have always vilified the Clintons mainly because they keep losing to them. Of course they also vilify Obama but by now that's a bit meaningless.
If we want to fix the election process we have to make voting in primaries and regular elections easier and more inclusive. Unfortunately I don't see any real effort in that direction.
More to come.
Jim
Number of people who voted in the primaries is being reported as 9% of all voting age Americans. This number could actually be representative if it was actually a valid sample of all voters. However it isn't, the ones who vote the most are those with a cause who want to express their point of view. If you are fairly content with things with a busy life, voting is a chore that you decide isn't worth it, especially in primaries.
The only way to fix this would be to make voting easier and rewarding. Unfortunately, having more people vote is not in the self interest of many of our elected officials who got elected by one or more of these fringe elements, especially at the local and state level. Consider the math. If you are in a state or district that always votes for one party you simply have to win that party's primary to get elected. So few people vote in primaries that you need to appeal to one or two fringe groups who will get out and vote for you. This path to success has been followed by many who have to maintain support by catering to the base that supported them and by keeping voting levels low.
In the Republican primaries none of the mainstream candidates lasted very long. Remember that Ted Cruz is by no means mainstream, he got elected by the tea party and evangelical fringe groups. Donald Trump is clearly not mainstream, and in fact has upset the party because he has created a whole new fringe group, angry people.
Are most Americans angry? I don't think so, but some are very angry as they lost high paying jobs in manufacturing or mining. They see an America that is becoming more inclusive which they view as curtailing their prior privileged position (it doesn't). They voted for prior candidates who made promises they couldn't keep even if they meant them and they feel betrayed.
How big is this group? I really don't know but its sizable and when energized can dominate primaries where so few people actually vote. Its not just Republicans, the angry Democrats have different issues, student debt, worthless college degrees, banks that are too big to fail but they are also angry. They made an impact and had the Sanders campaign got organized earlier we could be faced with a Trump vs Sanders general election.
As it is we have Trump vs Clinton. Republicans have always vilified the Clintons mainly because they keep losing to them. Of course they also vilify Obama but by now that's a bit meaningless.
If we want to fix the election process we have to make voting in primaries and regular elections easier and more inclusive. Unfortunately I don't see any real effort in that direction.
More to come.
Jim
Monday, August 1, 2016
August thoughts
Well the first part of the general election has started and its obviously too early normally to predict but its pretty clear that the majority of Americans will come to the conclusion that the Republican candidate is way over the line on almost everything and while he is certainly entertaining, hes no President and leader of the free world. While of course odd things do happen this isn't really worth much discussion.
What is worth discussion is why he has so many backers. In fact, we seem to have developed a fragmented society and while the Republicans have captured the main group of people who feel America is doing badly (it isn't based on any factual data you look at) they are not limited to just the right.
I think this is worthy of some exploration just to flesh it out.
The first thing that I should note is that there were always single issue voters, voters who felt so strongly about a particular issue that they would support whoever was on their side, not matter what else they espoused. The biggest of these issues involve things like abortions, guns, gay rights, discrimination. Israel is one of these issues but there isn't a notable difference on either side.
So someone who is anti-abortion and who considers it murders will support a candidate even if all their other policies are not what they want. Of course they would prefer an anti-abortion candidate who also has other positions they support, but faced with a choice between two candidates they will vote for the one that is anti-abortion since they feel so strongly about it. Everything else can wait until they fix that one big issue.
So this has developed into the respective bases of the two major parties although it also to some extent maintains certain third parties. While not everybody is fanatical in this group, picking a party because it is pro life or pro gun or pro (fill in the blank) probably means that any candidate you nominate will get up to 30% of the nation's votes, on both sides. You can't normally persuade these voters to change sides without alienating your own base.
It is also clear that issues within each party can be at conflict with each other. You have your Tea Party Republicans and your Occupy Wall Street Democrats that oppose what were major party platforms related to business and the economy. They have both moved their respective parties away from the middle and made compromise almost impossible. The bottom line though is that while they have tremendous influence in primaries they become a liability during general elections where the independent middle gets to decide. So candidates have to appeal to those voters effectively betraying the fanatics who do in fact feel betrayed. Of course democracy means the will of the many outweighs the will of the few and what is perceived as betrayal is simply the way the process has to work. Is it rigged? Well rigged by the nature of democracy where the winner gets the most votes.
I'll continue this meandering train of thought later in the week,
What is worth discussion is why he has so many backers. In fact, we seem to have developed a fragmented society and while the Republicans have captured the main group of people who feel America is doing badly (it isn't based on any factual data you look at) they are not limited to just the right.
I think this is worthy of some exploration just to flesh it out.
The first thing that I should note is that there were always single issue voters, voters who felt so strongly about a particular issue that they would support whoever was on their side, not matter what else they espoused. The biggest of these issues involve things like abortions, guns, gay rights, discrimination. Israel is one of these issues but there isn't a notable difference on either side.
So someone who is anti-abortion and who considers it murders will support a candidate even if all their other policies are not what they want. Of course they would prefer an anti-abortion candidate who also has other positions they support, but faced with a choice between two candidates they will vote for the one that is anti-abortion since they feel so strongly about it. Everything else can wait until they fix that one big issue.
So this has developed into the respective bases of the two major parties although it also to some extent maintains certain third parties. While not everybody is fanatical in this group, picking a party because it is pro life or pro gun or pro (fill in the blank) probably means that any candidate you nominate will get up to 30% of the nation's votes, on both sides. You can't normally persuade these voters to change sides without alienating your own base.
It is also clear that issues within each party can be at conflict with each other. You have your Tea Party Republicans and your Occupy Wall Street Democrats that oppose what were major party platforms related to business and the economy. They have both moved their respective parties away from the middle and made compromise almost impossible. The bottom line though is that while they have tremendous influence in primaries they become a liability during general elections where the independent middle gets to decide. So candidates have to appeal to those voters effectively betraying the fanatics who do in fact feel betrayed. Of course democracy means the will of the many outweighs the will of the few and what is perceived as betrayal is simply the way the process has to work. Is it rigged? Well rigged by the nature of democracy where the winner gets the most votes.
I'll continue this meandering train of thought later in the week,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)