Once upon a time (and, no...this is not a fairy tale) America was a country full of people who "did" things. Our forefathers never ever expected to be given anything; they expected to live or die on the basis of whether they succeeded or not. And many did die. The actual number of people that died as America was settled and then expanded west is unknown...at least I have never seen any estimate supported by good research. Those who survived accomplished amazing things.
These people were of all kinds: kind, cruel, gifted, lucky and all sorts of other mixes of character traits. The common trait, however, was that they had only themselves to rely on and that meant they had to take responsibility for the path that their lives took. They were doers...NOT watchers. They acted. They acted to accomplish goals: to eat, live, support their family, to defend their family. None of them...that survived...expected this to be done for them. They didn't sit around waiting for someone else to support or protect them.
Very few people of that frame of mind exist in America today. Those that do are vilified as cruel, unkind, uncaring and/or racist...in addition to many other terms of disrespect. Why? For two main reasons: 1. that sort of attitude is embarrassing to those who are supported by government handouts and if acknowledged as a good thing would leave the recipients feeling "less than";2. the politicians who use the "giving" of other peoples' money to those who don't achieve in order to "buy" their votes and thereby remain in office do not want that fact...or the fact that they usually never keep their promises...highlighted, lest they lose their position of power. I can remember the days of the Community Chest and local Churches and Charities taking care of the "deserving" poor. Yes...I said "deserving." Because in those days every town and county had hard working folk who had disaster visited upon them unexpectedly and were as hard-working as any other member of the community...they deserved help. Likewise, every town had some who were poor out of lack of effort or impulse, making a career out of looking for a hand out. Those folk were never indulged...except for the "elitists" and Progressives in town who were rich and make themselves feel worthy by ostensibly giving funds to any poor person providing it could be done ostentatiously...in public.
Today's America is populated by an increasing number of passive and active "victims." Almost half now receive money from the government that has no basis on their contributions to government programs, like Social Security. That is money that was paid by the recipients over past years, and that is repaid by the government now on the basis of how much you contributed during your working and productive years. No...I am talking about reverse taxation, unemployment, welfare and the like.
There was a time when a majority of people who found themselves in a position to have to take such support were embarrassed to do so; they knew that they hadn't earned it, and looked forward to getting back on their feet so that they could take pride in living off of what they earned. No such embarrassment today; in fact, there is a certain pride and braggadocio exhibited by those who are "stealing" tax dollars from those who do work and pay the taxes that are so blithely redistributed by politicians. And the majority allow this sort of attitude...even applaud it. I find it disgusting.
The same goes for defending ourselves. We allow the government to abandon guarding or enforcing our borders. We make excuses to not hold those that attack us accountable, thereby keeping from having to react in any forceful way to eliminate such attacks. A majority sit around as if there is nothing to be done...except to chant mantras and call for peace and love. I remember a saying common when I was growing up: "God helps those that help themselves." One didn't sit around moaning about something...you did something about it. Maybe you failed, but you tried. You didn't whine about it or mis-characterize it for some unrelated agenda item. It wasn't about words. It was about doing! Victims whine. Independent free human beings act, and take pride in that fact.
Too bad that America has forgotten how to do that.
Showing posts with label work. Show all posts
Showing posts with label work. Show all posts
Monday, June 13, 2016
Sunday, January 24, 2016
Why a "President" Trump may be best for America
Until this morning I had favored the election of Mr. Trump as President as a means of punishing professional politicians for their narcissistic, inbred consistent ignoring of their constituents wishes, requests and needs, choosing instead to form their badly disguised cross-aisle cooperation to protect each other at the taxpayers' expense. They all needed to rediscover and suffer consequences. I reasoned that an outsider would accomplish that, and although Mr. Trump seems likely to be far more liberal than I would like, it was paramount to punish all those with such a longer track record of not listening that I ignored his liberal potential.
But this morning my thoughts suddenly turned in a much more positive direction.
One of the constant complaints heard is that our government is not only responsive, but that it just can't get things done. We hear that our President had no interest in creating any working relationship with Congress in general, with the "other" side, and even is aloof from those office holders from his own party. We note that even wanted actions by the executive branch don't help because upon an election of a President who thinks otherwise, those decrees can be reversed...so no business or individual can invest in any business because of that inherent risk.
Others point to the Congressional impasses that result in lots of words and votes, but either stall or end up being vetoed by the Chief Executive.
May I suggest that electing Donald Trump is extremely likely to solve all of these complaints, relegating them to the scrap heap.
Why?
What is Mr. Trump's broadest impact on the world? No, not his Real Estate empire or accomplishments. It is the book, "Art of the Deal." It clearly demonstrates Mr. Trump's desire to "get things done"...preferably at a profit, but always as economically as possible.
To accomplish something that he deems essential, is he likely to walk away from anything because of ideology? I don't think so. He will want to have proof of what it will cost, where the money will come from (if from borrowing, he'll want to know how it will be paid back), and who and how will the costs be controlled and the results be guaranteed. No verbal assurances are likely to be acceptable to him...put it in the "voted for" document for everyone to see.
How or why is this good?
Because now...finally...there is supreme motivation for getting good people to run, and for getting people out to vote for Congressional and Senate elections!
It is very likely that a President Trump will work with whatever Congress the people elect...Republican, Conservative, Democrat or Liberal. And those elections will determine who will be "dealing" with President Trump. It is entirely likely that the more conservative the Congress, the more conservative the deals that will be made. But, conversely, if the "people" chose to elect those of the Liberal or Democratic viewpoints, Mr. Trump will work deals that would be more liberal. None of us would be completely happy, but I strongly suggest that government would, again, work! Remember that President Reagan worked with a Democratic Congress to get things done. So did President Clinton. Good administrators will find a way to accomplish more things in ways that make the most people more content.
So...if more and more people come to the same conclusion, I think that a lot of Democrats will cross over to vote for Mr. Trump...if he is nominated...knowing that if they also achieve numerical superiority in Congress, their views and wants will be heard and respected. And those of a more conservative bent will feel the same. Everyone will then focus on those Senate and Congressional races, realizing that the President will honor those elections in the manner in which he negotiates government action with the Legislative branch.
And THAT would be a good thing for the entire country.
But this morning my thoughts suddenly turned in a much more positive direction.
One of the constant complaints heard is that our government is not only responsive, but that it just can't get things done. We hear that our President had no interest in creating any working relationship with Congress in general, with the "other" side, and even is aloof from those office holders from his own party. We note that even wanted actions by the executive branch don't help because upon an election of a President who thinks otherwise, those decrees can be reversed...so no business or individual can invest in any business because of that inherent risk.
Others point to the Congressional impasses that result in lots of words and votes, but either stall or end up being vetoed by the Chief Executive.
May I suggest that electing Donald Trump is extremely likely to solve all of these complaints, relegating them to the scrap heap.
Why?
What is Mr. Trump's broadest impact on the world? No, not his Real Estate empire or accomplishments. It is the book, "Art of the Deal." It clearly demonstrates Mr. Trump's desire to "get things done"...preferably at a profit, but always as economically as possible.
To accomplish something that he deems essential, is he likely to walk away from anything because of ideology? I don't think so. He will want to have proof of what it will cost, where the money will come from (if from borrowing, he'll want to know how it will be paid back), and who and how will the costs be controlled and the results be guaranteed. No verbal assurances are likely to be acceptable to him...put it in the "voted for" document for everyone to see.
How or why is this good?
Because now...finally...there is supreme motivation for getting good people to run, and for getting people out to vote for Congressional and Senate elections!
It is very likely that a President Trump will work with whatever Congress the people elect...Republican, Conservative, Democrat or Liberal. And those elections will determine who will be "dealing" with President Trump. It is entirely likely that the more conservative the Congress, the more conservative the deals that will be made. But, conversely, if the "people" chose to elect those of the Liberal or Democratic viewpoints, Mr. Trump will work deals that would be more liberal. None of us would be completely happy, but I strongly suggest that government would, again, work! Remember that President Reagan worked with a Democratic Congress to get things done. So did President Clinton. Good administrators will find a way to accomplish more things in ways that make the most people more content.
So...if more and more people come to the same conclusion, I think that a lot of Democrats will cross over to vote for Mr. Trump...if he is nominated...knowing that if they also achieve numerical superiority in Congress, their views and wants will be heard and respected. And those of a more conservative bent will feel the same. Everyone will then focus on those Senate and Congressional races, realizing that the President will honor those elections in the manner in which he negotiates government action with the Legislative branch.
And THAT would be a good thing for the entire country.
Sunday, May 24, 2015
Do the American People even want real Freedom anymore?
Oh, I know everyone wants to do as they wish. But that is not Freedom. Freedom is not license and it is not lack of consequences; Freedom is the right and even the obligation to take charge of your own life, to make decisions for yourself, and then suffer or be rewarded for those decisions, learning from your experience and growing in the security that you did do that yourself.
What and how the government operates has little effect on thirty (30%) percent of the population; about 15% will never want or achieve independence or be much concerned with freedom; and about 15% will never be stopped from struggling for independence and freedom, despite any government or other attempts to make them dependent. But the remaining seventy (70%) percent of our population can be and are influenced by both laws and by what seems acceptable in general society.
For years, biblical morality was the general norm. People understood, even if the laws didn't say it outright, what was acceptable in society and in public action and discourse...and they abided by it for the most part. Men didn't swear in a proper public forum or in the presence of women; women didn't use foul language when in public (what and how they spoke when with other women has always been a mystery). Men held doors for women to enter first, parents disciplined their children as they saw fit, and children were expected to be seen and not heard. Not always codified, nonetheless there was a certain level of behavior that was expected.
And one of those expectations was that every person would earnestly try to successfully earn a living for both himself and for his family; that being "on the dole" or receiving assistance from family, acquaintances, a "Community Chest" organization or the government was an embarrassment and to be avoided if at all possible...and, if not, to be repaid or to get off of any assistance as quickly as possible. Such proof of lack of independence was a sign of both failure and or loss of Freedom of existence.
Again, this attitude was not necessarily codified...but it was enforced by public perception.
None of this appears to remain true today. Oh, there are some who give lip service to the concepts. But actions speak louder than words. And legal decisions seem to encourage and buttress concepts that consequences are politically incorrect; that there is no bedrock of "right" and "wrong"; that an inability to support oneself is not embarrassing or to be corrected, as someone or something else owes you a subsistence.
When the government creates a support system that actually results in reducing your earned income if you take a job instead of remaining on government-sponsored and created programs, thus punishing you for wanting to actually earn a living, the vast majority of the public quickly adjusts to the new attitude that working or earning a living doesn't matter...that government will be your "big Daddy" and take care of you. How utterly appalling, disrespectful, insulting as well as destructive to the individual and society at large. And how absolutely it puts the country on the path to destruction, as that kind of support ultimately runs out of money even as the percentage of citizens growing up to expect such support grows toward 100%.
And yet young adults all around me seem blissfully unaware of the inherent dangers of dependence on others to survive. They also have a narcissistic view of what is important in their world. Certainly there are some who battle this view...but they ultimately abandon that instinct because 1) of the influence of their friends, or 2) come to see the injustice of their being required to support so many who could but don't work.
So a very good case can currently be made for the proposition that, other than in words, the American people care not one wit about their Freedom and are totally prepared to be dependent and be controlled by any entity (currently our government) that will provide an acceptable level of subsistence and not hold them accountable or enforce "consequences." The failure to accept personal responsibility and hold to moral standards of conduct seem eerily reminiscent of the historical descriptions of the fall of both the Greek and the Roman Empires. Perhaps our country will prove the exception. I, at least, am not counting on it.
What and how the government operates has little effect on thirty (30%) percent of the population; about 15% will never want or achieve independence or be much concerned with freedom; and about 15% will never be stopped from struggling for independence and freedom, despite any government or other attempts to make them dependent. But the remaining seventy (70%) percent of our population can be and are influenced by both laws and by what seems acceptable in general society.
For years, biblical morality was the general norm. People understood, even if the laws didn't say it outright, what was acceptable in society and in public action and discourse...and they abided by it for the most part. Men didn't swear in a proper public forum or in the presence of women; women didn't use foul language when in public (what and how they spoke when with other women has always been a mystery). Men held doors for women to enter first, parents disciplined their children as they saw fit, and children were expected to be seen and not heard. Not always codified, nonetheless there was a certain level of behavior that was expected.
And one of those expectations was that every person would earnestly try to successfully earn a living for both himself and for his family; that being "on the dole" or receiving assistance from family, acquaintances, a "Community Chest" organization or the government was an embarrassment and to be avoided if at all possible...and, if not, to be repaid or to get off of any assistance as quickly as possible. Such proof of lack of independence was a sign of both failure and or loss of Freedom of existence.
Again, this attitude was not necessarily codified...but it was enforced by public perception.
None of this appears to remain true today. Oh, there are some who give lip service to the concepts. But actions speak louder than words. And legal decisions seem to encourage and buttress concepts that consequences are politically incorrect; that there is no bedrock of "right" and "wrong"; that an inability to support oneself is not embarrassing or to be corrected, as someone or something else owes you a subsistence.
When the government creates a support system that actually results in reducing your earned income if you take a job instead of remaining on government-sponsored and created programs, thus punishing you for wanting to actually earn a living, the vast majority of the public quickly adjusts to the new attitude that working or earning a living doesn't matter...that government will be your "big Daddy" and take care of you. How utterly appalling, disrespectful, insulting as well as destructive to the individual and society at large. And how absolutely it puts the country on the path to destruction, as that kind of support ultimately runs out of money even as the percentage of citizens growing up to expect such support grows toward 100%.
And yet young adults all around me seem blissfully unaware of the inherent dangers of dependence on others to survive. They also have a narcissistic view of what is important in their world. Certainly there are some who battle this view...but they ultimately abandon that instinct because 1) of the influence of their friends, or 2) come to see the injustice of their being required to support so many who could but don't work.
So a very good case can currently be made for the proposition that, other than in words, the American people care not one wit about their Freedom and are totally prepared to be dependent and be controlled by any entity (currently our government) that will provide an acceptable level of subsistence and not hold them accountable or enforce "consequences." The failure to accept personal responsibility and hold to moral standards of conduct seem eerily reminiscent of the historical descriptions of the fall of both the Greek and the Roman Empires. Perhaps our country will prove the exception. I, at least, am not counting on it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)