Common Cause

Our nation is one of the people, by the people, and for the people. We get to decide what it is we want in our lives, from our lives, and because of our lives. The government doesn’t decide this; we do.

Some of our fellow citizens seem to think that this gives them freedom to impose their values and thinking on the rest of us. No. They are wrong.

Democracy provides for open discussion leading to decisions by elected representatives. They make the decisions that govern our lives together. They do this after taking a good reading of what it is we want made public in our discussions, press offerings, and public media sharing of opinions of we the people.

Should those elected representatives get it wrong, they are to be removed at the next election. Pretty simple remedy. It takes our patience and forbearance, but it eventually gets done.

Meddling by these elected officials and their staff sometimes allow continuance in office through gerrymandered electoral districts and other nonsensical protocols passed off as ‘rules and regulations.’ But in time they will be found out and removed from office.

Failing that, I guess we have to impose term limits. That is our trump card (no pun intended). I don’t support term limits in the main, but in the final analysis it may be the only way to get elected representatives to do their jobs correctly.

If elected reps feel that the public has it wrong, then they should not vote contrary to the public’s view. Instead they should extend every effort to inform and educate the public where they think they have it wrong.

In this manner reps will not be allowed to make economic policy using the wrong theories and unproven methods. Macro Economics is what they should be using when fiddling with this arena of governance, not Micro Economics. Shame on them for this basic ignorance.

And ideology. It can and should be discussed, but it should not be overlaid as the final element in making decisions. We need to move beyond the ideology that angers and frustrates governance. We are in gridlock because of this. We cannot afford anymore gridlock in the federal OR state governments.

Seek definition of what the final outcomes should be in the many arenas of public life. Pick the most important arenas, settle on the outcomes as goal, and move forward to find the best ‘how’ to make it happen over time. Stop arguing about the things that don’t matter. Argue over what we ought to be determining as goals. Then take action.

We have made our democracy a sham. It is time to correct this situation.

Get on with it Congress. Get on with it Illinois Legislature. Otherwise you are all numbskulls playacting at meaningless activity.

How do you spell fool?  G R I D L O C K.

Thank you.

June 30, 2017

Press Secretary vs Fake News

Evidently Sean Spicer couldn’t hack the job as Press Secretary at the White House. Where he will end up in the trump administration is anyone’s guess. They can sugar coat it as a promotion to White House Communications Director, but even that job doesn’t direct, and sure doesn’t encompass communications – between or among anyone.

His replacement – albeit – unannounced, is Susan Huckabee Sanders. Not sure she is related to the other well known southern huckabee, but they seem of the same stripe. Daughter perhaps? They seem to share the same gene pool of dis-communication and assertion. One wonders what their diet was growing up? What causes such misplacement of reality as is their penchant?

Sanders’ rant Tuesday at a normal White House press briefing went on and on about how the entire press corps is suspect as to reporting facts when in reality it is the White House dispensing non fact that has muddled things up royally. Think about the twisted lies that trump has been snarled in. Think about the lies he has started via Tweet. Think about the fake Time news magazine cover he has duplicated and posted in his properties, mostly his golf clubs. Just think about that.

He foists onto the American stage of public opinion what he wants you and I to believe. But when checking the facts – as the press is supposed to do – he comes up wanting every time. Every time.

And then, of course, his minions under his employ – correction, under OUR employ – ape every misstatement of his as fact and/or policy. The opposite, of course, is true. So who is calling facts facts and lies lies?  Hmmmmm?

The rant ought not to be coming from the White House. It ought to be coming from the people and the press. We do not accept nonsense as government or policy. That truth is well out by now.

When a fake person assumes the mantle of the President, it does not make him the president. All the trappings are his own because that is what he is used to and what he has bought for himself throughout his lifetime. He is not the royal leader of our nation. Nor was he elected to that position. He was, by colossal error, elected to the Presidency of the USA. That will be corrected in time.  For now we have the Constitution and the other protocols, policies, processes, legal institutions, and history to govern in his stead.

He has tied himself up in his own conspiracies and lies and now finds himself writhing on the floor of the Oval Office unable to accomplish anything. Just as well. What he could conjure up as ‘accomplishment’ boggles the mind of normal people.

One has to laugh and shake heads about what history will say about this era of American history. It will not be about him; no, it will be about how We the People survived this terrible anomaly of governance.

Time for Term Limits for all of Congress; time for social security and Medicare, Medicaid for all of Congress in place of their sweet pot of benefits; time for removal of the Electoral College; and time for a Constitutional Amendment to remove corporations from citizenship.

The folly of present day is more than a laughing matter. It is serious business caused by ignorance and laziness within the public. Shame on that. Shame on them.

For the rest of us?  Resist!

June 29, 2017

Outcomes Wanted

It seems to me that Americans talk a lot and complain a lot. The more this goes on the angrier people get. Often the anger is not about disagreements over topics; rather it is personal and cantankerous. Our incivility begets vitriol begets ugly anger and maybe even violence. Add alcohol and the violence is almost automatic. Add guns and tragedy emerges, too.

I think much of this is due to laziness. We tend not to carefully think through the many ideas and discussions we witness daily. Many of these we participate in as well.

The laziness is really a lack of discipline. A lack of research and deeper thought on issues that matter to us. Rather than react to someone’s opinion because it doesn’t agree with yours completely, keep silent and ponder what he is saying. Note your disagreement with his argument. Follow that up with research. Determine if he is basically correct in recitation of facts; or incorrect and how and why that is the case. If the debater isn’t speaking of facts, then later you can call him on that. If you have the opportunity to discuss this with him at another time, share the results of your research. Do not accuse. Make it a pleasant interchange. If he doesn’t take this well, do not discuss it further with him and avoid all future discussion until he proves he is prepared.

No sense making matters worse arguing points with someone who doesn’t respect truth, facts or logic. Avoiding these folks may actually encourage them to prepare better for future discussions.

Laziness. The avoidance of research. The avoidance of taking the time to check facts. The sloppiness of using opinion as fact when it is not so. Laziness, too, to short cut logic and just get angry because of frustration. It doesn’t solve anything. It doesn’t make you right. It erodes trust and civility.

This laziness can be cured by investing time as outlined above. But another solution may be thinking seriously about what we want from life, from society, from institutions, and from government.

Often we focus on problems. Then it is a fight to determine how to solve those problems. The better solution is defining the outcome we wish for. I know this sounds too simple, but stop and think about it. Have you actually defined what you want to see prevalent in American society? In your neighborhood or town or city? Have you?

For example, here are some outcomes I would dearly see emerge in our American culture:

            -A reduction of gun violence

            -A reduction of youth gangs

            -High completion rates for all grades in school, especially high school graduation

            -Access to continuing education so each person gets what they need to fulfill their

             talents and interests

            -Healthy environment: clean air, soil and water

            -Smooth career transitions toward the new and the rewarding, matched to talents

             and passions

            -Access to health care that values each human life

            -Respect for all religions or atheism; it’s personal not requiring social adherence

            -Peace among nations; elimination of war

That’s a heady list. My point, though, is each is attainable. We don’t have to worry about how each topic will be handled; just that the end result is something we can agree on. The how will become more evident later on. First settle on the goal.

I truly believe we don’t do enough thinking about outcomes. Being clear on them is the first step in finding a solution to any problem related to the outcome. It takes discipline and patience to do this work.

It would also reduce heated arguments. That’s a good step to make other good things happen!

June 28, 2017

Trusting Government

I’ve been a student of politics most of my life and I’m now well into my 70’s. I’ve had doubts from time to time whether representatives truly understand a topic well enough to make decisions and legislate about them.

In today’s atmosphere of raging public discussion and non civil discourse, my doubts are also raging. What does a congressman know about Medicare, Medicaid, and healthcare in general? Tinkering with any of these opens the possibility for major unintended consequences. And then will they have the moxie to repair or undo the damage later? Not very likely. Even if they do the timing will likely be delayed and very slow.

I suspect the ideological arguments embedded in today’s debate about healthcare are actually this: How big a role ought government play in our lives?

Conservatives feel government should be small and focused only on narrow roles that only a central government can have proper effect on. Such would be national defense.

Liberals feel government should be large enough to control for desired outcomes for the common good of our people. Of course what limits may pertain on this is hazy, and those who doubt the common good provided by a strong central government wince each time the word ‘control’ or ‘regulation’ is mentioned.

Centrists feel borrowing the best of all ideas from right and left makes sense and produces compromises that are workable and manageable. Of course compromise for many is a dirty word meaning principles are traded away for something else. If these are valuable principles – which aren’t? – then any compromise is bad.

It seems to me the rhetoric is so hot at the moment that the entire issue of healthcare ought to be placed on hiatus. Keep the programs in place that are already there, and tinker with them to strengthen them so no one citizen gets hurt in the hullabaloo. The health of each citizen is important. That is a principle upon which I think we can agree.

So, how do we do the least damage to citizens while we attempt to build a program that is just, fair and affordable? The affordability is the crux of the matter to those of us who are of practical mind. We are spending public dollars after all, so we must be careful. But do something we must because of our principles.

Healthcare has become so complex and so costly that vast numbers of people fear they will be excluded from care. Those who have the financial strength feel that’s just a reality of the market place. If you can’t pay, you don’t play.

Only not playing costs the community, our society, lives. Some will argue that not all lives are of equal value; in a purist sort of way such arguments can be made. But they are done in folly because our principles tell us that each and every one of us is worthy of our care and protection. Every religion in human history claims this principle as their own.

If you don’t support the principle, then I understand your distaste for spending your money on others. But then you would be the beneficiary of our ‘charity’ if the roles were reversed. What kind of society do you wish to be a part of? Warm, accepting and valuing others? Or uncaring and disassociating?

Does it really matter what your answer is to that question? It does with regard to your attitude and personality type, I suppose. But as a social concept ascribing a value of zero to another human being demeans all of us. You are allowed to be asocial if that is your wish; but the rest of us answer to a higher standard. Your position will call forth consequences you may not wish; but ours will produce a society and culture of inclusion, diversity and massive creativity for the benefit of all.

Healthcare is one of those topics that begs the cultural value of each of us. Our federal government is attempting to deal with this enormous issue as though it is merely an economic issue. It isn’t.

It is a matter of our humanity. It defines our ability to love and being loved.

“Do this to the least of us and you do it to me.” What we do and feel defines who we are.

Let that sink in. Then let your congressman and senators know your position.

June 27, 2017

Letting it Sink In

"You just don’t get it,” the man shouted. “You don’t understand what I’m talking about.” And he was right, still is right! I don’t understand what he is driving at.

Oh, I know he wants to start a business with his favorite ‘widgets’ but I keep telling him there is no market for his particular item. He claims otherwise, so the chase is on to discover what he ‘knows’ and I don’t. I’m not sure the two are in agreement anyway!

Knowing a new product is a neat idea is one thing; knowing that a market exists for it is pure supposition. It is a guess that someone else likes it as much as you do and so it should be made, marketed and sold to those eager buyers. Trouble is those buyers are more in the mind of the widget inventor than in reality.

Besides, another consideration in this prospective is the timeliness of the market place. Is it ready for this product at this time? Or has this product come to market too late? Or too early? And if either or both are true, what does this tell us about other, similar products? Are they doomed as well, or is there a terrific opportunity buried in this data?

Well, that is the exercise the mind must tackle. Data and lots of it has to be gathered and studied to determine if the entrepreneur has a workable idea. Often they don’t; sometimes they do. The trick is to discipline the thinking and take the time to do the homework. A product may be a dandy idea but if it is limited to a small market of need, then the profitability of producing and distributing the product is too little or less than zero.

We want to limit the losses and disappointments. Better to think things through before investing money into something that is apt to be a loser.

Return now to the original sentence of this post: whether I get it or not is still an open question. Studying the product and understanding its appeal is what the entrepreneur wants me to do. He needs me to do this. So I have to study it more. In detail. In depth.

I have to let it sink in to a broader and deeper consciousness. Maybe this product is unique and very valuable. Maybe this product will revolutionize the marketplace, even grow a new industry around it. Steve Jobs proposed this and look what happened? So did Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates.

Just because their products became enormously complex didn’t stop them from pursuing a dream that led to an amazing new global economy. Singly they revolutionized their part of an industry. It became a new industry because of their innovation. Together, all three of these entrepreneurs revolutionized the lives of billions of people.

Now, let that sink in!

Of course, the widget maker may still have an underappreciated product that will go nowhere. Right now I still think that is true. But I should give him the benefit of the doubt and dig deeper.

Who knows what I will find?

June 26, 2017

Civility Model

In my work with SCORE I meet face to face with people who have ideas for new businesses, or already have small businesses in need of some help to succeed and prosper. These people come with a dizzying array of ideas that all contain hope for a better tomorrow – for they or others – and these ideas are not all aimed at customers or needy markets. Some are product ideas; others are for services. Most are for-profit, but many are for non-profit entities, too.

I have a long former career in non-profits. Actually, I am one of the few non-profit mentors in SCORE Fox Valley Chapter. Therefore, I receive a lot of requests for non-profit organizations. Of these requests, most are for help in forming the entity; the rest are existing non-profits with a problem or two they need help with.

Non-profits focus mainly on mission. There is a value orientation to their operation that helps people in need, or serves to support public programs that will improve society. A lot of these groups wish to serve educational and cultural needs of targeted markets. People who will benefit from the education or cultural programming are held high in the minds of those organizing these groups.

This should be lesson enough that our society pitches in and helps where needed. All such support is not done by government programs alone. Or by churches and their sprawling organizations throughout the globe. No; the needs of a healthy community or society extends broadly throughout the world. Rich county or poor, needs are ever present. And a group of caring people are ready and willing to help alleviate the suffering of others.

And improvement. So many groups want to improve living conditions throughout the world. Here in America groups are focused on this mission. Why? Because the need exists. In the midst of wealth and plenty millions of Americans are poor, culturally starved, and poorly educated to fully care for themselves and families. Helping hands organize to feed them, house them, educate and medicate them.

The presence of these groups tells us that needs exist in so many ways and in so many places. Government is not and cannot be everywhere; nor should it be. However, we need to be mindful of the need. When large enough it is likely that only a national government can make a dent in some of these problems. Then that government ought to step in and help address the problem. Meanwhile private citizens and institutions are doing just that already.

Recently a beautiful young woman came to me with news of a new organization that will help ease incivility in highly diverse cultures. In her case the target was the metropolitan area of Lima, Peru. There the society is marked by highly contrasting social castes and household income disparity. Walls physically separate neighborhoods and entire regions from the poor and ‘unruly’.

She and her organization is incorporated here in Illinois and eventually a sister organization will be incorporated in Peru. Both will raise funds needed to build youth and family camp programs offered throughout the year. The campers will be representatives from throughout the Lima social circles and castes. The purpose is to help each camper discover their own individual identity, the identity of those different from themselves, and then develop understanding and collegiality among the groups. The hoped for outcome is growing civility and stronger, sustainable communities.

Such is needed here in America, too! If her program succeeds, it will grow throughout the Lima metro area, then to other parts of Peru and South America. Again, if successful this program could be a beacon of hope and civility throughout the globe, including America.

This program comes from individual citizens. This program will be supported by individual citizens and institutions. It is not a government program, nor need it be.

People helping people. People being fully human. People being humble and generous.

Now isn’t that a refreshing message in a time of incivility and ugly public rhetoric here in the US?

Just thought I’d share this with my readers. All is not lost. All is not government. In America as in the rest of the world, society does best when it realizes it is of the people, for the people, and by the people.

Let’s all dig in and lend a hand.

June 23, 2017

Learning, Listening, Doing

Yesterday’s post was on listening. Giving other people a chance to be heard. That makes them feel respected and valued. It also gives you and I the opportunity to learn what they think and feel. With a little patience we will also learn why they feel this way. That process will likely help us see how much they are like us.

We may hold different opinions and beliefs but we are mostly alike. In so many ways.

Realizing that alone is a major step toward understanding our differences; also our similarities AND what we can do about these three elements. Identifying our differences and similarities leads to doing something about them. The doing ought not be focused on changing anyone’s mind. It should be aimed at changing outcomes we both would like to see.

Currently Americans realize how uncivil our public life is. That public environment is the very surroundings of our public discussions, Tweets, Facebook mentions and email traffic. It is not all about the news or elected officials and their political discourse. It is about all of us.

Some of our discourse is blasé and flippant. We intend it to be a joke or light hearted attempt to ease past a disagreeable topic. It is sort of our way of calmly acknowledging disagreeable things without going into details.

In many instances, however, the discourse gets a bit rowdy and heated. That’s the uncivil part, mainly because it calls forth a response. And then the fight is on. No winning is possible in such a setting. Best to let it go and find another way to combat the impasse.

But that’s the problem, isn’t it? We see and feel the impasse and it is frustrating. But what do we do about the impasse? Will we always be at odds with the other persons in this debate? Must there always be a debate? Must there always be an unpleasant battle associated with public discourse?

It seems to me we need to find a more constructive manner in which to be in disagreement. And I don’t mean TV comedy shows embracing political humor; those shows may be entertaining when they agree with your point of view, but they also strengthen the walls between mindsets all the more. I’m thinking of Steven Colbert and Trevor Noah here. Both of them are hilarious. Both of them support my viewpoint. Of course I’d think they are hilarious.

But the humor only salves the hurt, or eases the tensions. It doesn’t solve anything.

Yes; I’m a problem solver person. I want to fix things. I want people to feel better about things they can’t control, but then take practical steps to maybe solve the problem eventually.

Incivility run rampant does not allow us to solve anything. It only nettles us the more and makes the problem more difficult to solve.

I think most of us think we have a solid grasp on the issues; we likely think the ‘other side’ doesn’t get it very well. This is the crux of the problem, however; judging the others as not getting it is like saying they are stupid or something. They are not stupid. They just haven’t experienced the issue in the same manner as you and I have. And we have not experienced their reality either. It works both ways.

We need to give each other room to live our own experience. The trick is to learn how we are alike. What connects us? What builds understanding among us? From there we can tackle defining what it is we both support, like desired outcomes. What are those? Do we know? Or are we too caught up in the argument about other things?

We can argue the role of government endlessly, but what is it we hope for as an outcome? Do we want our community life – local, regional or national – to be calm, collaborative and successful? How do we measure that? Those are the outcomes I’m talking about. And both are possible with a small government or a large one. That is an issue of ‘how,’ not what.

And that may be the essence of our problem. We fight over the how so much we lose sight of the what.

I wish a good life for everyone. I recognize this is a fight for some to achieve on their own, so I allow some charity, church and government to help them. What’s the best manner to deliver the help? Best, I suppose without massive organization, just people to people helping each other. Too many get lost and forgotten in that process, I think, so I’d rather have a more efficient process. But there are other ways to achieve the same outcome. The main thing is knowing what the outcome is we all are struggling for.

Listening, learning and doing I think are the three elements needed to make this happen. It may be that we are muddling about so much with details that we have missed the answer entirely. Worth a try?

June 22, 2017

A Case for Listening

You have an opinion on an issue. I do as well. Others also hold a view. Not likely will these views agree with one another. Why? Because we have all experienced them differently at different times and at different ages.

How any one of us sees the world – the local one, the household one, or the region, state or nation – relies on many different parts from which to pull meaning. The guy who was accosted at gun point in the local bodega will feel differently about gun control than the fellow who has not been in such a dire situation. Both will likely have different views on gun control. Or maybe not. The fellow who had a gun pointed at him may very well say that guns ought not be allowed in his society. Or he may speak of owning his own gun to balance his feeling of inadequacy standing alone without arms at gunpoint.

Both of his reactions would be understandable.

But this is not the beginning or ending of the gun discussion. No, the beginning of the discussion I think is this: We have unprecedented gun violence in America today in June of 2017. If we agree that this is a pure statement of fact, we then have to ask the question: “Is this a problem we should do something about?”

If your answer is yes, then a line of discussion will follow supporting that conclusion.

If your answer is no, then a line of discussion will follow supporting that conclusion as well.

Please note that neither has suggested a solution at this point. Both arguments are different from the other but they center on the question of recognizing we have a problem or don’t. That is the first decision we have to make as a society. Is there a problem and is it large enough to do something about?

If the answer is no, then the matter is dropped.

If the answer is yes, then we proceed to the next round of discussion: “What is to be done to solve the gun violence problem?”

Now, let the chorus of differing opinions be heard! The only opinion not on the table for discussion is whether we have a problem or not. That decision will have been rejected by the point of the current discussion. Focus instead on the primary question.

What is to be done about the oppressive violence from guns infecting our nation today?

We will likely have to spend some time studying the issue for these elements: 

-Where is the issue felt most acutely?

-What are the common denominators of the victims?

-What are the common denominators of the shooters?

-What are the circumstances in which the violence occurred?

-Where did the guns come from? And the ammunition?

-What are the statistics, demographics of this entire issue?

-What meaning do the social sciences bring to this discussion?

And so many more questions will emerge as the study continues.

When all of these studies are completed, conclusions need to be drawn from them as best as we can. This will be a judgment call. Together we have to discern what is important and what is not.

Defining the problem as completely as possible is a major step in understanding the problem. We must understand well the issue we hope to solve or at least control to minimize the effect of the problem.

And that is an entirely different portion of our work together – how to minimize damages while we are hoping to learn what we can do to solve the problem. It is possible we cannot solve the problem totally; we may have to be satisfied with minimizing it only.

Once beyond this guidepost, we then tackle the job of listing all the options we have available to solve the problem. Those options are many; some are minor, some draconian. But a lot of options exist between those two bookends.

Meanwhile, patience and open minds are needed to get just this far. Note we have not come to any conclusions as to what to do about the issue of gun violence in America. Not one prescription of action has been offered here. It is too early to get alarmed about the suggestions. We are still in the discussion and discovery of facts stage.

All I ask is that we be brave enough and humble enough to begin the conversation.

Who among us is willing to do this?

June 21, 2017

We Have a Situation

Trump’s leadership is in disarray; never was in sharp focus.

That’s the situation and anyone who refutes that is either a blind Trump loyalist or totally out of touch with reality. We Americans expect an intelligent (OK, a few exceptions sneaked in!), well-spoken person to be the inhabitant of the White House. Our White House. The People’s House!

We don’t expect our president to be a strutting peacock on the public stage. We expect humility, seriousness and intelligence. If lacking pertinent information, comments are withheld demurely. Gravitas is the demeanor we expect. A healthy, respectful reserve before speaking one’s mind.

Instead we have a president who tweets his every thought about everything whether it is important or not. Although this has given us an inside view of a president never before experienced, we don’t like what we are seeing. Impertinent, rude, bully and all the rest. Petty, too; boy how petty his remarks have been.

Self-centered attention almost nearly. Brash claims of perfection, brilliance and accomplishment, too. All not in evidence. Just bald statements purporting to be truth. None supported by facts. Building day after day we are held waiting breathless for the next statement of nonsense.

And that, in the end, is what we now have: a nonsensical president playacting at governance.

A business man may know how to get things done, but he doesn’t always understand how to get others to go along and build a team approach to solving problems. Governing is not like leading a business organization. Authority and reporting relationships are involved in the business setting; in governance, the public is the intended object of understanding and benefit.

I often stated during the presidential campaign, that Trump did not understand policy or public policy. I also stated he didn’t understand governance.

The first few months in office have proven those points true.

So now we have someone in the office of President who is not presidential material or capability. We cannot allow this accidental president to remain in office. He must be removed if we are to maintain our reputation as a reliable world partner in peace and quality of life.

Mr. Trump is the very antithesis of everything America has stood for. For those who don’t agree with this assessment, I guess we have to leave them in their own world of disillusionment. I don’t see Trump supporters as stupid; just ignorant. They have an image in their mind of what America should be about and realize their own position is very weak in comparison, or their lifestyle is crumbling and going down the drain. I get that argument.

Their problem is they don’t understand why they feel that way. They don’t study history or science or much of anything. Life for them is on the surface. Little meaning and logic is required to be them. So their critical thinking skills are unused and untrained.

They are ignorant. Not stupid.

So the rest of us have to come to the rescue of America. The land of the free and the land of the brave have to stand up to wrest control from a madman incapable of knowing truth from fiction or self from others. In his world he is the center. In his world, he is the star of the TV show. His loss is caused by a lack of script writing. Others don’t know the roles they need to play or the script they are to read. And thus the house of cards falls to ruin.

Thank God. The end is in sight.

June 20, 2017

Guns Guns Guns

Live by the sword, die by the sword. Those are not my words; they have been around for centuries, probably in the Bible. Maybe other historic tomes as well. The truth is bold and bare; use guns; die by guns. Guns were made to fire bullets into people and animals. Originally for protection, then for hunting game, guns posed a controlling threat in social situations – the vary presence of a gun caused many to leave, change behavior, or submit to the control of another person. The very threat of it.

When the threat seems tame, shooting the gun gets attention; often hits a target – intentional or not. And damage is done. If a person is hit, death may occur. Serious injury will always occur if death is not also present.

That’s the nature of guns.

When the US Constitution was written the government had no money and little prospect of getting money. The ability to field an army or navy was a pipe dream in those days. So militia were the only way of gathering an armed force. Money was still not available to pay the militia. They were voluntary groups bearing their own arms. Just like the American Revolution. It was an uprising of citizens against the Crown of England. Farmers and shop keepers and blacksmiths and bankers. Not a professional soldier in the group.

Once independence was claimed, it had to be earned. Thus the Revolutionary War of 1776. Eventually financing was secured so General George Washington could wage a war and win it. Munitions, uniforms, ammo and rifles were secured; still much of these were volunteered and owned by the fighting men. And the munitions and uniforms were puny and scarce.

When peace prevailed and financial stability began to grow for the new US Government, armies were still absent. To keep peace both state and federal authorities relied on voluntary militia. Thus the reason behind the 2^nd Amendment to own and bear arms. Those same guns provided a measure of peace and justice in frontier regions. The guns were used to protect homesteads from intruders, Indians, large wild animals and other predators.

It was a practical matter back then. One owned a shovel for coal, gardening and snow. One owned a gun to protect the home and family and hunt game for the dinner table.

In a day and age of supermarkets, police departments, county sheriff departments, state police and national guard, we don’t need private militia. The American military establishment also maintains public order and defense of our borders. Militia are not needed.

Sport and hunting needs carry on. Thus private arms are allowed and encouraged. But broad access to guns of all types and ammunition designed specifically to kill and maim other human beings, has grown to be a travesty of our day.

It is more a travesty when fellow citizens hide behind an archaic reading of the Constitution to hide their fear that the government could take over their private lives and property. Such is not the case and not the historical basis for the 2^nd Amendment.

Anyone can now buy any number of guns and ammunition they want as long as they have sufficient money. Even if they are mentally ill and unstable. They can buy a gun. For whatever purpose they wish. No controls against abuse. Once the damage is done the person is responsible; not very practical in its timing!

Conservatives say they want to preserve the 2^nd Amendment. When guns are used to kill innocent people, they blame the shooter. They blame anyone but themselves for the very presence of the instruments of death.

Conservative wing nuts are most likely members of voluntary militias organized for political purposes. And fear. These conservatives do the damage well documented by history. Not liberals. Not the left. And certainly not middle of the road folks.

But today we hear ‘the left shot the GOP baseball team in Virginia.’ Not true of course; the wrong happened, not the right. And that is neither conservative or liberal.

No, the problem is not ideology. It is honesty and truth and history.

It is time the nuts shut their mouths and the responsible passed laws that control the issuance and ownership of guns. Some reasonable and practical laws and regulation to protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Let’s take the time to do this right and quit the nonsense bellyaching. Innocent people are getting hurt and killed. It’s time to stop the slaughter.

June 19, 2017

Concept of Fun

I was at a meeting the other night at church. Our job was to select themes for music, hymns and other items that go with the liturgical year and Bible readings. I know; sounds dull as dishwater, doesn’t it?  But that’s just the surface.

As we laughed over bad puns made over themes and Biblical texts, we then championed selection of hymns. We have decided solidly never to expose the congregation to a hymn that is too long, or too short, or totally unfamiliar to them, or tricky musical passages that require youth and stamina to sing. Yes, we have often turned to one another during a church service and said – “how did we let this hymn get past us?”

So, again, doing this task might seem arduous and not much fun. But you don’t know our group! We sit there and sight read hymns; this is not easy without a pitch pipe and acapella. And some of us don’t read music let alone get the whole tempo thing. So it is often the blind leading the blind and that leads to silliness.

It’s the silliness that got us the other night. Men and women laughing and giggling over hymn selections and god awful puns!  Well, I guess you had to be there!

But it was fun for us. And that alone leads me to ask: “What is fun to each of us?”

I suppose it is whatever fancies our funny bones. What is humorous or a delight to do. It doesn’t have to be humorous. It just has to be pleasant and capable of building a fond memory. Ahh. Perhaps that’s it – capable of building a fond memory.

Some people think it is fun to ride a roller coaster. I do remember doing that many years ago and looking forward to doing it again and again. Today, however, that activity does not pass my ‘fun meter’. No; I’d lose my lunch if I rode a coaster these days. It’s an age thing, and probably much more.

Same goes for watching sports programs. Lordy, for me watching sports is like watching paint dry. Not one iota of interest. Oh I hope teams from my city or region win, no matter the sport played. But the sport itself? I can’t imagine it being fun; all that pushing and shoving and landing in the mud and…exertion! Whew! The effort expended for what purpose? It never did attract my attention.

Now, a concert of classical music is a good thing to me. That’s fun to attend as well as pleasant and mentally stimulating. Now for me that’s fun.

Watching my grandchildren grow up is also fun. And my own kids, too, but then they are now adults having kids and they are not quite as watchable as they once were. No, their kids are the object of watching these days.

With Father’s Day nigh there will be grand kid watching aplenty. That’s a good thing. And fun.

What else is fun? Watching people dance. Especially if they are expressing themselves honestly and effusively. Such spirit and movement. And pliability. Gad, I haven’t moved like that for decades. And won’t. Dance is not for my doing; only for my watching; and glad that others can and will do it!

Writing a good paragraph is fun to me; I know it is like watching paint dry for others, but then that’s the point of this essay today. What is fun for one is not fun for another. The differences of this alone spell many differences in life that both define us, separate us and bond us together.

Freedom to be oneself and have fun is one of the good things about being American. It’s in the Declaration of Independence. Something about the pursuit of happiness? Now that’s fun.

I know where to find mine; you do too. So go do it this weekend!

June 16, 2017

Getting My Head Around Something

Let’s see, someone asks if I can help them with making their small business more successful. I ask about the nature of the business and what its prime purpose is. Why is this business important? Does it provide a unique service or product unattainable from any other source?

Is it’s mission important to potential users that makes the value of the business very real? Or does the success of the business only spell financial well-being of the business person owning the business?

Making money may be important to you, but it is not all that important to someone else. What you offer the market place is what is important; does it has usefulness and intrinsic value? If your product or service is truly unique, you have a winner.

Well, maybe a winner. Success will depend on how large the potential user population is; if it is small, the numbers might not work out. The operations may not produce enough revenue to cover all the costs of producing the output and distributing and selling it to customers.

Sometimes these calculations are simple. The result of noodling and doodling over the proposition is quick and relative easy. But sometimes the proposition is mind boggling. It is so large and complicated one really has to work at discerning the worth of the idea. Will it take too many resources just to set up the business platform so the product will be produced? Will the customer base you hope is waiting for this product recognize its value to them? Will they be moved, therefore, to purchase this product?

We call this the ‘value proposition.’ What makes an idea worthwhile to pursue as a business?

And if the numbers don’t work out, is this value proposition a worthwhile objective for a charity, non-profit or government agency? The latter might we appropriate if the proposition is of huge value to society but not profitable to produce. Such are the arguments weighed in considering a value proposition. And a government agency may not be the answer either!

Wrapping your head around some of these proposals is not easy. Intrinsically you recognize the worth of the idea, just not of its profitability for an enterprise.

The human mind may be able to conjure up almost anything worthy of attention; but resources do not exist for everything to come to fruition. We must make choices. Individually and as a society at large; we must choose options that make sense and are sustainable.

Not all projects are sustainable. Nor are they worthy enough to call forth government resources. Some ideas are just good but not worth pursuing. Maybe at a future date it may be, just not at this moment.

And then on to the next idea to consider.

I once had a client who desperately wanted to travel the globe and see and experience all the different cultures. She just didn’t have enough money to support the wanderlust. But then she thought of helping others travel the world and she naturally thought of being a travel agent.  But what would make her unique in the market place?

We put our heads together and came up with this: travel for a purpose. Help people learn more about life through travel. This led us to consider trips that would help people see and understand the Southwest canyons of the American west. Maybe bring a geologist along to help explain what they were seeing. For those interested in geology and the allure of the Southwestern canyons, this trip would be a huge draw.

If people want to see for themselves the poverty and need of poor African villages, and help those same villages improve their lot, then arrange a trip where travelers help dig fresh water wells for the village; or build a health clinic, school or orphanage. Such mission-centered trips might really make a difference in the lives of those doing the travel, and also the villages in which life will be met head on.

Spending time in Rome or Venice or any other major tourist attraction is more worthwhile if the reason why the site is important in the first place is studied. Maybe it is because of local art, or architecture, or history, or music, or whatever. Why is this place important to visit? Should we arrange special tour guides who will educate us about the region and its component values?

Travel with a purpose other than idle comfort or curiosity might just be the ticket to a winning idea.

I wonder how many other travel agencies cater to this worthwhile objective?

This is what I mean by wrapping your head around ideas. So many options to pursue; so little time or resources to make them a reality. Choice is involved; informed and discerning choice.

June 15, 2017

Choosing the Best

We make choices all through life. Who to vote for is far down the list compared with who to partner with for life! Which car to buy is a lesser choice of value as well, although I admit it is a major decision each and every time; that is most likely due to the price tag associated with the decision. Same for which home to buy or rent. So many facets to each choice, and much thinking spent weighing the pros and cons.

I once made a decision to shed two extra curricular activities. Each was important in special ways, but also sources of frustration for me. I realized I could make a difference with my other involvements, and that those differences were very important to me. When I made those choices, a close friend stated I had discerned what was important to me.

That made me think on what the word means. Discernment is not an easy thing to do, let alone define it. Here’s a working definition anyway from Miriam Webster:

a.      The quality of being able to grasp and comprehend what is obscure: skill in discerning.

b.      An act of perceiving or discerning something.

Well, that sort of gets at it – the grasping of what is obscure, and understanding it. But the obscure bit is part and parcel of discernment. Wikipedia perhaps gets at it better:

            Discernment is the ability to obtain sharp perceptions or to judge well. 

  

Yes; that’s more like it. Making a judgment with distinctions among perceptions that helps focus on the better moral position.

I like that. Discernment in my experience is about choosing to stay on track with the long term objective of what I hope to see happen. World peace is one of those objectives that offers many decisions toward building that peace without immediate rewards. It is a positioning towards the end result one hopes to gain.

So in my original situation I chose to drop two groups because I didn’t feel I was making a difference for them, nor was the involvement producing a position that would help me realize what I felt was most important in life. Letting go of those two activities was difficult, but it did free me up to perform better for the remaining involvements. Now a few years down the path my objectives are intact and my long term goals are shaping up very well. These goals and objectives, by the way, have nothing to do with or for me; they are focused on quality of life for others and my society.

Perhaps that’s what is most important about discernment. It may pertain to what you spend your time on, but it is time spent to benefit others that makes this a moral value that boosts an act of choice to an act of discernment.

Am I really spending my time in the best manner to produce the results I think are the most important for my society? That is the core question to ask oneself.

And yes, I think I am spending my time doing what is most important for the benefit of others. These are not easy things to weigh or discern. Maybe that is the proof that what we are about is discernment? And important!

June 14, 2017

America Struggles for Community

Over time we all see our communities shift from one sort of identity to another. Why this occurs varies from time to time and whatever is current in social circles. It may be an art form that swells from nothing to a major medium of sharing emotion and outlook. Or it may be a rash of horrendous weather that simply focuses our attention on survival, safety and comfort.

At other times we see ourselves different than before because of a popular TV program (Friends, M.A.S.H., et.al.). Then too it is a global event – good or bad – that cements our attention on broader things: 9/11 was such an event, as well as its aftermath of terrorism felt worldwide.

Not always agreeable, these occurrences spark talk, discussion and debate. What does the event mean? What can we do about it? Are we safe or at risk? Do we take extraordinary steps to protect one another? Or do we organize our lives a bit differently and then go about our business as usual?

Debate and argument with heat is what we have today. Polarized thinking and talking and acting we have as well. And not a little chaos as a topping on this unsavory dish!

Yes, America is in the throes of defining itself all over again. Are we a place of freedom? Freedom of thought, action and belief? Or are we a regimented society in which some would have us all believe the same thing? Yes; chaos. It dwells fitfully among us.

And then friends turn out to be nettlesome and unfriendly. “You are too liberal, too Muslim, too Christian, too Republican or too Democrat.” All the while these epithets are tossed about the real meaning and worth of the person is thrown out with the garbage.

How sad this is. Otherwise intelligent people attack others merely because they don’t agree with them. Lockstep beliefs are their mantra. Not very freedom oriented, eh?

No I don’t think so. But not them.

The other day I outlined some points of chaos and ended the blog with Peace. A comeback by one reader was that I was ‘too Muslim.’ Unfortunate for him this is not Muslim alone. It is also Jewish and Christian and probably other major religions, too. See how narrowly defined he is? Disagrees with you and labels you with abandon without knowing the me inside.

This blog is a commentary of my thinking. It is not a journalistic exercise. It is an act of freedom for anyone to see, read, feel. It is not to be agreed with or disagreed with. It is just there.

Too bad some folks don’t understand that.

Thinking aloud helps put pieces together for better understanding. Pleasantness goes a long way in allowing jarring ideas to bounce off one another.

Seeking truth and clarity is often a wondrous reward. But only for a moment because the environment of life is always changing and giving new perspective to old thoughts.

Perhaps it is this chaos we should seek? Or not!

June 13, 2017

Building Community

Thinking back over my career and current involvements, I’d have to conclude that my life has been spent building community. I use a broader meaning of that term, though.

I see it as a meaningful grouping of people ever broadening out to include more people in some sort of common bond. A town may be a formally organized political entity, political used in the sense of governed area. It has boundaries, by-laws, a legal description of its organization and powers, and so on. But a town is not automatically a community in the sense I am meaning.

No, a community is a grouping of people who live near each other, share communal duties with one another – schooling of kids, worshiping at various churches and institutions, gathering common assets to form libraries, fire protection districts, newspapers, government organizations that serve public needs (like police, streets, sanitation, etc.), and a host of other things both large and small. Working together and living together in some sort of commonality of place – that’s the sort of thing I’m talking about.

Helping a town or locale gain a sense of community is also what I’m talking about, and in many instances that is what I’ve spent my life working for.

I did it in my neighborhoods. I did it within my church congregations. I did it on campuses. I did it in entire communities and a linking of abutting towns, too. In my career this mission of mine served a large urban university campus, an industry of cooperative, non-profit businesses, and several individual cooperatives, too. All are representatives of community in different forms.

This blog is my way of expressing myself. But it is also a reaching out to others who may think and feel the same as I do. Along the way I connect with people with differing views and that stretches my understanding of the world a bit more as well; and I hope it stretches the reader as well. In a broad sense this is another community. And it is home for me.

I write a newsletter for the homeowners association which manages the condo building in which I live. That building is a neighborhood – a community. So too is the Fox Valley Chapter of SCORE; and I write short bloggettes for that organization as well as co-editing its monthly newsletter. Another community with yet a different wardrobe.

We live in community a lot. It is a voluntary sharing of space and function for moments (elevator ride? expressway commute, etc.) or for months and years. Or a lifetime. At its most basic function, community is a voluntary sharing of governing life that is instant and adjacent to each other. We are sharing something. It may be clearly defined or not.

Above all community must allow freedom of thought and action while assisting common functioning in other matters of practicality. Helping this community function well and pleasantly in the lives of all the other inhabitants is an intentional act. When done successfully the community is attractive for others to join.

Some towns are attractive for various reasons but one doesn’t want to live there. Others are sought out for long term residency, attendance. Recognizing what it takes to build community is the magic of building useful, rewarding relationships that make life meaningful and abundant.

Not always easy to do. But always rewarding to do.

All it really takes is a common desire to be understood, accepted, and loved. That is what makes it home and not a place.

Do you live in a community? How many other communities do you inhabit? An interesting thought, eh?

June 12, 2017

Being Cool in 2017

Cool? At 74 years of age? Now there’s a challenge. No teachers are at hand to help the elder learn what cool means these days. In the old days it meant you were in the know. Later it became a way of describing how an individual didn’t let chaos and upsetting news bother him or her. They just rode it out with little outward expression of bother.

I’m not sure what ‘cool’ means today. And for that matter, who is defining this term? Is it in the hands of Millennials? Or Gen Y-ers, or Gen X-ers? Or maybe the Boomers still have a voice in this?

I can’t say. I’m older than a Boomer and just an elder. I’ve known a lot and probably too much. Still I am at a loss for knowing about many things. Technology is one. Used to be a computer was a glorified word processor. Then it became a platform upon which we could perform countless operations and deeds. Today, floppies are out, so are insertable disks. Only thumb drives and wi-fi clouds are in play today.

Of course one can merely sit at the keyboard and type in data. I know that is quaint, but it is also original. The other formats are sharing pre-existing information and one never knows for sure who the author is. Not me. My stuff is my stuff and everyone knows it. Everyone that, is, who reads it. That’s a growing group but still not eye popping. Probably never will be.

So, I’m still reaching out and asking the question: What is Cool in 2017?

I could play a pun here and say global warming is making sure nothing is quite cool again! But then someone would point out the polar regions and all that ice; but I would counter with ‘its melting’ due to warming!

So we are still in a quandary at this address. Cool. Attitude. Calm. Peace.

Be gentle dear readers with your responses. My calmness is approaching nap time. And you know how I enjoy those!

Ta ta for now.

June 9, 2017

Blog Draft June 8

More Bad News

News headlines just keep coming. Mostly they are not good when it comes to stories on the White House and the new trump administration. [Note: the trump administration is not capitalized because he shows no respect for the office, the people, or the rest of the global community. When he speaks with respect and dignity for all, then those words will become capitalized.]

Here are the morning headlines on June 7^th: 

-Jeff Sessions Is Said to Have Offered to Resign

-Washington DC braces for Comey hearing impact

-Moscow says ‘zero’ proof Russian hackers involved in Qatar crisis

-Trump Foundation diverted $100,000 in donations meant for charity

-Watergate ‘pales’ in comparison to Trump Russia scandal, says James Clapper

-Eyes on Russia probe leaves Washington’s to-do list undone

-Senators to ask about Trump push back on Russia probe

-House Democrat drafting articles of impeachment for Trump

-Comey to Sessions: “Don’t leave me alone with Trump”

And these are only the stories on the first tier of the internet news service. There are more layers and more topics under discussion. And then there are the opinion pieces stemming from all of the above and the lower strata items, too.

In short, there is no shortage of meat and potatoes for journalists and news analysts to write about these days. And while the trump supporters and friends will always show their support and demand proof of what the rest of the nation and world is saying, we don’t need to anymore. The story is already pretty complete.

The situation is simply this:

1. Wrong has been done
2. Wrong is being done
3. The primary players in the wrongs are known
4. Studies, investigations and deep probes by the authorities are underway
5. When their findings are tallied, then a bill of particulars will be written leading to charges and indictment; in the case of the president, an impeachment charge
6. Then the authorized bodies will process the case against the wrong doers and those procedures will be covered by the press
7. When the cases have been fully pursued, the juries/Senate will ponder the evidence and testimony
8. The juries/Senate will announce their decisions as to guilt or innocence
9. If guilty, proper actions will be taken to address the situation; in the case of the president, he will be removed from office
10. If not guilty, then the players in the wrongful acts will be cleared of wrong doing and they will continue to do what they feel is the right thing to do in carrying out their duties. 

From all of this the American public will learn more about how their government works and why it is important to study issues and candidates well before deciding on who and what to vote for. The penalty of getting it wrong costs a lot of people upset, money and disruption to life. The world community also pays a price. That price is evident for all to see.

Supporters and detractors of trump can agree on this: what once was normal is not now. All is topsy turvy. Some will say it is about time this was done; others will say it should never have been allowed. Whatever the conclusions, we the people will have had our voice and civics lesson.

Hopefully the future will be kinder and gentler for all concerned.

In the meanwhile, stay tuned for constitutional actions that are sure to be called into play.

Peace be unto you and yours.

June 8, 2017

Civility

How well we get along with one another in public is the topic for today’s blog. I know that public civility has been better than today’s, but also worse.

Thinking back in my own life I recall the middle 1960s. JFK was assassinated in 1963. Civil Rights Movement marches, sit ins, beatings, fire hose attacks by police against protesters and missing out of state marchers (later found dead) were all the scene back then. Civil Rights was a theme that began its fiery resistance in the 1950s and extended well into the 1970s. The resistance to the Viet Nam War was a major theme throughout the 60s and then into the 70s. Riots, too, were a threat, then a reality in violent, poverty stricken areas of major cities throughout the nation.

Adding to the spice of the times was the Flower Power Revolution that removed most of the taboos of sexuality. Gay, Free Love, public nudity and open use of drugs and alcohol were ever present. This development unnerved older citizens but emboldened youth.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated in April, 1968. Riots followed immediately burning down large swaths of American cities.

Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June, 1968 following his California Democratic Presidential primary victory the day before.

The decade of the 60s was violent and apocryphal. It was the best of times and worst in so many ways. The shift in public temper, however, was tangible and decidedly marked by bad manners.

Discussion of any issue most likely started arguments in restaurants, in church, on the street and at the family dinner table. Everything seemed open to debate and not consensus or compromise. It was an ugly time.

And so too today. Ugly, uncivil, rambunctious and non productive as far as understanding differing points of view. Not a positive environment for social mixing.

All too many people seek friendly silos of agreement on issues. As they do this society becomes even more polarized.

There are those who believe we should actively oppose this negative social movement. Our answer? Intentional discussion of disagreeable topics but in an environment in which facts hold sway, questions and answers are shared gladly among people with knowledge, and others present to maintain the peace. Also, we agree to disagree agreeably! In doing that we also give each other room to further their research on various topics and learn more.

In short we want to start a movement of hear, listen and learn.

In Warrenville, Illinois, Trinity Lutheran Church is hosting a Friday evening program called Nexus. Similar to a coffeehouse ministry from the 1960s, Nexus will host people from a broad region to sit down with an informed speaker, encouraged to ask questions, and experience an open discussion that is facilitated for civility and calm. It is hoped this program will eventually expand to a weekly schedule and maybe even need a larger facility. Whatever happens, we trust it will be a pleasant and worthwhile evening.

Watch local information channels for the opening date of Nexus. Then plan to join a discussion intended to expand understanding rather than build walls separating us one from another.

Let the mind and ear join and understand.

June 7, 2017

Up, Down, Backwards, Forw…..

What you say to me I tend to believe. In return you will tend to believe what I tell you. Until one of us is caught in a shading of the tale, we rely on each other’s verbal communication. When one item is found to be not the full truth, we begin the cycle of doubt.

A couple of decades ago I encountered political talk that was like that. A Senator or Congressman shared their account of how a law came together in the legislative process. His account was interesting and informative. I could see what they were attempting to do. Then a Senator or Congressman from the opposite political party told their account of how the discussion behind the scenes helped form the new legislation. The two accounts were different. Not only a little but a lot.

I then began paying closer attention to what was reported via this sort of interview on the news, and what was then printed in newspapers; such are usually a fuller report on the details. I began to see a pattern developing. Interviews uncovered spin on the topics under discussion. Spin. Shadings of facts that favor one account of the happenings over another account of the same happening. They were different.

Eventually I noticed that news casts even began to favor one side of the spin over another. I wondered why this was so. Did the newscaster have more information than we did?

It turned out not to be the case. Rather, the news channel or network favored one party over the other in that particular news item, or the network felt the topic was of special interest to them.

Soon network bias became something to watch for. We had already learned via editorials how a newspaper’s publisher felt on some topics and whether they were a reliable reporter for the Republican side (Chicago Tribune) or the Democrat side (Chicago Sun Times). US News and World Report is generally thought to be favoring conservative arguments while Time Magazine leans toward the more liberal view on many issues.

During political campaigns one expects strongly shaded communications; but in the news media itself?

Yes. Sad but true.

But nowhere is this more a problem than when the White House Press Secretary is caught spinning just about every report it makes. One would expect the Press Secretary to polish the message to help the President and his administration look its best. But in 2017 the effort has gone so far as to be pure propaganda.

The announcement on June 1^st that the President was withdrawing America from the Paris Climate agreement warped the facts so much that a full analysis of the transcript would demonstrate the length the White House would go to shape the news. So much warp that much of the statements were fake news. From the president himself.

Turning on the TV national news the next night we were confronted with Putin touting how innocent Russia was of hacking the American election of 2016. He even posited that US hackers could have done the hacking and made it look like it was Russia. So now the propagandist in chief is spinning even more stories to confuse the issue.

The truth is malleable to some people. If you are an historian, the truth is the core of your passion and academic life. Getting to the truth is not easy, especially when so many people propagandize it to fit their interests.

In no time at all we are consuming words meant to be taken as truth when they are not that at all. In short order we simply don’t know who is speaking the truth or not. Facts are funny things; if not served well and truthfully, they have a nasty habit of popping up later to embarrass the propagandist.

Beware America. The truth/news/propaganda machines are working overtime these days. We don’t know what the truth is. Only history will conclude what was factual. But that takes many years to discern and study from the documentary record. Meanwhile, critical decisions are being made on flimflam.

If you weren’t nervous about the future before now, perhaps you should be?

June 6, 2017

Paris Climate Accord Withdrawal

On Thursday June 1 president trump withdrew the United States from the International Paris Climate Accord. Nicaragua, Syria and the USA stand alone among 200 nations as outside of the historic global agreement to combat global warming. Nicaragua didn’t agree to the accord because it didn’t go far enough in their view. The US, after the accord was written and agreed to, withdrew because trump believes it went too far. Syria? Who knows? They are tied up with a civil war and drawing attention to more inhumanity to mankind. They are busy and didn’t enter the climate discussions.

So now America stands alone in the battle to address global warming.

But more was at stake evidently. Checking the transcript of trump’s June 1^st announcement, just about everything he said was wrong or counter to fact. Everything. I am preparing an analysis to prove my point. When ready I will share it with you here.

Until then, here are some points to start with.

1. Economic progress report: job creation is built on Obama’s legacy, not Trump’s; too early for his legacy to be measured; stock market growth also built on Obama’s legacy, although recent week’s growth shows exuberance well beyond reason
2. European trip gathered military contracts that may stabilize jobs in military-industrial complex; however, they also undermine peace and stability in the Middle East; American armaments in the Middle East are the cause of the  destabilization in the first place
3. G-7 talks did not produce fair and reciprocal trade; he only demanded it
4. Level playing field globally for America already exists; it is called international free trade (mostly) and job dislocations are normal at first as industry adjusts to the new opportunities free trade creates; change almost always does this
5. NATO funding problem has been a problem for a long time; Obama’s handling is consistent with all previous administrations
6. Withdrawal from Paris Accord is not negated by restarting negotiations to replace the Accord; that is not up to the USA to do; 200 nations must agree; we stand alone; we could seek to rejoin the Accord, but then that would be up to the rest of the signers of the Accord to accept us
7. America is the largest polluter of the global community; that is because we are the largest manufacturer and miner of earth’s ores; China, India and Russia are also major contributors to pollution; but they are all in the Accord and will work to reduce their pollution (no guarantee they will accomplish such)
8. America’s efforts to reduce pollution is strong; results are strong as well; hopefully we will continue to do so; cost and price adjustments due to these efforts have already been ‘booked’ into the economy; the Accord will cause other nations to do likewise; such is the ‘look’ of the level playing field
9. The result of the Accord hopefully will be a reduction of global warming and possibly saving or prolonging the planet’s life for mankind; the pact attempts to get every nation on board to do similar work in saving the planet; America was not saving the planet on her own or at her own cost without sacrifice by others; that’s what the agreement is all about
10. Lost jobs due to the accord is fiction; jobs will be lost in dying industries as they would be in any cycling of major technology change; new jobs by the millions will be created to answer the opportunities created by the Accord
11. Failing to slow or stop global warming threatens our existence; what cost for that?
12. Loss of manufacturing jobs is well established already due to technology alone; that will continue unabated; new, smart manufacturing will also eliminate jobs; those people will find careers in new industries as they are created; they are already being created; solar, wind and geothermal energy industries alone will create many of those new jobs currently being lost to old technology as it disappears
13. Automobile jobs will continue to be lost to robotics, different transportation modes, and possibly the demise of personal transport of automobiles eventually
14. Calculations of trillions in lost GDP are phony; same for the 6.5 million jobs lost; all misleading and inappropriate fake news attempt
15. Passing America off as the victim of the Accord is a false front; we all win from the Accord if global warming and damage to our environment are tamed
16. The opportunity posed by ‘new energy’ development and production far outweighs the old economy being lost to change. The change is inevitable; best if we answer it with action to invent the new energy
17. Small business growth is a result of the larger economy stabilizing and growing because of the Obama legacy, not of two or three months of the new administration’s effort
18. America demeans itself. The world community is not demeaning America.
19. America is already great and attending to managing change as it always has. That change is uncomfortable but not to be feared.
20. Trump seems to think that fear motivates America to be great. That is a belief unproven at this time. 

Had enough? Our future lies in an age of inventiveness that began before 1776 and continues to this day. Our next big chapter is creating new energy sources that are renewable and non-polluting. We are well on the way there already. The demise of the Oil Standard is writ large. About time.

June 5, 2017