Beyond the Cusp

March 22, 2017

What Should be Included as the New Western Ethic?

 

There is an obvious pushback against President Trump throughout the Western World. Many areas of Europe, Canada, Australia and especially the United States in complete authentic meltdown over the prospect that Trump might succeed. This criticism of anything outside of the new ethic being modeled for the past seventy years or so has reached the point where accepting a speaking engagement could cost you your health if not your life should anyone start a rumor that your beliefs are unacceptably conservative or old fashioned. Take the reception Charles Murray received as he was almost lynched at the liberal college of Middlebury College in the state whose motto is “Live Free or Die,” Vermont. What was his crime? Well, he wrote the controversial book “The Bell Curve” which made claims that some people were more gifted than others and that there was a distribution of intelligence with a large median area and a slope downward from there in both directions. How absolutely horrid and insulting not recognizing that we are all equally gifted, just each of us differently. Nobody is smarter or faster or better at anything and we all deserve a trophy because we were there whether we engaged or just sat in the corner dreaming, we get a trophy. Our new age does not believe in competition, keeping score, recognizing winners or shaming losers to try harder, we just accept everybody and whatever efforts they feel they need to contribute today.

 

That is the one set of ideas which must be thoroughly erased from society, the work ethic, the idea that there are winners and losers, competition as a way of improving, striving to better oneself, making money, capitalism, actually defining words and having accepted correct spelling, standards, and the belief that some ideas and societies are superior to others and that freedom is something which is not only worth defending but requires defending because there are those who would subjugate the world forcing it to be ruled under their autocratic thumb. Wait, one of those groups are the elitists who are so against the ideals and ideas of Western culture and believe that Western ethics and culture is oppressive and evil. They find it based on violence because it has defended its freedoms and ideals from those who would have subjugated and destroyed their world. They claim that Western culture and society was responsible for World War II and the Cold War and that had they simply not fought to keep their culture everything would have been so much better. Sure the Nazis were not exactly friendly but did the world really need be turned into a shooting gallery just to defeat the Nazis and the equally disturbing Imperial Japan? Of course not as the Western nations should have negotiated with them. Those claiming such forget that there was this little thing called the Munich Agreement which Neville Chamberlin signed with Adolph Hitler as well as Georges Bonnet of France and Joachim von Ribbentrop for Germany, Benito Mussolini for Italy and declared as “Peace in our time.” The main detractor was Winston Churchill who was called the crazy old man and was ostracized by the leftist pacifists of that day who just like the modern leftists saw nothing to be gained by war and saw little need to defend against the Nazi threat because a treaty had put an end to the menace and Hitler was appeased. Well, not quite as Hitler next demanded Poland and divided it with the Soviets under the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. That act finally was more than the French or British were willing to permit and they went to war. Unfortunately, with the time given to the Nazis they had built a formidable war machine with which they came within a razors edge of winning World War II before the United States entered the war. Had they defeated the British and then turned against Russia successfully, the world would likely be speaking German today and there would be no Western culture to speak of and the modern leftists would have their dream, a socialist fantasyland where under the heel of dictators all would be perfect. Venezuela is one of the modern examples of where such thinking eventually leads.

 

Moneyed USA

 

Let’s imagine the United States after it has adopted the most easily recognized ideas which are favorites of the college educated elitists, not the professors, even though they are the purveyors of these concepts. We’ll use what the protesting students do, the ones who decide who is permitted to speak and what any speaker may present on their campuses. They proclaim that government must provide free education to all at all levels for as long as or at any point in time or point in their lives which people may desire, not require, simply desire. Further, all people, regardless of quality of their health, preexisting conditions, level of exercise, diet, weight or other physical, mental and psychological conditions should be granted equal coverage. The government must provide all citizens with a livable wage. Further, anybody within the borders should be granted citizenship. Everyone who desires to come to the United States should be granted entrance and citizenship because all people are equal and must be respected and given equal rights and treatment despite place of birth. The wealthy must be made to provide to pay sufficient taxes even if it means taking part of their wealth to provide government services which the people are entitled to as citizens. The people should be educated to understand and accept these concepts and the rest of the ideals of proper governance which includes freedom of gender identification, equal treatment of all sexual preferences, equal treatment of all people regardless of gender, identity, race, sexual preferences, nation of origin and a lengthy list of other identifiers as identifiers are evil and must be erased. When asked exactly how the society, actually the government, is supposed to afford these benefits and their reply will always be the same mantra, tax the rich, the wealthy will pay for it. What they refuse to understand is that in such a society there would be no wealthy as they would either leave for someplace where sanity ruled instead of feel good leftists or would have lost their wealth and joined the poor. Such a social arrangement for building a nation would result in a failed state where the average norm would be people taking courses, even if they had to take basket weaving, or simply party or enjoy long walks on the beach or through the park and collect their living wage as anything else would be punished with an unaffordable tax.

 

In order to collect sufficient funds to provide these benefits, the government would have to tax any income over the livable wage at near, if not above, 99%. Simply defined, if the living wage was set at thirty-thousand dollars a year, then with the above mention 99% tax on any income earned above that rate would have somebody earning thirty-five-thousand dollars a year would end up having a mere fifty dollars additional over those who settled for the livable wage. That begs the question, why bother working for a nominal wage when you would only receive a penny per dollar above the livable wage earned. Well, perhaps if you earned enough it would be different. What if you earned $250,000.oo? Well you would end up with $2,200.oo more than the livable wage. Now realize how much you would need to work as most people making a quarter of a million dollars put in over sixty hours a week at the office and another thirty at home and spend much of their free time thinking work. Then ask if a life of near constant working is really worth just over two thousand dollars or would the idea of taking courses or simply chilling with friends and take the livable wage be better. How bad could the livable wage life be compared to working your guts out for an additional two thousand dollars? The pull to avoid a punishing taxation and simply go with the majority would eventually result in the end of wealth as we know it. Additionally, if the livable wage proved not to provide sufficient life enjoyment and with likely the majority of the society collecting the livable wage, then it is likely that within a relatively short period of time they would vote to increase the livable wage. Politicians would place their jobs on that promise as they would not care as their salaries would either be tax exempt or sufficiently high such that their lives would be very comfortable, after all, they simply need to vote to increase the livable wage and also to raise their own salary.

 

Once again, look to Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela and the Soviet Union and the same thing becomes obvious to any discerning observer, they all have failed miserably. What makes this even more distressing is that Venezuela was a profitable nation with a capitalist economy until they elected a feel good socialist who decided that elections needed adjusting. He basically became President for life and he kept enacting more and more social safety net programs until Venezuela became a socialist utopia until the oil revenue could no longer support the social spending when the price of oil dropped as the United States discovered the means of retrieving shale oil through fracking. This led to Saudi Arabia to open up their spigots forcing the price of oil to the point where fracking was no longer profitable. This also placed pressure on Iran whose oil is of a lesser degree as it is very thick and needs more processing thus requiring more expense to process thus making their profit margin require a higher price than the result from the Saudi Arabian price pressure to a low level. Russia also has run into problems with the lowered price of oil which has proven that heavy social spending or other considerations can make a lower price for crude oil economically ruinous which has been the weapon used by the Saudis for years. The problem for Venezuela was more spending than lowered oil price; the oil price simple exacerbated their situation.

 

There is a reason why socialism will always fail while capitalism will usually work provided government spending is kept in check. The founding fathers chose an entrepreneurial based society for a reason, human instincts. There is one disposition in human behavior which can be counted upon in near all situations regardless of the governance, greed. Yes, being greedy is considered a negative personality trait but if we are honest, we will almost all admit that given no punishment for acting greedy, we will be greedy. Given a choice between a regular hamburger or a double hamburger for the same price, face it; we will most likely take the double burger. Make that three scoops of ice cream versus four scoops of ice cream for the same price? Four scoops, right? Let’s make it even easier, you are offered two jobs, both requiring you to clean up a football field which are across the street from one another with the one on the north side paying twenty dollars an hour and the one on the south side paying fifteen dollars an hour and both allowing you five hours of payment no matter how long you take, which job would you take and you can only do one or the other. Obvious, you take the north for the extra twenty-five dollars. Why these seemingly stupid questions, you ask? Well, capitalism counts on people being greedy, well, not exactly greedy but willing to work harder to gain additional wealth. Sure there are those who like me prefer a job which was interesting but when I worked on commission I worked far more diligently and faster than when I was paid simply by the hour. Perhaps that is why when department stores paid their salespeople by commission the service was so good and when they switched to hourly rate the service disappeared and, if you were fortunate, you could find a cashier to take your money. When my team of roofers were paid by the hour it took half a day to roof one townhouse but when our job paid by the length of roof we completed we managed to finish three townhomes by lunchtime, remarkable, right? That is called the capitalism effect.

 

Now let’s look at a socialist utopia where you are guaranteed a livable wage which would be relatively generous. Additionally, healthcare is free so you do not need a job to be covered. Housing is fixed at an affordable rate and there are price controls on food, vehicles, and other niceties. Entertainment is inexpensive or free. Education is free for all levels and you can remain in school taking courses all your life and even the dorm room is free as is the cafeteria. Most jobs are likely to be employing people from foreign countries as they would be willing to work for a wage as other costs in such a society make doing so easier to send money home to their families but these people work for a few years, make what their needs were back home and leave. Most of the citizens simply take the livable wage, stay in school and live a carefree life. Now let’s add one last item to the mix; anybody is permitted to enter the country and become a citizen simply by requesting such. Now how long will such a nation survive? Decades, years, months, weeks, until the first million people arrive? Face it, such a nation is doomed from the onset and there is no way around it even if there are oil wells as far as the eye can see. Even the oil sheikdoms limit their wealth and generosity to the indigenous peoples and guard citizenship for the precious fortune it is for their people who never need toil if they choose not to and foreign workers are brought in to do everything. Imagine if they allowed for open citizenship for just a week. Their ability to afford to continue their generosity would vanish and the goose that was laying the golden oil eggs would no longer be capable of supporting the expanded population as everyone who could get there, would get there and take the free income for life or for as long as it lasted. There can be no open border socialist utopia and even with a closed border it eventually will collapse, even Kuwait which has the luxury of an oil well for every ten people or something ridiculously close. Without near endless supply of wealth, the sole means of running a nation successfully is to take as much advantage of the one constant, greed. Using greed to power the country is far more successful than using the country to satisfy greed.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

March 20, 2017

Why President Trump Cannot Win

 

Before we start the actual article, we would like to mention and give our respect and condolences to all who are feeling the loss of Chuck Berry. The man was a Rock-n-Roll icon to four generations and his concerts later in his life while he was in his 70’s would draw everything from teenagers to silver haired ladies and all would rock right along as one. The man was also an example of how one should live their lives. His life was dedicated to his music, his fans, married to the same woman his entire life, did not abuse drugs, did not drink and was a man who attended church and truly lived a well-mannered life. We wish to respect his life and mourn a world which has lost a truly great man.

 

 

President Trump has all the power and can do anything he desires. This is the fear mongering we read in the newspapers all too often and hear from the leftists in full panic attack as they no longer control the White House. After eight years of a Progressive Democrat following eight years of a Progressive Republican which followed eight more years of a Progressive Democrat the left and the Progressive right are in a panic. They really should calm themselves as President Donald Trump is a fellow Progressive in many ways even if those he has appointed to some very important posts are not such. Look at those posts and one should be glad that he has put unemotional purists in the slots dealing with national security, the military, counter terrorism, homeland security, intelligence position and such which protect America and the free world. Thus far the most counter progressive appointment he made has been Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court and his main offense has been refusing to make law by interpreting the law to meet supposed modern sensitivities and instead simply applying the law. This has put Senator Schumer’s panties in a bunch and sent him screaming into the halls of the Senate rallying the troops. But we can expect this for every nominee which President Trump puts forth for position on any bench and perhaps people should remind Senator Schumer that it was President Obama who appointed Judge Neil Gorsuch to his current position. But Senator Schumer is far from the main opposition President Trump is facing.

 

President Trump is facing a hostile media which currently he is enjoying the threat and has turned much of the confrontation to his benefit, but that cannot last. The media enjoys strong allies placed throughout the nation in the form of entertainment media, their secret weapon. As television, music, movie and other entertainment venues slowly chip and pick at the position of the President and make jokes about his every miscue these things pile up and with time begin to affect the thinking of many Americans. Slowly they will ebb away at his support and make him appear buffoonish and even stupid and uneducated which will erode faith in his ability to make wise choices. As such, they will have him at a disadvantage within a couple of years and may make his reelection all but impossible. President Trump very likely will not even seek reelection as if there is a strong sense of doubt that he could win no matter who the Democrats put forth or that the Republicans themselves may try to unseat him in the primaries, he may decide that with such disregard for his efforts, why bother. But even all of this is not his greatest opposition.

 

President Trump’s greatest opposition is the government itself. While we have been asleep since about 1965 the government has grown to the point where the elected politicians do not even make the laws any longer, that has been relegated to the unelected bureaucrats. When the House of Representatives or the Senate write a piece of legislation it defines the end results they wish to see. This gets tossed around and watered down until it really means absolutely nothing at all, it just has some feel good phrases and soundbites which can be used in their reelection campaigns and some high-minded and altruistic goal in the title and otherwise is an empty shell. The only exceptions are military budgets and tax legislation where they say exactly what the lobbyists and the Generals desire most. These other empty titles are passed off with the same phrase that the Secretary of one of the many Cabinet positions used so their assistants and their assistants and on and on to fill in the legislation with the regulations necessary to accommodate the desired meaning of the bill. Now these Cabinet Secretaries are not about to spend their time weaving these bills into operative and meaningful actions as they are mostly there to oversee that things get accomplished. To that end they will slide this off on some high ranking bureaucrat responsible and presumably knowledgeable to flush everything out who passes this off to some of their underlings on down until it reaches somebody who has nobody else to pass it to or until someone feels like this is their ticket to the top and the regulations are written and the wheels of government continue to grind, the people they presumably serve, into dust. New rules are issued and eventually someone runs afoul of one of these regulations which most never knew existed but somebody inevitably gets caught in the wheels of the legislative and regulatory nightmare.

 

Any hope that President Trump believes he has for changing government will get lost somewhere deep inside the legislative machinery which now employs almost one in fourteen Americans (the number is higher if you count only working Americans, it more than doubles to 16.7 percent of the U.S. workforce). The government workers union, American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), was actually heavily invested in the reelection campaign for President Obama though they did so outside of the view of the media. The government, especially the Federal Government, is filled with people who are ardent Democrat supporters and are fully indoctrinated in liberal ideology. This has been further enforced through selective hiring and as the most dangerous time in a government worker’s career are the first few years, the years when they can be fired or removed through a reduction in force (RIF) directive where the department head is to remove people with the most recent hire first and in reverse order with an exception that if they can find a nonessential position where two people are performing a similar job for which only one is necessary, then the more junior person can be let go. This second means is another means whereby an identified conservative will be fired despite the many protections government workers enjoy. There is another way such an employee can keep their position but that requires approvals and other means whereby they push a person with less time in government out in their place and many are reluctant and prefer just finding a real job, as they would phrase it. These are the people who started the idea that it takes three government workers to do a single job equivalent to the same job in the real world. Is it true? Who knows, no such study has or ever will be permitted to be performed. Having resided in Washington D.C. and having been married to an employee of our Federal Government, I refuse to answer because the government has such long arms and is run by just such persons. Changing or removing some of, if not most, of these people is near impossible as this video explains to some extent.

 

 

 

Percentage of American Population Working for Government by Year

Percentage of American Population Working for Government by Year

 

The problem is not entirely in the government though that is where President Trump will find the greatest resistance and the perversion of everything he believes he has achieved unless he can persuade the Congress to actually write the entirety of the law and not leave it to the government machine to define the rules. Did I mention that this will never happen? The problem actually starts far earlier than with the government. It starts with the education system and from the earliest grades. We hear about the rare teacher who spouts out their political feelings and denounces President Trump, President Bush or whatever politician, usually a Republican. Do such denunciations ever target a Democrat? Great question and an example would be greatly appreciated. The reality is that many parents do not ask their children what happened or what they learned in school and when they do the child often shrugs or says, “Nothin’ much” and it gets dropped at that. If their child did grace them with an example, it would likely be the one thing they did learn and remember learning, but much of learning is more subtle, closer to subliminal. It is the subliminal education which often is the most permanent and where indoctrination does its damage. The textbooks are often written by academics that also have a left leaning slant and outside of the hard sciences there is much room for the soft indoctrination from the left in their education and through their societal influences. This is what has led to the “safe spaces” and the disinviting of conservative speakers or the outrageous actions such as the recent events at Middlebury College or University of California Berkley where students basically rioted and at one location severely injured one of the professors who was assigned to moderate the talk. These actions and the rioting in many cities where law enforcement was instructed to back off and give the rioters both in the cities and colleges the room required for them to express their outrage was an outrage in itself. Is this to be the face of the new world where hooligans are permitted freedom to destroy property and injure those with whom they feel have no right to any contrary opinion, or even who are accused of having a contrary opinion? If this is the way of the society in the West, then we can be assured that the West is going to fall. This is uncivil behavior and no civilization can survive when incivility becomes an acceptable means of expression. Such permissiveness and a government which with continued growth could reach an unsupportable size are reasons that Europe is failing and could become a critical problem for the United States as well.

 

There is one last item which could also cause the end of Western civilization, its inability to defend itself. The United States is still the world’s greatest super power, but that is not guaranteed for the future. It was not all that long ago when Great Britain was the great power and before them France and even Spain and they all proved, as if Rome had not done so before them, all super powers finally fall. Going back even further there were Greece, Persia, Babylon, Egypt, Hittites, China, India and even Siam. Having great power is not a guarantee of continued power. That requires dedications, vigilance and the desire to continue to bear the costs of such preeminence. Such costs continue to rise as weapon systems grow ever more complex and research takes greater scientific knowledge which brings us back to education, in this case the hard sciences, an area of endeavor which remains the most challenging and the less inclined rarely venture into these waters. Without an expressed importance placed on such study, it falls by the wayside as does military power which is not properly stressed and thus funded. The problem comes when a society gains so large a cost of social spending, particularly welfare spending and retirement promises where recipients don’t or no longer replace revenues into the system, exceeds the limitations of taxes and other revenues that the military becomes an expense no longer afforded. This is a prospect which the guaranteed minimum wage, especially as a livable wage, makes an even more dire situation and brings the choice as a sooner onset rather than a later one. There is a development which if technology continues at its current rate of increase will make these two situations collide and force a complete revamping of revenue enhancing streams as otherwise the governments will financially collapse. Eventually these advancements will make work more of a hobby which select groups will dedicate themselves towards while the majority of the population will do as they see fit and be permitted such by the advances of technology. That, perhaps, should be a future article leaving us to conclude on that sweet note.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

November 21, 2014

A First Step to Immigration Reform Obama Did Not Propose

 

Last night President Obama decided that the new Congress which will be sworn in come late in January of next year had been dragging their heels and not addressing legislation proposing solutions of comprehensive immigration reform. Since he will be giving his speech after my deadline for submitting my article, I will just assume, always somewhat dangerous but I feel confident my assumptions will prove safe and valid, it is distinctly possible that President Obama might give everyone a surprise, potentially a pleasant surprise, and actually suggest or even, drum roll please, promise to take his pen and enact any of my proposals. The first thing which must be resisted is the urge to take grand sweeping steps aimed at solving everything all with as few steps as possible starting with any form of blanket amnesty, especially a general amnesty with only the smallest of punitive requirements or inconveniences such as fines or complex forms. Unfortunately, President Obama has given indications that he will at least propose rigidly stringent guidelines he will expect, even demand, Congress meet within a relatively short deadline and put legislation on his desk meeting every last iota of his expectations or expect his veto followed by him using his pen and phone to enact exactly what he desires without Congressional input. We can expect some form of amnesty for the large number of those labeled ‘youths’ which were part of the huge tens of thousands of illegal children and young adults all unaccompanied by adults who entered the southern border to much media coverage, almost fanfare, this past spring and early summer. How much further President Obama may decide to go will be revealed before this article gets posted, but why guess when it will only serve to be anticlimactic, so on to what we believe is not to be expected but would have been a better course to have followed.

 

The first step to begin to solve the immigration problem has to separate those who are in the United States and are seeking to work within the legal system since their arrival, are gainfully employed, are paying taxes and simply desire to make a better life for their family from those who are here in pursuit of illegal activities, are chronic lawbreakers or are here to take advantage of government support programs designed to assist the needy and disabled such as welfare, food stamps, disability programs and other similar programs. Basically, one need differentiate between those here to gain from the system from those here who are working and contributing to the system. The American people are usually a forgiving people but not if they feel somebody has betrayed their trust and is out to game things and taking advantage of the Americans’ generous nature. Where the American people might be persuaded to accept somebody who may have entered the nation illegally in order to make a better life for his family and has worked steadily and even paid taxes, paid their rent, utilities and other daily bills, provided health insurance and were not causing any undue strain on the society, such a person would be more acceptable than anyone who had not shown such respect for the society and abused the systems instead of being fellow contributors to that system. This brings into consideration reports that the Justice Department gave its blessings, some even claim facilitated, the release of tens of thousands of illegal immigrants who were incarcerated on felony charges across the nation. It was rumored that these illegal immigrants were released in a preparatory move in order for making them legal in some expected subsequent amnesty, an amnesty which, in all fairness, has yet to have occurred. There is an initial step which could be used to separate out those who are working within the system and being a contributive member of American society from those who are taking advantage of the various support safety net systems within that society. This would be to require that everyone who applies for government assistance give proof and be required to pass a citizenship check before being given any support. This would remove those on such programs who were unable to pass such a background check and might be sufficient incentive for many illegals realizing they would likely be dropped from any forms of government support to return to their nation of origin or perhaps become contributing members of society seeking out gainful employment. Either result would be a positive result which most American might find acceptable and possibly even advantageous.

 

The next phase would require formulating what is referred to as a path to citizenship for those illegal immigrants who would be capable of providing sufficient evidence and desire to become documented and even take on additional requirements as further proof of their honest desire to mitigate for their initial illegal entry. They might be required to also take and pass a one year comprehensive American history course on a college or community college level designed by judges and professors specifically to provide a general knowledge of the important points in American history as well as stressing legal codes and the rights and responsibilities of citizenship and the important themes and origins of the triumvirate of America’s founding documents, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and their effects on the government and the legal code. They should be subjected to a full background check and also have to take the full citizenship courses and pass the test for citizenship all before being considered for final citizenship. The path should be more strenuous than the normal track to citizenship to make them have to pay a price as proof that they are aware that they have been granted a privilege which their effrontery of knowingly breaking United States immigration laws by entering the nation by illegal means. There have been discussions that those illegal immigrants permitted to seek citizenship should also be made to pay a fine as well as make good for any back taxes they may owe. The fine should be determined to some extent on a case by case basis on some established sliding scale which would take into consideration whether the illegal immigrant had paid taxes or avoided paying taxes amongst other criteria. Whatever the cost demanded from an illegal immigrant in order for them to achieve citizenship, that price will prove astonishingly low as it grants their family a prize others have applied for and waited what must seem to be a lifetime to achieve legally, a wait made that much longer by the numbers of illegal immigrants who reduce the numbers of legal immigrants accepted each year, they owe those people a debt which is impossible to repay or even determine a sufficient price. Whatever the United States government decides about what the price and path if any should be demanded from those who entered their country illegally, the people would very likely have demanded a much higher price if they would allow any price other than expulsion back to their nation of origin made to begin the legal immigration path from square zero. Whatever would be decided by the Congress, any such decision would better represent the people than whatever edicts fell from President Obama’s lips last night, but then President Obama has been showing a steadily growing lack of concern for the American voters which will only grow as his time left shortens. No matter what immigration policies the President will have introduced the world to last night; such ignominies will only pale when compared with what he has in store over the last two years in office. After all, did not President Obama claim that he will be listening to the two-thirds of voters who failed to vote in the midterm elections and would he not be able to claim that his intimate familiarity possessed with these silent voters is far more accurate than even they might know as he has already channeled their desires, he said so.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.