Democrats are sending out misleading messages about the budget proposals put out by the White House. Congress appropriates dollars and what Congress approves is NEVER THE SAME as what the executive branch suggests. But “balanced budget” has a nice alliterative ring which Democrats have been pushing for no good reason.
A budget is a spending plan — absolutely worthless if there is no currency to spend. Continue reading →
Before the passage of the Civil Rights acts and the expansion of the franchise to all adults, there was little civic involvement by the majority of the people and the ruling elites pretty much had their way. The gradual growth of true democracy has not been welcome, either by the elected or appointed office holders, who perceive themselves as poobahs, rather than public servants. So, the appointed cadre, under the auspices of “professionalization” has evolved to handle community affairs out of the sight of public eyes. Republicans actually had a valid point when they railed against the unelected bureaucracy, but that railing stopped when their people got elected and could participate in the secrecy–secrecy which is being sold to the public as privacy. As in, “we don’t reveal who the child abusers are to protect the privacy of their victims.”
Two items are of particular interest. One is an extensive report on a Memorandum of Understanding the Glynn County Commission approved, without discussion, to enter into with Taean County in South Korea because they have a lot of islands and had to do a lot of beach cleaning after a giant oil spill in 2007. The other is the report that the Sea Island resort is sponsoring a half marathon the first week of December because “that particular weekend, not a lot of people come to Sea Island.” Continue reading →
It has always struck me as a peculiar expression, especially since it is commonly uttered as a sort of excuse for perhaps unwelcome behavior. “Nothing personsl.” If it were personal, would it be worse? And what is the antithesis of personal, anyway? Continue reading →
This outfit is a significant player in our community since they own about 25 properties with “cottages” that they rent out.
Exclusive Resorts Club Management, LLC
1515 Arapahoe Street Tower 3, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202
Typically, although they are headquartered in Colorado, they are registered as a corporation in Delaware. Continue reading →
Status is different, depending on whether we regard it from the perspective of the recipient or the donor. It is not a fair exchange.
I have been puzzled by people who seek status apparently above all else. That is, they are apparently willing to do anything that gets them recognition as being somehow exceptional. Although the status is sometimes signaled by a tangible symbol, medal or ribbon, status is essentially immaterial. Perhaps it is good for the soul? Perhaps it assuages a persistent self-doubt that’s been instilled by a history of abusive parenting?
Whatever its ultimate effect, the reality is that assigning status is cheap compensation for whatever the individual has accomplished. It costs the donor nothing — no effort, no blood, sweat and tears. And that, I would argue is what makes it so attractive as a reward for service. Status is evidence that somebody has got something for nothing.
Actually, it was Congress that passed the legislation. But, it is convenient to pass the buck to the executive, who only has to face the voters after fiur years and then not at all. Richard nixon made it possible for the corrency to flow much more easily by decoupling it from gold. But, that created the problem of how the quantity was to be controlled so Congress could continue to benefit by applying carrots and sticks selectively. The first option Nixon came up with, price controls, were not effective. Carter opted for voluntary austerity to keep prices from rising. That was unpopular. So, Reagan opted for letting the banksters manipulate the currency with exorbitant interest rates. That managed to throw the economy into recession. So, Reagan attacked the greed of the workingman (by attacking unions) and joined Congress in currying the favor of money hoarders. If the currency is to be a control lever, then the quantity of what is essentially an infinite supply has to be artificially restricted. Financial diversion and Congressional sequestration accomplish that. Supply side economics has served the financiers and politicians well. Our mistake was in not understanding that it isn’t the supply or output of production that is to be used to control economic activity, but the supply of currency that is to be restricted to some and made abundant to others. It is sort of like restricting access to literacy. Illiterate and impoverished people are easier to control and control is the ultimate objective. If a particular population cannot be totally controlled, then the whole population has to be suject to controls. That is what the culture of obedience, which has evolved out of the slave culture, requires. And the reason it requires it is because the basic assumption that it is right and proper for some humans to rule others still cannot be admitted. Moreover, some humans actually like to be ruled. Being submissive relieves them of the obligation of exercising free will. Free will is a risky business.
You may wonder what basis there is to justify regulating the relationship between employer and employee. The answer is quite simple. Our currency, the dollar, is a public utility. It is issued by our representatives in the name of the citizens of the U.S. So, people who use our money to mediate/facilitate their transactions (trade and exchange) with each other, are properly subject to being told how the currency is to be used, including when it is to be returned to the Treasury (as revenue) for accounting purposes. Remember that Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden for failing to respect the condition of use that had been imposed on them. Ownership, even of money, comes with obligations. Jesus tried to re-inforce that when He instructed “give unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s.” There is an irony in the fact that fundamentalist Christians, in particular, resist being taxed. They just want to take without giving anything back. Maybe we should call it the “Adam/Eve Syndrome” and conclude it accounts for the thoughtless exploiters among us.