Greece'd Lightening

Words from Ezra Taft Benson, former US Secretary of Agriculture, and former President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I share this, not to spread fear, but awareness that the things we face together as citizens of the world are real, are far reaching, and feel closer than what we may think. This was shared decades ago... With the crisis in Greece, which seems to be the fall guy for what's really happening, I wonder when that same Greece'd Lightening will strike again?

"The pending economic crisis that now faces American is painfully obvious. If even a fraction of potential foreign claims against our gold supply were presented to the Treasury, we would have to renege on our promise. We would be forced to repudiate our own currency on the world market. Foreign investors, who would be left holding the bag with American dollars, would dump them at tremendous discounts in return for more stable currencies, or for gold itself. The American dollar both abroad and at home would suffer the loss of public confidence. If the government can renege on its international monetary promises, what is to prevent it from doing the same on its domestic promises? How really secure would be government guarantees behind Federal Housing Administration loans, Savings and Loan Insurance, government bonds, or even social security?

"Even though American citizens would still be forced by law to honor the same pieces of paper as though they were real money, instinctively they would rush and convert their paper currency into tangible material goods which could be used as barter. As in Germany and other nations that have previously traveled this road, the rush to get rid of dollars and acquire tangibles would rapidly accelerate the visible effects of inflation to where it might cost one hundred dollars or more for a single loaf of bread. Hoarded silver coins would begin to reappear as a separate monetary system which, since they have intrinsic value would remain firm, while printed paper money finally would become worth exactly it's proper value--the paper it is printed on! Everyone's savings would be wiped out totally. No one could escape.

"One can only imagine what such conditions would do to the stock market and to industry. Uncertainty over the future would cause the consumer to halt all spending except for the barest necessities. Market for such items as television sets, automobiles, furniture, new homes, and entertainment would dry up almost overnight. With no one buying, firms would have to close down and lay off their employees. Unemployment would further aggravate the buying freeze, and the nation would plunge into a depression that would make the 1930s look like prosperity. At least the dollar was sound in those days. In fact, since it was a firm currency, its value actually went up as related to the amount of goods, which declined through reduced production. Next time around, however, the problems of unemployment and low production will be compounded by a monetary system that will be utterly worthless. All the government controls and so-called guarantees in the world will not be able to prevent it, because every one of them is based on the assumption that the people will continue to honor printing press money. But once the government itself openly refuses to honor it--as it must if foreign demands for gold continue--it is likely that the American people will soon follow suit. This in a nutshell is the so-called 'gold problem.'

Viva la Liberty!

Yesterday was the Fifth of May, Cinco de Mayo. I went to a local establishment that serves Mexican Food. I had the Chili Verde Burrito. It was delicious. I enjoy the fun, diverse atmosphere that exists for such a day. I have to admit, I don't really know the foundation of Cinco de Mayo as a celebrated day. I had naively assumed it was somewhat similar to the Fourth of July is in the USA... Not so.

It is not a national holiday in Mexico; more of a regional holiday. It commemorates a victory of some 4,500 lightly armed militia over a much larger and more outfitted army from France who were coming to collect on defaulted debt from Mexico. The victory was short lived after Napolean III sent a greater army that ended up defeating and conquering Mexico. The French occupation and rule of Mexico wasn't long. The end of the Civil War in the USA allowed the USA to come to the aid of their Mexican neighbors to help take back Mexican sovereignty.

Cinco de Mayo though, has little recognition across Mexico, and is very strongly celebrated in Puebla, where it was fought.

It really is a great and fascinating historical occasion. Who doesn't love the story of the small, untrained farmers and militia, fending off a well trained army? I would say it speaks to all human kind.

Fast forward several hundred years though, to 2010. Cinco de Mayo gets recognition and is celebrated in the USA. At present there is a strong adversarial debate over immigration, illegal immigration (primarily accross the Mexico/US border), and legislation in Arizona that has stirred up a hornets nest in this arena.

At a school in San Francisco, CA., four students were asked to go home and change their attire because it was deemed "incendiary" and may lead to fights on campus. The heinous attire was none other than (drum roll please) "Old Glory"! They donned American Flag bandannas and tee shirts with American flags on them.

One of the guilty young men said, "They said we could wear it on any other day,but today is sensitive to Mexican-Americans because it's supposed to be their holiday so we were not allowed to wear it today."

Look, I am realistic and acknowledge that these boys were deliberately dressed in defiance against the celebration. Teen aged boys will do such things, I know, having been there myself.

It did lead to this statement by a fellow student who didn't see it quite like the disruptive boys did when she said, "I think they should apologize cause it is a Mexican Heritage Day. We don't deserve to be get disrespected like that. We wouldn't do that on Fourth of July."

Now look, I think the celebration is fun and such an act of heroic defeat of a better armed adversary is commendable. I think the victory of Puebla is awesome!

However when students in the USA are taking full advantage of what I deem their constitutional right to peaceably assemble and their right to freedom of expression (you know those Bill of Rights things), how can this be deemed incendiary?

I went ahead and asked around to friends of mine what Cinco de Mayo was. Most thought, oh it's Mexican Independence Day. One of them, whose mother is Mexican and father is Caucasian knew it wasn't Mexican Independence Day, but didn't really know what it was.

There seems to be some sort of false concept of what the reality of Cinco de Mayo is/was. With that in mind, is it the job of the administrators at the school to act in the way they did? Were there actions appropriate? Were those flag wearing heathens in the wrong and due some form of punishment?

For my money, I say no and that the administrators job is to first and foremost educate! They're educators. There was an opportunity to engage the students and provide for discourse and communication. But instead for fear of violence to a peaceable display, the administrators allowed misinformation and miseducation to continue.

I think as a result of the administrator to act in their area of accountability, they caused more harm than they prevented. They didn't engage young minds and foster a sense of community within their school. They fostered divide and disdain. How did our students, our communities, our nation benefit from this?

Low and Slow...

Last Saturday I took advantage of my time at home by practicing one of my all-time favorite hobbies...BBQ!

I smoked some St. Louis style ribs which, by BBQ standards, is a short cook (it only took 6 hours).

I love BBQ-ing for several reasons. Who can argue that treating an otherwise tough cut of meat with a little TLC, thereby producing some of the most tender, flavorful food known to man is a worthwhile endeavor? It's a great excuse to gather family and friends and create memories...all while enjoying good food.

I must admit though - my intentions with BBQ aren't wholly selfless. I love using my time tending the smoker to enjoy the beautiful weather and smell the wonderful aromas. There's something special about just sitting and watching the smoke billow from the smoke stack, not "having" to think about any particular topic, forgetting about problems at work, and watching the kids play in the backyard while they insist they're "helping Daddy".

I guess I can sum it all up by saying that I really just love being able to live a short portion of life exactly how great BBQ is supposed to be cooked - Low and Slow.

Here's to hoping that we can all find time in our busy lives to step back and enjoy a hobby or two!

AL

The Nuttiness of ACORN

Recently I had a message conveyed to me about the injustices done to ACORN. This was in the context of a class where Social Constructionism is the focus. Her posit is that ACORN's demise is that of a media bias, perpetuated by the wealthy media owners and also greedy wealthy politicians, particularly those of the conservative persuasion. She said that, "This forced closure is an example of how wealthy individuals incited the middle class and Tea Baggers into believing their victimization. This is a result of the efforts of wealthy individuals." That these same wealthy individuals and politicians voted to cancel government contracts and funding, "based on the beliefs that ACORN members are liars, pimps and whores who are a burden on society." She wrapped it up by stating that, "This is another example of William Ryan’s “blame the victim.” Poor people who are trying to better themselves by participating as voters as well as purchasing homes become the “bad guy.” Now I just don't buy it, nor the claim that ACORN is some benevolent institution whose sole purpose is to life the down trodden... Rather, here is my rebuttal:


It is difficult to take the idea that ACORN was really formed to fight for the lower class theory seriously. After all it was formed by individuals who firmly believed and supported the idea that overwhelming the current welfare and entitlement systems was a good thing; bringing collapse to a system already being impacted by ever increasing entitlements.

Is it "class" discrimination that leads to banks not wanting they lend? Having worked in the lending field for a number of years, banks lend based on formulas of, what is the likelihood of this debt being repaid?

You referenced many times that somehow it was just the legislative leaders who lead to the demise of ACORN. You posited that these leaders provoked "tea baggers" as you called them. Where did that term come from? Was it from the same media that you say wanted the demise of ACORN? It seems like the media just wants everyone to be villainized. The assertion that ACORN members are all liars, pimps, and whores is a stretch at best. But the assertion that there are some fundamental and organizational issues with ACORN seemed to be what lead to the demise. Yet the accountability for that is never said. Heaven forbid personal accountability come into play.

It seems to me the "Tea Baggers" as you refer to them represent a movement that is irrespective of who is dipping into their pockets. It seems to me to represent the idea that, a wise and frugal government should, "leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government." (Thomas Jefferson)

Walter E. Williams once said, “Reaching into one's own pockets to assist his fellow man in need is praiseworthy and laudable. Reaching into someone else’s pockets to do so is despicable and deserves condemnation.”

Also the "wealthy elected leaders" who ACORN promoted and aided in the election, including President Obama voted to cancel the funding for ACORN. Is that just the media's fault too? What rational explanation could be offered? The President, who has/had ties with ACORN even sought to distance himself from the institution. Why is that? With a strong majority of the house, senate and the White House being democrats, and the people ACORN represent tending to vote Democrat, why would they cut it off? If anything there would be motivation and desire to strengthen ACORN. If legislative districts are redrawn and the democratic majority that exists can increase its democratic majority, is it really logical to deny such a powerful organization as ACORN? Yet you place the blame again, at the feet of the “owners of media and conservative legislative leaders.” Just doesn’t quite add up to me.

The media magic article was a farce to me when it represents the ideology that, "There is enough wealth in our nation to eliminate poverty if we chose to redistribute existing wealth or income." (p 412) That whole concept has been tried in countries before. It was the ideology behind communist Russia. That everyone get equal pay regardless of what they do and live in the same conditions no matter what. The social impact of that is still felt in Russia decades after the fall of the USSR.

While there is surely some blaming the victim that goes on, I would say that for most, all people are "blamed" for things that are within their control. We all have stewardship over ourselves and for what we do with the time we are given. I would call that our duty. Yet this day and age everyone wants to talk about rights, not duty. Duty is something we DO.

The Proper Role Of Government

Recently I read an exchange of ideas on a popular social networking site pertaining to the hot and heavy health care debate being waged currently in our country. There was one individual who was staunchly arguing that the role of government is precisely to regulate in matters such as these. He said:

"What is wrong with the government setting up regulations? Most people don't seem to mind when the government makes laws about murder, crime, rape or other things criminals like to do. Your government is there to protect you."

Without bringing up the glaring differences which exist between laws protecting inalienable rights such as life (protection from being murdered) compared to privileges such as health care, I submitted one post which has been inserted below:

"I don’t want to write a novel or hijack this thread, but let me just say that your view on the proper role of government is inaccurate to say the least Sean.

After having read your posts, it seems that you think the proper role of government is to ensure justice reigns. This might seem fine at first glance but this proactive approach can’t exist without infringing on the very liberties our government has been established to protect. The correct and proper role of government is to prevent injustice from reigning. By preventing injustice from reigning, our liberty remains untouched by a potentially tyrannical government. For a more complete study on this topic, I suggest you read “The Law” by Frederic Bastiat (a Frenchman from the mid 1800’s with a profound respect for America).

What is being proposed currently regarding health care WILL rob us (citizens) of our hard earned property (money) by forcing us to pay for a plan that the majority of us (according to every major poll I have seen) does not wish to have established.

“Reaching into one's own pockets to assist his fellow man in need is praiseworthy and laudable. Reaching into someone else’s pockets to do so is despicable and deserves condemnation.” –Walter E. Williams

Feel free to give me any feedback you might have on my comment. Before being too harsh, keep in mind that I made the post quite late at night and therefore had to spew it out rather hastily! I did feel the need to say something nonetheless.

Thanks,

AL