Phil Beaver works to establish opinion when the-objective-truth has not been discovered. He seeks to refine his opinion by learning other people’s experiences and observations. The comment box below invites sharing facts, opinion, or concern.
Note: I often connect words in a phrase with the dash in order to represent an idea. For example, frank-objectivity represents the idea of candidly expressing the-objective-truth without addressing possible error or attempting to balance the expression.
The Advocate:
Our
Views. The writer expresses strange concerns, yet obfuscates
the directive:
“. . . our smallest desires might be attained
by legislation or decree.” (By the Church?)
“. . . the narcissism of our politics, the narrowness of our
generosity, the nastiness of reality TV.” (By liberal democrats?)
Who holds the above desires and egocentricity? To whom are
these concerns directed? It does not seem the normal human condition to me.
I think most people, perhaps 2/3 of inhabitants want broadly-defined-civic-safety-and-security, hereafter Security, so that they can pursue the happiness they perceive rather than the dictates of someone else’s ideology.
I think most people, perhaps 2/3 of inhabitants want broadly-defined-civic-safety-and-security, hereafter Security, so that they can pursue the happiness they perceive rather than the dictates of someone else’s ideology.
The illusory
“common good” the classical liberal writers pondered is a “public good” (James
Madison, Federalist 10), only to the extent of Security. Beyond Security, each
human being is too psychologically powerful to suffer the constraint of someone
else’s dream, except by coercion and force, and then only with great
resentment. The few who manage to break away from coercion and force have the
chance to discover that they may perfect their person (Emerson and his source;
see emersoncentral.com/divaddr.htm).
Baton Rouge
may enjoy the pursuit of the-objective-truth anytime it seems desirable to the
people. That’s a boastful statement, but iterative collaboration for “public-integrity”
emerged from meetings at EBRP libraries among about fifty people, and its
supporting theory exists in no other city.
Today’s thought. Ecclesiastes 7:8.
My opinion is that Solomon expressed the importance of perseverance and the humility
to do the work rather than expect to be taken care of because of self-assumed
importance: maintain the motivation and inspiration to reach your goals.
Barge
safety (Deloach). Thank you for allowing us to celebrate your accomplishments,
and thank you for the increased Security.
Your goals are impressive and may be mimicked: “do a good job, be a good citizen, and focus on protecting the public, our crews, the environment, and our vessels with . . . zero-harm.”
“Every citizen in the country should
be concerned when someone wants to . . . allow operations with foreign control
and crews.”
Ilegals (Usner). Don’t forget, the
liberal democrats falsely labeled illegals “undocumented workers.”
Liberal
democrats may reform anytime they perceive incentives. From what I heard in
President Trump’s first State of the Union Address, incentives to join his
initiatives are expected and will strengthen as they become realities. Most
people want broadly-defined-civic-safety-and-security, hereafter Security.
Froma
Harrop column. Ms. Harrop, you have discovered your
calling: Movie critic. Please take that career path.
Michael Gerson column. IMO, you
are suggesting that we subscribe to propaganda films.
You would not suggest a
film that informs gay obsession with sex. At this point in time, Hollywood
is not likely to produce a movie wherein gay partners contract to have a child
through surrogacy and eventually the partners get a divorce because one partner
fell in love with the child and they propose marriage. Maybe a movie about a
monogamous gay couple covering their entire life exists, but I doubt it. Such
movies can be written by creative thinkers.
Perhaps Gerson is too busy
writing to think past existing movies.
Lanny
Keller column. Will you please write about reducing Louisiana
spending instead of “push tax reform to voters”? Edwards is threatening $30 billion
when it should be $18 billion without special interest politics.
Charles
Krauthammer column.
Please. It seems immoral to mention Hillary Clinton let alone speculate she
would reach beyond political cronies to create a cabinet.
But I appreciate
learning that “Germany announces a 20.000-man expansion of its military” and
others will follow suit. And China won’t import coal from N. Korea in remaining
2017. Just as people don’t lie to each other so they can communicate
(Einstein), President Trump does not lie to nations so that they may not lie to
him.
Tram
(Page 1B). Hopefully self-driven buses will replace
the tram nostalgia altogether. See wgno.com/2017/01/30/the-future-is-here-self-driving-bus-visits-new-orleans/
or theadvocate.com/new_orleans/news/politics/article_06d98320-e725-11e6-abb0-374022e0f11b.html
.
State
of the Union Address(Page 1A). I like the message, “join
forces” for new greatness. President Trump expresses that message for the
people. I hope Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, and Independents reform so
as to serve the people. I hope special interest caucuses recognize they are
obsolete and also join to help establish public-integrity. No nation or people
in history has tried to establish public-integrity. The opportunity has been
left to us.
Sessions
(Page 2A). Good message. Our civic
examples should encourage people to collaborate for Security.
Washington
leaks (Page 3A). With the people’s best
interests at heart, I cannot imagine a more serious challenge than to rely on
the chief officer of an organization much less an underling or competitive
agent. Yet the media take it for granted. It is part of how they have eroded
their credibility.
Google shows the frequency of occurrence
of the term “anonymous source” from 1972 (Watergate) to 2008 increased 450%. See
books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=anonymous+source&year_start=1960&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Canonymous%20source%3B%2Cc0
.
Writers seem to be concerned with relationships
with the law, the anonymous source, the source’s authority, and the intensity
and motives for interest. There is little or no attention to fidelity to
the-objective-truth. See http://www.spj.org/ethics-papers-anonymity.asp
. Notice “Improving and protecting journalism
since 1909.” Also, “The ‘anonymous source tracker’ at the website inkstainedwretch.com
schaver.com/post/anonymous-source-tracker/ dispels any notion that anonymous
sources are used rarely today.
Clean
water (Page 3A). Grabbing
rainwater runoff streams and such is federal overreach.
Black
colleges (Page 3A). Everyone should be at
the table of public-integrity. Special-interest agenda not so much.
Black power
and black theology institutions are of questionable fidelity to
the-objective-truth. People have both red blood and the psychological power to
perfect their unique person, and institutions that cling to the past may bemuse
the person’s path and lessen possibilities for perfection.
I feel I had to turn to the future in
order to free myself from the past.
Gaffe
(Page 6A). Often, a mistake serves
to re-establish priorities and strengthen future performance.
Bathroom
bill (Page 7A). Fidelity to
the-objective-truth promises success. Infidelity begs woe. When woe is begged,
eventually it comes. I would not let the NBA or any other enterprise influence
my commitment to physics and progeny, biology. Physics herein mean energy, mass
and space-time from which everything on earth emerges. That includes lies,
heartfelt beliefs, and politics.
Philippine
apology (Page 10A). Good grief! This is a
predominantly Catholic people of 100 million. A beheading there shames me, even
though I claim no religion at all.
Other dialogues:
President Trump’s first
State-of-the-Union-Address The DNC just can’t grasp that President Trump is merely
approached by the GOP for favor. Whenever the DNC wants to serve the people,
they can influence President Trump. Eventually, they will catch on or drop out
by realizing they were replaced.
I do not like the word “society.” It connotes classism,
subjugation of the lower classes, and veneration of the upper class by the
subjects. I prefer civic connections or a civic culture.
Engineers serve a civic culture with public-integrity. Thus,
if an engineer has the responsibility to design a chemical reactor, he or she
works for broadly-defined-civic-safety-and-security.
First, the reactor, if it could blow up, will not blow up.
If there is a more efficient chemical reaction that produces the same product,
that reaction is chosen, unless an explosion with that reaction could not be
prevented. If there are laws that impact the intended operation, they are
observed. If the investors would be threatened by the intended reaction, a new
one is sought. If the intended product is itself immoral, the engineer will not
contribute to the production except under force. For example, my company would
not produce a war-chemical. I hope you get the point: In all considerations,
the engineer intends to serve a civic culture.
In civil engineering, the object is to design buildings,
bridges, and other facilities that serve the purpose efficiently and will not
fail the civic purpose.
Without a civic people to serve, the engineer has no
purpose. I hope this answers your question, and if not, please let me know.
If I may preach a little, your
question does not express understanding, because it employs the word “society”
and the phrase “our economic practices.” What society? Who constitutes the “our”
respecting economic practices?
I prefer to think of civic
connections, referring to willing collaboration so that persons here and now
may conduct transactions with private-liberty-and-civic-morality. In other
words, social morality, religious morality, and civil morality are insufficient
for public-integrity. Public-integrity is possible in a civic culture rather
than a society.
If that is understandable, we may
address an alternate question: what economic practices would serve unalienable
civic rights? Without analyzing alternatives, let me assume that the only
viable economic scheme is collaborative free enterprise.
By collaborative I mean
entrepreneurs observe the civic culture, perceive a need, and undertake to
supply the needed product or service. The undertaking is a horrendous in that
involves raw materials, processing the materials, situation of the process,
labor, capital including profits, logistics, government approvals, other tasks
and materials, and last of all risk. Quoting Ralph Waldo Emerson, “history
delights to honor” the most serving entrepreneurs.
The collaborator in the
free-enterprise is the customer and perhaps laborer in the process. Karl Marx
was most concerned about the economics of the laborer. Unlike the entrepreneur,
the laborer is not willing to assume the responsibility of perceiving a civic
culture’s needs and willingly supplying that need. The labor wants to live a
less risky, less demanding life. Erroneously, Marx thought the expansion of a
civic culture’s needs would end, meaning the end of free-enterprise, and thus
economic chaos, with no way for laborers to earn a living. Marx’s expectation
has not happened.
In American free-enterprise, the
laborer may be both consumer and partial owner in the enterprise, by saving and
buying stock in the enterprise or another one perhaps with a more promising
future. It is critical for the laborer to save & invest in order to
accumulate wealth against unforeseen events and for retirement. Thus, for life,
the laborer should live a reasonable life and save & invest enough of
income to build the needed wealth. Because this life involves less risk it
receives less reward.
It seems to me everyone has the
inalienable right to choose a life of either labor or of entrepreneurship. In
other words, your life is in your hands, if you receive the right coaching from
you caretakers or parents. In question is whether or not our economic practices
need reform. IMO, three reforms are needed.
First, the most menial laborer a
civic culture needs or wants must be paid enough share of gross domestic
product (GDP) to fund a livable lifetime. Key elements include Maslow’s
hierarchy of needs. The percentage of income dedicated to save & invest is
highest for this lowest job and it decreases as value of the job increases. To
account for the fact that the human being often beholds current uncertainty
more that future possibilities, the save & invest portion of income is
probably invested for the laborer until severe need or retirement. People must
work, the jobs must exist, and people who cannot work must be helped until they
can serve in some capacity.
Second, public education must be on
par with elite education, each newborn must be coached to know that he or she
is a person of importance to the USA and be inspired to take personal
responsibility to learn. There must be an incentives program to effect the
recognition and motivation. If he or she emerges at age 30.5 as a civic young
adult with understanding and intent to live a full life, an accumulation of
incentives provided at each successful step in the person’s learning path will
be awarded in full. Google “Phil Beaver + Child incentives brief” to learn
more.
Third, the objective of education
must be reformed from “training the workers we need” to transitioning the
person from newborn infant to civic young adult. The key to civic adulthood is
appreciation for and fidelity to the-objective-truth. For example, people do
not lie so they can trust the other party’s response. The civic adult views
career as a path of service and a vehicle for self-discovery.
Thus, a civic culture has economic
practices that, after all infrastructural and civic provisions, assures a
livable lifetime for the most menial worker. Each newborn is offered equal
education and the education that is offered coaches the child unto adulthood.
With these provisions, the consequences of each person’s lifetime may be in his
or her hands.
I continually write these words and
phrases. If they raise questions, please comment or question. I will respond.
Response to response:
Recall I spoke of entrepreneurial risks, naming “capital including profits,” and consumers “saving and buying stock in the enterprise or another one.” In a detail, management of capital-supply-and-profits is a responsibility that is shared by entrepreneur and laborer.
You address an aspect I would call money supply. It is as old a money. Jesus was a table-turning-brute about money exchangers 2000 years ago. Adam Smith tacitly said a person must have propriety in order to bear witness to civic morality, such as usury by the money supplier when an entrepreneur undertakes the risks to supply a perceived market. I take “propriety” in Smith’s context to mean education in the money-supply-business and its proper role in connecting willing entrepreneur with willing stake holders such as consumers and labors, which may be the same.
James Madison failed to address the issue of those with propriety vs the masses in Federalist 10. His idea was that people of high civic morality would be distinguished in the states, rise to national service for a term, and then return to sovereign citizenship. He noted that power might corrupt their civic morality, but did not know what to do about it. Term limits would help.
Madison’s thought processes were adversely affected by two considerations: religious morality and social morality. I’d be willing to meld the two and assert that they are insufficient: What humans need to support willing connections and transactions is civic morality; in other words, public-integrity.
I don’t know how you expected me to address “borrowers and lenders,” with the question you asked. One thing people don’t realize is that if they are not candid, they cannot expect accurate responses. In Albert Einstein’s expression and to expand from your particular obfuscation to the general, people don’t lie so they can communicate. Fortuitously, Einstein’s essay is posted online at My Friend Einstein? . I want to be clear that my suggestion to solve your dilemma is to educate the masses on par with the elites.
To solve the dilemma great thinkers could not solve yet is fundamental to confusion in 2017, caretakers for every newborn may motivate and inspire the child to trust that 1) he or she is a person of high value to a civic people and in the USA is free to pursue private-liberty-with-civic-morality; 2) he or she must take egocentric charge of his or her approximately 25 year transition from feral newborn to civic adult with the understanding and intent necessary to live a full life, and 3) just as he or she may serve (as laborer, professional, or entrepreneur) in order to connect and transact with a civic culture, he or she may iteratively collaborate for public-integrity.
Failure to participate in civic-morality begs woe in personal life.
I think your ideas are timely and I hope we work together on the education part of this moral debate. I am looking for someone with the economic expertise to speculate the thirty-year impact of the proposal found by googling [Phil Beaver + Child incentives brief]. I think it could push GDP to previously unimaginable levels.
No comments:
Post a Comment