We can’t control what others do and we can’t stop misfortune from striking. But we can control our own actions. Those who are financially prudent will most likely enjoy success, even if events don’t always go their way.
I point to the easy accessibility of using the internet to “inform” /propagandize opinion as fact. Also the 24 hours news cycle is overwhelming to inform instantly without time perspective. People are so easily manipulated nowadays!
Who are the extremists? My definition of extremists might be different than my neighbor.
Outlandish claims and finger pointing? Again, I hear them all the time but what I hear might not be what my neighbor hears.
Demanding honesty and accountability sure makes sense to me but maybe folks I think should be accountable because they have not been honest will differ from my neighbor.
Wow!! Facts can certainly be manipulated and have been and my neighbor’s facts might contradict facts I have.
Seeking common ground and compromise makes sense to me but maybe we need to work on the first four before we can tackle this one.
One way to do this might be to gather a few folks of diverse thinking–have them list extremists (as an example) on their side of the equation and extremists on the opposite side/ the side they would disagree with. Do this for all four and then start a dialogue.
OK by me. Limit government to those things that are “… for the good of all now and in the future.” To repeat: “… for the good of all now and in the future.”
So, the federal government (states and local governments) will be limited to only those items that are a net benefit everyone – the necessities, and the requirements, that which is in the Constitution. Everything else will need a premium or a toll that finances the entire cost. So, those who drive on the roads will have to shoulder 100% of the cost for roads. Those who ride public transportation will have to shoulder 100% of the cost for rails – as well as a proportional cost of the roads for busses.
By definition, that means limiting local, state and federal government to only those things where everyone benefits. Of course, that would include anything which is explicitly provided for in the federal (state) constitution – defense (federal), law and order (federal, state), education (some states), etc.
However, for everything else, the feds and states will have to rethink how those items are funded so that they are a net benefit to all. Same with entitlements, which clearly do not benefit all … at least not the way they are currently funded. We will need a much better definition of the concept “general welfare” and the term “uniform” per Article 1, Section 8: “… The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; …”
And, finally, we are all stewards of America, charged with maintaining the country and transferring it, intact, ever improving, to future generations of citizens.
I point to the easy accessibility of using the internet to “inform” /propagandize opinion as fact. Also the 24 hours news cycle is overwhelming to inform instantly without time perspective. People are so easily manipulated nowadays!
LikeLike
Indeed they are because they are not inclined to spend time looking for facts.
LikeLike
Of course the problem is always in the details:
One way to do this might be to gather a few folks of diverse thinking–have them list extremists (as an example) on their side of the equation and extremists on the opposite side/ the side they would disagree with. Do this for all four and then start a dialogue.
What the heck–nothing else is working.
LikeLike
OK by me. Limit government to those things that are “… for the good of all now and in the future.” To repeat: “… for the good of all now and in the future.”
So, the federal government (states and local governments) will be limited to only those items that are a net benefit everyone – the necessities, and the requirements, that which is in the Constitution. Everything else will need a premium or a toll that finances the entire cost. So, those who drive on the roads will have to shoulder 100% of the cost for roads. Those who ride public transportation will have to shoulder 100% of the cost for rails – as well as a proportional cost of the roads for busses.
By definition, that means limiting local, state and federal government to only those things where everyone benefits. Of course, that would include anything which is explicitly provided for in the federal (state) constitution – defense (federal), law and order (federal, state), education (some states), etc.
However, for everything else, the feds and states will have to rethink how those items are funded so that they are a net benefit to all. Same with entitlements, which clearly do not benefit all … at least not the way they are currently funded. We will need a much better definition of the concept “general welfare” and the term “uniform” per Article 1, Section 8: “… The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; …”
And, finally, we are all stewards of America, charged with maintaining the country and transferring it, intact, ever improving, to future generations of citizens.
That is what you meant, right?
LikeLike