Back in March 04, 2009, I wrote a blog entitled, "my two cents." Its intent was to relieve some of my frustration about the "great recession." Well my frustration has swollen again, and I am feeling the need to let some of it out.
What is troubling me is the ideas coming from the presidential candidates. With all of their professed experience and political wisdom I assumed they would understand more of the process of law making; especially since some candidates are or were members of Congress or governors. There seems to be no connection with the platforms they aspire to as a possible president and the process to enact their ideas. This is baffling to me. Also baffling to me, is that the guardians of our democracy, the press and we the people, let this pass without saying, 'Will your ideas be able to pass the 435 members of the House of Representatives. and the 100 members of the Senate?' With the entrenchment currently locking up our Congress, I believe that that question is vital, and to put a wobble into the mix, who really knows what the 2012 political make up of Congress will turn out to be. Yet, the candidates go on like their ideas will automatically become law merely on the strength of their vocal declarations. It seems that in their zeal to become president they unconsciously display their ignorance, and in like manner, our non-questioning displays our unconscious ignorance. Any ideas without the will to enact them are impotent.
Another troubling point comes from the candidates use of sarcasm and criticism. They seem to think that if they use sarcasm and criticism, on any level, it some how shows their wisdom, and of course, if they say these wise things, repeatedly in a sarcastic and critical tone they can sway the minds of the voters. The voters who hear these sarcastic and critical opinions over and over tend to use these opinions as "talking points" for arguments, and they can become strengthen when other people they relate to reinforce these opinions. It is my experience that a critic is not the wise man or woman. The critic is unconsciously exposing his low self-esteem and the accompanying crutch of arrogance. The sarcasm is used like an adjective providing an emotional power to his criticism. A wise man need not use criticism, because he washes all opinion through the strainer of his center of authority, his heart of hearts. He washes opinions clean, contemplating their validity, and either discards, accepts or rewashes them. Here is a suggestion in light of our discussion from Gautama the Buddha: "Do not accept something as true because of repeated hearings; nor because it is in scripture; nor because of logical arguments; nor because of philosophical reasoning; nor because it agrees with a preconceived idea; nor because of a person's seemingly ability; nor because it comes from your teacher."
"Be lamps unto yourselves. Betake yourselves to no external refuge. Hold fast to the truth, as a lamp."...
Here is a list of troubling ideas candidates say:
"The American people want this, that, and the other thing." When they say what American people want, they are not talking about all 35o,000,000 million of us. They are talking about what a relatively small minority of ideological sympathetic people want. What the majority of the American people want is, according to poles, for elected officials and corporate businesses to do their public and civic duties and find solutions to our country's domestic economic problems and bring economic justice for all.
" We must get government out of the way of business in order to grow our economy. Then the market forces can self-regulate our way back to economic health." The self-regulating markets are seen as some kind of mystic entity with omnipotent powers of balance. These markets are man made, and are therefore subject to the greed, hubris, and mistakes innate in the human condition. I do not know about you reader but my retirement account took a 50% decline, while it was in hands of the smartest money managers. I don't trust self-regulating markets.
"We are so many (put in your own percentages) away from the GDP before the "great recession." Using the GDP output of the middle 2000's as a bench mark goal for our economy to return to health, is insane. Why would we use a mark of high risk, closed eye regulation, and greed as an economic bench mark. Lets set realistic goals, sound goals set by healthy standards for the common wealth, in which to grow our economy.
Lastly, as a way of tribute, I like to hail the democratic movement for economic balance and justice coming from the "Occupy Wall Street-the 99%" group; especially those from the Oakland, Cal. area.