Republic Rules - The U.S.A. is a great representative republic.

Occasionally, you hear people complain about our government suppressing the discussion of some controversial topic.  It is doubtful that actually occurs and it seems people like conspiracy ideas.   Most often, it is simply the government not releasing certain information for a specified reason, usually national security.

In this age of the internet and world commerce, it’s hard for governments to keep secrets from its citizen… but some still try.  With the world spotlight on the 2008 Olympics, China is making true efforts to restrict access to certain topics.  This is an example of pure censorship… and is not even close to anything claimed in our country.  Sometimes, it’s good to have an example to compare with.

We enjoy many freedoms in the U.S.A. and each one of us should work hard to keep them.  When the government interferes with our legitimate activities, it is a loss of freedom for us.  If we want to eat certain foods, that should be OUR decision.  If we want to do business, so long as others are not hurt, we should be allowed to do it.

When governments get between people and their freedom, it creates a conflict… because those who run government are people, too… and that means some people control other people.  They are, therefore, not equal.  To one extent or another, some people become slaves.

And slavery cannot be allowed to exist.

The job of government is to provide certain services that we, as individuals, can’t provide for ourselves… police and fire departsments, the military, building roads and bridges, and so on.  I object when either elected officials (politicians) or bureaucrats (career government employees) overreach and try to control the lives of citizens in a manner beyond the charter of government.

For example, I think it’s fine for the government to educate people about healthy eating habits and to ensure our food supply chain is safe, but TELLING people what they can or cannot eat is unreasonable.  Over the years, there have been many laws proposed and some passed to ban the consumption of certain foods or, at least, make it very difficult to do so.  Smoking has been banned in many, many locales.  Trans fats are about to be eliminated in New York City.  Many schools ban vending machines with chips, soft drinks, and candy.  The list goes on.

Now, the city council wants to prevent any new fast food restaurants from being built in South Los Angeles.  They are concerned that the obesity rate is too high in this area.

Now, the intent of such government actions is laudable… it would be great if people weren’t so obese, or if they ate healthier, or if they exercised more, or if they watched less TV, or if they read more, or if they….

… but where does it stop?

And what gives the government the right to tell ME what I can eat?  They can SUGGEST.  They can RECOMMEND.  They can EDUCATE.  But they should not DICTATE.

Where is this power of government founded?  It certainly isn’t in the Constitution.

And what happened to personal responsibility?  WE can make our own decisions.  We SHOULD make our own decisions.  The really bad part about the government TELLING us what we can and cannot do is that, over time, people become CONDITIONED to that… and begin to look to the government to tell us how to do other things.   The government becomes our nanny, whose job it is to take care of us.  We can’t do anything without the government’s approval.  And, when things go wrong, the government must help us…. after all, we can’t take care of ourselves!

Our country was founded on the principle of FREEDOM… not restriction.  It seems government entities, and their scope of control, are expanding at an alarming rate.   We need LESS governing, not more.

All too often, people look at a problem and try to propose a perfect solution.  While that is a good goal, it is most frequently an unrealistic goal.  Most solutions are just practical ones… the best option given the circumstances at the time.  Sometimes, it is close to a perfect solution but other times it is far away.

A professor in a laboratory can come up with a perfect product, for example, but that may very well NOT be the one that ends up being manufactured on the production floor of the factory.  Sometimes, it just isn’t practical to build a product using the ultimate materials or the most precise methods… while you could do it, the product would cost so much nobody could afford it!  So, engineers look at alternatives and decide on the best ones… compromises are made and a good product is made at a far more reasonable cost… and many, many more people can enjoy the benefits of using it simply because it is priced low enough for them to buy it.

Engineers are good at coming up with the best solution to a problem given a limitation of resources.  Sure, they know the perfect solution… but recognize the reality at hand and arrive at the practical solution.  They don’t simply give up because the answer isn’t “perfect”.  They don’t delude themselves into believing only the “perfect” answer will get a job done.  They don’t stubbornly insist on the “perfect” solution when they have found a practical alternative.  Engineers don’t get emotional when the “perfect” solution cannot be found… they just do the best possible given what they have to work with.

Our country is great… but it does have some problems right now.  I believe many, if not most, of these problems are because politicians and citizens are trying to come up with “perfect” solutions where they might not exist… making decisions based on emotions rather than reality… fooling others (and perhaps themselves) into thinking their answers will actually do the job when they will not.

For some reason, it doesn’t seem like many of our elected representatives have an engineering mindset.  True, engineers don’t have a reputation for being “people persons”… which appears to the the main (if not only) requirement for political office… but they DO have a reputation for finding good solutions to complicated problems.   So, if we can’t have an engineer representing us, why can’t our elected officials at least LISTEN to a trusted engineer?  Henry Ford once admitted he wasn’t the best engineer in the world… but he HIRED the best engineers.

If we are REALLY going to solve the problems facing our country, politicians will have to listen less to their polling advisors and more to “engineering” advisors.   We need to talk less about “perfect” solutions that will never be realized and more about “practical” solutions that can actually be achieved.

For the very best discussion on one of the basic tenets our country was founded on, equality, I strongly suggest you read Chapter 5 of Milton Friedman’s Free To Choose. This is the most readable book on economics I’ve ever found.  It explains things in a straightforward manner that makes good common sense… a rarity considering the author is a Nobel Prize winner.

The Declaration of Independence states clearly:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

While the words “all men are created equal” seem rather simple, they have been the focus of considerable discussion since first written.  Friedman notes that true equality cannot be achieved, and therefore the words cannot be taken literally, but views the interpretation of this phrase as having evolved from its original intent to its current incarnation:

• EQUALITY BEFORE GOD - obviously, not all people are alike… everyone has different capabilities and characteristics:  physical, intellectual, emotional.  Here on Earth we are, in fact, NOT equal… but, before God, as individuals, we ARE.  Our Founding Fathers believed government should not impose its will upon individuals but, rather, provide us liberty.  In a time where Kings ruled over Subjects, the United States began with the idea that every person was to be his own ruler.

The obvious contradiction was the existence of slavery at the time.  The people were divided on this issue.  While many wanted to abolish it, many did not.  The Founders recognized that there would be no unity on this issue and, had the point been pressed, our country would not have achieved independence.  Many more years passed before support of “freedom for all” reached the point where its reality was possible… and even then, it took a Civil War.

• EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY - once “all men” were equal not only in the eyes of God but also under the law, then the concept changed.  Again, a literal interpretation is not possible:  try as we might, the opportunity of a blind person simply cannot be made equal to that of a sighted person… and there are a multitude of other examples.  Instead, it means government should not impose restrictions that would limit people from pursuing  any position they seek (and, obviously, have the talents to achieve).  The determinant should only be ability… not color, religion, sex nor any other irrelevant characteristic.  The government’s role, again, provides an environment based on liberty.

• EQUALITY OF OUTCOME - over the past few decades, a different interpretation has been gaining momentum… and it is troublesome.  While the concepts of equality before God and equality of opportunity both promote individual liberty, equality of outcome REDUCES liberty. Once again, this idea cannot be interpreted literally, so it becomes based on a vague notion of “fairness”… which begs the question:  who determines what is fair?  The trend is toward bigger government confiscating wealth from some and distributing it to others, which is totally contrary to the “American” way of life.

We should note here that this entire philosophy is rooted in Karl Marx’s “To each according to his needs, from each according to his ability”… with a modern take on it:  “Fair shares for all”.

It is one thing for government to provide a “level playing field” (equal opportunity) but an entirely different matter for it to take from one and give to another (equal outcome).  You can nurture the same ground that two seedlings are planted in and they will both benefit, yet one may still grow taller than another.  You cannot chop a tree in half and stack it on top of another tree and expect them both to survive… nor would you call them equal.

Those who see the virtues of Equality of Opportunity and the fallacies of Equality of Outcome need to speak up.  Education is the only way for people to understand the advantages of the former and the ultimate failure of the latter.  Sadly, our education system has become corrupted and will not teach this lesson, so it is up to the voice of individuals to convey this important warning to others.

In general terms, there are two prevalent types of governments.  Those where citizens have freedom from government interference and live in a state of mutually-rewarded cooperation with each other… and those where there is less freedom and many rules of conformity, which are commanded by a centralized authority.

Each has problems… but I choose the one with more freedom any day.

When there is freedom, there will be those who take advantage of it… at the expense of another… and one of the tasks government must assume is to enforce such encroachments.

When the government is a restrictive one, the problem becomes WHO makes that determination?   You might say “the government”, but that’s just an entity… some PERSON within the government will make the rules.  And that is the problem.  Even as in a free society, there will be abuse.  When the power is in the hands of a few people, the potential for abuse remains but the EXTENT of the abuse is much more far-reaching.  It is the foundation for dictatorships and such.

While the former is not perfect, the latter is inherently flawed.

Aside from the obvious advantages of living in a more open society, the primary advantage is that power is placed in the hands of MORE people, not less.  By spreading power among many, there is less chance of it being abused.

Ha!  I saw this article describing how a policeman was fired because he kept going to a local coffee shop and demanded free coffee.  He even threatened slower emergency response if they refused.

Obviously, a misguided individual.  Imagine, a government employee asking for additional favors in return for doing his job.

Hmmm…. it seems like a thin line, though.

How about a politician telling potential voters that, in return for their vote, the elected official will support taxing others and using that money to deliver additional benefits for those who vote for him/her?

With gas prices so high, there has been a new wave of conservation-oriented discussions… including debate of mandates in Congress.  But I don’t see very much ACTION.  Any actual progress made toward using our resources more effectively have been, I am sure, due to individuals making small changes in the way they do things.

First, let me repeat my contention that our country desperately NEEDS a national energy program to help guide us out of a difficult situation and also note that this was also the case 30+ years ago and our “leaders” failed to do anything.  Had a plan been put into place then, we likely would have made many technological advances and be enjoying those results today.  But, no, politics has little room for rationality and foresight… it is too concerned about only one perspective and short-term, self-centered results.

WE need to DEMAND our representatives abandon their narrow views and do their jobs.  Our society is very dependent on oil today, so we need to produce more TODAY.  We need to expand the use of existing nuclear technology to produce electricity that will be the power of the future generation of vehicles.  At the same time, we need to embark on a program to transition us to true energy independence based on even better energy sources and transportation technology.   None of this will happen quickly… we will have to suffer for a while for our lack of prior action… but no action at all now will AGAIN produce no results at all!  Let’s not let history repeat itself.

While I believe our federal government SHOULD be involved in some concerted effort to transition us to a new generation of energy, I do NOT believe our government should be TELLING US WHAT TO DO (or not do).  Even if gas prices are high, if I want to drive excessively and am willing and able to pay the price, that is my business.  The government cannot legislate this problem away.  Natural market forces will adjust prices and, as a result, people will make their own decisions about what they should or should not do.  The same holds true for telling me what I should eat, or how much exercise I should get, or how I should live my life in any way.  We are FREE to make these choices… and that’s one of the beautiful aspects of our great country.

As I said, I believe most (if not all) gains made in conserving energy this past year or so has been due to US… individuals… making rational choices based on the circumstances at the moment.

One thing that bothers me about SOME PEOPLE, though, is how they do things for SHOW but with little actual conviction.  They’ll preach that we should all drive less and use less electricity yet THEY will drive long distances to attend meetings about their cause and live in large homes that consume many times the electricity used in average homes.  They are hypocrites… and they usually shout the loudest about US needing to change the way we live.

Not only are they two-faced in this respect, they only think things halfway through (if that far).  For generations, we used paper bags at the grocery store.  Then, there was a political uprising with claims about wasting our natural resources to make paper bags.  It took many years and now plastic bags are the norm.

Hmmm… do we detect some odd thinking there?  Paper bags are made of a renewable resource (no, not from ancient rain forests… they are from trees grown specifically for such purposes).  Plastic bags are made from petroleum products.

Is it possible we were doing it right in the first place?  At the very least, the change that came about was short-sighted and a step backward in terms of environmentalism.  We shot ourselves in the foot.

So, you have to ask:  what changes being pushed today are politically motivated and how REAL will the results be?   Will we once again go along with the ideas of those who protest loudest and end up shooting ourselves in the foot… AGAIN?

It’s time to make some SMART decisions… not emotional ones.

In life, there are people who will tell you the truth… and those who will tell you what you want to hear.

Which should you listen to?

Which DO you listen to?

If it’s an inconsequential situation, it really doesn’t matter:

• Honey, do you like my dress?
• Isn’t my new car a beauty?
• Mom, did you like my solo at the choir concert?
• Do you like the way this room is decorated?

While I’m a strong advocate of telling the truth, there are some situations where sharing your truthful opinion is probably not the best thing to do… nor does it do any harm to deviate from being totally honest.

In other circumstances, though, we should SEEK the truth because MOST of what we are told is not.  I believe this is especially true when it comes to political issues.   Given our party system, each “side” has an agenda.  That’s just the way it is.  No matter which side of the aisle you support, you can count on what is said by BOTH sides to be biased.  If a politician is speaking:

“The TRUTH” is rare.

“The WHOLE truth” is even rarer.

“NOTHING BUT the truth” is virtually non-existent.

It is YOUR responsibility as a citizen to inform yourself… or risk being manipulated by lies and half-truths.  When a current issue is discussed, politicians and the media will invariably distort the actual situation.  It is easier and more popular for them to tell you what you want to hear… at least, what most people seem to want to hear.  It generally boils down to:

“It’s not your fault.”

“The government WILL help you… and only the government CAN help you.”

“Somebody else will pay for it.”

The first step to true freedom is personal accountability.  If YOU are responsible for your “lot in life”, whether good or bad, YOU have control and can do something about it.  If you abdicate responsibility to someone else (or someTHING else:  government), you forfeit your freedom.

TAKE CONTROL!  Don’t believe everything you hear… find out the answers for yourself.  Be receptive to the truth.  And then ask those who deviate from it WHY they do so.

Or maybe I should say:  misery loves company.

It is the nature of many, if not most, things to have a cycle.  The economy expands and the economy contracts. Global temperatures go up and global temperatures go down.  Breathe in, breathe out.  Nature at work.  That’s just the way it is.

Anyone who expects the economy to continually go up has unrealistic expectations.  And, when things take a downward turn, they make more of it than it is… they overreact.  Indeed, some people may be truly hurt, but many are not.  And it seems like quite a few in that latter category have too much empathy with thosewho are honestly having hard times.

I would like to first note that, without diminishing the pain some people are actually experiencing through no fault of their own, there are some who are having tough times who brought most of the problem upon themselves… usually by not saving, by running up bills at or beyond their ability to pay, and by failing to modify their habits when things started to get tighter.

Others are not actually experiencing problems but PERCEIVE that they are.  For example, someone who lives in their house that has a value last year of, say, $200,000 and that now has a market value of perhaps $175,000 THINKS they are suffering… but, if they are still able to make their monthly payments as usual, they will not actually lose $25,000 unless they sell the house.  It remains only a “paper loss”… a spreadsheet adjustment of their net worth… an imaginary reduction. While certainly not good, it is not real until they sell… and, if that doesn’t happen for a number of years, the market may be much different at that time.  Furthermore, the reduced value of their house compared to the prior yearis a short term comparison;  if the house bought many years before at a much lower cost, then they still have “made money” on their home (but, again, nobody actually makes any money on a deal until there is a buy/sell transaction).

But some people like to complain.

And the news media likes to accentuate doom and gloom.

A bad combination.  It creates a self-fulfilling scenario that feeds upon itself.  Generally, things aren’t nearly as bad as the media would have you believe… but they have newspapers and magazines and TV programs to sell, agendas to promote, jobs to justify.

Lost in the noise is the true American story of those who suck it up and tough it out.  Unheard is the saga of citizens who continue to work hard without complaint to pay their bills.  Forgotten is the “heart” of our nation who innovate and create, who figure out a way to make the best of the situation, who discover more efficient methods that squeeze every ounce of productivity out of business processes so we can continue to enjoy an exceptional lifestyle despite the many “bad things” going on around us.

One reason football is such a popular sport is we all enjoy seeing a lesser team come together with a common goal to beat a more powerful team… what they lack in talent, they make up with in determination.  They reach deep down and WILL themselves to win. They don’t give up, they don’t complain, they don’t ask for special favors, they don’t whine about injuries… each player just forgets about their problems and limitations, shuts out the noise of the crowd, focuses on doing their individual jobs the very best they can… and thinks about WINNING.

Even though football is just a game, there are some serious lessons to be learned from playing it.  We need more TRUE AMERICANS, those with a winning spirit… who will prevail no matter what… to serve as role models for many of our less confident citizens. WE CAN get through any problem thrown at us, so long as WE remain strong of mind.

WE don’t need the government to solve our problems, WE will solve them.  If anything we need government to get out of the way.  Let US do what comes naturally.

In my observations, I’ll often reference “WE” (usually capitalized), by which I mean WE, the people.  But does that mean I speak for everyone in the U.S.?  No.

The “WE” I like to speak of is a reference, of course, to the preamble of the Constitution of the United States.

Likewise, did the Constitution speak for EVERYONE in the incipient country?  No.  There were plenty of loyalists… people who did not want to break with Great Britain,  who supported being a colony under rule of the King, who opposed (ACTIVELY!) those who wanted independence.

So, from the very beginning, WE did not bean everybody.  WE refers to those who support our country and the priniciples upon which it was founded.  WE means those who BELIEVE in the Constitution. WE are the people who think our Founding Fathers “got it right”.  WE are the people who appreciate the selfless sacrifice of those who created and have defended our Constitution from the beginning.  WE are those who continue to have faith in the astounding integrity of the Constitution and want it to remain the basis upon which our great nation operates.

WE are those who fear manipulation of the Constitution by activist jurists, who fear elected representatives who place their own personal interests and/or the interests of their political party above the guidelines and restrictions dictated by the Constitution, who fear a populace that has not been honestly taught the many virtues of the Constitution and its worthiness of respect by our educational system.

WE are the people who object to a large and intrusive federal government.

WE are the people who object to a federal government involved in activities clearly not mandated or authorized by the Constitution.

WE are the people who are proud of our country and want it to remain a leader among world governments of the right of citizens to the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness.