Algorithms

          I want to address a subject today, about which I know absolutely nothing–nada–well, maybe a little bit, but certainly almost nothing. I would, also, bet my bottom dollar that neither do almost all of you who are reading this. In fact, I would go so far as to suggest that almost all of you have never heard the word algorithm (If you are not a mathematician or an engineer or such).

The New Oxford American Dictionary defines an algorithm as “a process or set of rules to be followed in calculation or other problem-solving operations, especially by a computer”. My view of an algorithm is essentially the same (how can I argue), but I express it slightly different. I view an algorithm as a “mathematical sensor”, a mathematical brain, if you will, used by a computer to “think” for us.

Algorithms are used in a variety of ways, computerized stock trading being one example. They are used in the creation and sale of credit default swaps, for another, the result of which you saw in the collapse of the financial markets in 2008, resulting in the current recession (As a side note, you might want to keep your eyes on that subject as I believe credit default swaps, CDS’s, and credit default obligations, CDO’s, forms of derivatives, are and will continue to be a threat to our economy for the foreseeable future–you can bet your boots the speculators, i.e. gamblers, won’t agree with me on that, though).

On the show, “60 Minutes”, Sunday, an infomercial was aired, telling us about the technology of facial recognition which enables anyone to be identified by a scanner scanning the features of one’s face and comparing it to a national database compiled from people’s pictures collected from a variety of sources such as arrest records, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.

A couple years ago, my wife and I were traveling up North when we checked into a motel in Franklin, Pennsylvania and our credit card was rejected. We paid our bill with a different credit card and went about our business; but when we subsequently called our credit card company asking as to why they rejected our transaction, they told us we had made a purchase at a Walmart in Hebron, Ohio much earlier in the day, casting doubt on the authenticity of our transaction in Pennsylvania later that evening–a security application based on an algorithm.

In a somewhat similar instance, month’s later, another credit card purchase of ours was rejected. Upon examination, in this instance, we discovered we had unwittingly left our alternate card in a local retail store here in Florida. Later, the same day, someone in Indiana tried to charge a rather large purchase against the card. The security algorithm rejected their transaction and negated our cards until we could make the necessary changes.

So much for algorithms–they are destined to be with us forever. What do you think? In combination with Facial Recognition, NSA, Credit Security, etc., etc., do you think that, just maybe, someday, somewhere, somebody will be knocking on our door because we are a Republican, a Democrat, etc., etc...?

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net

There is You and There is You

I don’t mean to beat a dead horse to death, as has been said; but, once again, I want to expand on my posting, “Who Am I?” of August 9^th, the one concerning the development of one’s character–the “color of his water”.

In that posting, we imagined in our mind’s eye that, in the very beginning, there was a spirit in Heaven, just waiting to be born, visualizing that spirit as a glass of pure and clear water, perfect in every way. The egg of the mother was placed into that glass of water along with the sperm of the father, thereby fertilizing the egg and creating a person with all the genes and DNA of both parents. The water became slightly colored. As life progressed in the womb, the experience of the fetus therein added to the color of water. Then the infant is born, nurtured, educated, grows up, etc., the environment and experience of which ever increasingly added to the color of the water in the glass–the person’s character. There is you.

What I failed to discuss, was the subject of decisions. As a person comes into this world and grows, his character (the color of his water) is influenced by the decisions of others. As he progresses in life, however, these decisions become his. Although his decisions, in part, are influenced by his past, as he matures, they become increasingly his and he is in charge, leading to the ultimate formation of his character (the color of his water)–for better or for worse. There is you.

You have made your life what you are and you are responsible. There are over three hundred million “glasses of water” in our country; they all have a different color; and, looking through different colored lenses, they all view everything as well as each other differently. But, I have another question. If you poured all three hundred million of those glasses of water, each with a different color, into one huge bowl representing our nation, do you think the resulting color of water in the bowl would represent the combined character of our people? Is not our country the sum total of its people?

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net

Separation of Church and State

I want to talk with you today about the subject, separation of church and state. Admittedly, I haven’t been trained in this subject; or, for that matter, I haven’t even taken a course. However, it is a subject discussed frequently and most often is a subject of dissension. To that end, I would like to present my view.

I’ll say up front, when I refer to the state, I’m referring to our national government, The United States of America. When I refer to the church, I am referring to the Christian Church, the church upon which our Constitution is based. In my view, God is our Creator and the basis of all things–that’s my starting point. Please don’t get scared, or be offended and run off down the road. This may be Sunday morning, but it is not a Sunday school lesson–or a lesson in religion for that matter. However, I must have a starting point and a base on which to build.

My base of justification is this. God created the heavens and the earth on which he placed man. I’m sure you all know the story so I’m not going into detail except to say that God created the earth on which we live for all men. The earth and its resources belong to all of us, rich and poor, believers and non-believers, alike. We’re all in this together, and he has ordained that we live in peace and harmony with one another. Many believers and non-believers alike do not think this; but religion, any religion, is a thing of the heart. It is between you and your God. If you really believe a certain way, you should and will live that way. It’s a given. “Where your heart is, your money is, also,” etc. Your beliefs should be obvious from your lifestyle. This is said throughout the Bible, Old and New Testaments alike, your government notwithstanding. So much for religion–Jesus said, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s. He wants your heart, mind, and soul. The remainder is between you and your government to whom you, also, have an obligation.

I said, above, “The earth and its resources belong to all of us, rich and poor, believers and non-believers, alike”. An efficient, hard-working, conscientious government (beyond that, I won’t go in this posting) has the responsibility (it’s their job) to manage the affairs of our nation for the well being of everybody–no exceptions. This means Gays, atheists, black, whites, Latinos–everybody. It should be obvious, just from this that the law of the land, if fairly administered, is not going to match the law as given to us by God in the Bible. The state must govern all; and, in our democratic republic, all have a personal responsibility, politically and morally, to maintain control over that government. Those who fail to live up to that responsibility deserve what they get. No government is any better than the quality of its people.

What is my conclusion? When you have a government elected by the people, and that government doesn't live up to the beliefs of your religion, there is a valid reason–our world is here for all of us. God gives us free will to make up our own mind. He doesn't force anything upon us. In terms of spiritual beliefs, neither should government.

I submit one more thought to you. When you have a government that claims to represent your spiritual values, beware of wolves in sheep’s clothing. Christians, real Christians, don’t lie, cheat, steal, and unnecessarily kill people, politics notwithstanding. Church should and must be separated from the state. That’s my view. What’s yours?

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net 

Edward Snowden

In all honesty, I am almost completely ignorant of the travesties of Edward Snowden. I don’t know what he actually did; and, therefore, I have no opinion except for one

.

My government has good reason to classify tactical defense secrets. My government has good reason to classify strategic defense secrets. I can and do understand that my security and the security of my country depends upon it. It’s my government’s business and responsibility as they work for me to insure that security–not mine.

On the other hand, however, if my government decides to create a public policy of spying on citizens without probable cause, I believe that is my business. The key word(s) is public policy. In a democratic republic, wherein my government works for me, I have a right to know my government’s policy. It is my business.

For that, I thank you, Mr. Snowden.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net

Get a Life

I have to believe that everyone reading this has at one time or another heard the expression, “get a life”. Among all of you, there are those who will understand what I am about to say; and, on the other hand, there will be those who will not. Unfortunately, those who will not are the very ones who need to most. Let’s see.

Everyone, without exception, needs to “get a life”–most all of us do, but some of us seem to never do so. The process begins at birth (Read my posting of August 9, “Who Am I”?) and proceeds until life’s end with each and every individual developing his own character–his own color of water. What I failed to mention then was the effect of one’s decisions during the course of his life. Every decision one makes during the course of life has a cause and effect, seen and unseen. Frederic Bastiat has taught us that “what is not seen is just as certain as what is seen”, and both leave the marks or scars of their effects with which we must live throughout our life. For better or worse, our decisions during life affect our employability, our relationships with others, and our views toward life–they reflect how we think and what we accomplish. They are us.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net 

What a Nice Swim

In the news today is the story of Halle Berry and Jennifer Garner asking lawmakers for stricter control over the paparazzi who constantly harass celebrities and their children for pictures, gossip, and other compromising information. In an earlier posting, I discussed demand, supply, and jobs. This celebrity event is a beautiful but sad example of what I was talking about. The demand is from the people, the public, wanting ever more celebrity gossip publications provided by the paparazzi–the supply. This along with so-called soap operas and other like media has become a booming industry competing for the hearts and minds of our people; and the people just “eat it up”. 

There’s no doubt that this demand creates jobs; but, isn't it sad that our people prefer this kind of “stuff”, celebrity worship and gossip, over information which is more responsible and essential to their very livelihood, government, jobs, and standard of living? In a democracy, wouldn't you think people would be more involved in things much more important such as what their government is doing to them? But, oh well, maybe I’m just naive. It seems to me, however, that we are like frogs in a pan of cold water, delighting in our wonderful swim while, unknown to us, someone else is slowly turning up the heat under our pan.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net

                  

A Glass of Water

          A glass of water–what is it? Really, what is it? It’s a glass of water, of course; and, if you’re thirsty, you might drink it. You might, but would you? Just maybe, you might decide not to drink it. You might decide not to drink it because of what is in it. What’s my point? Just the other day I was having lunch with a friend, and we were discussing the subject of cisterns. Some of you may not even remember what a cistern is. I think of a cistern as a large hole in the ground, usually lined with flat rocks and covered by a wood deck with an access door on top, used to store rainwater collected from the roof of a house or building. As a young child, I lived on a hillside farm in West Virginia where we used a cistern as our water supply. We lived on top of the hill so a well was not an economic option at the time. We used the water for all things for which one uses water, i.e. drinking, cooking, laundry, bathing, etc. Today, that’s a no no. At least one shouldn't. Today, our rain is polluted. What’s in your glass of water?

          OK! I’ll get to the point. Anything, even a glass of water, is only worth the quality of its content. Isn't a nation, really, like that? Isn't our country like that? Would you say a nation is only as good as the quality of its people? Winston Churchill is said to have once said “A Democracy is the worst form of government there is, but I know none better”. Isn't a democracy only as good as its people–just as a glass of water is only as good as its purity? If, in a democracy, its people are apathetic, don’t keep up with what is going on and lack knowledge, don’t participate in government, and leave the course of events to others, doing only what they like and what makes them feel good, do you think that democracy can really last?

What happened to the cisterns?

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net    

Jobs

It is an economic fact of life that for anything for which there is a demand, a supply will always become available to meet it, whether the demand is for government services, automobiles, groceries, doctors, hospitals, drugs, or whatever. Where there is no demand, there will be no supply; and, therefore, no jobs–jobs being a function of supply. This sounds overly simplistic; but it’s the bottom line–believe me.  The key word here is “demand”. Demand can only come from the people, i.e. the consumer, the user. An increase in the demand for government services will result in an increase in government jobs; an increase in the demand for automobiles will result in an increase in automotive jobs; an increase in the demand for housing will increase in construction jobs; an increase in the demand for healthcare will result in an increase in those jobs, and so on. As we cry for more jobs in these trying times, we must understand that only our people can create jobs, and that is through their demand. There is no other way. In the final analysis, jobs are not a function of government. If the politicians tell you differently, they’re either ignorant or liars. This isn't a Democrat Rule; this isn't a Republican Rule; this is a law of economics. Like gravity, only God can change it.

We now get down to the hard part of this discussion–the really hard part. There is another economic fact of life: whosoever demands must pay for his supply. He may pay cash; he may borrow the money; in the case of demand for government service, he may pay through increased taxes; or, he may pay through the benefit of welfare– also paid by taxes, through which someone else must pay for him. In addition, one should take note that when government services are increased and taxes are not increased accordingly, government borrowing is incurred for which we are liable, also. Either way, sooner or later, “the piper” must be paid. As Milton Friedman is said to have said (I didn’t hear him personally), “There is no free lunch”.

Before we can go from here in this discussion, we must, also, understand that as a whole, our nation and people are in debt “up to our ears”. We may or may not be “maxed out”. That’s arguable. But we are certainly not in a position to continually take on more debt with impunity as we have in the past. For the past seventy-plus years, we have been living a false prosperity far and above our real productivity because we have been living above and beyond our means–our income. We have been living on borrowed money, personal as well as government.

Stated in a different manner, our nation’s demand, government and private, over these years has been excessively, and therefore, artificially high relative to what it would have been in a normal economy without our many wars (WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.) and consumer spending “on the cuff” over and above income. This has been grossly exacerbated by the fact that, although we pretty much paid as we went, so to speak, through the end of the Carter administration (our national debt then, was under $1 Trillion, the closest to zero we’ll ever see in our lifetimes), our national debt after that literally exploded, increasing 1,004% by the time G W Bush left office (the surplus he inherited from Clinton notwithstanding); and, after that, another approximately $7 Trillion (or 70%–almost double) to the approximately $17 Trillion where it stands today under President Obama (after the financial crash of 2008). The artificially high government and public demand in the past really translates into an artificially high number of jobs then relative to the demand (jobs) today as we pay down our enormous government and private debt.

I really hope I have adequately explained what I have just said, folks, as it translates to me, that there isn't going to be any significant increase in demand and, therefore, jobs until we can, at the very least, pay down our debt–both government and private. For private debt, this means credit cards, second mortgages, and student debt, especially. For government debt, this means we must first eliminate our annual deficit spending. You have to quit adding to debt before you can subtract from, i.e. reduce, it.

In conjunction with this, let me call your attention to two more factors. First, in the “Final Report of the National Commission on the Causes of the Financial and Economic Crisis in the United States”, issued January, 2011, it was reported that twenty-one million people were out of work in this country. I can’t provide you the profile of this group of people. It’s not available to me. But please allow me to speculate, and you make up your own mind. Most all the new jobs we are told are being added to today’s workforce are being filled by those who are newly entering the workforce (an estimated 250,000 per month or so–I can’t remember the time period for certain), and most all of those twenty-one million originally laid off are still unemployed. Those entering the workforce are young, cheaper (lower paid), better educated, more efficient, etc. As to those laid off, I don’t believe most of them will ever find a real job until they die. They are, most probably, over fifty, obese, poorer health, aren't as good at relating to people, less efficient, on the verge of receiving their retirement pension, etc., etc.–all those reasons why companies want to clean house and get rid of their less favored and productive employees. Second, outside of certain service jobs, most new jobs will require higher level technical skills than in the past.

My conclusion is that it will be a long time, a very long time, if ever; before we can increase our demand and our economy will revive again. We have too many negatives working against us–our sins of the past as well as our sins of the present. In all honesty, I do believe we can correct our course and recover; but we will not unless we change our mindsets and way of doing things–especially in government and in the involvement of our people. With freedom goes responsibility.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net

Who Am I?

Who am I? Who are you? For that matter, who are we? I've been thinking about this for a long time and have developed a theory. I’ll share it with you and see what you think. Let’s suspose–I know; the little red line just came up on my computer, telling me I misspelled the word, suppose. In passing, let me explain that I have this very dear friend, a lawyer, whom, over the years, I have come to love and respect very much. He’s from Georgia; and, when discussing or explaining an issue, he likes to say, “Let’s suspose……..”. So, therefore, please forgive my digression and indulge me while we suspose.

Beginning at the very beginning, let’s suspose that for every unborn individual there is, somewhere in Heaven, an individual spirit just waiting his turn to be born. For the sake of illustration, let us imagine in our mind’s eye, that spirit as a glass of water, clear, pure, and transparent–with no color whatsoever, either in the glass or the water–it’s perfect. Now, along comes a man and a woman who each, respectively, drop a sperm and an egg into the water. The sperm fertilizes the egg and they, combining their respective genomes, become one, the beginning of a person–the water in the glass becomes slightly colored. The “glass of water with the egg” spends nine months in the woman’s womb, the experience of which slightly changes the color of the water.

Then the baby is born, coming from the warmth and comfort of the womb into a cold and not so comfortable world. Again, the color of the water is changed. We now have a new human being with his own DNA, looks, physical condition, personality, and character–the color of his water. But, we can’t stop here, can we. Life goes on.

Next comes the nurture of the new baby. He may either be breast fed or bottle fed, diapered and changed. He is affected by every aspect of his environment down to the smallest: the volume and tone of the voices around him, language, temperature, light, darkness, and on and on and on. He is constantly learning–from what he hears and perceives even more so than from what he is told. Every effect lends itself to the ever changing color of his water–his character. The baby is constantly learning to walk, to talk, to speak, to read. He becomes educated. He grows up, and he continues to grow mentally and physically until he is finally a mature person with his very own personality and character–his very own color of water. Let us suspose the color of his water is now yellow. That is our new person, you or me.

To help us understand further, let us suspose there are two more persons with their glasses of water. Their beginnings, their environments, their nurtures, their experiences, their exposures, and their educations–all these in one way, to one extent, or another (most probably even in the womb) are different. In our susposition, we now have three persons, three distinctly different characters, three colors of water–let’s say red, yellow, and blue.

It has been said that we are all three persons. We are how we see ourselves; we are how others see us; and we are as God sees us. You don’t have to agree with me, but think about this for a moment. Let’s suspose the person in the glass with the yellow water is talking to the person in the glass with the blue water, what does he see?  I submit to you, he sees himself as yellow, and he sees the other as green. I further submit to you that, when the person in the glass with the red water looks at the person in the glass with the blue water, he sees himself as red and the other as purple. Now, let’s ask one last question, and I’ll quit. When the person in the glass with the yellow water is talking to the person in the glass with the red water about the person in the glass with the blue water, how will they view each other’s perception of that guy in the blue water?

Who am I? Who are you? Who are we? Let ‘suspose.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net

Our Underclass–The Bottom Feeders

Just recently, I wrote to you about the “Bottom Feeders and the Top Feeders”. Today, I would like to discuss, in more depth, the “Bottom Feeders”, those of our people who get the real “dribble down” part of our nation’s income and wealth–our “underclass”. They are ever expanding as our rich get richer and our poor get poorer. Jesus told us the poor will always be with us. We know we cannot eliminate poverty completely; but we can and should do our utmost to reduce it.

 Who is this underclass?  I envision five types of people. There are: (1) those who are completely disabled and cannot support themselves– they were either born as such or were injured at some point in their life, (2) those who are partially disabled but can and are willing to perform work of some kind or another, (3) those who have a job but don’t earn enough to keep their “heads above water” (Their jobs may be either full time or part time; and their wages are too low to sustain them at a livable standard of living), (4) those who really want to work but cannot find a job, and (5) two sub-types, those who are able but unwilling to  work, and those who are unacceptable to the workplace because of their lifestyle and/or personal persona. They will always rationalize their condition; but, in the end, those in this group are unproductive and contribute little, if any, to society. They are a real and ever growing problem for our nation. They are “takers”.

In the case of the first group, the truly disabled, we should provide help collectively as a nation sufficient to humanely satisfy their needs for a reasonable standard of living. In my mind, there should be no argument for even a second about that. It is a question of moral values for they cannot help themselves. For the second group, we should help them find work commensurate with their abilities and subsidize their employment to the same level as the first group. That, too, is a matter of one’s moral values. For the third group, we should essentially do the same; but they should be motivated to upgrade themselves though education, skill enhancement, and job search to help them become productive, self-sustaining, members of society and rise to the middle class. For the fourth group, those who want to work but cannot find jobs, we should help them help themselves, also. We should provide unemployment compensation during their period of job search, and they should help themselves by skill enhancement (personal as well as professional) and education. In too many cases, a change in mind-set will be imperative, too. Times have changed. They have changed and we have not kept abreast. This is just my personal observation and opinion, but I believe massive change, social as well as technological, grew its own bubble over the years, one which burst alongside the housing bubble, the financial bubble, the debt bubble, etc. There was the seen change we recognized and the unseen change within the bubble we failed to recognize until it “popped out”– the problem of  “the less productive and unwanted employee” (not to be confused with those in the fifth group). But I digress.

Our objective must be, to the fullest extent possible, to eliminate our nation’s “underclass” by enabling those within to rise to the “middleclass”, a must for the overall good of our nation. This leads me to the next issue, the fifth group, those who are unproductive, the “bottom feeder” parasites (as opposed to the “top feeder” parasites discussed in a prior posting to this blog)–those who are able but unwilling to work and be a contributing member of our society and those who are unacceptable to the workplace because of their lifestyle and/or personal persona. This is the hard part of this discussion–the really hard part. It is a cancer in our midst.

I think most of us understand that we are raised within the same culture, lifestyle, attitudes, and standard of living as our parents; and, in general, we inherit that from them–usually along with their worldview. People reared in single family and/or undisciplined households, irresponsible, doing as they please, skipping and dropping out of school, running in gangs, committing crime, doing drugs, conceiving children out of wedlock, etc., can never rise out of poverty and be responsible and contributing members of society–NEVER! They will only perpetuate their unfortunate condition or culture through their offspring, forever remaining an ever growing burden. Exceptions to this are rare–very rare. In the end, people in this class will never rise to the middleclass until they change or overcome their culture. There lifestyle itself will preclude such and only help to bar them.

I am not a sociologist, and what I’m going to say scares me, but I submit to you that only two avenues of pursuit can resolve this problem and both are imperative. One is the need to change the type of nurture in the home of these people and the other is education, both of which must begin in very early childhood, as near birth as feasible when learning is at its peak. The trained sociologists can develop the details–the “how to’s”, if you will, but it must be done. Achievement of this objective will be highly argumentative, politically disquieting, and expensive; but, is the alternative affordable either? Our prisons are already full and we certainly cannot do what the British did in the eighteenth century, send them to Australia. 

This condition must be remedied for the good of all, including those involved. Even our most wealthy have only so much money.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net

Free Stuff

There is an email currently in circulation, titled “We Are Not Coming Back”, said to be written by Rabbi Steven Pruzansky, spiritual leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, New Jersey (Refer to bio on Avi Weiss–Wikipedia), explaining the loss of the 2012 presidential election by Governor Wilbur Romney. Rabbi Pruzansky’s email was quite long and encompassed several subjects in the course of his explanation, one of which I have already addressed a few days ago, titled “Conservative Virtues” (see below), in which  I told you why Governor Romney really lost the election. Beginning below and continuing with additional postings within the near future, I’ll discuss the remaining subjects about which he spoke.

Today, I want to talk about “Free Stuff”. The Rabbi said, in effect, Governor Romney lost the election because of the American people’s propensity for free stuff. Before settling down to an objective discussion of the subject, however, I am compelled to rid my chest of the ire I feel with the Rabbi’s statement about “free stuff”, i.e. charity. Rabbi Pruzansky is a Jew! To my knowledge, there is no civilization in the history of this earth, God’s very creation, which has been more magnanimous in its attitude and teachings toward giving, loving, and being charitable to all than the Jew (except maybe for the Christian). The Jews have been shining examples to welfare throughout history. He’s a Jew; he’s a Rabbi; and he is negative to charity? Frankly, his political stance defies my imagination.

What is this free stuff anyway? In his email, Rabbi Pruzansky talks about 47,000,000 people on food stamps, people receiving two full years of unemployment compensation, a disincentive to look for work while acting as an incentive to work off the books “while collecting a windfall”, “the difficulty of (Romney) winning an election in which ‘47% of the people’ start off against him because they pay no taxes and just receive money-‘free stuff’-from the government”.

How dare anybody talk like that or refer to our people in such a manner–his very audacity infuriates me! We have over twenty million people out of work in this country who can’t buy a job. Most of them lost their jobs through no fault of their own. Do you remember the crash of 2008? I don’t know how many are living with their families on the streets and in their cars. I don’t know how many have lost or are under water with their homes in a stage of repossession. I don’t know how many jobs were moved to another country, putting our people on the streets, so that people like Steve Jobs, Sam Walton, etc., etc could make an extra buck to pay for his $4,000 shower curtains or mansion in the hills. How dare he? How dare anybody.

Yes. There are thieves and robbers among us. There are those who take advantage of the system, those who lie, cheat, and steal with impunity. I’ll admit that. Let’s name names. I’ll begin by giving you one name, and perhaps you can continue the process by naming others. For starters, let’s begin with Bernie Madoff. According to the write-up in Wikipedia, the money missing from his client accounts, including fabricated gains was almost $65 Billion. How many food stamps might that buy? Now, it’s your turn to give a name.

I submit to you. Governor Romney didn’t lose the election because 47% of us didn’t have any skin in the game as he said. We have skin in the game all right. We really do! We not only have skin in the game, it’s our skin that’s on the line here. Answer me this. How many trillion dollars are lying off the shores of this country evading taxes?  Whose skin is it in the Cayman’s? Whose skin is it in Switzerland? It’s long past time for some people in this country to stand up and do the right thing. Our nation is in serious trouble.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net

My Doctor(s)

I was thinking the other day, and my doctors came to my mind (I have to make that plural–It seems I have so many anymore). Did you know that Medicare pays doctors who provide care under their plan only 89 percent of their usual fee; or, even worse, Medicaid pays only 60 percent (Ref. Cannon and Tanner 2005: 101–102, Healthy Competition. Washington, DC: Cato Institute)? Did you know that, in order to better control costs, the federal government has cut back on some Medicare cost of living adjustments in paying physician fees? Also, are you aware of how chronically late the government is in paying its bills to healthcare providers? In conjunction with this, you must know, I have to believe, of the enormous uncertainty and turmoil within our healthcare system today. If you can get your mind beyond the myth that all doctors are rich and don’t need the money anyway, there large business investment and debt notwithstanding, you must surely understand the continuing threat to their income, under which they work. This is about him.

Now, think about this for a moment in light of the above. You are sitting in your doctor’s office while he is examining you for some ailment or another–perhaps even something very serious. Most probably, he is smiling and being cordial, trying to put you at ease. He is trying to care for you and enable you to become well–all those things because he cares and is dedicated to your best interests. It’s all about you.

Isn't there an irony in this? What if you were in his shoes? Would you care? Would you even be cordial?

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net 

Law and Order

In my posting today, I’m going to talk about something of which I know very little–only what I have learned from the television program, Law and Order. Nothing! Absolutely nothing! 

What I do know, however, is how I feel; and that is one of aversion, disdain, and, in a way, downright fear. I don’t know why. Maybe it is because of when I was born and the times in which I was raised. I was born at the bottom of the great depression, raised in the thirties and forties during the rise and fall of Hitler’s Third Reich, his Gestapo Police, and World War II. I graduated right into the lap of the Korean War and America’s occupation of the Far East. The propaganda and mind control then was horrendous–every bit as bad (if not worse) as the political propaganda being spewed forth in these times. Maybe that is the reason I have these feelings.

           Whatever! I was watching CBS’s Sixty Minutes on television yesterday evening and they were discussing the Springfield, Massachusetts’ police control of gangs in their city, modeled after our military’s anti-insurgent efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq. I watched and listened to the policeman, an Iraq veteran, who had initiated the program. He was obviously a really nice, sincere, and conscientious person, and I really liked what he was doing. I hope it works. We need to do what he is doing there. But, do you know what? I looked at his shaved head. I looked at his crushed hat. I looked at the wrap-around shiny boots he was wearing. I looked at his starched shirt, shiny belts, gun, cuffs, and all that paraphernalia; and I listened to his voice–you know–that special tone which some of our military people use when they talk. I can’t explain it, but you know it when you hear it. All I could see and hear was GESTAPO.

          Earlier this year, Governor Chris Christie was giving his State of the State Address in New Jersey. He was giving an excellent speech on the floor of the New Jersey Legislature. On either side of him was a soldier policeman. There were those crushed hats, boots–all that paramilitary stuff. The image? GESTAPO.

          I am sure there are many people in this country who will disagree with my views and opinions on many issues; but there is one issue on which I am dead certain I can get 99% agreement. We don’t want any dictators in any way, shape, or form in authority in the United States of America. I find just the very image of paramilitary authority to be threatening and objectionable. Such may be cool to some but not to me.

That’s my view. What’s yours?

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net

Conservative Virtues

There is an email currently in circulation, titled “We Are Not Coming Back”, said to be written by Rabbi Steven Pruzansky, spiritual leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, New Jersey (Refer to bio on Avi Weiss–Wikipedia). 

I want to comment today regarding one statement in particular stated by Rabbi Pruzansky in his alleged email. In explaining why Governor Romney wasn't elected during the presidential election of 2012, he said the governor’s loss was because “conservative virtues–the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness - no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate.” Therefore, Governor Romney just didn’t get the votes. I have no idea if Rabbi Pruzansky even wrote the email quoted (so many emails are false), but I discuss it here because of its excellent example of political propaganda being daily perpetrated on the American people–especially during elections. I call it propaganda because it is an outright lie–true only in the perception of those who have believed it for so many years and want rightly ever so much to believe it is still true.

I have been a registered Republican for at least forty years (and I still am) because I earnestly believe in those same virtues. Without compunction, I have worked hard all my life–very hard, even to the neglect of my family–because I believed in them. Now I want to tell you something; and I ask you, for just a little while, to please set aside your preconceived opinions (we all have them if we are truly honest with ourselves and will admit it) and think very deeply and honestly about what I’m going to tell you.

Rabbi Pruzansky is wrong–very wrong. America hasn't lost those virtues. They’re still with us. They’re all around us. Those values are in the hearts and minds of most of us–not all, unfortunately, but most of us, political parties notwithstanding. It isn't the people who have abandoned those values. It is the Republican Party–more specifically the so called neo-conservatives, the extreme right wing. I submit to you that the vast majority of Republicans who voted Republican during this past election voted that way because they have those very values and sincerely believed their party did too. But they were wrong–very wrong–because they failed to recognize and admit their party has been stolen from them–stolen by their extreme right wing, ostensibly represented by Wilbur Mitt Romney and his cohorts, who really represents the interests of the very rich, the very powerful, power elite in this nation–our Shadow Government, if you will, who really controls this nation. That’s why he didn’t get elected.

To those of you who don’t like to read, to study, to educate yourselves, to stay abreast of current events and think beyond your own back yard, to be a responsible voting citizen of a Democratic Republic like the United States of America; to those of you who like to leave the responsibility of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people to others, SURPRISE! Your Shadow Government is in charge. Your Shadow Government controls the vote in your Congress.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@bellsouth.net