Busted for Drugs

Trey Radel,

Representative of the State of Florida to

The United States House of Representatives

          I’m sorry, Mr. Representative. I really am. Not only am I truly sorry for you, I’m sorry, also, for your family; but, really, you picked a bad time to do this. You picked a time when the effectibility, credibility, and personal character of the whole Congress is in question. I say, shame, shame on you. You picked a time when so many of your kind have sold their very souls to the lobbyists, representatives of the Shadow Government (The corporatocracy and power elite) which really “calls the shots” in America and rules over us–just to get re-elected.

          You claim that you want to “continue serving this country” (Ref.: USA Today, November 20^th). As is so with any representative of the American people, the best way to do that was to begin by setting an example–not only in character (that’s extremely important); but, also, in your credibility. Are you really sincere when you vote on an issue? Do you really believe in that for which you are voting; or, on the other hand, is your vote in the House of Representatives only a reflection of the party line, i.e. pseudo-insurance for re-election? I’m thinking of your co-sponsorship of legislation to change the nation’s mandatory minimum drug sentencing laws, a bill that calls for states to drug test people who receive food stamps (Again, Ref.: USA Today, November 20^th). That does raise an idea, though. If, today, in these times when our nation is in a state of economic depression, we are going to drug test poor people on food stamps, perhaps we should initiate a program of drug testing Congressmen.

          I say again, Mr. Representative, shame on you. You really don’t belong in office. You should resign. If you were a black man, you would be doing time–another travesty in our legal system, i.e. one law for the underclasses and another for the upper. You can take that to the bank, Mr. Representative.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@comcast.net

It Seems To Me

I readily recognize I don’t know everything, and I don’t pretend to, the thoughts of my critics notwithstanding; but it seems to me that, in their mismanagement, our government is treading a perilous path in these difficult times, rapidly approaching a line in the sand; which, if they cross, will lead us beyond a point of no return.

You might correct me on this, but I believe our country and our people are different from those of other nations. We are different, if for no other reason, in that we were born free. Personal freedom is ingrained in the minds of every one of us from the very beginning of our great nation–the Revolutionary War; and that inner subconscious belief continues with us to this very day–whether we were born here or immigrated. Freedom is ingrained in our culture–freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and freedom of action, limited only by that of others, i.e. my freedom ends where yours begins.

In the beginning, our Constitution, approved in 1789, was written and approved behind closed doors by the power elite of the time and given to us, we the people, for our approval, effectively telling us we were free. Subsequently, the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments) was added, again increasing our freedom. Further along in history, we decided that the people would elect members of the Senate, once again increasing our freedom. Then, in 1865, slavery was abolished, followed one hundred years later by the Civil Rights Act of 1965. As a nation, freedom is all we know–this is the color of all our glasses.

I mentioned earlier that our government is treading a perilous path. A government of the people exists for only one purpose–only one. That is to manage the affairs of our nation. As the Preamble to the Constitution says, “In order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity…..”. Managing the affairs of our nation, in my opinion, does not constitute playing chess with party politics at the expense of the people. I heard former Senator Tom Daschle say on Washington Journal this morning, to the effect that, what our government needs is a good dose of bipartisanship. My contention is that, what it needs is a good dose of patriotism–patriotism for our nations’ affairs. Rather than the one and one half days per week they are now working (they go home on Thursdays and return on Tuesdays), we need them to take care of business and relieve us from our overwhelming stresses; and you can believe–they are overwhelming to all of us. We can use a little bit of that Tranquility right now.

Now, having provided the groundwork, I’ll get down to it. Our nation and our people are under immense stress right now. I’ve pointed it out over and over in my several postings to this blog, but I’ll briefly do it again:

1.     We have approximately twenty million people either unemployed–looking for work, employed part- time, or who have given up looking. Our recession may be over, but we are still in depression.

2.     Many, if not millions (I don’t know how many, but too many) are living in cars, under bridges, on the streets, or in homeless shelters. They are living on welfare, securing food from food banks, eating out of dumpsters and food kitchens, or whatever.

3.     Since the 1970’s, and more so since the 1980’s, income and wealth of our middle and under classes has steadily decreased right along with their standard of living. The rich have gotten much richer and the poor have become poorer.

4.     As a result of the burst of the housing bubble and financial collapse of the financial markets in 2008, millions of our people have lost their homes, are under water with their home mortgages, and over their heads in personal debt with no apparent way out.

5.     Large corporations (long standing members of the power elite, our Shadow Government), in order to increase their profits, have been outsourcing jobs to slave labor abroad, exacerbating unemployment and reducing tax revenues. You call it what you want, but a rose is a rose is a rose. I call it slave labor. Not all, to be sure, but many of our slaves in 1865 lived better than those to whom we are now outsourcing.

6.     On top of all of the above, our nation is saddled with a national debt of $17 Trillion, accumulated over a short period of thirty-three years–a debt so huge that our ability to manage the nation’s fiscal policy has been seriously constricted.

7.     Now comes the Affordable Care Act, aka Obama Care. This nation severely needs a healthcare system. Every thinking person knows that. We need a new system to improve the health of our people; and we need a new system to reduce costs (and, therefore, our deficit). The way this system is designed, however, presents severe hardships to far too many of our people who live from one paycheck to another (if they are employed, that is) and employers.

8.     I’m sure there are more sources of stress to our people at this time, but I’ll name one more and conclude this posting. There is the stress of NSA, our National Security Agency. This is a big thing, folks. If you don’t think so, why do you think they kept it a secret? Have you heard the news today? They are even monitoring many of our conversations as we walk down the street. Let’s cut this to the quick. If our government can monitor us this closely, they are only half an inch away from having the ability to dominate and control us just as many dictators have done throughout history. Adolph Hitler and Joseph Goebbels would have loved to have some of our security systems. Are you a Democrat? Are you a Republican? Mmmmm……

Now, folks, tell me. Isn’t this more than enough stress and uncertainty? I submit to you that these problems are and/or can be simpler to solve than our government, Democrats and Republicans alike, are making them. They are simple, but they are significant, however. It has to be obvious to all that our people are in turmoil and under heavy stress. It’s a known fact, also, that our people are armed to the teeth, just as is our Department of Homeland Security which has been buying ammunition by the billions of dollars for quite some time (Check out www.infowars.com. There is a lot of political propaganda in the website, but so also is such with Fox News, MSNBC, etc.–You can sort out the truth from fiction). My point is that, surely, our government doesn’t want to continue their present mis-governance, introducing even more stress points upon our people. Trust in government is the lowest in many years. We don’t want it to go even lower, so let us not let Pandora out of the box. Once she is out, it will be a long time before she gets back in, if ever. Once the first shot is fired, what little democracy we have left will be gone, I believe, forever.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@comcast.net

The Affordable Care Act, ACA

          Anyone who has read my blog knows my feelings as to the Affordable Care Act. Not only do I feel it will not work; but, also, I firmly believe a single payer national healthcare act modeled after Medicare will serve our nation’s needs much better. If for no other reason the ACA will quickly price itself out of the market, both on the public’s end and on that of the government.

          That having been said, I grow increasingly weary of all the thoughtless discussion of the subject. It blocks all the media, shadowing over (some maybe even more important) events in the news; and, in all fairness, rather than destroying the program through politicking and propaganda, we should just let it alone to follow its natural course, wherever that might end up. It will either work or it won’t. It’s either a bad program or a good one. In either event it should stand on its own merits which shouldn't be distorted by our intervention, which leads me to my next point.

          If I plan a wonderful vacation or long trip and the engine in my car fails, the fault of the engine failure notwithstanding, that failure certainly does not mean in any way that the trip was bad or wrong. In my mind, the thinking of these people when they talk about the computer glitches and program failures in implementing the Affordable Care Act defies all logic and understanding. People should keep their eye on the real subject which is how the program will work after implementation–not on the “blips” and “tweets” before it is even begun.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@comcast.net 

Once Again, Our Shadow Government, the Power Elite

          To those of you who yell for smaller government and less, if not the elimination of, regulations, here we go again. There are two articles this morning in the New York Times, “C.I.A. Collects Global Data on Transfers of Money”, and “U.S. Investigates Currency Trades by Major Banks”. Surprise! Surprise! Didn’t our government just complete an $18 Billion fraud settlement with J. P. Morgan? Didn’t we just endure the banking financial crisis of the century in 2008, which came within a “hair’s breath” of destroying our whole country? (Surely, you don’t want to argue about that). What was the name of that guy who “pulled off” that huge multibillion dollar swindle of his friends, neighbors, and business associates? I think his name was Bernie Madoff, and the amount was said to have been around $36 Billion.

 Do you really think these people are ever going to stop? Do you really think we need to quit or reduce regulating? That’s what we did from ’81 through the first decade of this century, isn’t it. We not only quit regulating, we quit enforcing, didn’t we. If you’re not sure about that ask Clarence Cox, the infamous leader of the SEC (during the administration of President George W. Bush) when the derivatives market collapsed. It seems to me that it wasn’t very many months after that when some employees of the SEC were accused of viewing pornography on the job at their computers during working hours. I think that’s true.

What am I really getting at? Maybe I’m an idealists and very naive  but I think it is a downright dirty shame that people in responsible positions are so greedy that they undermine the interests of their country and their fellow-man for self-enrichment. I think these kinds of things have done more damage to America than Benedict Arnold ever did. De jure, as the law of treason is written, they are not; but, de facto, they are traitors and should be treated as such–especially, any public official who betrays the oaths of his office. Most Americans strongly believe in a strong work ethic with equal opportunity for all, i.e. Study hard, work hard, save your money, get ahead, make your mark; and we don’t hold in very high regard those who don’t. To those of you who advocate self reliance and free markets (to which I wholly subscribe), take note that those who lie, cheat, and steal, taking unfair and/or illegal advantage of others (and their country) to get ahead, undermine the free markets for all of us. There is no free market without a level playing field.

What does this have to do with our Shadow Government, the power elite? Don’t you think these global bankers are part of that picture right along with other corporatists pulling the strings of our elected officials through their lobbyists? For that matter, is it just possible that some of our elected representatives on the wrong side of those strings might be accessories after the fact?

Think about it. Talk to me. I welcome your opinion.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@comcast.net

Massive Unemployment

You know, folks, how prone we, as a people, are to forget. The crash of 2008, only five years ago, isn’t even cold yet. We still haven’t recovered. It’s not even “in the grave”. Our people are still very much in trouble. The Financial Crisis Inquiry Report, (the final report of the National Commission on the Causes of the Financial and Economic Crisis in the United States, a commission appointed by President Obama), dated January, 2011, reported then that twenty-one million people were out of work. We are now in 2013–three years later. Although the figure is not finite, there are still an estimated (if anyone has information to the contrary, I would appreciate hearing as to how many and the source) approximately twenty million people who remain either unemployed– looking for work, employed part-time, or have given up looking. This is one whale of a lot of people, folks. This is a picture of misery and hopelessness. Many (I don’t know how many, but too many) are living in cars, under bridges, on the streets, or in homeless shelters. They are either living on welfare, securing food from food banks, eating out of dumpsters and food kitchens, or whatever. We call them lazy loafers on the dole, looking for something for nothing.

When you look at the cars in the parking lots of the malls, you wouldn’t think such a condition exists, but it does. The reality of it all is that we have three nations in one in this country–one in misery, one enormously wealthy, and one in between, worrying when they will lose their jobs and how they will pay their bills. Guess what. Our illustrious Congress, most of whom are wealthy beyond our imagination are doing nothing about it–nothing–nada, that they are charged with the responsibilities of managing the affairs of our nation in Article I of our Constitution notwithstanding. Oops! I’m sorry. I forgot. They allowed cuts in the food stamp benefits of forty-seven million people on November 1.

What do I know? I only know what I see; and that is, they just don’t care. All they want is to get re-elected and keep their “goodies”, their future employment secured by the Shadow Government which they really serve. It is all too easy to forget the less fortunate when our belly is full. Our recession may be over; but our depression goes on.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@comcast.net

National Healthcare and Government

          On November 11^th, I discussed briefly, national healthcare, socialism, and capitalism, comparing the latter two subjects with one another; and, then, I spoke of our need for a national healthcare system to replace the Affordable Care Act, i.e. “Obama care”, modeled after our system of Medicare. In conjunction with this, contemplating objections, I explained why this was not socialism.

          I don’t want to talk this to death, but I am compelled to “get this off my chest”. I sincerely believe good healthcare is an extremely important subject to everybody as well as our nation. In fact, it’s absolutely critical–even to the point of life and death. As you very well know, we have argued, going around and around, this subject for decades. We talk about our deficit. Let me ask you. How many millions of dollars (if not billions) do you think we have wasted in our arguing and bickering over these decades? Looking beyond this facet of the subject, a significant–a huge–portion of our healthcare costs haven’t even been paid for yet, payroll deductions notwithstanding. We have purchased it “on the cuff”. It’s in our deficit. It’s laying there in our national debt. I try to say this kindly; but, as a nation, we are fools. We continue year after year to flagellate ourselves with a system that is expensive, inefficient, and corrupt; and, to add insult to injury, it hasn’t even done its job. In the mean time, there are those who have gotten rich on the system. You know our healthcare is behind other countries because you have heard the statistics over and over, comparing ours with theirs. And why have we sustained this kind of self-torture? Because we are slaves to an ideology, a prejudice that only exists in our minds.

          You say national healthcare is socialism. I say not. It is progressivism. Winston Churchill, if he were here, might call it Liberalism. Please allow me to insert in this posting a small portion of a speech he made in 1906, comparing liberalism to socialism:

“Socialism has its own formulas and aims. Socialism seeks to pull down wealth; Liberalism seeks to raise up poverty. Socialism would destroy private interests; Liberalism would preserve private interests in the only way in which they can be safely and justly preserved, namely, by reconciling them with public right. Socialism would kill enterprise; Liberalism would rescue enterprise from the trammels of privilege and preference. Socialism assails the pre-eminence of the individual; Liberalism seeks, and shall seek more in the future, to build up a minimum standard for the mass. Socialism exalts the rule; Liberalism exalts the man. Socialism attacks capital; Liberalism attacks monopoly. These are the great distinctions which I draw….”

One of the most famous maxims of Deng Xiaoping, dating back to the years before the Cultural Revolution in China, states that "It doesn't matter whether a cat is white or black, as long as it catches mice." The fact is, we have real problems in our country, and we need to solve them. It’s past time for us to quit this self-serving dilly dallying and start catching mice.

          To those who think the Affordable Care Act is the answer, I don’t agree. I sincerely believe it will, for many reasons, self-destruct. I've never met President Obama; but, from what I can see of him on television, I like him. I think he’s a nice guy. When it comes to his healthcare program, however, I think he’s on the wrong track.

          I want to tell you why a single payer national healthcare system, modeled after Medicare would be best for our people; but, first, I want you to understand something. Our great nation has some of the “greatest brains” in the world. There is no subject on which we don’t have fully informed experts on hand, somebody ready and willing to serve us–healthcare included. They've been there, done that, and know what they are doing. Having said that let me tell you what I believe you would gain from a system of single payer national healthcare modeled after Medicare:

1.     All the expensive arguing and bickering would end (or certainly should).

2.     Every citizen would receive paid healthcare, from the cradle to the grave.

3.     The whole system should be relatively transparent to everybody. They could choose their own doctors, hospitals, and pharmacies–no confusion, no upset.

4.     There would be no confusion about computers, computer access, reading contracts, paying bills, knowing what to do, where to go, etc., etc.–no confusion, no upset.

5.     There would be no premiums to pay, no payroll deduction, no employer contribution, no confusion, no upset.

6.     The economy would be stimulated by employee spending of what used to be deducted from his or her pay.

7.     Employers would no longer have to worry about providing health insurance to its employees. Their profits would be enhanced and they would be able do a better job of forecasting the future of their company (In my day, we called it profit planning).

8.     The forty-hour workweek could be reinstated which, from a macroeconomic standpoint, would aid in stabilizing the economy. Just the contemplation of a standard thirty-hour workweek is scary.

You’re thinking, “How are we going to finance all this”? In considering this, my mind used to immediately go to payroll tax deductions, but my thinking has changed. Payroll deductions will have a negative impact on employee budgets, on the economy, and politically–not good at all. I feel very strongly that we should establish a national sales tax (in fact, two separate individual taxes) to finance national health care and Social Security. Each should be a separate identifiable tax applied to the price of the purchase, but not included in the price–just as state sales taxes are done today. There should be a separate stand-alone fund, excluded from our national budget (just as we have for Social Security) for each program into which all revenues will flow (each tax into its own fund) and from which all expenditures will be made. Effectively, these funds should be deficit free with all over/under amounts to be paid by an annual adjustment to both taxes. In this manner, both funds would be on a “pay as you go” basis and, hopefully, not have to be revisited for ever–no more politicking and no more discontent.

          I am sure there must be more benefits, just the elimination of national unrest being one of them, if none other. I’m sure the politicians will love that. I am also certain there will be negatives, one of which first comes to mind is having to wait long periods of time for appointments and/or spending long hours in waiting rooms. To these, my answer is that there is no reason why any of this has to happen. With all of the expert knowledge available to us, there is no reason we cannot find solutions to such problems in the beginning. There should be nothing that can happen that we can’t anticipate beforehand. I’m sorry, but we must keep the hands of the politicians out of it.

          This is your solution Mr. and Mrs. Politician, let’s do it. Let’s do it now. For once in your life, set politics aside and get the job done. Let’s gitter done, and go on to solving the next problem.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@comcast.net

           

          

The Cost of The Government Shutdown

By now, the estimated cost, $24 Billion, of shutting down our government for a period of sixteen days, ended just recently, is well known to most all of us. In the scheme of things, we throw these numbers around like they are nothing–a billion here, a trillion there….who cares? It’s only money. We can always print more. Isn't that the way we think subconsciously, if not consciously? It flies right past our head, barely missing our ears.

Well, let me give you a picture that I’m sure won’t go right on by you–a picture that will to some extent, at least, give you some indication as to just how much money $24 Billion is. If you will, recall to mind those pictures you have in recent memory of Typhoon Haiyan that, in effect, has just destroyed the Philippines at an estimated cost of $14 Billion and 10,000 lives. Recall the massive destruction–all around, the dead bodies, and the misery. Folks, that’s what $14 Billion is.

Think for a minute of the destruction to come when Typhoon Haiyan lands in North Vietnam and Southeast China. In total, folks, that should just about add up to our $24 Billion, doesn't it?  In my mind, that’s something you can see. That’s something you can put your arms around. That’s the amount of money our illustrious Congress just nonchalantly p*&% away (Oops! I mean squandered– Sorry!). Does that mean something to you now?

Ronald Miller

mtss86@comcast.net

Capitalism, Socialism, and Healthcare

I want to briefly address today the subjects of Capitalism, Socialism, and Healthcare.

In as much as we are essentially a capitalist nation, the word capitalism is usually accepted in a positive vein with respect and acceptance by most people in our society. Socialism, on the other hand, is usually thought of in negative terms. The word is inflammatory and easily arouses tempers. Under certain circumstances, it makes for good propaganda, though. In my experience, however, most of those who use the word use it as a pejorative and speak from a lack of knowledge or understanding. When they talk on any aspect of the subject, they are usually talking from an emotional or subjective point of view.

Let us first discuss capitalism. When one talks about capitalism, especially those who subscribe to its principles, they usually think in terms of laissez-faire capitalism and free markets. “Capitalism is an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and capital goods, and the production of goods and services for profit in a market economy.” Laissez-faire is French for “an economic environment in which transactions between private parties are free from government restrictions, tariffs, and subsidies, with only enough regulations to protect property rights”. (I must note. Those definitions indicated in quotes, above, are copied from Wikipedia.)

In a system such as capitalism, the principals are motivated by self-interests. As such a system “normally works out”, it is highly competitive with others in the same markets, and only the strongest survive. As the saying goes, therefore, “let the devil take the hindmost”. My take on all this is that, as the process approaches its ultimate conclusion, the free market in which it operates becomes no longer free (the competition, and, therefore, the level playing feel, has been eliminated), and the process self destructs–as we shall see, also, when we discuss socialism, below. As competitor after competitor is eliminated, the winners of the competition become monopolies; and monopolies become oligarchies. In the end the nation is governed by a dictatorship.

“Socialism is an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy. ‘Social ownership’ may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.” (Again, I have copied this definition from Wikipedia). My take on socialism is that, like capitalism, it generally starts out positive and ends negative. It usually starts out with the people and ends up with a dictatorial government in charge.

Socialism has been around a long time. It may date further back in time than this; but, to my knowledge, I first studied it in the Holy Bible, i.e. the Book of Acts in the New Testament. You remember, “They held everything in common.” I’m certainly not an expert on this subject and don’t pretend to be; but, as I understand, the shortcoming in socialism is that participants fail to produce, looking to the other guy to contribute. Everybody wants to take and nobody wants to give. Therefore, it doesn’t succeed. In the end, socialism, as in capitalism, ends up with a dictatorial government and is self destructive. See Russia; see Cuba; see China.

Not unlike Russia, China was a Communist Nation with its roots deep in Socialism, a dictatorship. A failed nation in deep poverty, China changed its economic system from Socialism to State Controlled Capitalism. In that it remains state controlled, I think you might agree that it remains a dictatorship. Their capitalism notwithstanding, I submit to you that this too will fail. In the final analysis, a dictatorial government is so destined. I’m sure you can connect the dots.

All of you know full well that I am a strong advocate of National Health Care. “Obama Care” is self destructive for many reasons on more than one front. We should cut our losses short and adopt a single payer National Health Care Program in our country immediately, modeled after Medicare and incorporating a prescription drug program with government ability to negotiate prices as we do in the VA Healthcare Program. As soon as I say that, someone will yell, “Socialism”. I say, “Not”. This is not a national economic system. It will, however, provide us with good healthcare on an economic and politically sound basis at realistic prices as well as eliminate the profiteers in the middle. It will be economically sound because it will be affordable. It will be politically sound because it will take healthcare off the back of employers. Also, financed by a national sales tax, it will put more money in the pockets of employees and employers, therefore stimulating the economy immediately. Administered by a stand-alone fund outside our national budget, as is Social Security, on a pay-as-you-go basis, with the tax adjusted at the end of each year in order to eliminate any deficit, it will facilitate elimination of the national deficit and a myriad of highly expensive arguments every year. It should take care of itself for years to come if not forever. If that’s not politically sound, I don’t know what is. It’s not socialism and it doesn't have to be, but it will solve a multitude of problems. Let’s have government–not oligarchy. Let’s put the healthcare question behind us once and for all and get on to the next challenge in the management of our nation’s affairs.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@comcast.net

Our Personal Freedom

          There are many of us with whom, on a micro level, I cannot help but agree; but, on a macro level, I cannot agree at all. The difference depends upon one’s focus. Many among us want to be completely free–we want to be left alone to go, come, and do as we please with little or no hindrance. Really, isn't that what is behind the arguments surrounding “big” and “small” government?

To be free sounds good to me. Let’s allow everybody to have complete freedom of choice and, in the end, let God judge us. We don’t need “Big Daddy” to watch over every move we make. But, smoking, public smoking, trans-fats in our food chain, obesity, drugs, our personal dress code, giant soda drinks, governmental monitoring of our lives, legal harassment for the production of government income, free sex, our voting practices–are just a smattering of controls that may (or may not) be placed over us every day. Do we really need all this? – Maybe. Maybe not.

          There was an earlier day when our neighbor was up the “holler”, over the “ridge” or somewhere “yonder”. Today, our neighbor is next door, just down the street “a piece”, upstairs, downstairs, or on the other side of the wall. Today is different. In yesteryear, we were an agricultural nation spread out all over. Today, we are more apt to be clustered in towns, cities, and giant megalopolises–we are congested. You have “heard” me say before, “My freedom ends where yours begins. If for no other reason than to maintain peace and harmony among us, don’t you think we need to be regulated? In a society where your good health is almost as important to me as it is to you (I have to participate in helping you pay for it), do you not think I may have an interest also? If you live in an area or neighborhood with other people, don’t you think you should be expected to maintain your property in a fashion compatible with your neighbors? In my view, the answers to these questions are self evident.

          In the same vein, when you are viewing the size of government, don’t you think the good and well-being of all are better maintained by a more central governing body than one which is local? It’s true that some decisions should and must be made at a local level, the decision being in closer proximity to the problem and more commonly shared. On the other hand, in many instances, problem(s) are more commonly shared by the nation as a whole, in which case I would think they would be better resolved at a central or national level.

At a national level, we are one nation in the midst of many others on this planet, and we need to maintain our security in the midst of such. I think it was Benjamin Franklin who said, “Together we stand, divided we fall”. We vitally need each other and our country. National security is just one example for the needs of a centralized government. Education is another. We don’t want, to express myself in the vernacular, “dumb” states, smart states, and “also runs”. We want an educated, smart, and secure nation with equal opportunity for all. We need communications, roads, bridges, and a strong infrastructure throughout our county as well as a prosperous and affluent people with a decent livable standard of living. We don’t need, on the other hand, a nation of surfs living in human bondage to an oligarchy of the corporate and power elite, and so on.

Let us quit fighting and get along with one another. Let us love our neighbor as ourselves and stick together.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@comcast.net

Food Stamps

Forty-seven million Americans were hit by food stamp cuts on Friday, November 1^st, because, once again, certain people in our Congress have failed our country and our people. Temporary recession-era boosts to the federal food stamp program were allowed to end without a new budget from a deadlocked Congress to replace it. In addition, some of our illustrious representatives are working diligently to cut these benefits for our people even further. I have said to you before, our nation is in deep economic difficulty and threatening to sink even deeper. Just look around you. The parking lots of the malls and the restaurants may be full, but don’t be fooled. There are twenty million people either out of work or underemployed in this great country. We have two worlds around us, the “haves” and the “have-nots”; and many, if not all, of the “have-nots” are in dire straits economically. They need these benefits badly, and some will starve without them. I will, also, point out that many of the “haves” are living right on the “edge”, tilting toward joining the “have-nots” very soon.

The food stamp program, also referred to as SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition and Assistance Program is part of the “farm bill”, which is administered by the Department of Agriculture with benefits distributed by the individual states. It constitutes approximately eighty percent of the “farm bill”, the Food, Conservation and Energy Act–$80 million per year, based on the year 2000.

Based on these brief pieces of information alone, I think it is more than fair to say that to even think of cutting the food stamp program in these days and times is absolutely idiotic, short-sighted, and irresponsible as well as heartless. We are no longer a nation of small farmers. In the main, our farms are huge industrial enterprises, many of which are owned and operated by some of our members of Congress. How does it make sense to take food from the mouths of the poor and give it, in effect, to the super rich? If we want to cut food stamps, let’s do it by putting the recipients of such back to work. Let’s give them jobs. Let’s pass the Jobs Bill. If you want to cut costs, lets eliminate farm subsidies–especially those to the “power elite”.

In closing, I want you to understand this. These are people who want to work. They really do. Being unemployed is not good for anybody–neither mentally nor physically. Those who say differently are either liars (you know who they are), seeking personal gain, or people who are very uninformed and myopic in their thinking. Yes. There are lazy people among the unemployed who do not and will not work, but don’t paint the vast majority of the people with the same brush as they. We cannot conduct our nation’s affairs based on the tiny few. We must manage our country based upon the reality of the majority. Let us get our nation back on track; which, if we really do, will negate our need for these things.

Ronald Miller

mtss86@comcast.net