I remember...

From atop the Stoa this day, I sit, elbow to knee and hand to chin, thinking about continuity, time, people, events, and their places in our collective memories.

Rush Limbaugh made a great observation many years ago. He stated, basically, that "One's view of history begins with the year of their birth." Or something close to the effect.

He is right on. People always look to the times just around them to draw conclusions to a future that they can know nothing about. History was simply a stupid class in school that the teachers used to push modern environmental and socialist agendas, leaving out the context from virtually everything and ignoring that which would have been too difficult to fit into their templates.

I am a Gen-Xer. Born in 1969, several weeks before the moon landing. I don't remember that. I have vague remembrances of helicopters evacuating Saigon and sharper memories of burned out helicopters and decomposing bodies in the Iranian desert. I remember the landslide victory of Reagan in 1980.

I remember my father selling our broken boat to an out of work autoworker for a penny.

I remember my stern Grandfather on my mother's side who could keep the peace in the house by simply bending the corner of his newspaper over, fixing us all with his glare.

I remember him crying at the dinner table as death crept ever closer to him. I also remember his funeral.

I remember the Challenger exploding during launch. I was in High School and struck dumb with silence, as was everyone else around me.

I remember graduating from high school. It was a warm night. I spent time standing in the parking lot, talking to my other set of Grandparents.

I also remember each of their funerals as well.

I remember my first job. Washing dishes at a local restaurant. I remember my second job even more...heavy construction on the New Jersey shore during the height of summer.

I remember laying on a pontoon platform out in Lake Erie, late one night, with most of my childhood friends. It was our last night together and we all knew it. The moon was full and the sky was partly cloudy. We lay on the platform talking about life as we knew it then.

I've never been with more than one of them at a time since then.

I remember basic training in the US Army. The endless days and nights of discipline, regimentation, and fatigue. I am a far better man for having endured that experience.

I remember meeting my future wife for the first time. Language barrier or not, I was taken aback by how fiercely intelligent she was and how she effortlessly deflected the advances of one of my idiot friends.

I remember telling her some months later that she could not go back home since I told her we were going to be married.

Oh, how I remember so much. The birth of my children and the gray hair they give me on a regular basis.

Today I'll remember the day after the Supreme Court called ObamaCare a Tax. They essentially booted the issue back to Congress and told them to clean up their own mess. I have no faith in Congress to do the right thing.

Every one of us remembers things differently. Sometimes we remember the same thing differently from time to time. We are fallible like that. The strongest memories are always associated with the strongest emotions or pain. Back before computers and even books, events were passed from eldest to youngest and remembered. If a particularly important event took place, the elders would find the younger (not the youngest) among them, recount the event over and over, and then beat them severely. This would fix the memory of the event and when it happened firmly in their minds.

9/11 was like that for many. So was the shooting of Reagan and the killing of JFK for my parents. Pearl Harbor for my Grand Parents (GI Generation). The Stock Market crash and WWI for my shadows, the Lost Generation.

What will my children remember? Will I be that grumpy old man who has to put down his archaic iPad to glare at my son's or daughter's children making too much noise in the living room?

I hope so.

Live well,

Zavost

Rodney King, We hardly knew you.

Atop the Stoa this day, I'm pondering truth, reality, and perception.

Some say that perception is reality. To me this is akin to saying that when David Copperfield makes an elephant disappear in a parking lot in front of thousands then it must me magic, since that was my perception.

Yep, bunk.

That phrase gets tossed about in business as well and it is just as much bunk, designed to provide cover for people who refuse to think for themselves...but I digress.

Rodney King catapulted into the national consciousness in 1991 when, while intoxicated on booze and dope, lead police on a high speed chase through the streets of Los Angeles.

Needless to say, the cops were not pleased with Mr. King, who resisted arrest and tried to flee the scene. The police began to spell out to him that he was being rude by beating him senseless with night sticks and boots.

The entire event was immortalized on tape and broadcast all over the country with the tagline, "Police beat innocent black man".

Well, the police did beat a black man, but I'd hardly say he was innocent. That is perception. Was Rodney King guilty of driving under the influence? Even without blood tests I'd have to say yes. No one takes the kind of beating he did and keep trying to get up. He was feeling no pain.

The police were guilty as well. They failed in their civic duty to protect and serve. Sometimes, the police must protect us from ourselves. Rodney King was not in his right mind when he was pulled over. It is like trying to reason with a newborn.

Guilt, innocent. They are cultural terms that mean different things to different cultures. Specific to our culture, people are LEGALLY innocent until proven guilty. In terms of absolute truth, he was guilty the instant he tried to run from the police. He must be held partially accountable for his actions.

The police were certainly guilty of using excessive force. They could have just sat on him until he got tired enough to put cuffs on. No need really to break his bones. He was trying to flee, not attack. Both parties were wrong on so many levels.

Then, our legal system failed yet again. It looked to stark right and stark wrong. That kind of truth was there, but only on one side. Was Rodney King at fault? Yes. He ran from the police, and he refused to follow their instructions. Guilty.

Was the police at fault? Yes. They used excessive force to apprehend an unarmed man. They continued to beat him even after it was apparent that bones had been broken, not realizing that his continued movements were really just twitches from the muscle spasms caused by the beating.

The ruling that was handed down for the police, "Innocent" sparked the famous LA race riots of 1992. In the end, it was decided that the police acted as they did because they feared Mr. King was on major drugs to continue to resist them after the initial beating. Perhaps there is something to that. Perhaps not.

Mr. King was made famous when, interviewed during the riots, he said, "Can't we all just get along?". I think that was the smartest thing said by anyone involved in the entire case, bar none.

53 people were killed in the resulting riots. Whites, like Reginald Denny, were pulled from their cars and beaten, many to death. Mr. Denny was saved by a black man who rescued him and drove him to the hospital. More than 2,000 were injured. Damage ran over billion dollars (1992 dollars).

His incident was a hot coal that sparked a wild fire in history. Even he was horrified by the death and destruction that resulted in his decision not to pull over. The moment he decided that it was fine to drink, get high, and then drive, he sealed the fates of those who died.

Mr. King had a hard time staying out of trouble. At the time of the beating he was out on parole. After the beating he continued to get arrested for petty offenses.

He has been largely out of sight and out of cultural mind for quite a number of years. Recently, his fiancé called 911 saying that Mr. King had been found at the bottom of a pool. Apparently, after a night of drinking and smoking dope, he fell into the pool and drowned.

An ignoble passing for a man who was the focal point of so much death and destruction in 1992. He was 41 years old.

The civil rights leaders today are hanging many labels around his legacy in an attempt to turn him into a totem for their cause. Some say he was a civil rights leader, others say he was a martyr for the civil rights movement.

Its all bunk. Even according to Mr. King himself.

The only time he made the news after the riots was when he got arrested for any number of things. He was not a great leader, nor was he even a follower. He did his own thing and his arrest record can attest to that. He was not well spoken or well written.

It was quite possible that he could have crashed into a telephone pole and died in 1991. This happens a lot in this country and his death would have gone unnoticed. In 2012, he got drunk and high and fell into a pool and died. This too would have gone unnoticed if not for his run in with the law in 1991. Would we have been better off had he hit that pole?

The truth of the matter is that he was a poor black man that was as much a victim of the civil rights movement as he was the poster child for that movement.

The perception of the matter is that the media and the black civil rights movement will use him in death in ways they could never use him in life.

The reality of the matter is that a man has died a meaningless death, having contributed so little to our society. I mourn his passing as I mourn the passing of any living creature.

His life created a spark that burned out 53 other lives. His actions released pressure that had been building. Perhaps someday, others will look to him and run in with the law and see it in the proper context.

Can't we all just get along? That is good stuff. Really. Rodney and I seem to have wished, and still do, for the same thing.

Live well.

--Zavost

Evil Triumphs when Good People do Nothing

From atop the Stoa this bright and warm day, I wish to ponder the title of this blog entry.

It is an oldie but a goody. In fact, this quote was featured prominently on my mother's blog site. The truth of it is painfully obvious.

Some points in history:
Nothing stopped the Arabs from taking over the classical world.
Nothing stopped the Mongols from murdering 20 million Chinese simply for more grazing land for their horses.
Nothing stopped the Europeans from nearly exterminating the Native Americans from both the North and South continents.
Nothing stopped the French from murdering thousands of nobles for the crime of being of noble birth.
Nothing stopped the North from crushing the South in the Civil War.
Nothing stopped the South from continuing to persecute blacks right up to the Civil Rights era.
Nothing stopped Stalin from murdering 20 million Ukrainians for not bowing down to him.
Nothing stopped 9 people in black robes from discovering a right to abortion in the US Constitution.
Nothing stopped the Nazis from conquering the known world....hold on, something DID stop them. WE stopped them.

We who chose not to sit back and watch yet more evil spread into this world.
We who chose not to allow humans to be bred like cattle.
We who chose not to allow the conquest of the civilized world.
We who chose to bleed and to sacrifice for the betterment of others.

It was we who chose to rebuild the world after WWII instead of simply taking the world, for there were NONE strong enough to have stopped us, had we wished it.

It was we who chose to harness the Atom for power and not simple destruction, though we mastered that as well.

It was we who chose not to be racist, and it was WE who welcomed the world to live with us, as long as they respected our laws.

It is we, through our neglect and intellectual laziness that permitted the Fabians to erode our values.

It is we failed to call Socialism out for what it is.

It is we that have begun to wake. It is we who are realizing, in horror, what has become of the country of our Grand Parents.

It is we that realize now what our hard work and treasure has been perverted and warped into.

It is we that have now begun to correct the errors of our neglect.

Yes, we are busy and yes we all have lives of our own. We wish that we did not have to work at the organs of self-rule as much as we must.

Life is like that. It is hard and requires constant attention. It is We who must put down our novels and our soaps, our Internet and our weekend trips. It is we who must turn back to the organs of government and remove the corrupting influences that have been allowed to gather and fester.

It is up to WE the PEOPLE to fix what we allowed fall into disrepair.

Thank you Tea Party. Thank you III percent. Thank you to Country Music and NASCAR. Thank you for remembering what our country is about.

We the People, we the silent majority that occupies "fly over country". We the people have awoken and we are filled with a terrible resolve.

We will remove, with only the power and the memory of the Constitution of the United States, the errors we allowed into existence.

We will remain vigilant for a generation or two, and then the Fabians will once again begin to encroach. It is the way of things, for as long as we make "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" our goal and not the mundane maintenance of government, then We the People must always have to relearn what made us great.

The evil of Socialism, of Fabians, and of ignorance itself must not be allowed to enervate the fabric of our souls, as it has in the old country of Europe. Their path leads to ruination. We must maintain the path of our Founders, for there lies the Last, Best, Hope of Humanity.

Live well, everyone.

--Zavost

A Donut Without a Hole is not a Donut, its a Danish

From atop the Stoa this day, I have to say; some of the best things Chevy Chase ever said were written by other people.

France has elected what they like to call, a Sensible Socialist. A National Progressive Socialist who will "do it right, this time".

Riiiiiiiiiiiggghhhht.

So how is this "new" Socialist going to do things differently? Well, he is going to do this:
1. Raise taxes on everyone earning more than one million Euros
2. Raise taxes on corporations and industries that he feels don't pay their fair share
3. He is going to pass programs to "equalize" the distribution of wealth in the nation
4. He is going to subsidize or outright make education a "free right"
5. He is going to heavily regulate the banking and insurance industry
6. He is going to re-write the import and tax tariffs on goods and services
....

So how does this differ from "old" Socialism? Some say, "he'll do it right, this time". How can you take money from one person and give it to another any differently than in the past? Two methods: threat of the gun, and/or threat of prison.

Someone would also need to tell me how the Socialist's policies in France differ in any way with those policies pushed and crammed by Obama?

I'm waiting...

So, a donut without a hole is not a donut, but a danish.
Fabians, Progressives, New Democrats, Communists, New Dealers, New Society, and Modern Democrats are not "new", their Socialists.

Can this be any clearer?

Class dismissed. Enjoy the wonderful day outside.

Live well.

--Zavost

Socialism, Part Duh

From the Stoa this day, I will look at a few specific ways that Socialism has been translated from theory into practice.

People LOVE theory. Everything is so nice and tidy in the land of theory. Everybody shares and no one tries to take more than they are entitled to take.

Meet reality.

Socialism is supposed to be fairly straight forward. You get paid according to your skill and contribution to society and your needs as an individual...the old "each according to his means, each according to his needs" and all that.

All property is everyones, while at the same time it is really no one's. A small elite, party members all, decided which is what and when and where. Socialism fails because this small elite feel that they are entitled to live a better life than the rest, since the stress and pressure of their jobs is so much more than the common proletariate. No real incentive to give up the luxuries...so FAIL.

Lets remember that in Socialism, all are equal. That means that everyone should have what they need. Maybe not what they want, but they will have food and a place to sleep.

Socialism is loyalty to the State, as embodied by the Party, you know, that small elite making sure that everything runs smoothly. Loyalty to the State means ensuring that the State has its needs met. Human as well as material resources.

In this wonderful place, as you work your way through the educational system, you are routed where the State needs talent and manpower the most.

Think of it this way: an agency looks into the future and feels that goods and services will need to travel by train rather than trucks. You know, the environment and all. So they feel that the number of mechanics and skilled support need to all be increased by 45% over the next 20 years. As children make their way through the educational conveyer belt, they are routed off to schools where they will be turned into the engineers, mechanics, and managers that will staff and control this new train system.

Do you think that all of those children who became the mechanics and engineers really wanted to do those jobs? Irrelevant, really, since it was in the needs of the State and by extension, the People.

In America, our version of Socialism in Education translates into, "No child left behind." This means that the best and brightest will be slowed, or retarted so that the less capable will be given more time to learn. The reality is that schools now teach to rote testing without regard to actual learning. Funding for the schools and all. This fails on multiple levels. Those with talent don't develop that talent, and those that are destined to be ditch diggers waste a lot of time trying to learn things they will never need. No one wants to look little Johnny in the face and tell him that he is not destined for the University. That little Johnny is not smart enough to be a doctor or lawyer. All children have equal potential and all that illogical stuff.

It is sad that the Socialist countries of Europe have a better educational system than ours. One reason is that they run their human resource through a cold calculation. We demand x number of students with y level of education. Well, we have too many students to spend a limited supply of resources upon, so they sort out the best and the brightest from the chaff and chum of society and spend the most resources on them.

This comes from a variety of "cullings" that take place in your educational development. When a child first enters school, their aptitude and basic intelligence is measured. The exceptional artists are taken out and sent to a dedicated academies, such as music, dance, gymnastics, and mathematics. Those that are left continue on until about the 8th grade. From there, they are separated again along intelligence and aptitude scores.

Those that are not college material are shunted towards a trade school. This batch, at this level, is destined to be your line workers. Cars, bottles, road work, you name it, these are the people that will supply the vast manpower needs of the State.

The rest will proceed on a "college prep" path that will again match classes of children to the trade or service needs as projected by the State. When these children turn 18, they will take more tests to determine their paths.

Those under a certain line will go to work in their chosen trades as midlevel managers or more highly trained specialists. Those over a certain line will go on to the University for the best training. Even with these cut offs, there are more students then capacity, or need. So the first two years are meant to weed out the weak. Those unable to take the pressure or the pace are removed and sent back to the trades as mid level managers or specialists.

Those that make it through their University training, become the architects, designers, and executives of the trade organizations and government run companies. They also have been sorted out according to their "politics". Those from "good" families and good politics will become the next generation of party members and State planners.

Has there been any discussion of the student and their "holistic" needs in any of this? Have we even mentioned the "self-actualized" child? No, and you never will. The State does not CARE. There will always be more people than positions. They can afford to take the best and discard the rest. There will always be the need for menial labor. Robots are expensive. People are cheap.

This is the kind of world Obama embraces. This is the kind of world that people who love Theory will eventually inherit, as they don't think things out to their logical conclusions. People are just another resource for the State to manage, much like cattle are managed for meat.

Our schools spend on average of $10,000 or more per student. Socialist nations spend much, much less. With all that money going into our schools, you think the quality of the product would be commensurate. It is not. Not by a long shot.

Places with dirt floors and wooden planks for walls are turning out students of higher quality and better aptitudes then our schools.

What the hell went wrong and when did it go wrong?

That my students, is another blog for another day.

Until then, live well.

--Zavost

Socialism, History of

Upon the Stoa this day, I was going to speak of "Modern Socialism", however, that is a misnomer since Socialism is Socialism no matter the age it is practiced.

The discussion is appropriate at this time, my class. This is a Presidential election cycle and though every election is important, this one, I feel, represents one of those pivot points in history. The United States can either continue its slide into self-imposed inferiority or it can come to its senses and wake up.

But first, a short history on what we today call "Socialism".

There have been, recorded in history, attempts to share equally and to equally bear the burdens of survival. The small hunter tribes of our distant ancestors are the only example of this working, but even then, it worked only because the leader of the tribe was bigger, stronger, and held the spear point.

In those earliest of days, the Men hunted and the women Gathered. The men broke their bones and died far from home and family coordinating to take down dangerous animals many times their size. The women endured the long torment of being another's property. Someone has to keep things organized while the men are gone. Who better than the elderly and the women.

People have been the same for the last 80,000 years. I'm sure that there were Cro-magnon fathers smacking the hands of their children who were reaching out to screw around with the cave art. Likewise, I'm sure the children had to be told to finish their antelope hoof or they will get no bone marrow for dessert.

As families turned into clans and clans turned into a people, so too did the process of government grow more complex. The division of labor, farming, and technology contributed both good and ill to our race.

Fast forwarding to a more modern example of Socialism, one need look no farther than the Mayflower colonists of Plymouth Rock fame and the first of the Jamestown settlers in Virginia.

The "Mayflower Pact" was not just a document that described their relationship with God, but described also their relationship with one another. They agreed that to have the best chance of surviving in this hostile land, they would share the fruits of their combined labor equally.

Now, people are people the world over. I'm sure that some were given better plots of land than others, some had more children to help, others had better seeds and technique than others. The inequities of life and all that.

Some grew more food than others. Some worked harder than others. Those with better seeds grew more food with less work, while some who worked hard produced little food. Life is like that. It does not care for us one way or the other. The cosmic shrug.

The results? Starvation, disease, and mutiny. Colonists died in droves. Some had food to eat, but most did not. Those that made more food than others were forced to give up that food to those who were not successful, or to those who failed to work hard enough. The result was that EVERYONE went hungry and many died.

In the Massachusetts Bay region, those that survived tore up the compact with one another and grew their own food and bartered the excess for items they could not create or did not possess. The Free Market was once again allowed to come to the fore and Massachusetts began it climb to be the most industrious of the original 13 colonies.

In Jamestown, malaria, starvation and disease took many of the colonists. "Collectivization", as it was thought of then, failed miserably. It took a hard-charging Adventurer/Mercenary to put an end to the insanity. Like farther North, the people began to grow and trade their surplus. Virginia then became the richest of all the 13 colonies.

Socialism was tried from 1607 to 1610 and killed more colonists than did the Native Americans.

The concept languished with the harsh memories of Jamestown and Plymouth fresh in historical minds. It was not until the French Revolution that Socialism began to be repackaged into something more "modern", though at its roots it was still the same old thing.

In the United States, the Founding Fathers were so Liberty-minded that the modern term Libertarian does not do justice to what their politics really were. Ron Paul would have had a comfortable dinner debating politics with Thomas Jefferson, the first recognized Democrat.

The Constitution and Federal and State laws were erected to ensure that laws placed a "Collective" burden on the people and not individual ones. The government, at any level, could not force one group to pay all the bills and allow other groups to enjoy the fruit of someone else's labor without pitching in. In other words, no one group had to pay more (relative) than another. The rich paid more because they consumed more. Plain and simple.

Sounds alien, does it not? Look up the Whiskey Rebellion. The first and only time that a sitting President led the United States Army to the field in person. A tax was being levied on Whiskey, but not other types of spirits. The Pennsylvania distillers were irate that Beer and Rum were not being taxed the same as them.

The "rebellion" was put down, but the tax was removed nonetheless.

The French took a different spin on the concept of Freedom. The Americans felt that the lay farmer had more wisdom on the soles of his shoes than anyone educated at William and Mary's, or Harvard. The French felt that the educated and the enlightened needed to care for those less educated and polished. The idea that the State was to preserve the freedoms of the people was established. Remember, in America, it was the citizen that was responsible for protecting the Republic. A huge difference that will have future relevance.

I've started with these simple concepts of how "Socialism" is not as fair as people think. To get something for "free" means that someone else must provide that good or service. For the person who gets Food Stamps or Welfare, there is no real "Input" of resources, only "Output". Without regeneration, the system will feed on itself...but I get ahead of myself.

In the 1920's, Calvin Coolidge refused to help Texas farmers during a drought. His reasoning was founded on the bedrock of the Constitution. It was not the responsibility of the Federal Government to respond to a State or regional issue. If we were being invaded by a foreign power, then yes, he would respond. To give money to farmers who did not create anything was patently insane.

Today, the Farm Bill is annual give-away by both parties to buy favor and votes...but again, I get ahead of myself.

Socialism, as put forth by the "Great" (I'm coughing as I say that) thinkers Marx and Engels, was only the beginning of a historically inevitable process as nations and peoples grew more complex and interdependent.

According to them, Capitalism (i.e. Free Market Theory) would collapse under the greed and avarice of the fat cats as the worker would rise up to take the fruits of their labors.

It was thought that this would happen in the industrialized nations, as those two felt that it was the factory worker who was the most oppressed.

Turns out they were way, wrong. The revolutions took seed in the rural areas of the world. Russia, China, and the nations smashed by WWI saw Communist activity.

You see, Socialism would give way to Communism. According to Marxist theory, no nation was ever able to attain pure "Communism". True Communism is a government-less society. Everyone works for the welfare of others, who in turn, work for the individual welfare. Everyone has a car, a phone, a place to live, and food to eat...all without a government.

Wow, that sounds pretty utopian, but that was their central theory.

Along the way, Nations would evolve from Capitalist, to a hybrid model that included creeping Socialism, and then Socialism. After a period of time, government would drop away and the people could enjoy true Communism.

Again, didn't happen.

What did happen, is that people are people are people. Some are born with more ambition than others, some are born with more drive and morals than others. It is simply in our human nature.

Remember, we are descended not from those ancestors that say,"Here, after you," but "Hey, after me." Remember that. We are here today because those who came before had more food, influence and women than other men.

What really happened was a small group of people centralized power and decided that they knew best on how to build society. Social Engineering and all that.

You see, the Free Market has been described by those like Adam Smith. Observed and documented like a force of nature. I use those terms because the Free Market is just that. It is something that exists all on its own. All you need for it to exist is for one person to trade something they don't need for something that they do need. You don't need a government telling you what you can trade and for what you can trade it for.

Socialism is humanity's attempt at remaking the world, bending the forces of nature to meet our demands. It works about as well as putting a hand up and demanding that the train stop at your whim.

To explain the complex simply, we need to look at things simply.

Nationalized healthcare sounds cool. If you are sick, just go to a doctor and get fixed up. Its free. It is a right.

It is not. Healthcare is a commodity. If my car breaks, can I go to the mechanic and simply have him fix it, no money down? No. If my car is smashed, my insurance may cover it, or help me replace it. It is my choice if I want anything more than legal liability covering the car.

I would love full coverage if someone else was paying.

How about dinner? We all need to eat. Why is food not free? Food is a right.

However it is not a right that the government was designed to provide, nor is it designed to provide for healthcare, or education, or anything other than national projects and national defense.

Socialism is great as long as you have someone else's money to spread around. New York, New Jersey and California are having a grand experiment right now. How many rich people can they drive out of their states and still have a functioning economy? Turns out, when even a few leave, the ripple effect is disastrous.

It turns out those horrible rich people actually SPEND their money...they buy houses, cars, boats, and take trips to other places, leaving a little of their money behind all the time. Wow.

When those people leave, they buy all that stuff from someone else, and YOU suffer. Bummer. Pretty simple, huh?

How about the Federal Government seize all of our rights and make the 50 (or 57) States completely dependent on Washington D.C.? The rich will not be able to run any longer...what? They can go to Singapore and other countries? Darn.

Socialism loves to call the rich "greedy", but it is the rich that have done more for the Republic than any other.

Thomas Jefferson donated his library to the Federal Government who then used it as the seed to start the National Library.

Big Oil bastard, John Rockefeller provided the grand money to permit Colonial Williamsburg to be restored as a living example of American Exceptionalism.

The Anheuser Busch family created Busch Gardens. Walt Disney gave us, well, Disney. The Smithsonian was a donation from an English guy who never even lived here, though he admired our spirit. Why didn't he give his inheritance to the British government, I wonder?

Theodore Roosevelt provided free education to the poor and disadvantaged in the big cities. He sent them West where they could become self-reliant MEN. He was poisoned with Progressivism, but the results there were pure charity.

In Socialism there can be no charity. Only a small group of people deciding who gets what and who must make it. Over time, an equilibrium is reached and there is then forever growing expense and not enough money to pay for it.

The EU and Europe are the best examples of this.

During the late 1800's, nations began to play around with Socialism. Germany had universal healthcare in 1871. Democratic Socialism began to blend...the hybrid model...

By the 1960's, this liberal experiment of blending Socialsim and Democracy began to falter. Democracy never works because sooner or later, a group of people will begin to vote themselves ever increasing amounts of largesse. It just happens that way. That is why we are a REPUBLIC, with checks and balances.

The EU now finds itself Trillions of dollars in debt and with NOTHING to show for all that. Can you believe it? Trillions have been loaned and will NEVER be repaid.

This is because all of that was expense without any intent to create wealth. Wealth begets wealth and debt begets more debt.

I'm sorry, but that is just how it works. Everything costs and nothing is free. Someone, somewhere must pay for that good or service that you are possessing or consuming. Farm tractors don't just assemble themselves. Bridges don't just fall into being. The ham sandwich provided at your meeting may not have cost you anything, but the person setting up the meeting caused it to be created and given to you. Someone with currency requires something. Someone with skill constructs or provides that need. The rich people are the perpetual motion portion of a free market economy. Kill them and you kill the economy...and innovation. Just remember, it was no government office that willed the iPad into creation, nor could it will the smart phone into existence. Rich people seeking to become richer did those things.

Socialism breaks the human spirit. Just ask East Germany and Cuba. How many West Germans were killed trying to get into East Germany over the Iron Curtain?

Here is a hint: ZERO.

How many Floridians die every year trying to ride the ocean current to Cuba and Socialist Utopia? Zero.

Say what you want about the pros and cons of Socialism. It is all just theory anyhow. Look to how it is applied and who chooses to live under it.

Your answers are there. America began the hybridization some time ago and our system is beginning to collapse. We are not far behind Europe.

Just remember these types of Socialism:

Socialism: means of capital and production centrally directed by a small group of unelected officials.

Communism: means of capital and production undirected and are spontanious to the needs of the people (fairy land).

Fascism: means of capital and production controlled by the STATE. Think GM and Fanny Mae. Also, when you hear people say that the Republicans are Fascists, point out to them what the acronym NAZI stood for: The National Democratic Socialist Worker's Party. Socialist, NOT Free Market based.

Socialism has murdered over 150 million people in the 20th century. How many must die in the 21st?

Live well,

Zavost

The Great Race

Atop this wet Stoa this day, I wish to discuss "The Great Race".

My son the other day was watching an episode of, "Scared Straight", where teenage punks are sent to jail to see what their future will look like. The best part of the episode is the end when you get to see who was paying attention and who was not. To see those that straighten up and fly right vs. those who continue their spirals.

My son asked me why these kids do these things? If they know they are going to be in trouble, why do it? If their lives are going to be messed up forever, why do it?

Again, the kids do listen, even when you don't think they are.

What he is referring to is what I call, "The Great Race". This is a euphemism for what everyone else calls, "Life".

We all have our races to run. Our own paths to take. Sometimes they cross, sometimes they run together for a time. Some paths end prematurely. Others, steer off the path and into a tree.

When a child is learning to walk, the most they have to worry about is falling on something sharp or pulling something heavy down onto them. When they are getting on to their Junior or Middle School years, they really need to be thinking about their placement on the starting line. What their pole position will be in life.

My goal, and as I've imparted upon my children, is to live a life of comfort and contentment. Am I comfortable? Not really. Life is tough. Am I content? For the most part, yes. As Mr. Conehead would say, "contentment and stability have been achieved." If you set out to be rich, then you really do not know what will make you happy for money certainly is not the answer.

To do this, you have to get a good education in school. I don't give a fig about "extra-curricular activities". It is about knowing something or knowing how to do something that some one, some where, some time, will be willing to give you money in order to provide that something as a service.

Helping the homeless is admirable, but you've got your own bills to pay. Feeding the poor does not help the poor find work, nor does it help if you end up being at the back of the chow line yourself.

Like in a falling airplane, put the mask on yourself first, then help others.

Get good grades, pay attention in class and teach yourself how to think. Challenge your teachers and be critical of things that smack of pseudo-science.

From there, go to a good Community College or University, or combination thereof, and learn a skill or trade that others will be willing to pay you to perform. I don't care if it is engine repair or quantum mechanics. Don't take primitive Latin poetry or Underwater Basket Weaving or Post Feminist Studies in Gay and Lesbian Policy Making in Elizabethan England. No one will pay you for those skills.

The race is that everyone else out there is looking for the same kind of comfort and stability in their lives, even if they are not consciously aware of it. It is the "duck, duck, goose" of life. There are only ever so many chairs at any given time. You MUST be able to compete with and defeat the guy or gal standing next to you for the spot in the University or the position at work. If you studied hard and learned more than the other guy, then you will do alright.

When you are at work, you must continue to better yourself. Learning does not end with school, it only begins. You must work smarter and harder than everyone else if you want to get paid more. What you produce must be superior to others if you want to remain comfortable.

The trick is balance. If you devote yourself to work, you will lose in the end, for you will have lived to work instead of working to live. Remember the Stoic concepts of strife and unhappiness. Those only happen when you are not living in accord to Nature.

There will be the potential to be "downsized" at every point in your life. Be in the top 10% of anything you do and you will prove to be too valuable to be cut, though even that will not help you all the time.

Live your life your way, don't harm or impose upon others. Don't ask for anything that is not offered, and even then, all in moderation.

You will always be racing and competing with others. For the attention of a boy or girl at the school dance. For the head nod at a job interview, for the recognition and promotion of a job well-done.

You must be sharper and cleaner than the others if you wish to stay ahead.

If you have to be sent to jail to learn what your future home is going to look like, then things are not looking good for you. If you have a Juvenile criminal record, colleges and Universities may pass on you. If you have a criminal record, then even working at a gas station becomes a goal as most others will have nothing to do with you.

In a tight labor market, the employer is looking for the best and the brightest at all times...at the right price. If you have strikes against you, then you simply set yourself up for failure each and every time you go for a new job. Each and every time.

Run the race. Run it honorably. Live without regrets. Live understanding those things you can and should change, and develop the patience and wisdom to know the difference between them all.

Take care, everyone.

Live well.

--Zavost