Issue 644 Influence vs. Authority July 23, 2015

Do you know the difference between Influence and Authority?  Do you know there relationship to power?  Well, let's find out.

What they mean:  Both of these have an integral relationship to power, with power being the ability to compel someone or a number of people to do something whether it is in line with or against their will.  Now, this power is exercised in a number of ways, but there are two ways that it particularly manifests itself with respect to people interacting with other people.  Those manifestations are both Authority and Influence.  But what are these terms and what do they mean.  The easiest to understand is Authority.  It is literally the ability to command or control what goes on.  So, when you have authority over someone, you can compel them to do something by simply telling them to do it.   However, Influence is different.  It does not use commands to make someone do something.  Instead it is the ability to guide, or cause a change in someone's opinions or actions.  Basically, when someone has influence over someone else, they literally have the ability to change people through what they tell them because they are usually trusted in some way.  So someone you trust and whose advice you act upon is someone who has influence over you.  This is how both Authority and Influence are an exercise in power over others.  

Conclusion:  Politics is the exercise of power, and authority and influence are two forms of power that people have over other people.  Your boss, your parents, people who make laws or enforce laws are those with the authority form of power.  Friends, people you put your faith in, or people you look up to have the ability to influence others.  While these examples are very simplistic, it is not my intention to say that people having authority or influence over someone else is bad.  Instead, it is that you should be aware of how much power you are giving to others around you or how they use that power over others.  This lets us maintain independent thought, and protects us from abuse by others.  So basically be self-aware of power and its forms so that you do not end up losing power over yourself.

Issue 643 Abortion Revisited July 28, 2015

Abortion is still an ongoing debate, but I wanted to give an update on the exemptions that most people know of.  These being Rape, Incest, and Woman's life in danger.  Here is what we know now.

Rape:  This will always be an exception, and I do not think many people will dispute this, despite misgivings.  However, morally speaking, the amount of women according to the news media getting pregnant from a rapist is very small.  In short it is rare.

Incest:  Incest for those who do not know is when two relatives have sexual relations.  Sometimes this will result in a child with disabilities, but that is not the reason why this is one of the exceptions.  The reason is because this is typically associated with rape as it usually occurs in the act of a rape.  That’s right, it is one family member raping another.  As such, under current law, this exception is really not necessary from my perspective as it is already covered under the rape exception.

Women's Life in danger:  Now this one may hopefully go away soon.  Technology has made this form of abortion (partial birth) almost irrelevant and stands to continue to do so.  Science has made it possible to either avoid the woman's life ever coming to harm, in any process of the pregnancy or to remove the child safely during childbirth.  So while this one will remain as a key exception, the need for it is slowly vanishing.

What does this mean:  Now this brings us back to the debate, is this a women's rights issue trumping the life of another.  My opinion is yes as the baby beyond a certain level of development is viable let alone recognizable as a human being while in the womb.  It may be technology that ends the need for partial birth abortions completely as we can see and save these children in the event of an emergency and see for 100% certainty that they are human children and not a cluster of cells.  But, others do not see it that way as they still believe that they are a cluster of cells despite that the baby in the womb is formed.  But if you want more evidence on if the baby looks human beyond a certain stage of development, simply look up when the baby has all the body parts formed.  Also, look up a partial birth abortion.  I guarantee you, you will never be able to unsee it, and that the right to life is being overridden.

Conclusion:  Abortion has been a debate since before the American Revolution.  We are all alive and people forget that even if the baby cannot fully survive outside the womb yet.  Remember, they are human too.

Issue 642 Transracial July 27, 2015

Is it possible to be born white, but believe you are black?  Rachel Dolezal former NAACP president was born white, but identifies as black, even going so far as to change her hairstyle, and skin color to match.  Is this something bad?  Or is it a step in the right direction?

Transracial:  For Dolezal, she felt she was black when her adopted black son said that he felt she was his natural born mom.  Thus, she apparently felt the need to be black for him (though this was not the start of her racial identification).  But can someone identify as a different "race".  It is possible when you look at it from the context of adopting a type of culture.  For instance, Irish Americans that were born in the United States are not ethnically Irish, but have adopted a part of the culture here in the States.  Therefore, if you do not identify as Irish, despite your heritage, then you are not Irish.  Likewise, Black Americans have their own unique culture in the United States, and thus it may be possible to identify as a Black American despite not being Black in any form.  In short, culture and how we identify ourselves is something flexible irrespective of skin color.  Also, if you believe it is ok to alter your body, or to be a hyphenated anything, then you must accept that people of different heritage could and will identify as a race as opposed to an ethnicity.

As to whether this is a step in the right direction is subject to perspective.  By not viewing oneself as an ethnicity, it lends people to looking at themselves in a larger cross country context (especially as there are far less races than ethnicities).  But on the other hand, if anyone can be any race, then what happens to the culture and spirit when wannabe black, or Asian etc. try to become part of that group.  It blurs the lines between us further, and purists will fear it, while it slowly blends every culture together and makes race into a tribal thing as opposed to a genetic thing.  So people born as a race may lose their racial identity overtime and therefore the traditional separations we know of and create disappear.

Conclusion:  Now whether Dolezal is crazy or not I do not know.  But if this is a turning point with respect to racial identification, then many things will change, hopefully for the better.  People will possibly see themselves as just that, people first and adopt aspects of the various parts or sub cultures that make up the larger global community.  As such, race ceases to exist as a boundary.  But this may not occur as like I said, the woman may simply be nuts.  Only time will tell.

Issue 641 Sheep stealers July 24, 2015

Now this is funny.  A sheep stealer is not someone who steals sheep, but when a priest is so compelling that parishioners leave one church for another.  So how does this affect us?

What does all this mean:  This fear of one priest stealing another's is the reason why some churches will not work with their fellows.  The congregation and their donations are what support the church to keep it open and thus if a "sheep stealer" is present they want to avoid their parishioners interacting with this potentially more compelling Priest.  In short, they do not want to lose your money.  Now if that isn't disappointing I do not know what is.  A priest is more concerned about cash than the salvation of his/her flock.  Very, very stupid in my opinion, despite my understanding that they could shut down if enough people leave.  However, it would show how good a priest is and how much faith they have if they do work together with other priests.  In short, you will know for sure that the priest cares more about you than your money when they willingly works with other priests from other churches nearby.  Also, when you think about all the good one church does for the community, what would happen if more of them work together for the greater good?  Think about it.

Conclusion:  Sheep stealing is so dumb in my opinion.  If your church cannot keep parishioners then maybe you should question yourself on whether or not you are a good priest, or what else is going on in the community that could be making people not want to come to the church.  Do not let fear prevent you from doing what is right.  Work together, help each other and set an example for your parishioners to follow.

Issue 640 Courage or faith July 23, 2015

So what came first between the two of these?  Was it faith that gives us courage or was it courage that gave us the faith to believe?

Courage 1st:  In this case it is courage that gives you the ability to believe in a higher power.  It allows you to take that leap of faith to have faith and thus reinforce your ability to believe.  The courage to believe is to possibly remove doubt or to overcome doubts in the first place.  But courage is a unique emotion.  It is the reinforcement of our will to do something against the odds.  As such, to have courage with respect to faith is to overcome doubt itself.

Faith 1st:  With regards to faith first, courage is not there yet.  Faith itself is what enables you to feel the courage to do something.  It gives you the strength to have courage to do the impossible.  The impossible could be anything, such as overcoming doubt to literally laying with lions.  It provides the fortitude to stand alone when needed.  In essence, faith is the backbone to all that you are.

Conclusion:  Thankfully this is not anything like the chicken and the egg debate.  Faith or courage coming first is something personal for each person.  No answer is right or wrong or makes anyone’s faith less flimsy than another's.  It is all a personal decision, and whatever reinforces that faith or whether faith reinforces who you are is unique to you as an individual alone.

Issue 639 Pay the kids! July 22, 2015

I really mean pay kids.  In this case, for what they do in school.  There are three areas where I think they should be paid.  So let us discuss.

Sports:  At the high school level, sports become very competitive and can be a money maker for schools (same with colleges too).  As such, let these kids get a cut for entertaining us.  It allows them to make money that can go toward college, or other activities these kids may want to partake in.  It can also help poorer communities by allowing poor students who otherwise would not be able to afford to go on school trips or afford school lunches to have money to pay their way rather than having their parent(s) scrounge around for money.  It also adds a level of professionalism that these students will need when they enter the real working world.

Tutoring:  All kids who tutor other kids through the school should be paid a wage.  Let's face it, tutoring is hard work (well depends on who your tutoring), and the teachers cannot be there for all students.  So the kids can handle the tutoring for the teachers as the information is fresh in the student's head and they can relate to any issues with learning the problem or piece of information.  Thus they are better equipped to teach their fellow students if they have recently learned it themselves.  So for helping with homework and studying can be one fee.  Editing papers and even grading their fellow students on the teacher's behalf can be another.  Also, this experience allows students to develop social skills, conversation skills, and information transfer skills.

Economic Rewards:  Students should be rewarded for their performance.  So when they do well in class, they could get money as a prize based on how well they do in a test or quiz.  If they are a tutor to their fellow students, then if that student scores well or has an improvement, that tutor can be further rewarded.  Basically, reward them with money for doing well.

Conclusion:  In case you haven't noticed, I cover the sports kids and the academic kids.  This ensures that a vast majority of students can have access to earning more money outside of simply rewarding them for good grades.  Also, non-sports clubs like chess can make money in the sports area for winning contests.  If there is a school garden, then they can sell some of the flowers to make a money too.  Sure most of the money will go to the school, but with this scheme, you get students motivated to get into clubs, into tutoring and into their academics.  Yes it is controversial, but, unconventional approaches are what make the world work.  So what's not to try?

Issue 638 We need rich old people July 21, 2015

We really do need rich old people.  You are wondering why you aren’t.  Allow me to explain.

Rich elderly wanted:  One of the main reasons is that they are out of the workforce sooner.  This frees up jobs for younger individuals who otherwise would not be able to move up, or get hired if the senior were still working.  Also, rich elderly do not need as much aid or can pay for their own aid which means less need for our seniors having to go on welfare to simply live their lives.  But how can this be achieved?

Making more rich seniors:  For one, just like increasing access for the poor with stocks, not taxing any investments in any way and not pre-taxing investments when they are invested like a 401 K allows for the possibility of more disposable income.  However, we should not tax any of their income past a certain age.  As such, they can hold out longer with respect to supporting their daily living arrangements without the need for any form of aid.  Basically do not tax them under any circumstance.  Even if you do not change anything else, by simply not taxing seniors they are able to live their lives with less out of pocket cost and less stress.

Another thing we can do is use Social Security to increase the money they would get.  To do this, the money would be invested as soon as someone starts paying into the system.  First it will go into high risk stocks and then into low risk as time goes on.  However, to ensure they do not lose money, the government will have reserve funds to make up any loses, and a portion of the money being gained from the investments will help to rebuild this fund after a loss.  As such, the fund is being built up constantly to protect from market failures.  Also, once reaching retirement, a guaranteed minimum of money will be there for the least fortunate of seniors.  In this case, the poverty level of a given area will be determined, then money will be tacked on so that the poor person reaches the economic level of lower middle class citizen of that area.  Basically, enough so that they will live comfortably without need to have their money increased yearly by a cost of living adjustment.  The money should also be given in a large lump sum so that they can budget themselves accordingly without fear of delayed or lost checks or computer glitches in a direct deposit.  

Conclusion:  I am really drawing a blank on what more can be done to make more seniors that much richer and make it so they have to rely on others less.  Technology will certainly help with home delivery of groceries, smart homes that handle tasks for people, and even exoskeletons to keep the seniors moving so that they remain physically healthy.  All of these aid in reducing costs in one way or another for seniors.  Remaining healthy and active alone is a major benefit for they do not have to pay medical costs, or waste money paying for gas.  Heck, even the hybrid homes idea by Elon Musk will do wonders in savings for our seniors’ energy bills.  There must be more we can do?  We just haven't thought about it yet.