Issue 429 The Galt Strike! September 30, 2014

I base this issue on Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged.  The idea in concept is simple, what if the producers in our society just up and went on strike?

How it works:  Basically, people like Donald Trump, Steve Forbes, and the like all decided to leave their positions as heads of their companies.  Not only that, but they remove their businesses entirely from the country as well before they up and disappear.  The result would actually be economic chaos due to the economic vacuum left over from these giants vanishing.   

The purpose:  The purpose is simple.  It is to show the world how valuable these producers of the goods and services we enjoy are.  Right now we take these individuals and their contribution to society for granted.  But we could no longer take them for granted if they leave us high and dry without the financial support for the economy, the tax revenue going toward government, or the lack of internet or other services that would vanish if these titans left us.  As such, we would understand that we need them and that because they can up and leave so easily if they so choose.

Reactions:  The initial reaction would be hatred and fear because people would hate these individuals once they realize that these people are valuable and that they left them.  But if left alone long enough, these people would (while still embittered) would beg for these individuals to come back along with their businesses.   However, they cannot wait too long as this would result in other businesses taking their place.  So it is a game of patience and timing.

Conclusion:  This may possibly be practical for specific businesses in the United States due to technology.  Many businesses will evolve to the point that they do not need brick and mortar offices or even use a single countries currency or banking system so as to avoid taxation, and certain regulations.  By doing this, the producers who long have been abused by the tax system, (save those who use it to abuse others) can leave and not ever have to look back.

Issue 428 Tragedy Tourism September 29, 2014

Have you ever heard of tragedy tourism?  You would be surprised by what it is and what it can actually do for a community.  So let's discuss.

What is it?:  This form of tourism is where people come to view the sites of natural disasters, murder scenes and similar tragic events.  Basically, they come to see where people's lives have been ruined.  

Morbid:  Yes, it is morbid.  I mean, why would you want to see a place where death and/or destruction have been wrought?  Think about it, do you want to see the abandoned buildings in Chernobyl?  Well, there may be some merit to this.  Another place that is part of tragedy tourism is Auschwitz, one of the many places the Holocaust took place.  This tourism is useful to keeping memories of man’s cruelty and foolishness alive so as to prevent it from happening again.

Unexpected benefits:  A benefit of this form of tourism is that it helps the economy of the places where it took place.  After the tornadoes that occurred down south in the U.S. like in Joplin, these tragedy tourists came to visit, spent their money and then left.  Along the way these tourists spent money which turned into an income to those affected economically by those storms.  The result was the economy of the area rebuilding itself much faster than if there had been no tourists of the disaster at all.  Same thing happened at ground zero in New York City.  The area’s economy and the country’s economy were in upheaval.  These tourists from around the world came to see the scene of death and in doing so bumped the economy of the area up enough through their spending to help NYC get out of its economic rut all that much quicker.  So this can actually be a very good thing for an economically depressed area, or an area suffering through a depression.

Conclusion:  While I still think it a bit morbid, It has unexpected gains.  Thus, I say visit these sites as you actually can help the victims by spending money in the areas they live.  So in my opinion, let this form of tourism keep going because it has the possibility to help others.

Issue 427 Envy Mindset September 26, 2014

Envy is one of the seven deadly sins.  It is an evil mindset and emotion that will bring others down.  So what is it?  Let us discuss.

Envy:  This is best described in an example, so here it goes.  You work very hard each and every day, but despite this are poor.  Then you see others who are better off than yourself.  Due to this you then want to bring others into the same position that you are in due to the envy you feel.  As such, you are vengeful over the successes of others and thus want them to be in the same miserable state you yourself are currently in.  This is how envy works.

Are we an Envy mindset nation?:  Sometimes I think we are.  Yes we do have people in poverty and that they see those with more "wealth" as showoffs, boastful and even just plain pompous.  But we also have it with people who make barely above minimum wage (I make barely above minimum wage) where they protest to get higher wages through government.  Meanwhile I am paid less than a fast food worker while working as a pharmacy technician.  Hence why I perceive some of these people as envious of others’ lives and thus seek to acquire it through government aid. Others have attacked business owners out of misdirected rage over corporate greed (they are envious over corporate America's wealth).  Basically it is sad.  However, we may be able to escape the foolishness by recognizing this foolish mindset.  Which is why I write this issue for you my readers to read.

Conclusion:  Do not become envious of others.  You do not need what they got and you don't need them suffering with you because that will not make anyone feel any better.  Envy is the tool of the bitter, and of people who are quitters.  All I can say is fight on my readers, and take every opportunity to advance yourself whenever possible for that will help you succeed.

Issue 426 Conquest versus Rival mentality September 25, 2014

There are two mentalities to countries, businesses and sports teams.  These two mentalities are Conquest versus Rival mentalities.  But what does these mentalities entail?

Conquest:  This mentality is the oldest form of mentality.  Here we steal, control, destroy others to achieve success.  Basically, you eliminate the opposition to your goals by any means necessary and thus leave nothing left of the opponent.  This mentality is also the kind that creates future conflict, and hatred.

Rival:  In contrast a rival mentality does not destroy the opponent at all.   They do not steal or destroy, but rather run parallel to the opponent to compete with them.  Here, there is no destruction (save self-destruction if people get careless) so as to create a culture of competition.  As a result, this leaves room for friendships and the freedom of choice by others to enjoy both sides’ benefits.  So as an example, two clothing manufactures can exist making the exact same product rather than one having to be destroyed in order for the other to survive.  No hatred, or animosity, just friendly competition without the chance of a monopoly.

Conclusion:  So what would you rather have?  The Conquest or the Rival mentality?  I personally prefer the rival mentality that some often attribute to American Capitalism.  But today we are losing that rival mentality and reverting back to the foolish conquest mentality.  So I say we have a choice to make.  Choose the mentality upon which to have and expose via example, or go back to the barbarism of conquest.  Remember, your actions affect those around you.  So by you alone leading by example, you can change the minds of thousands.

Issue 425 Dr. King Jr. and Affirmative Action September 24, 2014

 Affirmative Action is a controversial topic today over the discussion on whether it is necessary or not in today’s society.  For those who do not know, affirmative action is where people of a certain race are given special treatment to prop them up for positions and acceptance in certain institutions.  But what did Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. think about affirmative action?

Dr. King Jr.'s thoughts:  Apparently Dr. King believed in affirmative action.  He felt it could be used to speed up the process of social equality in America.  And to a certain extent I believe it did as well.  But now it comes to question on if he would support its continued use in today’s society.  So he would probably be of two views in my opinion, and they are:

1) Dr. King would continue to support affirmative action, but would begin removing the benefit for certain people based on level of social equality.  At the same time he would probably suggest revving it up for those who have taken the place of the oppressed in the United States while the previous oppressed become accepted.  And even then, people will not be as oppressed as time goes on, so the level of interference by an affirmative action program could be diminished over time.  Hence, true social equality could be gained, but unfortunately through government force.

2) His other possible opinion would be to eliminate it seeing as it is now a tool for race baiters who wish to continue the idea of inequality (or inequality itself) in order to gain power through hatred and resentment.  So once its initial job was done, it would disappear.

Conclusion:  While we can only suspect what Dr. King might say, I believe he would go with option one as it has the least chance of being used by race baiters as it will constantly shift from one oppressed group to another.  Dr. King wanted social equality, and as we have come very very close, there are those who threaten to rip it to shreds.  If Dr. King was still around, the world and social equality in America may look like a very different place. 

Issue 424 Dr. King and Guns September 23, 2014

Did you know that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Once attempted to buy a firearm for the purpose of self-defense?  Bet many of you did not.  Let us discuss.

What happened:  Dr. King, before he was the leader of his movement for the equality of all races once attempted to own a gun.  He wanted it for the sole purpose of protecting his family from the mobs that would sometimes lynch people of color and those who sympathized with them. Basically, it was the same logic that most people have when buying a gun for personal protection, to defend oneself and family.  However, the Alabama authorities denied Dr. King the ability to purchase a gun.  Their logic was that it was to protect Dr. King who was black and thus he did not need a firearm.  Of course we know this to be a biased opinion based on racism and thus Dr. King was denied the right to self-defense.

Implications:  This can mean several things.

1) That Dr. King while not a violent man recognized the right to protect oneself and by de facto logic the second amendment of the Constitution.

2) This may have impacted his development into a national leader on civil rights by him renouncing violence as he may have thought that by even having the gun at that point it would be yet another excuse by authorities to arrest him or even call him a hypocrite.

Conclusion:  Whichever of the two implications you believe in (or both as I do), it shows Dr. King had an understanding of the power of the gun representing the potential for violence in comparison to his nonviolent civil rights movement.  So with this, does it change your opinion on who Dr. King is and what you think of him as a person?  For me, it did as I gained a certain level of respect and admiration (more than I already had) as he is someone who knew the difference between the power of the gun and the power of peoples voices.

Issue 423 Comparing all to Hitler September 22, 2014

It is important to compare ourselves to others to help our growth as individuals as it aids us in revealing our flaws.  One of the biggest people we can compare ourselves to is Adolf Hitler so that we do not become a monster like him.  Let us discuss.

Reasoning:  By comparing ourselves to the monster that is Hitler we can realize what hatreds we have and potentially how they can grow into something horrible.  We can use this evil man as an example of uncontrolled hatred taking over.  

Feelings:  By not only comparing ourselves, but those in power to Hitler we can keep each other in check as well.  Think about it. Was it a good thing that people compared George Bush Jr. the 43rd President of the United States to Hitler?  Is it a good thing to compare President Obama to Hitler?  The answer is yes because it also makes us pay attention to their actions.  It also can make them pay attention to their own actions and think more about what they are doing in the position of leadership. Basically it makes them more self-aware because of how disturbed we feel even being compared to the Nazi's and their evil leader.

Conclusion:  Artists and regular people use Hitler as a method to attract maximum attention to their voice so that it is more likely to be heard.  The feelings of turmoil and anxiety being compared to the tyrant serve to awaken us, and force self-reflection.  But this comparison is not overused as it really only comes up in situations where people think an action is reminiscent of Hitler's' actions/words toward the Jews, the Gays, the deformed, the mentally ill, and those who did not conform to Nazi ideology and ideals. So it has less risk of the word (in this case the name Hitler and its evil legacy) from losing its power like the word racist which is so often overused as a verbal weapon.  So remember, comparing ourselves to evil can also prevent evil as well.