Good, bad and the ugly

Although I feel my actions are "good", I don't hold "good" and "bad" are moral standards. Everything that one does is both beneficial and detrimental at the same time. I may buy a loaf of bread for a poor family, but that loaf was made by growing and then killing yeast; it was likely delivered to the store in a truck that consumed fossil fuel that polluted the atmosphere; it was packaged in plastic, also from fossil fuel, that when discarded will be garbage polluting the Earth. Here's a more basic example: every breath we take adds a few seconds to our life, but also takes us one breath closer to our last.Something good is something we perceived as more beneficial than detrimental; and visa versa for something that is bad. So, from this, how does one presume a moral code? "Experience" is often sited. However, since everything is relative to one's prespective, how is society supposed to trust each individual's experience to steer them towards activities which it feels are more beneficial than detrimental?Once we answer that, then we can toss out religion. Any takers?
For me, my morality is based on my experiences. I do try to have all of my actions within what is preceived as being "good" (more beneficial than detrimental). Is there any way for society to codify this? Yes, through secular law. Of course, then one can get into the duscussion about fairness of certain laws, but that's another topic all together.

Trouble with personal responsibility

Personal responsibility seems to be elusive to some people. It's like, there's individuals that don't really understand or choose to ignore just how their actions directly impact those around them, and their own lives.
If you cut someone off in traffic, you screwed up. Don't go flipping off the person cuz they were so scared they didn't know how to respond. In fact, let me make this broader. The Today show did a segment today where they talked about how parents are feeding their daughters self confidence, like they can do they want, but then don't give them the tool necessary to handle the empowering properly. They aren't taught how to handle failure, or that others need respecting as well. They aren't taught the consequences of their actions. They aren't taught how to take responsibility for themselves when the do something detrimental, such as drugs are teen sex. I think it is because my general (who's having and raising all these brats), took these lessons for granted. How we learned them, without realizing them is somewhat of a mystery. It means that my generation isn't doing a good job of passing this knowledge. The knowledge of personal responsibility. Society doesn't owe us anything other than thangs that make society good, like roads and schools and local police, etc. We are responsible for ourselves. I'm not just talking about in this society, but also Karmically. If you hurt someone in spite, that will come back on you somehow, so don't be all butthurt about it when it does. Anyways, people need to learn to take responsibility for their actions. Many people need to realized just how their own actions directly and indirectly affect themselves. Ok, 'nuf ranting on this topic.

Trouble with Crucifixion

People really do treat each other extremely poorly. The more I hear experts talk about the crucifixion, the more it becomes apparent just how little human well being was regarded in the ancient world. Even for criminals, this treatment was horrific. No matter what one believes about Jesus death, the fact that anyone (be it son of God or lowly criminal) was nailed to anything through their hands and feet is repulsive.
Make no underestimate, these people suffered. Some of the most sensitive nerves in the body where pierced with a large nail and then used to hang up a the body upon a tree, stake or cross, left to suffer agonizing convulsions and nerve shattering pain throughout the body while onlookers gawked. How inhuman does one have to be in order to condone this?
I know this sentiment regarding crucifixion is two thousand years too late, but people still do engage in similar activities in modern times. Even with recent American torture embarrassment, it is not a normal thought for us to accept the inflictation of real torture on the scale of the crucifixion. The guilt of those particular U.S. soldiers in the recent cases amounts to taking hazing a bit too far. There are people in our current world that not only feel real torture is acceptable, they take joy in committing the heinous acts and are rewarded for them. This posting isn’t as random as it may seem.

Unions still have their place

I used to believe that Unions are no longer necessary, but I'm not so sure anymore. As the union power recedes over time, employers are becoming increasing arrogant again. (Enron wouldn't have come close to getting away with their scam with union bosses on their tail.) It's not yet as bad as the 1800's, but we aren't as far off from reliving that nightmare again as some seem to think.
Already, some of the basic protections for workers are being scaled back, being wrongfully labelled as "archaic". We should be pushing world's developing nations to aspirer to meeting the challenge of copying our system of labor. We should not be rolling back our system to compete with them. As someone who is firmly rooted in white collar middle class, I can say the only thang protecting my career is the rarity of my work skills. As the world market becomes more competitive, that rarity will diminish, as with many American jobs. We need to help other countries realize that having a suitable standard of living is just as important as having one or two successful companies in their country. Henry Ford gave us clear examples of how to run companies that benefit the employees and in turn, benefit the company because employee prosperity is spent buying company products. Anyways, we are on a slippery slope that we should back away from.

World of Hypocrites

Hypocrisy is part of the human condition, but it is not part of what it means to be human. We just have a bunch of people in our world that feel they have a right to tell others what to think or how to act while exempting themselves from those same rules (at least in their own minds). This is the classic scenario for over 2000 years since the rise of monotheism. It seems that the belief in only one god inherently creates a breeding ground for hypocrites and liars. 

The world is full of popular people who instruct their believers one thing, then turn around and do the opposite themselves. They are also capable of saying one thing here, but say the opposite somewhere else to appease whatever audience to which they are speaking. Open lying is terribly obvious these days when one does it on TV for an audience of millions, yet the likes of Pat Roberts still do so freely in full view of everyone, and they are never held accountable. Many professed Christians are now getting caught up in possible crimes of their hypocrisy such as bribery, insider trading, stealing, false testimony, treason, violating National Security, etc. These are the same people that just a couple years ago called upon fellow Christians to vote for them because they held the same religious beliefs. Now that all these people are being held accountable for their misdeeds, their proponents are standing by their sides saying, “They are being attacked because of their faith.” Is corruption really apart of the Christianity?

I get the sense that these people are the same that claim that Christians are being persecuted by this world. ::cough:: This world is under the power of Christianity and has been so for a 1000 years. Who in this world is persecuting Christians on a large scale? Other Christians, perhaps? Ridiculous. It’s as though the word persecution really means that a Christian’s misdeeds aren’t being ignored and other people aren’t helping that Christian to commit their misdeeds. What else could it possibly mean in the context of today’s world?

These issues aren’t limited to Christianity. Islam and Jewish faiths also carry this burden, but the Christians are in control, and it is they who must take the lead to stamp out the hypocrisy. Of course, for the time being, they will not, at least in the U.S.

Miserable response to disasters

Our government’s miserable response to the recent hurricane disaster is a clear condemnation upon neocon ideologies and cronyism which is currently gripping our country’s leadership. Neocon ideologies depend too heavily on the concept of free market without regard for reality. Our system is based on free market principles, but our system is not an unchecked free market. These neocons try to pretend that it is an unchecked free market (or that uncheck free markets work best). These ideologies have crippled our government from being able to respond to domestic threats outside the realm of security. Neocon ideologies also promote that government take as little of a role in our lives as possible, without regard for the needs of the individual people that make up our nation. The belief is that the free market left unchecked will make any necessary corrections to provide for the populous needs. This, of course, is complete nonsense. The government has a responsibility to provide for its people regardless which economic system is in place.

Unchecked free market leads to instability if centralized forces work to abuse the system for personal gain, as in case of Enron’s manipulation of western U.S. electricity supplies at the turn of the 21st Century. Uncheck free market leads to too many people being hurt in recessions, and not enough people benefiting from booms. This is why America does not have an unchecked free market anymore. We have a Mixed Economy, which is free market based, but utilizes beneficial methods from all forms of economies. We use what works well for the individual, balanced with what is best for the population on the whole. Too much pull by one side or the other in the past has led our nation down roads we should not want to journey again.

Neocons live in a fantasy realm of 100% happy people, perfect conditions always persist, where up-trends never end, and everyone gets at least enough money for participating in the system at any level. They pick and choose events and quotes from American past to justify radical economic experiments. These experiments are ultimately victimizing our modern day populous for the gain of only a few fat cats.

Those fat cats are openly applying cronyism from the White House right now. They put ideological friends in charge of government agencies instead of looking for the best qualified person. This is the other reason for the failure of our government right now. Leadership positions are full of unqualified cronies, putting our country at risk and making dangerous situations much worse.

The current government is arrogant and haughty, bolstered by willful blinders preventing them from seeing their errors and making adjustments to account for imperfections in the system. This has led to a blind faith in an ideology, rather than acceptance of reality. Anything from reality that contradicts their notions is called a fluke, or even blamed on some other factor which they should’ve accounted for but pretend they can’t.

Our inability to take preventive and aftermath action at the federal level in the recent national disaster is a direct result of these flaws in our country’s leadership. This blind belief in disproved ideologies and the cronyism supporting it have led America to repeat the mistakes of our past on a monumentally grander scale. The time to correct these mistakes is soon at hand. I’m not going to say specifically who to vote for in the next elections. I will directly say who not to vote for. Do not vote for neocons or anyone that supports the neocon movement. If you are Republican, take back your party from these lunatics. If you are Democrat, vote for Democrats that have a proven record of taking on these lunatics. If you are an independent like me, vote in a way that stops the neocons from staying in power. Sometimes, this means not voting for the best person, but the best person given the circumstances.

Thank god

Well, thankfully, the number of dead in the Gulf region from Katrina isn't up around the numbers previously suggested. A lot of people may have survived the onslaught. Even still, the behaviour of the State and Federal governments is deplorable. Even though many survived, they lived through something they shouldn't have had to first hand.

Even though the number lost is not as high, the President's lack action early on crossed over the line of what is acceptable for a President to do and not to do. He failed to protect Americans from harm. Yes, the storm is uncontrollable, but how we act if fully in our control. It is dishonorable behavior to not act to protect America. The homeland was under attack, and the very man and agency that the President set up to protect American acted like it wasn't their job to do anything and the President accepted this and tried to defend it. Basically, he failed to carry out his duties as President when it was most important for him to step up. He failed to act when it counted, even though they was creditable warnings up to one year ago about this kind of disaster. Katrina itself posed a threat for days before it hit. Days in which the President needed to ack to make sure everything was in place. Days that he instead spend running around the country trying to collect campaign money. What was he collecting campaign money for anyway? He's not going to be re-elected. In fact, this lack of action to protect American is cause for impeachment.

Ok, enough of that for now.

Tipping in American

Something really strange happened a few years ago in the realm of tipping. Over the counter food preparers and cashiers started putting out tip collection jars, baskets, cups, etc. What’s that about? Has it ever been tradition to tip the cook? Not at all. The reason servers (waiters/waitresses) get tips is because they provide a service as the focal point between the customer and restaurant and its staff. When you tip a server, typically a portion is re-tipped to the host/hostess and the busboy separately. If there is no host/hostess, the server usually doubles as the host/hostess. If there is not busboy, the server has to double as a busboy. In these cases, the server keeps the portion that would normally be given to another person fulfilling those roles. In any case, these are the only three positions in a restaurant that can expect tips. Cashier is not tipped. The cook is not tipped. The owner or manager is not tipped. Basically, if there is no server, there is no one to tip.
So, why tip over the counter food preparers? You’re not supposed to. This is even an IRS relevant matter. If a tip is expected, the person receiving the tips must pay tax on 8% of the sales that person handles, whether they receive the tip or not. Comparatively few people tip over the counter, so this means those cashiers and food prepares are required to pay tax on money which they have not hope of receiving. The responsible restaurant owner should not allow tipping jar placed on their counter, and should even have a no tipping policy. This saves the staff from paying extra taxes, and saves the restaurant from the headache of having the paperwork and labor to track tipping for the IRS.
I tip generously. This is because I live in Silicon Valley, were the expected tip is 15 to 20%. Where service is reduced (you take your own bill up to the cashier, or you seat yourself), the tip may be reduced in kind. In those cases, 10% is acceptable. Where there is no service, there is no tip.

Emotional Cheating

This term "Emotional Cheating" is being plastered all over infotainment shows like the Today Show today. They got experts up talking about it as if it is some sort of disease where one person in a relationship forms a strong, unnatural, emotional connection with someone other than their partner. What complete nonsense. One would have to be an emotional infant to consider this as a genuine category of human behavior.

There is not such thang as Emotional Cheating. It's a term that is created to vilify normal human interaction. Emotional attachment between any two people (male/female, male/male, female/female) is a natural part of being human.

Emotional Cheating is a term that hides the true nature of what it's trying to describe. The cause of the issue is a rift between two people in a relationship. However, the term is used by one person to push off blame for the rift onto some third party interaction that is absorbing their partner's attention. It pushes blame from the cause to the effect. It allows the slighted partner a false excuse for their feelings of betrayal. The real cause is that the two partners are allowing themselves to drift apart. For the emotionally immature, the emotional bond which one person is developing outside that relationship is response to that drift. For the emotionally mature person, any emotional bonds developed outside the relationship are irrelevant to what is going on within the relationship. The forming rift must be addressed directly, either to mend or break completely.

Old rules that led into the evolution of the marriage tradition were based on primitive survival needs of those times. Over time, the marriage rules have become more restrictive, and less in touch with human nature. The Old Testament glorifies behavior that is seen as obscene in our time. By contrast, marriage rules today would be considered absurd to the bible's writers. The rules change, but our species hasn't. So, what's going on?

Since the beginning of the 20th Century, we now have the power to understand ourselves in ways that weren't even imagined in previous times. Yet, as a society, we seem to be gravitating more towards emotional immaturity than ever before. We should be trying to move towards emotional maturity. As a society, we have to learn that we are emotional creatures. Emotion is part of who we are. We are going to experience emotion whether we want to or not. Trying to create new ways to vilify our nature is pushing us in the wrong direction.

Two people should be able to have an emotional connection that doesn't interfere with that relationships of which those people are a part. Guys and girls can be close friends without being involved. Where the issues of emotional cheating comes in, is when that close friendship becomes an excuse. Either person in the relationship can use it as an excuse, but it's still only an excuse for the unrelated cause.

Back for the Post-modern

One thing I find amusing is that there are people so caught up in their limited old definitions of our world, they continue to use ridiculous terms like post-modern.  So, I’m going to pick on people that don’t realize the absolute absurdity of the term post-modern.  These people use the term to talk about the period of time in which we live in relation to events previously associated with the word modern.

This is ignorant on two levels.  First, we already have a word that describes the time in which we live. That word is modern!  There is no way to be in post-modern times unless you time travel.  Even then, that doesn’t make sense because if you travel to the future, you are still going to be in the modern times of that period. Secondly, use of the term post-modern shows a complete lack of knowledge about the Industrial Age and our transition into the Information Age.

Since the 1980’s, people understood we were at or nearing the end of the Industrial Age.  But without an obvious understanding of the catalyst that was already in place to usher in a new age, few knew what to call this new period.  Some people rightfully used the term Post-Industrial for a while. That makes sense. We are living in times after the Industrial Age.  Other people didn’t understand this dynamic, and quickly adopted strange words like post-modern.

Of course, these terms do not define all aspects of society.  In art, the term is postmodern.  It is a response to modernism, which itself was a fad during a particular period of time.  Why art would be labelled in any way "modern" is funny, since the art of any period of time will be modern to that time.   Beyond art, the term modernism describes a period of time long past, during the 19th and early 20th Centuries.  How can it be "modern" if it was over a century ago?  This is all very silly.

I think it was people who are caught up in a limited world view that coined terms like post-modern and modernism, without taking into account more aspects of the times in which they live.  Basically, they got so used to using the word modern to describe certain series of events, they didn’t know what word to use once those series of events came to a close.

The catalyst for the new modern age was the establishment and popularization of the Internet, bringing a new understanding of ownership of information, and the resulting technological, cultural and economical shifts.  Once people started understanding the driving force behind this new age, we knew what to call it.  We are now in the Information Age.

There are other terms, such as waves of the Industrial Revolution.  However, the problem with this term is that we are already on the 'fourth' such waves.  This metric is really just tracking ups and downs in manufacturing rather than identifying a significant period of time.  A revolution is a point in time, not a long period.  Long periods of time tend to be identified by trends.  By definition, a revolution is not a trend, but rather specific events of upheaval, overturning an old system.  Industrial Revolution lead to the Industrial Age.  However, these subsequent supposed revolutions aren't really the start or stops of any particular ages, and they aren't responsible for any specific upheaval.

These little revolutions have been happening as a backdrop to the bigger trend, being the rise of importance of information.  Aspects of the Information Age allow for improvements to manufacturing, but manufacturing itself has taken a backseat to the real revolution that happened with the advent of the Internet and new levels of data collection and usage.