Greetings from
The Publisher . . .
Our Times, Open Debate and Richard
MartinI think you can all say we've qualified as living in interesting times. Lot's of anger, finger pointing and rage out there—or R(AIG), as Tim, our graphic designer, spelled it.
Interesting to me to hear the back and forth. “AIG was legally obligated by contract to pay the bonuses,” for instance. Versus—Did the same people say the same thing when some companies decided they wouldn't continue to pay health care or pensions for retired workers?
The most “compassionate” argument going around is that the people who got rich creating and selling these “creative financing” packages have suffered enough. They should not be penalized because their financial wealth has already taken a hit. I assume that means pre-bonus wealth. “They paid the price,” is the argument. “The system is self-correcting and works.”
Then again, when an individual gambles with his money—whether at the casino or in the stock market—not everyone pays the price. It doesn't affect the whole country—or the world.
I'd hate to see some crazy who was really affected by this greed take it out on someone. There's plenty of private and public figures that might be considered targets by unstable people who are now economically unstable too.
If a small group can wreak havoc on the world economy and just walk away from it without consequences, leaving people without a sense of justice or equity, would it be surprising to see someone seek revenge?
We do have a lot of things to figure out. I still think that giving money/jobs to people who spend most of their money is better than giving it to companies to pay off their debts and maintain a system that didn't work. The last thing we want is to give bonuses to people living in multimillion dollar homes. What are they going to do with the bonus anyway? Invest it? Isn't giving them capital encouraging mischief?
It's also revealing why the Europeans are resisting our efforts to push them into creating stimulus packages such as ours—they have safety nets in place that keep people consuming, in their homes and working. They feel that is enough right now. German companies in trouble “lay off” everyone so that everyone works ? time, their safety net pays them for 2/3 of the time they miss and while not working they can receive vocational training to improve their skills. They also have health care, of course.
While it's always interesting listening to people use arguments they were previously on the other side of—i.e., honoring contracts—it's more important to explore what others have done that lessens the impact of “bad times.”
The bigger picture is to remember what we're doing here. Aren't we really continuing the process of redefining ourselves that began for many when we realized we had arrived where we were headed?
We found us/US raging a preemptive war, torturing prisoners who turned out to be simply suspects, and listening to those who claimed bombs could actually be smart enough to know on whom they landed. We destroyed Iraq's infrastructure and alienated a lot of people with long memories—and now even we think we won.
The ways we were headed that bothered people are too numerous to list. A few are the environment and energy policy; the way people were looting the treasury getting no bid contracts they did not fulfill; and the Imperial Presidency that thought rights were given to people, forgetting the right to govern was given to them by the people. Way too many people acted as if they took an oath to the President and not the U.S. Constitution.
Once again we are redefining ourselves, asking who we are and adjusting. Now the focus is on business and the economy. For many of us it's painful to see the values—or lack of them—that our largest businesses are showing us/US.
There is one positive change, however, that enables us right now and that is more open debate.
Looking historically, do you think when the Founding Fathers envisioned Congress as the place for our representatives to publicly debate public policy, what they had in mind was for the members to break into two groups, agree to support the policy positions the majority of their group wanted, come up with keywords—talking points—to describe it, and then take turns repeating those points over and over? There's even a Whip to keep them in line.
I think the FF thought debate might look a little different. That discussion might actually lend light, bring new information and new views to be considered, you know, enlightened debate. People brainstorm in that way. They actually consider alternatives. Instead we see stormy accusations—mixed with plenty of “honorable” mentions directed at those being attacked. Our representatives follow the party line, and seldom actually think or get creative. But that's okay, in a democracy that's our job to lead them. The good news is the President is openly discussing his plans.
This may be changing in Congress now, but for the last couple of months and for the first time in a long time people are questioning and looking at alternatives and really seem to be looking at how to establish economic stability. Those who are simply delivering the party line with all ‘yeas' or ‘nays' are looking like caricatures. We can hope these exceptions are on the road to making themselves obsolete by not participating in the discussion. The more they object to everything that comes along, the more they show themselves as being the direct opposite of the Founding Fathers. What united the FF was their honest desire to create the best system possible and they wanted it to work. Imagine what they would have thought of the idea of wishing the “other side” would fail as we hear now. What other side?
Perhaps the discussion has changed because we haven't been in this exact place before and no one has proven answers. We have to explore so maybe there's more allowance for options and questioning. Let's hope it continues and it hasn't just been a short honeymoon.
This issue we have a Richard Martin economic perspective that's worth mentioning for several reasons. Every time I run his articles I get comments, usually very emotional ones. I don't agree with everything he says, but knowing Richard, I know that he is always straightforward and tells the truth as we sees it. I think where I disagree with him the most is when he says that what's ahead is inevitable.
Clarifying what I mean by emotional responses, I mean I get mail strongly objecting to not only Richard, but also seeing any negative ideas in The Light Connection . These are probably one in ten of the responses I get about Richard and they contain a lot of venom directed at me and/or Richard—that tell me negativite thinking should have no place in our lives. Ya, I'm with you.
The other nine respond with tears or near tears and gratitude for his perspective. I've never had any writer get that kind of emotional reaction. I'm running his article because so many have requested it.
Even as recently as this March I received a call thanking me for running the article that ran in April of 2008 about money market funds—and also for saving their financial life. A couple I have known for 30 years called with similar comments about saving their retirement.
What I object to the most is the idea that telling people that the freeway is jammed and at an impasse is negative. It's a clue that it's time to relax, slow down and enjoy the coast route.
I wonder if a forecast for rain gets similar reactions—it's a possibility.
This is, after all about en-lightening up. Isn't that the place you get to after you try different things on for size to see what works for you—and then personalize it—not defend your way as the only way for everyone?
In the process of rethinking our government, our economy and our selves, maybe it's time to be a little less sensitive when others disagree with our ideas. If we can change that, there's a lot that could change. After all, democracy is the ultimate trickle-up philosophy.
Have a Great Month,
Steve
HOME - FEATURES - NEWS - FROM THE PUBLISHER
LETTERS - COLUMNS - MUSIC REVIEWS - BOOK REVIEWS
PLANETARY CYCLES - CALENDAR - ABOUT TLC - CONTACT US
CLASSIFIEDS - RESOURCE DIRECTORY
ARCHIVES - SUBSCRIBE - ADVERTISE - SEARCH
