»
S
I
D
E
B
A
R
«
Racial troubles in the NBA — Again!
Sep 8th, 2014 by jgnash

JGN_H&S2011_LR_BorderOf Cabbages and Kings

by j.g.nash

Perceptions of racism as being based on one’s skin color are wrong.

In spite of continuing, misdirected attempt to blame skin color for their problems — both real and imagined — “blacks” (an imprecise and misleading, but politically-acceptable categorization for Negroes) avoid addressing the real reason why they often suffer from perceived discrimination.  Hard and irrefutable fact is: It is how an identifiable human group (race, ethnicity, religion, etc.) behaves, which determines how they are viewed and received by others; the color of their skin has, essentially, no relevant influence whatsoever.  Put in a different way, and as the age-old maxim wisely advised: ” When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

It seems obvious that blacks (in the U.S.A., as well in other non-Negroid nations) do not, in general, try to gain acceptance by acting like the main population: indeed, they seem to be attempting to make themselves as different socially as may be possible.  In just about every possible way (e.g., hair style, type of clothing and how it is worn, chosen names, religion, attitude, language, music choice, work ethic, criminal activity, holidays, families, marriage, locomotion, and education) their behavior “gets in the face” of other social groups, which, understandably react by shunning blacks, which serves not to inspire them to mend their ways, but to, contrarily, move them ever further in the wrong direction.

As an illustration of my contention, there’s a headline story in this morning’s Atlanta paper (Sep 8th) announcing that an owner of another basketball team is “out” because of what is perceived to be “racist email.”  In fact, it appears that the incriminating, 2-year old, communication, was nothing other than an attempt, by the financially-concerned owner,  to analyze slumping ticket sales, and suggest ways to improve the business’ bottom line.  Let’s take a brief look at some of what the allegedly offensive email contained.

My theory is that the black crowd scared away the whites and there are simply not enough affluent black fans to build a significant season ticket base. … I want some white cheer leaders… and music … familiar to a 40 year old white guy…. I’ve also balked when every fan picked out of a crowd to shoot shots in some timeout contest is black……And many of our black fans don’t have the spendable income which explains why our (food and beverage) and merchandise sales are so low.”

Those seem, to me, to be legitimate concerns of a business man, whose primary focus is the bottom line. but our confused nation apparently views such comments as insensitive and unacceptable, so the offending individual must seek forgiveness by public apology, while being “ridden out of own on a rail.”

It seems to me that the real persecution, and prejudice, here, are of the team owner, whom is not permitted to, even by private correspondence, suggest that today’s blacks, when they become dominate in any venue, tend to drive away others, and thus reduce economic profits.  But the politically (and financially) motivated NBA issued, in part, the following statement:  “(The subject team owner) acknowledged, the views he expressed are entirely unacceptable, and in stark contrast to the core principles of the National Basketball Association. He shared with me how truly remorseful he is for using those hurtful words, and how apologetic he is to the entire NBA family.”

What a bunch of hypocritical baloney!  If there were any “hurtful words,” the “hurt” is essentially self-inflicted, by insistently anti-social behavior of the offended group.  And so, on we go: dangerously ignoring the underlying cause for growing friction between blacks and others, even as it gets worse.

As I have stated, repeatedly, over years: “To be accepted by the majority, wherever and whenever that may be, one must act in as much as is reasonably possible, like that majority.”  Sadly, tragically, blacks in these United States clearly seem to be working in an opposite direction.

>30<

Of Cabbages and Kings is a syndicated feature by j.g.nash.  Relevant comment may be sent to him at jgn@jgnash.com.

Riots, Race, Ferguson, and Liberia
Aug 24th, 2014 by jgnash

JGN_H&S2011_LR_BorderOf Cabbages and Kings

by j.g.nash

Dissatisfied with life in these United States of America?    Then move to Liberia!

N.B., It is necessary, to facilitate adequate understanding of the following opinion column, to use the scientific, racial terms, of “Caucasoid” and “Negroid,” and/or their derivatives.  There is nothing derogatory implied in such linguistically correct use.

So, we now suffer from another, racially charged incident, involving a “white” (Caucasian) law enforcement officer and an “African American” (Negroid) youth.  Irresponsible, opportunistic, and/or emotionally-controlled, “African American” leaders (from our President down to the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton) have, once again failed to take effective action to quell the unjustified rioting, looting, and other resultant, violent behavior — indeed, instead, seemingly enthusiastically fanning the flames of baseless discontent.

When blacks kill blacks, or rob, beat, maim or kill someone of other than the Negroid race, there are no such riots, pillaging, vandalism, or other subhuman behavior: one can only conclude that it is the element of a Caucasian killing a Negro, which fans the flames of righteous fury.  So, this is all about race, and really has next to nothing to do with the much blamed, “lack of justice.”

The black rabble rousers excuse their lawless, irresponsible, racially-divisive, nationally-destructive  behavior by falling back on the tired argument that they’re fed up with being treated badly by “The (white) Man.”  The whole damned thing, in their distorted view, stems from slavery — an ancient crime against Negroes in the U.S. (which is still widely practiced in much of Negroid Africa, where it was begun by Negroes themselves, then aided and abetted by Moslem Arabs, before being exported to the New World).  As the argument usually goes: “If the white man hadn’t made slaves of us, and shipped our ancestors from our homelands to America, none of this would be happenin’.”  Well, I suggest that the enslavement, and relocation of their ancestors was, for most “African Americans, the best, and most fortunate part of their history; they should get down on their knees, and thank GOD (not the Allah they mistakenly seem to choose these days) for that history of slavery. because without it, they might be living in west-central Africa, from whence all of their ancestors came.

That part of Africa is, and always has been, a basket case of primitive religions, social repression, brutal tribal warfare, and, yes, continued slavery — of blacks by blacks.  Were you and your family living there today, your life expectancy would be 45; your annual income (if you had one) a maximum of $1,300; there would essentially be no formal education for children; woman would be treated like cattle; there’d be no medical care, while tribal warfare, rape, and slaughter would be everyday events.

Liberia (one of those nations) is much in the news these days, because of the dreadful outbreak of that terrible Ebola disease.   Liberia contains an important message for “African Americans.”  It is a nation, artificially created by others, in the early 19th Century, as a democratic model, which would, hopefully succeed, and positively influence the other, rag-tag group of Negroid-populated and ruled nations, in sub-Saharan Africa.  Starting in as early as 1820, it was populated by thousands of slaves, freed from bondage in the States.  Our government encouraged other freed slaves to go there, to help to create an exemplary free state ruled by Negroes; many did.  For a short time, while the minority (Americano-Liberians) ruled the new nation of the Republic Of Liberia, all seemed to be going relatively well.  However, tribal, Negroid societies eventually overthrew the “Americanos,” and Liberia descended back into the poverty-stricken mess that still characterizes most of Negroid Africa.

Today, because of its predictable poverty and corrupt government,  Liberia is in a state of lockdown, wherein the government throws up walls of barbed wire to confine it’s panicked citizens to controlled zones wherein Ebola kills thousands.  Drinking water is carted in on wheelbarrows, and prices on everything, double overnight.   That is where you might be living, if not in St. Louis County, where the government (i.e., working taxpayers) provides you with a place to live, food, and money with which to buy lottery tickets, wine,  and narcotics; so that you have lots of free time, in which to burglarize, or otherwise destroy businesses in your own neighborhoods.  What is the matter with you?  Are you somehow primordially moved to be self-destructive?  Get a grip on yourselves, and on reality, or please move out of the U.S., which you seem to hate for providing you with opportunities far above the best available back “home” — in black Africa.

As I said: You’re damned fortunate to be here, rather than back where your ancestors may have come from — so thank those lucky stars, and, for, at least, Allah’s sake. stop destroying the goose that lays your golden egg.  Recognize your unusual good fortune, and behave in a manner that shows your appreciation  -  rather than an apparent desire to be in Liberia, where many, understandably, wish you would go.

The U.S. Postal System is dieing
Aug 18th, 2014 by jgnash

Of Cabbages and Kings

by j.g.nash

Unions and careless management killed our Postal Service

I derive no pleasJGN_H&S2011_LR_Borderure from here stating, once again, “I told you so!”  Way back in 1980, one of my first published columns warned that the U.S. Postal Service had turned off on the expressway to financial ruin; I’ve written several sequels to that piece, in the 40 years since; this one may be my last such.

That first opinion piece pointed out that the USPS was carelessly, and destructively, raising wages and retirement benefits, far beyond what economic sense could support or permit.  They were, simply put, paying their employees much more than their economic worth;  when customers left them for the newly emerging e-mail services, their reaction was simply to charge more for their inefficient and over-priced services.

In my first column on the subject, I also told the story of my father-in-law, a barber in Denver, Colorado.  He was losing customers, because they didn’t like his radical, off-the-wall, political opinions, which he, unwisely, spouted while cutting their hair.  His, USPS-style reaction to that loss of income, was to raise his prices’ which drove away more customers; so he raised prices again; following which he — well you get the idea.  He, of course, went out of business, blaming everyone but himself.  That is the path chosen by the inept USPS management.

The USPS has just reported that its second quarter earnings, for 2014, are, in spite of recent rate increases, some $30 Billion below what they need to break even. The only hope for survival of the historic USPS, lies in recognition and acceptance of the fact that they screwed-up big time, when they spinelessly caved to union demands for “more for doing less.”  To live again, the dieing USPS must decimate its cancerous union, severely cut pay and benefits, and demand increases in efficiency and productivity.

That ain’t gonna happen — RIP USPS.

Wisdom increases with age
Aug 13th, 2014 by jgnash

JGN_H&S2011_LR_BorderOf Cabbages and Kings

by j.g.nash

Father knows best: but only if he’s 16, rather than 60

Many animals are born with most of the knowledge they need to survive and reproduce their kind.  Snakes, for example, are usually on their own as soon as they break out of their shell; their parents are non-existent, and offer no advice nor training.  The more advanced the species, the more time they spend educating their offspring, prior to sending them off to fend for themselves: apes, elephants and many others stay with their young for years, passing on their accrued wisdom, so as to maximize chances that the new generation will live and continue the species.

It wasn’t so long ago that mankind spent the most time of all creatures in educating its young.  Mothers and fathers worked closely with their children until they reached their late teens, and essentially never stopped offering wise, experienced, advice and counsel for the rest of their lives.  It was widely understood, and appreciated, that wisdom came from experience, and thus increased continually with age.  That caring, nurturing, educational process was recognized and exemplified through books, movies, radio and television programming. Happy, healthy families were those in which “Father Knows Best.”

In just the relatively short span of a couple of generations, we’ve become a society in which fathers are routinely portrayed as the least competent members of every, typically disfunctional, family; the opinions and advice of parents, teachers, and other “old foggies,” are derided and ignored, because somehow, in this most-enlightened age, infinite wisdom, infallibility, and invulnerability are invested in children, somewhere in their tipsy teen years.  Teens not only no longer look to elders for sage counsel and advice: they now indeed are insulted and incensed when an adult offers constructive criticism or suggestion.  As today’s youth (13-26) sees it: if you can’t praise them, no matter what they do or don’t do, then mind your own damned business!

One place to see evidence of what I have alleged is on the social networking sites that have spread, like a plague, over the, otherwise potentially useful, Internet.  There, like-minded, inexperienced, uneducated, pleasure-focused, narcissistic, hedonistic children preen immature egos, complimenting each other on anything and everything they do, however vacuous, destructive, meaningless, or dangerous such may be.  I recently, for example, saw a post on Facebook, in which a distant young relative of mine complained about her father’s disapproval of her having published revealing self-photos.  Her “friends” comforted her with comments such as, “You don’t have to pay no mind to what he says: he’s just an old man”; and, “We like ur selfys, so keep them comin babe — shake that booty!”

A mother recently told me how, when she criticized/corrected her daughter’s semi-literate grammar and spelling, as used on the Internet, the child reacted with, “Why do you have to be hateful all the time?  My real friends know what I’m saying, so get used to it; live your own life, and leave mine alone.”

Yes, we have stood idly by as the vital function of the traditional family has been all but AENewman_LRdestroyed.  By failing to respect elders, and draw from their experience and wisdom, we have become less well educated, less moral, law abiding, responsible, and self-sufficient.  As a direct result, our nation, composed increasingly of irresponsible, careless, feckless youngsters (of all ages) slides rapidly toward ignominy.  It seems possible that such a mindless, rudderless population might choose Alfred E Newman (photo) as their next “we can do it” president.

The failed, $400 billion, F-35 fighter/bomber aircraft
Aug 5th, 2014 by jgnash

C&KPrtrt_LR_MatOf Cabbages and Kings

by j.g.nash

The costliest-ever aircraft development program flops!

Started 18 years back (1996), the Lockheed-Martin F-35 “Lightning II” system research, development, testing, and engineering was begun with the objective of having the world’s most advanced military aircraft in operation by 2010.  Now, after development costs have doubled (to more than $400 billion), it is becoming clear that the costliest weapons acquisition program in history has resulted in a government project that is “too big to fail,” yet will, if continued result in production of an aircraft inferior to many similar, in the hands of potential enemies.

The specifications established for the F-35 are so technologically advanced (think Google Glasses that control a supersonic, stealth aircraft, with futuristic armaments, which can land and take off from a football stadium) that they are, apparently, impossible to meet.  A computer simulation, completed by the prestigious RAND Corp., showed that, in combat with Chinese aircraft, our F-35s would be shot out of the sky, and we would have lost the battle.

How could that happen?  The basic answer is that our governments almost never develop and produce anything efficiently, economically, or effectively;  there is, however, in the case of military equipment, the added destructive element of misdirected personnel assignment policies and practices.  With rare exception (e.g., Admiral Hyman Rickover, “Father of the Nuclear Powered Navy.”), the military’s incestuous promotion systems routinely result in incompetent, uncaring, ill-trained, overly personally-ambitious, boot-licking, officers being temporarily placed in charge of high-visibility acquisition programs, such as the F-35.  The thinking behind that inexcusably destructive practice is: If we (the generals and admirals in power) want the likeable and compliant, Major Jack Politician promoted fast and far (to eventually join our select fraternity of unqualified managers and leaders), we must set him up in a series of “high exposure” jobs, where he will be seen and heard by high-ranking military officers, and powerful politicians.  Posting such politically astute, “up and coming” officers to jobs associated with major weapons acquisition programs, permits them to routinely make formal presentations to groups composed of influential members of Congress, along with a bunch of star-rank officers more concerned with how the briefer looks as a potential member of their exclusive club, than in how he’s managed the multi-billion-dollar program, for which he is, tragically, now responsible.

Almost certainly, the F-35 program is the monumental blunder it has become, because. in large part, the officers charged with its management were inexcusably inept.  As long as the military continues its destructive policy and practice of creating generals and admirals based on personalities, and like-minded compliance with unwritten rules of conduct for their exclusive fraternity of egotistical, politically-aware, ambitious, and usually incompetent officers, there’s no hope for avoiding still more, disastrous, F-35 incidents.

USA retreats from Libya
Aug 4th, 2014 by jgnash

C&KPrtrt_LR_MatOf Cabbages and Kings

by j.g.nash

I tried to warn you!

[Late July, 2014 news item]

The worst fighting in Libya, since the 2011 overthrow of Qaddafi, threatens the Tripoli Airport and its fuel storage depot.  As the Islamist militants retook full control of Benghazi, the U.S. (having learned something, if hardly enough, from the infamous attack on the U.S. consulate in that city) evacuated its embassy in Libya, retreating ignominiously to a neighboring nation (Tunisia).

For some six years, I have tried to alert readers to the,  perhaps now, undeniable fact that our antiquated, essentially useless, and economically-wasteful practice of establishing expensive, unnecessary, and dangerous embassies and consulates in every other nation is inexcusable, risky, and shameful. There have been a half dozen of my relevant columns, on that subject published over the past six years.

[This extract is from  column that ran in October, 2008]  “(The fortified embassies we’re building in foreign nations) are an insulting declaration that we have little faith in the host to provide expected security. Those ugly monuments to “American imperialism” are provocative and tempting targets for terrorists; they are unnecessary, because the only physical presence our State Department needs, in any other nation is a consulate staffed by from three to twelve persons, which could be safely housed in the upper stories of a run-of-the-mill office building. Ambassadors and their large staffs are absolutely unnecessary, because the State Department, in Washington, has immediate reliable contact with the consulates, as well as with all foreign governments and their representatives. Do you recall the famous “red phones” which were direct links between our presidents and the leaders of the Soviet Union, during the Cold War? Those devices obviously bypassed ambassadors from both nations, whom didn’t know what their bosses were discussing until after the fact—if even then. Clearly, those ambassadors were excess baggage, even back then in the 60’s.”

[Here's an extract from a November, 2012 column]  “Now then, let’s imagine that there had been no U.S.embassy nor consulate established in Libya following the destruction of its government; in which case none of the politically-motivated interest in, and concern over, what the hapless Mizz Rice did or didn’t do would exist, and those disgraced generals could get on with their clandestine bedroom antics. I have often pointed out that technological advances (e.g., secure, voice communications between Washington and all other, major capitals) have made embassies obsolete—they’re an expensive, and, as has been adequately demonstrated, dangerous diplomatic “dinosaur.” We should close all of them, leaving only a small office in a very few (reasonably safe) nations, which could help U.S.tourists with their problems, while also serving as a base for our spies. No ambassadors—no Consul Generals—not even a staff ready to meet and carry bags for boondoggling members of Congress.”

[This from an April 2013 column]  ” Bottom line is that we waste about $60 billion a year on archaic, useless, often diplomatically destructive embassies and ambassadors. Small, unobtrusive, efficient missions, staffed by trained professional foreign service personnel (there are many such), could effectively handle such as problems encountered by U.S. tourists, and do so for less than $10 billion annually. By eliminating ambassadors and embassies, we not only save big bucks, but actually improve our image abroad. Let’s do it! ”

{From a column closely following the one above]  “My recent column, which suggested eliminating archaic embassies and ambassadors, drew an expected flurry of fire from those whose “golden ox” I had thereby gored.

Their major objection seems to have been stimulated by my references to ambassadors as “boorish, destructive,” and as “ugly Americans.” Kindly allow me, here, to clarify such critical categorization, by stating that most of our ambassadors (those whom are trained and experienced foreign service personnel) serve the nation well: my condemnation is reserved for, and directed at, the scores of unqualified and unsuited persons appointed as ambassadors to plum posts (e.g., Paris, London, Tokyo, Rome, Madrid, etc.); most of which have been, and will become, those ‘ugly Americans.’”

[Break in continuity]  “In relatively recent times, the United States of America has anointed itself as “the World’s conscience,” strutting about, most undiplomatically, while demanding that all others comply with whatever current social fad may be popular in California’s la-la land. If women are treated “unfairly, or unequally” in some nation, then we make a point of sending them a female ambassador. If homosexuality is taboo somewhere on earth, we may try to force them to accept an openly homosexual ambassador. Where other forms of government, such as dictatorships, or absolute monarchies, exist with relative success, we openly proselytize against them. And if a nation is essentially of a single religious faith, we send them an ambassador that openly practices another. To get along with neighbors, one must respect, and, at least, appear to honor their values: not openly attempt to convert them to one’s own. That’s where U.S. diplomacy fails.”

[This final clip is from an August 2013 column]  “Our bloated, ineffective, Department of State (particularly the bobble-headed bureaucrats that opened both an embassy and consulate in Libya, which had no functioning government; was beset by internal tribal and religious wars; and which had a long history of hating America) now wastes billions of borrowed dollars fortifying our embassies in dozens of foreign capitals. What does it tell the citizens of those countries, when they see us erect embassies that look like stone forts or prisons; when massive concrete blast barriers rise around other embassies; where diplomatic centers (embassies) are surrounded by razor wire and patrolled by combat troops in full battle gear? I believe that it leaves them with an impression that we’re a frightened occupying force, rather than a diplomatic one.  Better not to be there, than to leave such an impression.

I have written often about how modern technology makes most diplomatic missions (embassies, consulates, etc.) unnecessary; now that they have become prime targets of terrorists, we should give serious, immediate, and productive thought to closing them all, and kicking similar installations out of our own country. The Department of State should continue to exist, but at about a fourth of the manpower and budget it now wastes on archaic, expensive, useless and embarrassing embassies and, too often, incompetent ambassadors. A small office, or cubicle, would be established in the pared-down DOS; one for each nation on the planet. Those desk officers would be charged with monitoring news from and about their nation of interest, along with regular, real-time, electronic discussions with visitors to those countries; then, after analyzing the information, discussing it with other relevant desk officers, they’d finally produce reports for use by intelligence services, the President, and Congress.”

So, here we are, six years after being adequately cautioned, retreating in disgrace, from an embassy that never should have existed after Libya devolved into uncontrolled chaos, while continuing to waste billions of dollars on archaic, useless, destructive, and dangerous diplomatic missions, which are, all too often, managed by dangerously inept personnel (especially politically appointed ambassadors).  Will we never learn?

A few, very important questions
Jul 31st, 2014 by jgnash

JGN_H&S2011_LR_BorderOf Cabbages and Kings

by j.g.nash

Some questions pertinent to our near-term fate

       Germany, which has the most successful economy in today’s World, has a robust manufacturing sector, and is therefore able to sell more, to other nations, than it buys from them, thus showing a profit from international trade.  The U.S. of A., which has, through greedy, thoughtless, labor union abuses, inept careless management, and a hedonistic, lethargic population, all but demolished its manufacturing base, imports so much more than it exports that it has become the World’s largest debtor, and is in imminent danger of default, and bankruptcy.

       If what I postulate is not so, then –

       Why do we ship our scrap iron and steel thousands of miles to China, where they turn it into huge rolls of steel, which are shipped back across the Pacific Ocean, so that foreign-owned automobile factories here can make our cars with it?  We have done, could do again, that work, right here.

        Why are the even the ships used to transport that metal all made in, owned, and operated by other nations?  They were once all made right here, and manned by U.S. crews; why not now?

        Why do we also buy processed foods (e.g., hamburger patties, and chicken parts) from China, which arrives in those same foreign-owned ships?  Surely we can do that work here.

        Why do foreign oil companies (e.g. Shell and BP) explore and drill for oil here, when we were doing that, and damned well, before those companies were even an idea?

        Why are so many of this nation’s motor vehicle plants owned by other nations, and filled with expensive machinery produced over there, where the plant profits also go?  It wasn’t so long ago that Detroit was the automobile production capital of the World: now it’s a disaster zone.

        Why do we buy most of our electronics (cell phones, computers, i-pads, televsions) from other nations, when they have to be shipped here in container ships owned by others?  Didn’t GE, AT&T, Westinghouse, RCA, Bell, and others handle that job well at one time?

        Why are the wind turbines we want for cleaner energy, built by a German company, which also makes our rapid transit, light trains and street cars?

        Why, for Heaven’s sake, do we concert our corn into a substitute for gasoline; then turn around and buy corn-based livestock feed from other nations?  If we’d opened a proposed pipeline from Canada, and produced more of our necessary oil from our natural resources, we’d be able to satisfy our own demand for corn, and perhaps ever sell some to help pay off our debts.

        And, finally, why would any conscious nation freely accept millions of illegal,  charity-case immigrants, which routinely send the largest part of whatever cash they have (and don’t pay taxes on) back to their home nations, rather than spending it here, where they earned it?

       In each and every case (other than the final one), there is no rational nor reasonable excuse for our having allowed those conditions to exist, because we have, in the not-s0-distant past, successfully handled each and every one of those jobs right here at home.  As was presented in the opening paragraph, we have through mindless greed, weak, careless business management, bad government, and an increasingly spoiled, nonproductive, and uneducated, citizenry allowed our industrial base to weaken and crumble.  For as long as we fail to act decisively to rebuild and reinvigorate our manufacturing sector, the problem will worsen — eventually destroying this once-great nation.

>30<

Of Cabbages and Kings is a syndicated feature by j.g.nash. Relevant comment may be sent to him at jgn@jgnash.com.

You owe $151,000 in taxes.
Jul 24th, 2014 by jgnash

C&KPrtrt_whiteMatOf Cabbages and Kings

by j.g.nash

The debt that is threatening our nation, and your comfortable lifestyle!

       As of last May, our National debt was $17,620,000,000,000 and growing fast.  That long, dfficult-to-imagine, figure is in the quadrillions.  It can be divided by the number of taxpayers (no one else will pay it off) to become $151,000/person; would you like to pay your share today, or do you prefer to shift the burden to your children, when it will likely become $200,000/person?  If someone doesn’t soon pay the debt owed,  whomever is around, at a time in the not-so-distant future, will be, effectively, evicted, and left without a functioning nation.

     This is no cruel joke, nor a sadistic attempt to unnecessarily frighten anyone.  It is a straight from the shoulder, undeniable fact.  Our nation is drowning in debt, which, if not paid, will destroy us, by blowing apart our economy.  Imagine, if you can, or are brave enough to, life without the U.S. dollar — or with the dollar, but one worth only a nickle.  Your life might well seem to be unsustainable; at least intolerable,  but if we don’t take immediate steps to, at the very least, stop the steadily increasing  national debt, that is exactly what will happen.

      What we really must do. is to not only halt the growth of that debt (a relatively simple. if lengthy, step to take), but also so drastically and dramatically change our national character that we no longer import  more in goods from other nations, each year, than we sell to them (a deficit that now adds some $63 billion/year to our debt )  That second part will be so difficult to implement that it now seems almost impossible to achieve.

     You see, in the nearly 70 years since the end of the Second World War, we have gone from being a nation of producers (ships, tractors, airplanes, wheat, corn, beef, steel, copper, lumber, refrigerators, cars, trains, etc.), to become a nation of flagrant, irresponsible, spoiled, consumers and servers (lawyers, financial planners, psychiatrists, bankers, stock brokers, cosmeticians, personal trainers, professional athletes, historians, entertainers; the list goes on forever).  In a healthy economy, 70% of he workers should be employed in direct support of production of things needed by the nation itself, and which may also be sold to other nations.  The remaining 30% would then be employed in services: some necessary (medical personnel, military, police, teachers, etc.), but mostly not so.  Today, in these dangerously transformed United States, more than 70% are employed in the seemingly more desirable services, while fewer than 30% produce anything of value.  That is why we buy far more from other nations than we sell to them, which can not long continue before our economy collapses, catastrophically!

     The problem is many faceted, pervasive, and widespread.  Fast food restaurants buy beef patties, chicken, and  other products that should be, and could be, “Made in America,” from China; those products are shipped here, over thousands of miles, and in Chinese vessels.  Similar ships bring us steel, forged from our scrap iron, which also moved in foreign-flagged ships.  Foreign nation’s build motor vehicles in plants located in the U.S., but filled with machinery made in their own nations, to which the profits, in U.S, dollars are also sent, thus adding to our serious problem with the balance of payments in foreign trade.  Most recently, an Atlanta magazine featured a report on the city’s in-progress streetcar service; it had a prominent sidebar announcing that those streetcars were “MADE IN AMERICA”; trouble is, they’re made in a factory owned by a German company, using German machinery, and which sends the profits right back to Germany, even further deepening the national debt.  And, need I say much about the billions of dollars that regularly flow out of the U.S., via wire services, as illegal immigrants send much of what they earn here back, to benefit their homeland, thus, again, adding to our destructive imbalance of international trade.

     A wise, conscionable, and concerned federal government could, in relatively short order put the brakes on imports of such as: automobiles (including those assembled here, but in plants owned by foreigners); steel; wheat, corn and other livestock feed; and, of course, oil.  They could also turn off the means by which illegals funnel dollars back to their homelands.  Such necessary actions would be a good first step, which, by itself would cause some pain for most of us, but which is necessary if we are to long survive.

      The major part of the cure for our economic rot lies in turning our minds away from expecting to have gleaming, “green” cities, free from those awful industries, and away from a jobs market in which “work” is the 4-letter word it has become.  Dirty old fashioned “work” isn’t just currently undesirable: it’s something left to be done by those same illegal immigrants that send most of their earned dollars back to their native lands.  No one, that you now know, probably “works” for anyone, or on anything: instead, they are “associated with” this, that, or other prestigious-sounding name — even check-out clerks in Walmart are now “associates,” and the person that is tasked to inventory the auto parts section is a “manager.”  For every one child that studies production-relevant courses in college (e.g. engineering, mathematics, physical sciences, etc.), or learns a trade in technical schools (electrician, welding, farming, masonry, carpentry, mechanics, etc.) six opt to take the easy road, studying such as English, public relations, sports management, arts, languages, history, sociology, law, communications (i.e., television broadcasting), and toenail painting.

     In order to accomplish a nationwide shift to studying for, and then entering jobs directly involved in production, the Federal Government (especially the President) would have use all of its many powers to encourage workers to choose jobs in production, rather than the soft, cushy, prestigious-sounding jobs in services.  For example, student loans and scholarships could be made available only to studies directly related to production; even taxes on income from productive workers could be set below those levied on service sector employees. The essential — vital — idea is to lead, coerce, attract, or in whatever way, funnel trained workers into production, from which they have fled for over two generations.  That’s what must be turned around, and that may be something we aren’t capable of doing, without seemingly harsh, dictatorial policies from the Oval Office — which I can’t see happening.

Sweet dreams!

> 30<

Of Caggages and Kings is a syndicated column by j.g.nash.  Relevant comment may be sent to him at jgn@jgnash.com

Finally: Conservative and Liberal defined
Jul 15th, 2014 by jgnash

 JGN_H&S2011_LR_BorderOf Cabbages and Kings

   by j.g.nash

   The essential difference between political affiliations

My BFF (that’s “best female friend” for all you old folks that still use telephones to talk to others) put down her chocolate-marshmallow Martini to ask: “Just what is the difference between liberals and conservatives; between Republicans and Democrats?”

“That can,” I knowingly responded, “be boiled down to just four words for each.  Conservatives are characterized by 4 Cs : Constructive, Careful, Creative, and Conventional.  Liberals, also by just 4 Ls:  Loose, Looney, Lazy, Losers.  Republicans bring to mind 4 Rs: Realists, Rational, Reasonable, and Responsible.  Democrats earn 4 Ds: Dreamers, Duh, Dangerous, and Destructive.”

Sipping her vodka laced slurpy, my trophy blond wrinkled her little nose and questioned, “But what about Independents?”

” Ah yes, the new free-thinkers; let me see — they’ve 4 Is: Indecisive, Ineffective, Inactive, and Incapable.”

Miss Piggott, Arkansas, of 1992, giggled, shook her empty glass and seductively asked for “another please.”  Politics are simplified by wise old men, and booze.

>30<

Of Cabbages and Kings is a syndicated column by j.g.nash.  Relevant comment may be sent to him at jgn@jgnash.com.

Senator Harry Reid plays the race card
Jul 9th, 2014 by jgnash

JGN_H&S2011_LR_BorderOf Cabbages and Kings

by j.g.nash

Five white men decide womens’ right to birth control

If there is a poster boy for sleazy, dangerous, amoral, unconscionable, destructive, dishonest, sneaky, politicians, it has to be the Majority Leader of the Senate, Harry Reid.  In a recent comment concerning an important decision by the Supreme Court (which properly relieves employers from having to provide abortion pills/devices to their employees, when such is contrary to the employer’s religious belief and principles), our senior senator used the issues of race and sexism to inflame and excite mindless liberal masses.

In referring to the 5 to 4 decision in the now well-known Hobby lobby case, which was, disappointingly, but typically, split right along ideological and emotional lines, rather than according to what the law of the land has to say on the matter, Reid said essentially the following: Five white men decided whether or not women should have access to birth control medications. the use of “white,” in this context, is racist; can you imagine the furor that would arise were Speaker of the House, Boehner, to say something such as: A black man (the President) has increased taxes on white Republicans?  

It seems clear to me that Reid’s racist/sexist comments were made to stir up divisive social tensions, for no purpose other than shady political gain.  But that aside, if you can, let’s look at the accuracy of Reid’s shameless, inflammatory statement.  Are there five “white” men on the SCOTUS?  Clearly NOT, if, by “white,” as surely intended by irresponsible Reid,  is implied the often denigrated, “white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant (WASP).”  Of the five male justices forming the majority vote in this case, one is “black” or “African American”; one is so-called “Hispanic” (or “brown”); and two are “Italian-Americans.”  That’s hardly the “five white men” intentionally and maliciously suggested by Senator Reid.

Then there’s the intentionally misleading statement that the Court’s decision denies free birth control medications to women: all the court has said, is that employers whose religious beliefs prohibit abortions, are not required to provide such to their employees.  Many types of birth control pills and devices will still be freely furnished.

It’s no wonder that the man on the U.S. street is disillusioned with just about every part of today’s Federal Government: it has become racist, sexist, inefficient and ineffective, wasteful, bloated, divisive, dishonest, deceptive, selfish, arrogant and dictatorial.  And, there seems to be no light at the end of that long, dark tunnel, leading to —– ?

Are there no longer any Jimmie Stewarts to send to Washington?

– 30 –

Of Cabbages and Kings is a syndicated column by j.g.nash.  Relevant comment may be sent to him at jgn@jgnash.com

»  Substance: WordPress   »  Style: Ahren Ahimsa