Friday, February 20, 2009

"The more irresponsibly you behave, the more government works for you."

I have to agree with David Harsanyi who said this in his column today in the Denver Post. He also makes some other good points:

Who knew that playing by the rules comes with a government warranty? After all, I may play by the rules and engage in bizarrely self-destructive behavior. You may not. You may have played by the rules — invested in the stock market, a home, a business, a career — and found yourself stuck with a financial dud.

As every 2-year-old knows, consequences are the incentive to avoid risky behavior. So why are we rewarding failure and abolishing consequences? Many of the homeowners who government is bailing out took unnecessarily chancy loans that helped fuel the financial jam we're in.

My question is, what do we tell our kids about how to get ahead in this new economy? I don't think telling our kids to scrimp, save and work hard only to turn their earnings over to others is prudent at this point. We have to teach our kids how to make it in the new system of rewards for failure and penalties for success. Or maybe just explain that success is failure now, that up is down, that wrong is right. That seems to be the prevailing "wisdom" with our new government overlords.

Labels: ,


Blogger uncle ken said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

9:39 AM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

"My question is, what do we tell our kids?"

This too shall pass? I wish I had an answer. My wife and I will undoubtedly hold on to our spirituality and the morals that come with it, but it feels like we are exercising them in an increasingly foreign world.

Part of it is the growing resentment of Christianity from the left, the other part is how America feels topsy turvey.

I honestly think that this will boost our church attendence, which is not a bad thing at all. Beyond that, I wish I had more of a feeling for the next four years.


9:39 AM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

Uncle Ken, I think I am stealing that one completely!

Big trout in Chile. New Zealand too.


9:41 AM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger uncle ken said...

Dear Son:

Acquire a marketable skill. Stay current in your knowledge. Stay completely out of debt. Avoid the markets, buy hard assets but only for cash. Get a passport. Visit New Zealand and Chile. Pick one.

Yer loving father,
uncle ken

( I have 5 boys)

9:41 AM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger Unknown said...

The usual rush to blame. In fact, most of those homeowners were suckered in by lenders who convinced them that house values would rise and that would work in their favor. Those banks etc not in trouble simply did not get greedy but acted in a responsible manner.Now blaming the poor and scarcely educated is a nice way to feel good about yourself and get the greedy people off the hook.

9:49 AM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger Unknown said...

A guy on the Rick Santelli video said we should ALL stop paying our mortgage. I couldn't do that. We wouldn't be able to get away with it anyway.

This really pisses me off. OUR tax dollars will proably be going to pay for the people in the affluent neighborhood over the hill where the houses cost three times as much as ours, are at least 20 years newer, and are at least 1500 sq ft larger.

In a way, I'm envious. We almost lost our house a few years ago when my husband lost his job and couldn't find one for an extended period of time. There was no "bail out" for us.

We're still slowly and steadily making our way back but, unlike government, we have scaled back, examined our priorities, cut corners where we could (like discovering Goodwill), and we are much better off than we were a few years ago. How I wish the government would do the same thing.

10:03 AM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger DADvocate said...

In fact, most of those homeowners were suckered in by lenders who convinced them that house values would rise and that would work in their favor.

Wrong. First off, the truly poor didn't buy any houses. Secondly, I'm one of the recipients of a no dowm payment loan. I bought a house a little over 4 years ago. BUT, I made sure I had a reasonable fixed rate and the payments were something I could afford.

There was no pressure or trickery by the bank. And, this is one of the banks in trouble. I probably owe more now than the house is worth but the investment value was secondary. I wanted a home in the country with a big yard so my kids would have room to roam, etc. That's what I got and I'm happy. The value will eventually go back up.

It's reasonable to assume that housing prices will rise. This is the first time since the Great Depression that they haven't. I know plenty of people who are not "scarecly educated" who over bought on houses because they are the ones most likely to have the money to over buy.

10:08 AM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger uncle ken said...

Stuart said...

"most of those homeowners were suckered in by lenders who convinced them that house values would rise"

Most of those homeowners were buying on expectation of profit, not buying shelter. They were investing. If we are to bail them out shall we bail out all the other investors in stocks, bonds and other assets that lost money as well?

"Those banks etc not in trouble simply did not get greedy"

The banks which DID lend to non-creditworthy borrowers did so after being coerced by FedGovCo. Community Reinvestment Act. Perhaps greed entered into it, I cannot judge without knowing.

FedGovCo created the problem by demanding money be lent to those who could not repay it. Then the Feds spent a trillion dollars to get us out of debt. Now DC is demanding the responsible majority such as Mia Z pay for the profligacy of the irresponsible minority.

If they hold that Tea Party in Chicago I'm going.

10:11 AM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger Tom Spaulding said...

Looks like my "Reverse John Galt" might actually be a viable option...I had hoped I was engaging in hyperbole.

11:08 AM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger I R A Darth Aggie said...

Perhaps greed entered into it, I cannot judge without knowing.

I think greed entered into things once those banks realized they could finance a loan, make the initial profit on that set of transactions, and then sell the loan to Freddie/Fannie and not hold the paper (bag).

The profit was just the icing on the cake. Not getting sued by ACORN or the like over lending practices was the motivation.

11:45 AM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger uncle ken said...

"The profit was just the icing on the cake. Not getting sued by ACORN or the like over lending practices was the motivation."

Makes sense to me.

11:56 AM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger uncle ken said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

11:57 AM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger Scout said...

I suppose I will tell my children the same thing I have been telling them for the past several years: Be able to be as self sufficient in as many areas as possible. They already know that just because many people in the world do not do the right thing (be responsible for themselves and their decisions) does not make it okay for them.

1:09 PM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger Unknown said...

Stuart seems to have confused education with good sense.

It's a wonder so many of the "educated" class of our country don't understand such a simple distinction.

1:55 PM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

Stuart, I am not angry with the poor and irresponsible, I am angry with the government for subsidizing poverty and irresponsibility.

Benjamin Franklin said that the coutries that are kindest to the poor have the most to be kind to. He went on to say that people who are generally interested in the poor should make them uncomfortable in their poverty. I wish my President understood the laws of operant conditioning as well as Benjamin Franklin did. And Franklin understood it before it was even named!


2:00 PM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

I agree, Tmink, the poor banks received aid, now they want more aid. The poor car manufacturers received aid, now they want more. It's never ending.

2:28 PM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger Thor's Dad said...

Why should liberal Democrats care about responsibility? They've just acted irresponsibly and created a mortgage that future generations may never be able to pay back. Whose going to bail them out? If it happens I guess it will be the responsible people who work,especially the evil rich who create the jobs in the first place.

2:28 PM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

The first debt to be paid for future generations will be for the cost of the war in Iraq. Future generations better get busy.

4:20 PM, February 20, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Iraq? We've never paid for the Great depression or WWII that I have read. And I've looked. The only country who ever paid us back their war debt was Denmark, I believe. And I think it was WWI debt, not II. There's an awful lot of stuff still lying around on the ground if you look for it.

6:18 PM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

Does anyone know when the last time the federal government didn't carry a debt? We can't be demanding future generations act responsibly when we (and previous generations) are the worst examples.

6:26 PM, February 20, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, this is certainly nothing new! Women have ALWAYS played by completely opposite 'rules.' Men work hard, play by the rules, then women just sit around and do nothing and then manipulate men through fraud for houses and everything else these men work hard for all their lives.

Women have ZERO accountablity and justify anything they do wrong and THEN attempt to turn the blame around onto others. A man burns his hand and curses himself. A woman burns her hand and curse the fire. They are NO consequences for women for anything!!

Cheat on you husband? He gets angry and shouts at you? Obtain a restarining order and he goes away forever! Problem solved. No consequences. And just not 'no consequences' people are punished for holding a woman accountable. Right is wrong is right. Good is bad and bad is good! Wrong behavior is REWARDED. Isn't that really neat?

Steal from your job or lazy at work? Your boss threatens to fire you? Accuse him of sexual harassment or sue him for sex bias!

No consequences. And just not 'no consequences' people are punished for holding a woman accountable. Right is wrong is right. Good is bad and bad is good! Wrong behavior is REWARDED. Isn't that really neat?

Commit any crime including molestation of children? Just cry in court and get probation- women only make up 5% of the prison population- not because they're better behaved- because all the laws are made to punish men- not women.

Can't compete in the world or in school? Just sue everyone until they lower all the standards!

No consequences. And just not 'no consequences' people are punished for holding a woman accountable. Right is wrong is right. Good is bad and bad is good! Wrong behavior is REWARDED. Isn't that really neat?

This bailout business is KIDDY STUFF compared to the PSYCHOTIC world of 'no rules' world women have lived in for God knows how long. And that is ALL women- rich or poor, classy or cheap, smart or stupid- all of them.

There are two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT standards for men and women and you know it! Legally, culturally and every other way you can think of.

Am I jealous of women? HELL NO. I would rather kill myself than to ever become THAT pathetic of an excuse for a human being.

9:01 PM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger DADvocate said...

Cham - the last time (and only time) the federal government didn't carry a debt was under Andrew Jackson for a short period of time.

9:22 PM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger uncle ken said...

Yes, Andrew Jackson, 1834. Paid off the national debt.

However up until the 1930s the Feds ran surpluses two years out of three. Paying off the national debt was considered an obligation right next to national defense.

Our national debt now stands at roughly 75% of GDP. Right after WW2 it was 130%. Fwiw Japan is 180% of their GDP right now. Of course, if productivity falls during the next year the precentage will get worse even without any more profligate behavior in Congress.

9:38 PM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger . said...

The key is to look for ways to leave the system.

Think outside the box.

Alter your mind and your attitude.

Stop thinking money. Start thinking goods and services, and what their intrinsic value is... don't think "an apple costs $1", think "an apple costs an apple, and an apple is worth 3 strawberries." Start working from that paradigm and you can prosper quite nicely.

No matter the monetary value on your home, it is after all, still worth only one house. The sooner people clue into this, the better they will be for what is sure to follow.

"Change" comes from within, Mr. President.

11:54 PM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger Unknown said...

And Reality### shows up, goes OT and exposes his boils again. Remember what I said about blanket statements, buddy. Offspring can read this stuff too.

11:57 PM, February 20, 2009  
Blogger RAMZPAUL said...

Just for fun I decided to call GMAC to see if they would reduce my mortgage. I figured if I have to bail them out with my tax money, they should give something back to us taxpayers who play by the rules. I made a video of the call. There response was somewhat interesting.

12:17 AM, February 21, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I kind of agree with Reality2008 that women grow up in a parallel universe to some degree. Many don't show accountability or responsibility because they DON'T HAVE TO. It's very easy for a woman to take that route in society.

Here's where I disagree: I think every human being - male or female - has a small voice of conscience in them, and some men and women are moral no matter what society offers or allows.

A very clear example of a woman who didn't take the easy way out, and who calls the behavior of some women exactly what it is, is Esther Vilar (a good book by her is "The Manipulated Man").

The problem is not that women are intrinsically bad people, it's that when men exploit, use or bully others, they eventually wind up in jail or ostracized. Women, on the other hand, wind up in a big house, driving a big car, with a legal vice clamp around the nuts of the (paying) husband who now wonders what he got himself into.

I put a lot of the blame for that on chivalrous men. Society builds up a woman who should be shunned and shamed into a goddess who is pure and innocent.

8:30 AM, February 21, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


I'm not sure if you are suggesting a quasi barter society or not, so I want to make this comment about barter transactions in general:

Although the IRS doesn't usually get too excited about small instances of it, and doesn't aggressively pursue it (right now), barter transactions are on the same footing as cash transactions with regard to the income tax. Instead of money, you are getting "in kind" payment. It doesn't matter if you pay a dentist with US dollars, or with Swiss Francs, or with ears of corn, or by fixing his car, he is responsible for the equivalent of that amount as income.

People who suggest a return to barter relationships to get around the income tax kind of forget that. If it became a major deal, the IRS certainly WOULD start pursuing it.

8:40 AM, February 21, 2009  
Blogger Unknown said...

I'm not sure how government would tax barter (sending them 28% of a chicken would be silly). I can predict with great certainty that the rules for figuring it out will be onerous, and that congresscritters will not be punished for failing to send in their cadillac bumpers.

9:03 AM, February 21, 2009  
Blogger Unknown said...

TMink --

"Part of it is the growing resentment of Christianity from the left, ..."

Recall that at Althouse's, ricpic, traditional and others routinely inject "anyone not Christian is evil" into the debates. Here too, though less often now. It does generate a little resentment to be called evil from nowhere during a discussion about say, a chimp attack.

9:42 AM, February 21, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dr. Ellen:

No, you don't send in 28% of a chicken (or of a car, see below), you send in 28% of the fair market value of the chicken. And this is already the law.

As an example, many companies give their employees a company car. The portion that the employee uses for his personal affairs is taxable. It doesn't matter if the company pays the employee more income and the employee buys a car himself for his personal needs, or if the company makes a car available for his personal needs. Either way, that is income and the employee is taxed on it.

It doesn't matter if you pay for goods or services with US dollars, EU euros, the equivalent in chickens or whatever. You are subject to tax on the fair market value of that transaction.

9:52 AM, February 21, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One of Obama's nominees was recently tagged for that (can't remember who it was - Dashle?). Someone provided him with a limo service, and he didn't pay tax on it.

It doesn't matter if someone gives you the money and you buy your own limo service or if the limo service is directly provided for you. The fair market value is the taxable amount in either case.

9:57 AM, February 21, 2009  
Blogger DADvocate said...

I saw the mortgage bailout plan which included lowering mortgage payments to 31% of gross income. Curious, I checked my payments. I only pay 19% of my gross income now.

Of course, the more you earn the larger the percentage of you income you can pay on a mortgage. But, I can't help but think that most those who need their payments lowered to 31% were being highly irresponsible when they took out the loan.

11:30 AM, February 21, 2009  
Blogger Brother J said...

"Does anyone know when the last time the federal government didn't carry a debt? We can't be demanding future generations act responsibly when we (and previous generations) are the worst examples."

Cham? Are you suggesting that we do nothing? We may presently be setting a bad example, but that doesn't mean it's too late to set a different example by recognizing the problem and starting to climb out of the hole we've dug. If we do that, then yes we can demand that future generations act responsibly. And we'll have some really good evidence of the consequences of not doing so to present to them as to why.

12:11 PM, February 21, 2009  
Blogger Joe said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3:45 PM, February 21, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I keep coming back to blogs like a moth to a flame and entering ongoing comments. We rant and rave, and otherwise vent. We talk each other and ourselves out of the trees.

Maybe it's time to quit talking and act. The left has been banding groups together for a long time. They have been drawing these individual groups closer together for a long time. They now vote as one. For one party. Even though they are as diverse as can be.

A line will be drawn, if it has not been already. The tipping point is well within view. But a decision will need to be made. Are we to remain a republic, or will we become a socialist nation? We all know which way we are heading.
Is that where we want to go? Newsweek even blatantly has it on the cover.

5:08 PM, February 21, 2009  
Blogger Adrian said...

You were born with two choices in life: to suffer the indignity of your own bad behavior or the injury of everyone else's. No one would blame you for refusing to endure the latter. But, then again, you will have to live with the former in that case. Don't think you are special -- that you will get through it without losing it. Everybody does, and that is almost always what everyone ends up regretting most, in the end.

Honestly, the most principled thing a man can do these days is grab his rifle. This has been true for some time. But, it is also true that they'll just kill you if you do.....

5:46 PM, February 21, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It has always been time to have weapons at home, but it is nowhere near time to pull them out and dust them off. No one has fired at me yet.

As fast as things are moving, though, do you not feel this nation is in danger as far as surviving as a republic? And if so, when should we say "enough"? When the government takes 80% of your income? 90%? When one worker supports 5 people, yet all have the same few things? When electricity is only on certain hours of the day, certain days of the week - and you never know what day and what hours that may be - as in some nations in Africa?

At 56, because of illness, I'll never see 60. It is my children and my grandson I am concerned with. I used to be concerned with millions upon millions. But not so much anymore. I've been reading too many Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and Mark Twain quotes lately. With all the knowledge we have, we still slip down that slope.

6:25 PM, February 21, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

By the way, I am very new to exercising my second amendment rights. I never thought I would ever need to.

6:27 PM, February 21, 2009  
Blogger uncle ken said...

"By the way, I am very new to exercising my second amendment rights."


Rule 1 - never point at anything you're not planning to shoot.

Rule 2 - until you verify it's empty, it's loaded. If it leaves you're hand for any reason, when you get it back it's loaded. Even if you just set it down. Always, always assume it's loaded.

Rule 3 - always set your shotgun down before crossing a barbed wire fence.

That's most of it.

6:56 PM, February 21, 2009  
Blogger Adrian said...

It has always been time to have weapons at home, but it is nowhere near time to pull them out and dust them off. No one has fired at me yet.

The first person lynched during the American Revolution was a tax collector. That whole thing happened over far, far less than what we have been raised to endure without even a second thought about it. It has long since been time someone set things straight. But, a large part of how we got here was because some of us tried to stop it and/or get out and got beat down hard during the civil war.

When it became clear that Obama was going to be president, I said "That guy is so far left, his own democrats are going to have to rein him in." Obviously, I was being far too optimistic about congress when I said that. Keep an eye out for the economic freedom of the world report. It will be interesting to see how far we slide. And, my question is when we are just as much of a welfare state as anyone else (or even more of one), why stay in the welfare state with the highest incarceration rate, a runaway CPS, the most powerful and over active and numerous federal agencies used to oppress the populace, and so on?

As for gun safety rules, I try to be polite (e.g. not pointing a gun at anyone or anything), but I try to keep it to one rule for my kids: keep your finger out of the trigger guard. Nowadays, the only time anyone ever gets shot by accident or on purpose is when someone puts their finger on the trigger. If you never stick your finger on the trigger until you are about to pull it, then 99.9% of all accidents will never happen.

9:28 PM, February 21, 2009  
Blogger Dave Cornutt said...

"What do we tell our kids about how to get ahead in this new economy? "

That's easy: go into politics. As a politician, the rules that apply to little people will not apply to you. You will easily become a multi-millionaire, even though your position nominally pays you a below-market salary. You will have a campaign slush fund which you can tap whenever you want, and you can pay yourself any amount you wish from it. People will pay you tens of thousands of dollars, simply to hear you deliver a canned speech. Paying taxes will be optional for you. Not to mention the constant ego stroking. And at any time you decide that standing for elections is not your thing anymore, you can simply move over to K Street, become a self-appointed gatekeeper between the government and the people, and get paid even more simply because of who you know. And at the same time, you can disparage people in the private sector for making money, even though they aren't making as much as you are. It will be by far the best gig in post-capitalist America.

1:16 PM, February 23, 2009  
Blogger aspie6073 said...

I originally sent this to Helen Smith in an email but I decided this is appropriate for everyone.

Dear Dr Smith

First of all, I am 29 years old about to turn 30. I have been recently diagnoised with Asperger's Syndrome. These are my problems I've had. Most of this stuff I asked my fiance and my father.

Workplace like Kroger:
1. There are multiple supervisors at Kroger who has the same level of power or status. Let's say one tells me to do something and the other tells me to do the complete opposite, who do I obey so I do not be an insubordinate employee?

2. Here is a scenario that happened to me at Kroger plenty of times when I worked there from 15-19. There would be no activity for a period of time. Little to no customers would be in the store. The policy was that we should all be busy during a time of slowness like I could go sweep the floor or do whatever as long as we stayed busy. One problem with this. I would do as I was told and went back to the back to do kroger stuff. Well, 2-5 minutes activity would pick back up in the front. I would be yelled at for not being up front to bag the groceries of the orders that all of a sudden showed up.

The rules then are as follows
a. if the front is busy I need to be up front to bag the orders
b. if the front is not busy than I am to be going around the store and find stuff to do like sweep.

How do I follow both of these rules at the same time all the time so I don't make anyone angry?

3. After about 2-3 hours my feet starts hurting bad. They hurt so bad that I literally can't stand anymore and cannot function so I have to go into the bathroom to sit down. Is there something I can do to rectify this so my feet do not hurt bad and I become incompacitated.

4. When I first started working at kroger when I was 15 years old I asked the other teens how much they got paid and they didn't mind telling me. When I asked, Larry, at the time how much he was paid he said that you're not supposed to ask anybody this. At the time I really did not understand why and he did take the time to explain why. He did give me the explanation and said there are some people who are embarrassed by how much they're making compared to the others. The second reason if one person has the same position as others and others find out this particular person is making more than the others the others will consider that as unfair and could harrass that person. Are there any other social things that are maybe taboo that shouldn't ask of my fellow co-workers?

5. Offically, who is my boss the supervisors, the manager who hired me, or the manager of the store? In obeying orders given to me, do I obey the orders based upon the status and the chain of command? For instance the store manager may tell me to do one activity. The front end manager may tell me to do another thing. A supervisor who is on the lower end may tell me to do another? Do I obey the store manager first, the front end manager second, and the supervisor third or does it matter who I obey first as long as all tasks are done?

6. Kroger and other places have a system of hiring in which you fill out an application by using their computer. Once I fill those applications out what exactly do I do afterwards? If I am suppose to call anyone back, who exactly do I ask to speak too? Where am I even supposed to call too, the particular store that I applied too or the corporate offices? Once I get the correct person to speak too am I supposed to talk to them in a direct or indirect manner? Am I allowed to get forthright to the point or would I come across as rude when I did that?

Sales Job
1. How do I come up with the sales pitch on the spot without deeply thinking about it? They gave me the algorithm. I could do it if I had 2-3 minutes to think about it but doing it in an impromtu manner I was lost on how to do it.

2. I did not receive a list of my inventory and not everything was included in my inventory. I did not know I was supposed to have a name tag. Was there a inventory list I could've refered to to make sure I had all of my materials?

3. The computer department gave me completely different instructions than what I was given by Leigh Nickens. The computer department said they were going to bring my customers to me. Who's instructions was I supposed to follow?

4. What information from the whole packet was I supposed to memorize and not memorize?

5. They gave me a computer to use. What exactly was I supposed to use the computer for? What were the rules governing the use of this computer?

6. How exactly do I determine what kind of a customer a person is by looking at them? There was more than the two or three kinds of customers that were discussed in the training. How do I come up with a pitch for them? What are the rules governing this? How exactly do I make my voice inflexion seem friendly not stilted and monotonic. How exactly do I use my hand gestures in the correct way. How exactly am I supposed to look at a person? Am I supposed to look directly into their eyes or the corner of their eyes? Am I to maintain eye contact at all times?

7. During the sales pitch how technical am I allowed to go?

8. How technical am I supposed to go?

9. Where exactly was I supposed to take the customer to in the computer department, the technical support or sales?

10. How do I answer Leigh Nickens questions in the on the spot manner she wanted?

11. You told me not to ask anyone any questions because I would've sounded incompotent? What pray tell should I have done to obtain the information that I needed?

12. Did I have to exactly stick with the algorithm of the training to the letter?

13. Let's say during the time I was scheduled I had a question. Who was I supposed to call? They never told me the rep I was assigned to.

14. On that sunday that Leigh Nickens called me to come in what exactly were my hours for that particular day since I came in at a different time?

15. Was I supposed to work both saturday and sunday or just sundays? If it was both days, were the hours the same?

1. You say I'm supposed to pay attention to my surroundings. What in my surroundings am I supposed to pay attention to?

2. Is there a correct way to pay attention to my surroundings so I don't look obvious that I am doing it or look awkward doing so?

3. What is the best way to memorize where is my car is at in a huge parking lot? What are the landmarks I should use?

Praying to God:
1. Is there a correct procedure that God wants me to do to pray to him? If so, what is it?2. You say if I receive a message from God then I should wait for at least 3 or more comfirmations? What if the message was from the devil and what if the comfirmations I receive are from the devil too? How do I comfirm the comfirmations?

Taking Responsibility Questions:
1. For taking responsibilty for my actions and blaming others I agree with your mom 99% of the way. There are three questions I have with you, your mom, and the take self-responsibility types?

a. How can I take responsibility for a given situation if I do not even know what I did wrong and how it was wrong in the given situation?

b. In fact, how can I take responsibility for a situation I didn't even know it occured and it wasn't told to me until months later or I never know?

c. Let's say that I understand my role in a given situation and I know and feel I'm responsible for. How can I take any kind of responsibilty (meaning right the wrong) if the offended party does not tell me what compensation they want or to tell me exactly what they want me to do make the amends?

Basically, I am asking in all of this is there a correct and appropriate procedure for taking responsibility for my actions?

d. Is there ever a situation where other people or everyone else could be at fault and you have no blame to the bad situation that happened? If so, how do you determine if this is the situation?

2. Hanging out with others
a. Way before I met you I was hanging with Big Eric, Jason, Adam, and others. Here is a situation that happened between Jason and I. Jason said he was offended by my addressing him by his first name instead of when trying to address him saying "hey man or hey nigga". I don't understand how it is offensive to address someone by their first name. Can you please explain?

b. Can you give me a guideline of what words not to use in a given situation since you say I use big words? I didn't even know I did. If this is seen as rude I will correct this.

When my fiance asked me what are my plans for the future, I could not answer and this was the reason why?

Let me give you a background of why I have come to my thinking.

Right now, the smallest unit of matter is the quark which make up subatomic particles like protons and electrons or leptons or muons. This comprises about 10% of our universe. The rest of it consists of it consists of dark matter and dark energy.

The thing is is we have different possiblities for different arrangements of quarks into different types of subatomic structures which then makes different types of atoms. We then have elements and each atom can be arranged differently to make an instance of an element where order does matter. The elements can be arranged into many different compounds. Based upon this many different events can occur depending on the arrangement of quarks and subatomic structures in physical space.

Here is a rough permutation and I don't even know if I have all of the elements of this permutation. P=Permutation. All Possibilites=( P(quarks)+P(subatomic structures)+P(atoms)+P(instance of an element) + P(elments arranged in compounds) + P(compounds arranged in physical space. Right now, we do have a unit of time which is the (speed of light divided by the plank length). This right now is the base unit time of existence.

This is called Plank Time. I can break down the possibilites to a given particular plank time and then add them all up to make up a second, minute, hour, day, week, year.

Here are my questions based upon this

1. Without knowing all the possible arrangements how can I be absolutely certain of a decision I make and that it was the best one to make ?

2. How is it possible for me to even know all of the different arrangements or possibilites of what a decision can take?

3. Without all of this data how can I plan for anything if I am ignorant, and I do not know anything with absolute certainty.

4. Without this data to even run my own life how can I tell you how to run your life. How can I give you any advice at all on anything.

The truth is is I am ignorant and I know that I am ignorant. How can I answer anything you say if I don't even know it and I am not 100% sure of it?

I can try to make guesses based upon data I do know though when you ask if I know anything the answer is is no I do not and it is logically impossible for me to know anything with absolute certainty.

Check out these verses from the bible. What do these verses mean exactly? By these verses are we not supposed to even worry about the future at all? Are we supposed to totally depend upon ourselves for subsistence or on God based upon these verses? Matthew 6:1-40 (King James Version)

This is the major problem I am having and this is why I need major, major help.
Matthew 6
1Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
2Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
3But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:
4That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
5And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
6But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
7But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
8Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
9After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
10Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
11Give us this day our daily bread.
12And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
13And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
14For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
15But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
16Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
17But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face;
18That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.
19Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
20But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
21For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
22The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
23But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!
24No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
25Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?
26Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?
27Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?
28And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:
29And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
30Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?
31Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?
32(For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.
33But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
34Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.
Here is what I was trying to say with quarks and planning the future. This is Phil's website. Here is a paragraph from his website on his description of Aspergers:"The features of AS include an excellent rote memory, the ability to absorb facts easily, a generally high standard of maths and science, a general inability to cope with criticism or imperfection, a target of teasing in the school environment causing withdrawal into isolated activities, an unusual gait or stance with a tendency to be clumsy, a presentation that is often seen as odd or eccentric, an appearance of good language skills but limited content, poor social understanding, a louder than normal voice with a tendency to be hyper verbal, a tendency to live in a fantasy world, a tendency to be disorganised, obstinate, callous, vindictive or insensitive, a tendency towards obsessional questioning, a tendency to be restless, repetitive or a strong sense of perseverance, and may have fads or obsessions." This is my problem right here when I talk a lot of the times to someone: an appearance of good language skills but limited content. This is why I explained it the way I did. I know what I want to say but I didn't know the words to say it. I will try right now though. The problem I have is not an intellectual problem but a social problem. Because of this lack of what Phil calls a social instinct my intelligence went in a different direction. There are glaring gaps in my knowledge of the social fabric of American Society. I can learn facts, history, science, grammar, math, and more vocabulary words but there are things I cannot learn at all or if I can learn them it will come accross as odd. It's almost like learning a foreign language and still having your native accent. For example a person from Jamaica learns how to speak english but we would know he was from the carribean area. This means I only know some of the moves I can make within this social fabric. So, on a lot of things I don't even know what to do and how to do it. In fact, there maybe things I don't even know that I can do and I am supposed to do. This happens to me all the time. Here are more of my issues:
1. I've been told to expect the unexpected. How do I do that? 2. How do I find out what moves I am allowed to make and not make in American society? For example , the banking system. How exactly do I use the banking system to save money over time? How do I know which bank would be best for me and how do I know what kind of account is best for me? Where exactly do I start to get a tutorial on this?
Another example, the stock market, how exactly do I use and play the stock market. What do the terms Dow and Nasdaq actually mean? Where exactly do I start to get a tutorial on this?
Another example, buying a house. How exactly do I do this? What is the procedure for this? When looking over a property what exactly do I look for to know if a property is a good deal or not or if it is in good or bad shape?
Another example, buying a car we went to the dealership and I learned nothing. I don't understand the procedure my you all did and I don't understand the procedure because I didn't see the process as a whole. I only saw the process from one end which is my parent's end. I didn't see the process from the dealer's end.
This goes for the bank and the house also.
This means there are glaring details missing and I need those details to complete the whole.
In a way, it's similar to the way I described to "opposite side" problem to you. Dr. Helen Smith, here is what happened. My fiance told me to put the pot of water she had on the front right burner on the opposite side. I couldn't tell from this lack of information so I didn't know what to do. Here is how I perceived it. There are four eyes on the stove. I perceived the top in a two dimensional way which had four quadrants. The back, right eye was in quadrant 1. The back,left eye was in quadrant 2. The front, left eye was in quadrant 3. The front, right eye was in quadrant 4. In this case there are multiple meanings to the word opposite. The left is the opposite of the right and the back is the opposite of the front. How do I determine what the correct one is supposed to be?
This happens alot in everyday conversations For instance, here is an example. My fiance or someone will tell me a story but without giving the facts and details behind it.
Here is an example of a sentence that an NT will say. "My friend argued with my other friend at the club." There are things missing from this: 1. Who is friend #1 2. Who is friend #2 3. Where is the club? 4. What kind of club is it?
After this, saying the above sentence they will go straight to the plot.
They don't give me the exact characters and setting.
This is the opposite side problem. I logically understand the cube but it's hard to envision the cube without seeing all sides at the same time. I had major problems in geometry with this especially when it was in printed text. I am much better at this though as I have become older.
This is the problem I'm having with living in society at all. This compares to the cube problem. The problem is is if I don't see or experience the opposite side of a cube It's hard to envision it. Since I have seen it and experienced it I know understand and can envision the cube.
This is the problem with my living in society. I don't have the details to be able to construct the whole. Certain allowable moves, facts ,rules, and details are missing.
In fact, this goes for even leaving a tip at a restaurant. Right now it's 20%, but how do I know when this amount will change?
In fact when I was a teenager I was just told I was supposed to leave $4-$5. Apparently this changed. How do I know when this rule changed. I have problems interperting language in general. Two cars leave Memphis from exactly the same spot at exactly the same time, one traveling north at an average speed of 70 mph and the other traveling south at an average speed of 65 mph. Approximately how long does it take before the cars are 270 miles apart? A. 1 hour 18 minutes
B. 1 hour 28 minutes
C. 1 hour 38 minutes
D. 1 hour 48 minutes
E. 2 hours I don't understand the language of this problem. Here is how I can interpret this? a. 270 miles each from the starting point which is memphis
b. 270 miles from each other Here is another way I could also interpret it and that is before each car hits 270 either both from memphis or from each other.
In essence from my point of view, this is vague languageDr. Helen Smith, I love numbers alot. In fact, I am on my way to prove that you can divide x/0 where x is not equal to 0. I've been told I cannot live my life by numbers. What does that mean? How else do you live life besides by numbers? Dr. Smith, check this out. Do you know that multiplication is fast addition? Let's say you have 3 X 2. This says that you take 2 and add it to itself 3 times which gets you 2+2+2=6. But wait, it really is saying this, 0+2+2+2=6. The 0 is just implied to be there. This is why it works from both ends when 5 X 0 = 0. It says this broken down, 0+0+0+0+0. We can't forget the implied 0+(0+0+0+0+0). This means if we tried to add 5 together 0 times then we have the automatically implied 0 so it works from both angles.

Here are more questions:

2:55 PM, February 23, 2009  
Blogger Jack Steiner said...

There are people who acted responsibly and found themselves in trouble. Some of them went out and purchased homes that they could afford and got into trouble because they were laid off or had some sort of unexpected illness.

Not everyone out there is a victim of their own stupidity.

3:00 PM, February 23, 2009  
Blogger Dave Cornutt said...

Yeah, if you get laid off or ill, it's the end of the world. You'll never be able to make another dime ever again. For the laid-off, there is such a thing as finding another job. And what the heck is an "unexpected" illness? Is there such as thing as an expected illness? "Next year, I plan to have cancer." Someone who gets ill and immediately has no resources, not even to carry them for a short time, isn't as responsible as they make themselves out to be. Allowing for contingencies is something people rarely do anymore. Everyone proceeds on the assumption that it'll be sunny and mild, every day, and if it ever isn't, they'll get a lawyer and sue God.

4:48 PM, February 23, 2009  
Blogger Joe said...

most of those homeowners were suckered in by lenders who convinced them that house values would rise and that would work in their favor

I've yet to hear a sob story where the homeowner didn't know they got a killer deal AND WERE PROUD OF IT. They bragged about it. Many spoke as though they "stuck it to the man"--that they had bamboozled the system.

NPR had a report on a protest the other day and one of the men there had purchased a $450,000 house with a $40,000 income. Another couple were whining about how they had "scrimped and saved" to buy a house beyond their means by any normal measure and only later admitted they paid nothing down. It was beyond arrogant.

Moreover, has it occurred to these idiots that the system is working as designed? Bankruptcy and repossession are ways to get you out of these messes. Yes, your credit rating is rightly ruined, but you don't have the debt burden hanging over you for the rest of your life (and are alive!)

The government has been increasingly distorting all financial markets, including the housing market, for decades. They have arguably done more harm in the last year than ever before. Unfortunately, they are now distorting the legal market. The repercussions of this are astounding.

4:56 PM, February 23, 2009  
Blogger Jack Steiner said...

Someone who gets ill and immediately has no resources, not even to carry them for a short time, isn't as responsible as they make themselves out to be.

That is not necessarily true either. My first job paid just enough for me to pay basic bills, rent, food, power/water and gas.

If I was careful I was able to put away a small amount each month. But it wasn't a ton. I saved a little for more than a year. A bunch of us were laid off and bam, I had to rely on my savings.

I had enough to live on for six weeks. I found a job in four, but what would have happened if it had taken eight or ten.

I wasn't irresponsible. I didn't live beyond my means. I saved as best I could.

And I know a bunch of other people with similar stories. No one asked to be bailed out or cried woe is me. But the reality is that some people get stuck and it is unreasonable to paint everyone with generalizations.

We have a social and moral obligation to help people. It is not about a handout, but a hand up.

1:22 AM, February 24, 2009  
Blogger uncle ken said...

"We have a social and moral obligation to help people. It is not about a handout, but a hand up."

Charity is laudable. It is also voluntary.

When the state transfers wealth by force (try not paying your taxes and see who comes to the door) to those who are losing their unaffordable homes because of ignorance, banker's greed and/or political expedience, they steal your life (hours of labor) and give it to others. Such taxation is a form of slavery.

6:25 AM, February 24, 2009  
Blogger Unknown said...

I've had a credit score of 800+ for years, have never missed a bill, and have never had a mortgage that I couldn't afford.

The more government "help" that goes to the subprime mooches, the more I feel like a complete fool. If this government rewarding of irresponsibility and treating adults like wards of the state continues, I might just walk away from it all. It's hardly rational to be a responsible citizen when it's bad behavior that gets rewarded.

Atlas shrugged. I may join him.

7:39 AM, February 24, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Personal responsibility", blah-blah-blah ! It's just a bullshit phrase used by rightwing lunatics to sell the country out. Besides, if they really believed in "personal responsibility", they wouldn't be over-nurturing big corporations "legally" deemed as "persons". And the same idiots who complain about moochers are no less moochers themselves or they wouldn't even be posting on this site. With such a DYSFUNCTIONAL Main Street, it's no wonder Wall $treet's laughing their ways to the banks.

1:44 PM, February 25, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Frederick Johnson, truly, you are an idiot. You possess one of the largest
reserves of dumb ass I have yet to encounter. I believe you will find a gold membership awaiting you at Daily Kos or Huffington Post. Just venture over and be welcomed with open arms, as one who has come to a right of center blog and "showed 'em".

5:36 AM, February 27, 2009  
Blogger uncle ken said...

Well think about what Frederick J said:

If personal responsibility is just a bs phrase what does FJ advocate - must be personal irresponsibility. "Impersonal responsibility" is a vacant phrase; academic masturbation - like waxing a rental car. Impersonal responsibility gives us potholed roads, Amtrak and dirty, dangerous public toilets.

All corporations are legally deemed as persons. Without corporations you would not have any investment, as corporations limit risk.

Capitalism did not cause our current woes, corruption did. Until the lying borrowers, corrupt lenders and politicians on the take are all tried and punished, we will not see any more private investment here.

And since that money, from individuals, corporations and sovereign funds, comprises 2/3 of all credit extant we are going to remain in this tailspin. The banks cannot bail us out.

Prepare for 10 to 12 years of bad road.

8:13 AM, February 27, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

LOL !! Just as I suspected ! You righties just "love" corporate socialism even as you rail against socialism. Come to think of it, you looney tunes on the right will be just as fun to listen to on the far right as the Obamabots ! And all this as both the Democrats and Republicans finishing flushing this country down the toilet and selling it to China ! Yeah, maybe I'll be on my way to Europe as you losers become China's new slave members ! LOL ! COUGH ! COUGH ! LOL !

7:29 PM, February 28, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home