I don't know if it helps, but I've been actively writing politicos of all sorts to suggest that we could use a simple plan for living, and that their best bet for election is to create one. Everybody seems to be willing to criticize, but nobody has a plan to remedy matters. My suggestion is the same for politicians as it is for confused patients. State clear, simply defined goals, that are attainable through a series of simple intermediate steps.

We do have Sara Brady, Diane Feinstein and a few others, like Hillary Clinton, who seem interested in altering our government to a socialist basis. But that's going to create chaos if they try. Socialism works well only in a very few cases, and then only if free exchange incentives are maintained.

My vote would be for the guy who proposes a realistic way to get steady de-escalation from war status, and also has ideas about salvaging the Social Security fund, providing basic medical and shelter care for seniors and the disabled, and who will stop over-reaction and persecution of people who cross the borders without formal documentation in order to obtain employment. And if that's all the new Pres were to do, that would be just fine. In the Tao Teh Ching, Lao Tse told us, the government that does the least that interferes with the people is the best.

As for the "Florida Factor", nearly universal adoption of easily hacked (by actual test) electronic voting machines may have made the last election to be the last semi-democratic election in this country. Future elections using the electronic machines will surely be compromised, so that we will be fortunate to get any kind of valid representation.

This is a heck of a mess to leave my grandchildren.
d

Of course we can rely on God (or Buddha or Krishna or ...) to make it all happen. That's the underlying theory behind Hinayana, and probably most Christianity, at least as practiced.

The old Yugoslavian Worker's Council format was about as good as a socialist system can get. The central planners set out expectations and goals, but the industries competed, and enjoyed direct profit sharing amongst the workers.

Communism was a wonderful idea, but hopelessly idealistic. I think that a few sports teams and maybe an occasional family might be able to share without corruption, but in general the communist system only worked at the level of the citizen and the bottom line dedicated block worker. For the rest it was an excuse to do less and get more. Sounds a bit like home, huh?

I feel that central planning would be good for basic health care clinics, senior and disabled housing, education and the various quasi-monopolies like the garbage collectors, phone services, electric power companies, and community services. I see no reason to replace the present entrepeneurial system, but some of these areas are poorly served  by the profit motive, as the greatest need is usually by those who can pay the least. Unfortunately, I don't feel that our leaders are able to lead into this area competently.

My solution for better government is for the candidates to lay out a strategy, describe the desired end conditions to be obtained, and to specify a series of simple, easily attainable steps by which to reach the goal. What I actually see is that advertising and public opinion companies are prodding these people, telling them what to say and do, and the business of state is losing ground to the cult of the ego. There are no goals except popularity, no objectives except profit and power, and no obligation to either morality, or even their oath of office.

This looks to me like the end of the world of the Gods and an impending fall into the Hell realms for this nation. By contrast, my interpretation of the international scene looks as if the European commonwealth is solidly in the Human world, plugging away at practical issues, and very much involved with the needs and values of the common person.  I'd place China in the transitional phase between Titans and Pretas, and unfortunately, headed toward Preta Loka.
 
One of my degrees is in sociology, so I guess I'm entitled to a half-baked opinion.

d

Hey there,

@Mactek

Problems cannot be solved by saying "it is none of your business", I always thought there was something called freedom of speech, so it does mean that someone is allowed to present his/her opinion on a topic, even if there are some miles between the countries.
I have to strongly disagree with you in that point, that it is not our problem when it comes to the political situation in the US (Iraq, etc., don't you think, even if I am from Europe, that it is after all interesting for me what comes next, as it is not a personal issue of the US, it became international.... )
If it comes to a point when the US government claims the right to be a force above NATO and UN (I think you know how the political contracts, that are made between the states that are part of them, work) it is as well my problem as it is yours, but not because I like to mock on your government or the USA, only because Mr. B was "smart" enough to make it a worldwide issue. Or haven't you spent a thought on the fact, that 9/11 could also happen in EVERY western country, as fundamentalists make no difference between the US and Europe, for them they are from the west an it is all that matters (think of what happened in London, and you might have heard of bombs on german trains, that, thank god, have not worked). If a government (I use the term government as I am convinced that not every one is as fanatic as Mr. Bush, seems you folks are also fed up and are sure, that he was no real help for the USA) tends to play world police (don't misunderstand me in this point, I am not referring to WW1 and 2, where your troops helped to beat down the german army ), just to have influence in every part of the earth, it is nothing that I can accept, as it is not only your country that is endangered by such kamikaze politics, it is a danger to what in Bushs terms would be the "free world". It is like playing russian roulette, let's see who is getting hit by the bullet.
And I am sure that I do not have to tell you that Iraq is your second Vietnam, and that if you start war against one of the islamic countries, that it can happen (maybe it has just begun) that you have all of them against you. Sad that some have not realized that it is not the people there, that are dangerous, but their governments. But now I want to ask you "Is it the matter of the US how the political situation in islamic countries works? Have the islamic countries interfered in your war for independece, or any american civil war? I guess not. So my point of view is, that the people down there are able to break their chains on their own, without western help. You see, Bush may have killed a dictator, but it was just pouring oil on a fire.
Seems like they did not want any help, or would they be upset if it was the other way around. When it came to Mohammad-caricatures, they were standing one for all and all for one.
There is one thing I still do not understand, you may help me on this one, why can some people in the USA consider, that only their pov on democracy is the right one? Is it necessary to start wars, that are sold as "crusades against the evil", to bring their idea of democracy across the world (is war for freedom a good sold on the global market, or a issue of globalization?)? Is it necessary to do it in the name of god, striking argument, when you remind yourself, that it is the same creed that islamic fundamentalists have.
So it is not my problem? I only say: o rly? I guess, if WE (the western world) do not handle it with care, it won't take long to have WW3, and it is not only the USA that is to blame, maybe also we across the pond, who have not tried hard enough to stop this.


The integration issue is really a striking point to worry about, but not because our governments tend to refuse integration (it sounds like if it was racism after all...) , it is the "hottest" political issue, and parties work their butts off to find a solution.
Integration has also two sides, it doesn't help if we just offer people to be integrated (to speak from a german pov, there are things like the opportunity to learn the language, what I consider to be the first part, when the communication works, the acceptance also grows, and it is so much easier to get along with each other, I think if I would go to the states not being able to talk english, I would also be refused). But it is a problem when people want to start a new life in a country and stick only to their origin and culture (they shall not fully convert to our cultural understandings, or convert to our religion..etc.) and only stick to their relatives and people with the same origin, who also left their country behind to start a new life, where shall we start integration? It is, after all, a two sided thing, if I accept and respect people that come to my country and want to start a new life, it is the least thing to take the given integration opportunities (I would do the same thing if I was interested in moving to another country). I know a lot of people (at my age), whose parents came to germany to widen the possibilities for their children, most of them are muslims, and are well integrated, and it works, they have done their part by taking the possibilities that were offered, and have gone places.

If it still does not work this way, there is a way to find solutions then. I am not worried about immigration, and do not see people with a different origin as dangerous (I keep saying this over and over again...I am not a racist as well as the majority of the germans, who are also not racists, get it right, Hitler has not been reanimated!), I also like multiculturalism, and if the two sides come closer, one can learn from another. Maybe a strange thought, but I guess that in the future there will be multicultural societies around the globe.
There is of course also an organization called Central Council of Muslims (in Germany), as sort of a voice for their problems, but I also have to add, that this organization regrets that some of the muslim communities refuse their help and refuse to be integrated. One last thing about this one, the pilots of 9/11 went to university in germany......and there comes the danger, if there are communities that refuse integration, it is a perfect place for hate preachers and raising suicide bombers/pilots

@ dave

Seems like we have similar povs on politics, as what you said, is part of the political charta of the party I voted for (social democrats)

Think global, act local!

Today I stay with a yours sincerely,

pulsar

Hi all My dad had not got anytime for politicians,he always said that "It does not matter who gets voted in,they all take you down the road and rob you.

Love and God bless Love juditha

Vajra,

I'm assuming that because you've been on this board for a while that you are familiar with TMI (of course) and probably Frank DeMarco? Here's a link to his website that will give you another perspective on this:

The Challenge of Our Times

http://frankdemarco.wordpress.com/2007/08/27/tgu-session-02-09-02-in-the-black-b...

Rob

vajra,

What is more troubling is all the unwarranted New Age excitement about 2012 as a pivotal period for human consciousness.  I note with amusement attempts to anticipate the inevitable decisive discrediting of New Age apocalypticism.  People opine that the change is already happening, if imperceptibly, and that the coming change may be slight, even unnoticeable.  Such waffling is just another specious attempt to make an absurd New Age claim unfalsifiable in principle and hence epistemologically meaningless.  In fact, for example, the Golden Age of channeling occurred in the early 1900s, not the present.

Jesus taught that the kingdom of God "does not come with observable signs, nor will people be able to say, 'Look, here it is!' or `There it is!'.  For the kingdom of God is already in your midst (Luke 17:21)."  As for apocalyptic date setting, Jesus admits that even He has no idea when He may come again (Mark 13:32) and He sternly warns that "it is not for you to note the times or dates the Father has established by His own authority (Acts 1:7)."  But New Agers like to generalize from the lowest common denominator.  This ploy is of course the essence of bigotry.  

The low vibration of this site never ceases to amaze me, especially the latest hateful assault sparked by Matthew, against one of the greatest saints who ever lived, Mother Teresa.  I will respond to that nonsense as well and use it as a platform to discuss New Age misconceptions about the nature of higher consciousness.  

Don

Vajra,

I had done a search on Frank's site and thought I had found the link. I guided mistake, I think.

A repeated search yielded better results. I found where I originally read The Challenge of Our Times on the website of Matthew Joyce (another TMI alum):

http://blaze.higherselfguides.com/?p=58

A short Bio of Frank is here:

http://www.themetaarts.com/pages/frankdemarco.html

Rob