I find there is less and less common sense in the world, so when I find some, I collect it. Here's an example or two:
One columnist wrote this:
"... I would raise the voting age to 26.
If you're still covered by your parents' insurance policies, you're not an adult. The only exceptions to the rule would be young people serving in the military. I would also require those people who aren't old enough to collect Social Security to prove they pay income taxes. If there is a screwier notion than
allowing those who pay no income taxes to vote for those in a position to force those of us who do pay them to pay even more for the benefit of those who don't pay any, I don't want to hear about it. ... Finally, I would insist that anyone who wishes to cast a ballot prove he can read English by passing a basic civics exam. If you don't know who George Washington was and you have no idea what the Bill of Rights is, you have no God-given right to cancel out the vote of someone who does. I mean, for crying out loud, you have to pass a written test and prove you can parallel park to get a driver's license. In order to vote for our political leaders, shouldn't you have to prove anything beyond the fact that you're still alive and breathing -- or, in the case of Chicago elections, that you were ever alive and breathing?" --columnist Burt Prelutsky
I also liked this quote from Australia's Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, who is not as wishy washy, wimpy and politically "correct" as we in America often are. She said:
"I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.
'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom'
'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society. Learn the language!'
'Most Australians believe in God.
This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.'
'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.'
'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom,
'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.'
'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.' -Julia Gillard, Prime Minister of Australia
And lastly, from Oliver DeMille:
It is a truth universally acknowledged, that when a nation treats business badly, corporations with extra capital take it abroad and the home nation faces job losses and economic challenges.
Such nations experience widespread anxiety about their future, problems feel overwhelming, and the leaders seem unable—or unwilling—to find and implement effective solutions.
But the answers are actually quite clear, if only the people and their leaders have the courage to apply them.
When great nations struggling with debt, deficits, sluggish growth and high unemployment cultivate the most friendly global environment for business investment and economic growth, their economy booms and flourishes.
The current debate in Washington about debts, deficits, taxes, spending cuts and political parties is a lot like a Jane Austen novel.
There are attractive, well-spoken charmers who turn out to be villains, shockingly inappropriate self-promoters, and well-meaning individuals of influence whose personal flaws and arrogance cause problems around them—even as they are entertaining to the audience.
There are also regular, good people who stand to gain or lose a lot.
And, above all, there is the romance of important things happening, things which touch us on a level deeper than the intellect.
The most striking similarity, however, may be that the first paragraph of the story—and even the title—contain the whole answer.
Readers who carefully ponder the thoughts of the first paragraph of certain Austen novels get a preview and veritable overview of the whole plot to come.
In Pride and Prejudice, for example, the reader discovers in the first several sentences that the daughters of a modestly-situated family are in need of marrying well and that their prospects have just improved due to the proximity of a promising young man.
The plot is pretty much determined at this point.
The girl will get the boy, after some courtship, disappointments, major crisis, and so on.
And since we are told right off the bat that more than one girl needs to get a boy, we can be sure that at least some of them will succeed.
The title helps too: we can be fairly certain that the disappointments and crises will have something to do with pride, prejudice and misunderstandings, and that when these flaws are overcome the crises will be over and the story will find resolution.
The same is true of our current national narrative, which could be entitled Debts and Deficits.
Chapter II: A Rocket Science Conclusion
It really isn’t rocket science to conclude, even without going into detail, that deficits will be solved by spending less than we bring in, and that debt will be overcome either by not borrowing too much in the first place or by growing the economy to bring in surpluses that pay off the obligated amount.
Of course, it is in the details, dialogues, relationships and minutiae that the real fun is found.
Who will succeed?
Who will show their true colors?
Which characters will face reality and change?
How will the audience respond?
Still, whatever the particulars, the plot is generally known from the beginning.
Yes, it is within the realm of possibility that the whole thing could turn strangely off course.
The story could progress, develop and build toward crescendo only to suddenly go in some strange and totally unexpected direction, but only by refusing to overcome the debts and deficits.
These are what the story is about, after all, so dealing with them is vital—and eventually this is what will happen.
Americans want two things which seem to be in conflict with each other.
Chapter III: Greedy Americans
First, they want freedom, opportunity, prosperity, low taxes and non-intrusive government, and, second, they want a lot of government programs that provide significant benefits which they have become accustomed to enjoying—from roads and schools to trash collection, national defense, personal protection, prescription drug benefits, retirement checks, and much more.
At first glance, it seems impossible to simultaneously increase both.
Either government spending must go down or taxes must go up.
This is the crisis.
Darcy wants massive new programs that will require huge government spending increases, while Lizzie wants tax cuts and decreases in government red tape.
You can imagine the letters they would exchange on the subject.
As the disagreements escalate, both sides eventually resort to name calling: “inferior connections,” “lack of gentlemanly behavior,” “tax cuts for the rich,” “socialists,” “party of no,” “the President has no plan,” etc.
Still, the plot is basically set: overcome your pride or you won’t get what you want, realize that your prejudice has caused you to misread people and their real character, spend less than the nation takes in or see fiscal problems exponentially increase, become attractive to business investment and hiring or watch the economy and unemployment continue to sputter.
Mrs. Bennett’s behavior is shocking; no wonder Darcy feels pride in comparison.
The corporate tax rates in the United States are double those of our top competitors; no wonder jobs are scarce in the United States.
Sometimes the context tells the whole story.
David Cote said on Meet the Press:
“Right now the problem we’ve got is uncertainty of demand. Businesses don’t add until they’re sure that somebody is going to want to actually buy something. To that we’ve added uncertainty of regulation, and when you combine those two it just causes businesses to say, ‘I’m going to wait a little bit.’ And I always find it interesting when I hear government say, ‘We need to create jobs…’ Actually, government doesn’t create jobs. Government can create an environment where jobs can be created, and I think it’s important to start to distinguish between the two.”
Ohio Governor John Kasich added, in the same conversation:
“In my state, where we faced an $8 billion deficit, we wiped it out and eliminated it, and here’s the interesting thing: we have just been taken off of negative watch [credit rating]. In the middle of this we also have jumped—according to CNBC—11 places in terms of business friendly [states]. We’ve been able to cut taxes, improve and reform government, and you know why? We looked it square in the eye because Ohio was dying, and we are beginning to really become business friendly. That is what they’re not doing here in D.C. right now.”
Ohio faced a massive deficit, and overcame it by becoming business friendly, by attracting business growth.
As a result, they were able to cut taxes and drastically improve their economy.
But Washington has yet to make such changes.
As Senator Marco Rubio said on Face the Nation,
“If you talk to job creators, not politicians, not presidents, they will tell you…they’re looking for some regulatory reform….because they think these regulations that are being imposed make America a more unfriendly place to do business. When people tell you, ‘communist China is a better place to do business than America,’ you know you’re in trouble.” ... (There's more: )
http://oliverdemille.com/2011/08/debts-deficits-jane-austen-story/
