Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Maybe such is just an idiosyncrasy of human nature, but have you ever noticed that when asked to describe one’s personal traits and demeanor, people often seem to describe themselves differently than how they are appear to everyone else that knows them? That is, folks typically seem to see themselves differently than how they are viewed by the rest of us? Of course it could be that the viewer doesn’t really know the speaker/describer as well as they had thought. But I think the issue is more that we describe ourselves as how we would like to be seen by the world, regardless of any warped perceptions, be it a subconscious defense mechanism or whatever.
Also, have you noticed how often people say they are going to do one thing and then, regardless of intentions, set out to bring about an end that is diametrically opposed to their stated goal? For example, say, when a politician gets elected on a stated goal of trying to end partisan fighting/bickering/squabbling between the political parties (regardless of the actual feasibility of the stated goal), and then nearly immediately that politician personally champions legislation on a subject that has a recent and well-known history of being one of the most partisan issues of our times. I mean, to introduce such a polarized and partisan subject to the divided and polarized leadership of our nation and expect the leadership to come to an agreement is nearly ….. well, anyway…. Let’s just say, maybe such a political pursuit as to push for an agreement on an extremely polarized subject surely could bring about no realistic end other than to incite more partisanship and fighting between the polarized leadership and political powers – especially when discontent runs rampant everywhere.
Is this where the idiosyncrasies of human nature create the absurdities of the bureaucratic government? Or vice versa? Or..., maybe something totally different? Is the championing of a polarized political subject while trying to achieve unity in government an example of hoping for hypothetical ‘result A’ while in reality doomed to only achieving the unwanted 'result B'? Or is the whole thing and goals some form of an oxymoron? Maybe merely a smoke-screen to cover for something else? I suppose one can only surmise from the vantage point of a typical citizen.
Adam Trotter / AVT
I’m reporting from March 16th, 2010. Southern California, West Coast, USA.
2300 Hours, Pacific Standard Time / Pacific Time (GMT – 7:00, Daylight Savings Time).
WHEN AND WHERE ARE YOU? Let us know, if you would be so kind.
Adam Trotter / AVT
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Hey elected U.S. officials and national leaders, now that’s its been forty years or so that you have made allowances for our industries to move off-shore, before its too late, maybe you could revisit this matter and have our industries bring our jobs back!??!! Union leaders, you know, it wouldn’t hurt you to assist with this request as well! Maybe its time you mature beyond your self-centered and egotistical paradigms of the last fifty years and look to act for the benefit of the nation. No more free U.S. government insurance/support for operating overseas! I ask: Are you determined to see our nation become another of the many bygone superpowers with nothing for citizenry other than the ‘haves and have nots’ like the rest of the world?
Now that you ‘leaders’ have allowed our penny-hungry corporate-types to teach our core competencies of manufacturing to countries whose governments have never seemed to like us much to begin with, maybe you should entice those firms to bring their operations back here. Obviously those U.S. corporations would prefer to operate off-shore where they can pollute as much as they want, pay their workers slave wages, and not worry for a moment about any rights of their off-shore employees. [For instance, I seriously doubt that one would see many disabled employees working in any off-shore factory of an American corporation. Hardly. Injured on the job? They likely throw injured and therefore under-performing overseas workers out onto the street.]
To put it in other terms that you ‘leaders’ may better understand: If all our industries [and jobs] are off-shore, when you find a larger or more profitable war to fight, you may someday need a domestic manufacturing base in addition to merely needing a destitute populace to send to fight that future war. Do you remember back in the day when the U.S government would not buy foreign made products to put on the aircraft carriers? Do you remember when the products for the Army had to be American made? I do. What percentages of products on the warships are foreign made today? Bring our jobs back before it’s too late!! Please?
Adam Trotter / AVT
PS. Digression: In addition to giving away much of our competitive advantages in manufacturing, you ‘leaders’ seemed to enable other nations to steal all the defense-related national secrets they chose to steal. In general, you ‘leaders’ don’t seem to be very good judges of character – as evidenced by supporting the emigration of our jobs! In particular, concerning the safeguarding of national secrets, poor judgment often seems a rampant plague to the ‘leadership’ at the Department of Energy and the CIA. Not surprisingly, the level of poor judgment in any given Federal agency seems to be inversely proportional to the amount of access given to the people to review the actions of that poorly-managed agency.
Friday, March 5, 2010
As one that often blogs about wrongs in our society and dysfunction in our governments, don’t think I haven’t noticed the large numbers of announcements of impending retirements among the ranks of our most influential national leaders – young and old alike. Having been ‘around the government block’ to some extent, I am well versed towards accessing any real and under-lying situation, or at least determining the likely circumstances behind official statements and press releases. As such: To whomever may have likely ‘inspired’ those announced, impending, and no doubt ‘well-deserved’ retirements, I’m fairly confident the nation owes you a debt of gratitude – if not more.
Thanks again to any unnamed and unknown individuals who may stand for ethics and Law over political party lines – should you be out there.
Adam Trotter / AVT
Afterthought (3/6/2010): Of course I could be wrong and all the concurrent and planned retirements by government officials could be a result of these elected officials becoming disgusted with the realities of the current political system and landscape. Then again, for any number of reasons, such an agreement of disenfranchisement is not very likely, because it’s unlikely that even this number of nationally elected officials could agree to agree on anything.
There are several possible reasons why the power-elite structure of the nation seems to have such little regard for an educated work-force and populace. One possibility is the widely known paradigm that an educated populace is more likely to revolt against any repression by its government – just ask the Shah of Iran. A similarly paranoid paradigm alludes to the necessity of a vibrant middle-class section of the populace for success of any revolutionary endeavors. However, a more likely reason for the economically dim-witted, short-sighted, and unadvertised support for an uneducated populace by the nation’s power structure is that the U.S. nation’s power structure seems to like to operate on some sort of a post-World War II mentality. By that I mean, the power elite seems to prefer to have an uneducated populace because it would then be easier to gather up people to send them off to fight the wars determined to be beneficial to the elite and beneficial to the corporations of the war machine – even though people aren’t really even needed to fight our wars anymore. If you should doubt my words in this regard, one only needs to look to the military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. In those conflicts it is reported/believed that the U.S. Federal government spends in excess of one billion dollars per day in each of those theaters of conflicts ($1,000,000,000 x 2 wars / day, which also seems to include the rebuilding of many schools in those nations, btw). What type of education system might we have if the government was to infuse such amounts of additional monies into the education systems of our nation?
In their defense, however, those that seem to prefer to limit the access to higher education likely may say something to the extent that such limited access to education helps to separate the ‘chiefs’ from the ‘worker indians.’ They would also likely complain about waste in school systems and the likely dysfunctional and self-fulfilling educator’s unions that help to enable any waste and misdirection of funds.
Adam Trotter / AVT
Thursday, March 4, 2010
While you had a super majority in power, maybe you could have established a more significant or a higher number of jobs bills. Even your adversaries would have been forced to respect such acts and ultimately would be forced to support such acts as well. Also, higher employment numbers would have greatly increased support for the larger ‘fish’ you desire to ‘fry.’ Helping more to be employed would have provided an easy victory and increased your momentum for the larger ‘fish fry.’ Also, if more people had jobs and cash in the bank (or preferably in a cookie jar), not as many would vehemently fear the required changes to invoke universal healthcare insurance coverage. Of course, hindsight is 20 – 20 vision. But, I’m just saying a slight alteration of course would have benefited all, no doubt.
Adam Trotter / AVT
PS. Nevertheless, I am available for consulting on a contract basis, btw. I’m not suspect to the typical paradigms which appear to afflict so many in your field. Hiring me would be worth every penny – if I were to even require any pay.
The ruckus over the seemingly insurmountable budget shortfall for the upcoming fiscal year for the City of Los Angeles looks to be somewhat unjustified in my opinion, a statement which I base upon the 2009 - 2010 Budget Summary from the Mayor’s Office. A reported two-hundred million dollars ($200,000,000) deficit for the upcoming fiscal year seems like a ‘no-brainer’ as to how to fairly distribute such a shortfall – especially in light of six or seven billion dollars of approximate city revenues ($7,000,000,000) and despite the absurdity of the amounts in which we speak.
Anyway, not to demean the issue, but a solution doesn’t really seem all that difficult to see – again, in my opinion. To begin with, where did the one and a half billion dollars ($1,500.000.000 - or bond) come from for the recent and on-going upgrades to the LAX Airport?
Adam Trotter / AVT
PS. For your information, I am available for consulting on a contract basis, btw. I’m not suspect to the typical paradigms which appear to afflict so many in your field. Hiring me would be worth every penny – if I were to even require any pay.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
March 3rd, 2010
Blog my vision, Dr.? Try to see the light? Then build the team, incorporate, and set-out, you say? Which way and which blog? All of them? :)
Are you out there and receiving? [Jolly] Roger?
AVT / Adam T.