Money As A Measure of Individual Value

Money is a great development to humanity.

Humanity by nature is extremely judgmental and money at least is not personal. Utilizing money and wealth as a criteria for human judgement eliminates prejudices based on skin color, religion, geography, gender and this is a great thing. In our modern world, money trumps all else in terms of valuing people's worth and is a wonderful comparative tool such that we can individually get a sense of our worth and our placement in society.

Where this personal valuation has gone awry however is in terms of the origin of one's individual wealth. The mere possession of money has come to supersede the means of accumulating it. In our modern world any single person can accumulate wealth with no regard to the impact one makes on other individuals or society. The worst aspect of our current system though, is that one can accumulate wealth at the expense of others.

In my eyes, accumulation of wealth at the expense of others is not wealth that should be judged as valuable or honorable. I suggest, that wealth that is accumulated without adding value to individuals or society should be shunned and per my initial point regarding human judgment, should actually be judged as negative.

The effect of this negative label would be to encourage individual wealth-building as a result of benefiting a wider group of persons. It would also serve to keep those who have amassed their fortunes in a less than savory manner from having personal influence or access to broader political, business or social institutions.

Unsavory then becomes the criteria for valuation at this stage. Unsavory needs to defined as wealth-accumulation that derives from 1) illegal actions, 2) curtailing production, 3) reducing societal economic conditions or 4) detracting from the human condition. Recent examples of each would be as follows: 1) Bernie Madoff's 25 years of fraud, 2) stock market speculation, 3) Wall Streets debt mortgage products and 4) pornography. This is just a quick list.

Let me state clearly that anyone is still free to amass as large a fortune as they may want.

Ethics though need to be re instituted into wealth-building such that the amount of money that one accumulates is proportionate to that contribution that is made throughout that process.

The Dilemma of Islam

The issue that we are facing with the Islamic religion is a major one.  Whether or not religious freedom can lead to a complete overhaul of the tenets that our nation was founded upon.

By allowing Muslims to enter our society we essentially run the risk that at some point in the future this group becomes powerful enough to usurp the fundamental nature of America.

For example in Britain, a recent poll was conducted within the Muslim community and 40% of the respondents indicated that they would like to see Sharia Law imposed.  Right now, that number does not constitute a large number of voters but it clearly articulates the point for the future and one that we in America have to consider.  Is it right to allow a group of people who are fundamentally opposed to the American way of life into the country?

The First Amendment of the Constitution offers religious freedom as a fundamental right of humanity.  However, if those claiming religious freedoms are not interpreting that doctrine in a manner consistent with freedom but rather pro ports a moral code and political direction that undermines the basic philosophy of individual freedom then should it be opposed?  I would say 100% absolutely.


The Constitution further suggests that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion..." though it does not go as far as separating church and state as many people believe  It is obvious that religious fundamentals are not universally shared but the basis of individual freedom is an ability to make independent decisions.  Any group or organization that disagrees with this view point should be resisted in their access to American institutions or their ability to construct their own.  Individuals would be able to worship as they choose but any attempt to organize to undermine principals of freedom and independence should be opposed.


It is not necessary to ban Muslims from moving to the USA but efforts should definitely be made to curtail them from gaining any type of influence.  For example, several steps can be taken at this point to curtail an emergent political movement that supports Sharia Law or strives to change the nature of America.


The first would be the banning of any Muslim from holding political office at any level.  Two, limiting of mobility within the nations borders upon entry.  Thirdly, the holding back of US citizenship until individuals have demonstrated an ability to appreciate the principals of the western world and finally the out right ban of Muslim schools.


Though these thoughts sound counter-intuitive to the basic fundamentals that the USA holds paramount, keep in mind that America has only ever had to deal with fundamental opposition to freedoms on this scale once before and that lead to a Civil War.  The goal is not to limit individual freedoms rather ensure that the thinking and principals that have allowed the world to thrive continue unabated by a religious/political movement at the institutional level.

Why Does Justice Take So Long?

The entirety of the judicial process needs to be shortened such that criminal activity is dealt with in a reasonable and effective manner.

The most important thing that has to happen is that the time lines associated with the process must be shortened.

No criminal trial should ever last more than a year from the time of the infraction. This is possible if the following tactics are implemented. One, lawyers on either side are compensated by determining the truth. Two, the police are given broader abilities to investigate crime and to collect evidence and three the judiciary simply works harder.

Conceptually, the idea of plausibility has to be eliminated.  The notion of reasonable doubt has clouded the legal system as defense lawyers create any myriad of arguments to create an image of innocence. They genuinely create artificial circumstances to cast doubt on the guilt of the accused with no bearing on the facts at all. This should be considered a highly unethical and a catastrophic abandonment of legal principal.

Also, the legal system seems more than willing to take into account mitigating circumstances. Why? If the crime is committed than punishment is warranted.  Though one can argue as to the compassionate nature of our society by considering the factors that might lead to violent crime they should not be admitted as they just cloud the issue at hand i.e. guilt or innocence and take up time.

The first step to changing the system is to have lawyers on both sides of the process paid by how well they arrive at the actual circumstances of the case.  The notion of guilt and innocence needs to go away.  The defense is obligated to provide evidence it collects and witness statements including those from the accused into the trial.  The defense should never be considered a process to create excuses for the action, twist the facts and in worse case even create lies.  The accused also needs to be required to take the stand in all trials.


Lady Justice is symbolic of being blind to the equitable nature of who is the accused rather than being blind to the truth itself.  The framers of the Constitution envisioned a system of judicial equality not one where the truth is incidental.

The Recognition Era - Part 2, What It Means "Top Ten" List conc.

This post is the continuation of a previous post on Friday, June 15, 2012.

---------------------------------------------------

Six.  Irresponsibility.  The world is very complex and it is pretty tough in today`s social, business, political arenas to assign blame to an individual.  Even in instances whereby direct blame is is obvious the subject can easily find excuses for poor performance.  Problem solving and putting out fires is a better skill these days than foresight.

Seven.  Apathy.  People care about what they consider important more than ever and not much else.  Further,as the need for recognition is paramount, effort will only be put towards areas whereby there can be acknowledgement.  Subsequently, if recognition cannot be attained then people won't care and will not put any effort at all towards areas in which there is no success.

Eight.  Triviality.  Recognition for its own sake does not require significance.  Therefore, people will attempt to succeed in areas that are niche and quite likely inconsequential.  Being acknowledged for being good at something trumps the importance of the activity as well as any type of moral contribution.  As recognition is the key driver, the means of acknowledgement is inconsequential therefore non-traditional socially acceptable means will become mainstream.  Crime, pornography, abhorrent behavior.

Nine.  Ease.  Very few people appear to want to work hard for anything these days.  Recognition and success have to come easy and early for anyone to pursue it.  No one wants to see the fruits of their labor materialize three years down the road.  Instant impact and rewards are what drives motivation in the twenty-first century so abandonment of difficult tasks will occur frequently.

Ten.  Individuality.  Recognition is greatest when it is a singular achievement.  More and more people will strive to be acknowledged for their own efforts rather than being part of a collaborative team. Within the team environment as well there is a need to be considerate and follow much more procedure which is the bane of individuality. As everyone feels that they know what is the best course of action for them, then teamwork will become the antithesis of the individually minded person.

All these things in total do not necessarily require negativity rather a willingness to be accommodating and an ability to manage in this new Recognition era.

The Recognition Era - What It Means "Top Ten" List

As the world becomes less focused on accomplishment and more on recognition here is what we can expect.  Here is a proverbial Top Ten list split into two postings.

Firstly, an overall decrease in quality of just about everything.  From clothes, to cars, to food you name it, it will get worse.  The exception of course will be at the high-end or luxury type items whereby those who can afford quality will be able to purchase it.  Everything will be built or grown to ultimately be disposable so quality will be a secondary goal.  Consumers expect their products now to be functional and design-oriented.  Durability is not something younger generations strive for as they are used to products being replaced regularly due to advancing technologies, evolving trends which has lead to an inherent obsolescence of goods and services.

Two.  Transiency.  There will be an increased growth in movement as people can simply leave one area or sector where they are not getting enough attention and search out greener pastures.  The easiest way to get recognition is to be the "new guy" as expectations are usually lower while attention is usually at its peak.  People will however, will still want to gravitate upwards in their careers so expect a lot more movement as candidates for internal promotion become less and less available.

Three.  Sound-bites.  The recognition era is of course driven by short attention spans and digital media.  Therefore, do not ever expect to have time to explain yourself fully.  Every message including personal conversation has to be delivered quickly.  The result will be that society and business more forward in a piece-meal fashion and requires leadership who can respond quickly and effectively but also mobilize those around them to respond as well.  Think of it as flash mob leadership.

Four.  Inconsistency.  Most people these days hold more of a go with the flow approach.  Just look at the political world to see that what the candidates said five years ago is no longer meaningful nor are they even individually accountable for it.  The world is changing very fast and new information surfaces constantly so what worked last week may no longer be even relevant.  Planning will become less influential when compared to the need for speedy reaction times.

Five.  Success.  Success will not be 100% measured in terms of pay and income.  Flexibility of working, unique processes and freedom of action will become paramount.  No one who thinks they are special want to do things the same way as everyone else.  Quick promotion and titles will be more important.  Expect the companies that get and retain the best people to be the ones with the least amount of management.  Plus, many younger people have access to their boomer parents wealth and know they are OK financially.

Numbers 6 through 10 will be available on Wednesday, June 20, 2012.

The Recognition Era: Accolades without Achievement

People today prioritize and strive for recognition over all else.

The days of actually earning recognition through accomplishment have been overtaken by a world whereby accolade is easier in a self-developed media environment and subsequently there has grown a culture of reward for nothing else other than doing.

Reality TV is the obvious outcome as people who have no significant skill or talent and certainly have not achieved anything are watched and on occasion celebrated for doing absolutely nothing.  This phenomenon extends from people going about their daily jobs like building motorcycles or catching fish to the full blown cult of celebrity whereby people who are otherwise normal gain a following for merely being followed by cameras (the Kardashian's for example).

Our society has created this from birth as we no longer embrace a spirit of accomplishment to gain recognition nor do we rely on competition to distinguish those who deserve accolades. Everyone today, who in the past would have been considered average receives acknowledgement.  At a recent university graduation, every graduating member of the class received Honours or Distinction status.  What is the point?

In sports, there is a Para-Olympic program that permits those with disabilities to perform on a world stage though quite often their achievements are microscopic when compared to the world’s best.  In fairness though, these folks work very hard to get where they are.  Even in team sports overall, a spirit of inclusion and equality of playing time quite often is paramount when compared to winning and losing so why even refer to it as sport?  Under these conditions it has become merely exercise.

YouTube has given every single person in the world the opportunity to be acknowledged for doing nothing more than holding a camera.  Sadly, the elements of YouTube that attracts the most attention are cat videos, people doing dumb things and Justin Bieber.  None of which adds anything to a broader society beyond a few brief seconds of distraction.

On an extremely more negative note, recognition has also become more important for the truly dysfunctional element of society.  These individuals now feel justified in undertaking quite spectacular atrocities so that they receive some type of acknowledgement as they know that they cannot be acknowledged within modern societal norms.

What needs to happen is that achievement and accolades have to become more attainable without the media being present and/or for merely fulfilling the mundane part of existence. 

People who deliver results and rise above difficult circumstances certainly warrant more from society than they currently receive.  People who contribute greatly to their local community deserve more pay.  People who rise above the norm deserve more acknowledgements for their contributions.  Those who truly have unique skills or achieve major accomplishments in athletics, business, entertainment, beauty can still attain disproportionate amounts of success due to their personal accomplishments.

The Presidency is Undemocratic

Obama or Romney.  It won't matter in the least.

Once again the lack of choice is testament to the undemocratic nature of the American political system.  On one hand you have a candidate who has failed miserably to inspire America and stem the downfall of the economic system and on the other hand you have a candidate who is an opportunist who has zero credibility in terms of leadership.  There really is no preferred choice.

The Presidency was designed to be a powerful leadership position for the entirety of the USA.  It was to be a position of intelligence, might, and most of all a defender of the Constitution and the multitude of freedoms that the USA was trying to establish in the world.  In our current era, the Presidency should be the number one defender of these same liberties.

The oath of office makes the Presidents role extremely clear.  


"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Over the years this oath has essentially been abandoned by the office of the President.  The Presidency has devolved into being merely a position for the top party representative.  This person ultimately is beholding and controlled by the parties themselves and the Constitution has been forsaken.  Therefore, the President does not represent America.

The democratic ideals and principals of the US have been completely usurped.