Saturday, December 5, 2015

When we trade our freedom for a promised security, we also lose our morality ~M.O.M

Frederic Bastiat complimented our Country when he wrote "The Law." He might be a little disappointed how things have changed since 1850:
“ . . . look at the United States. There is no country in the world where the law is kept more within its proper domain: the protection of every person’s liberty and property. As a consequence of this, there appears to be no country in the world where the social order rests on a firmer foundation.

The Path to Dignity and Progress
Law is Justice. And it is under the law of justice—under the reign of right; under the influence of liberty, safety, stability, and responsibility—that every person will attain his real worth and the true dignity of his being. It is only under this law of justice that mankind will achieve slowly, no doubt, but certainly—God’s
design for the orderly and peaceful progress of humanity. It seems to me that this is theoretically right, for whatever the question under discussion—whether religious, philosophical, political, or economic; whether it concerns prosperity, morality, equality, right, justice, progress, responsibility, cooperation,
property, labor, trade, capital, wages, taxes, population, finance, or government—at whatever point on the scientific horizon I begin my researches, I invariably reach this one conclusion: The solution to the problems of human relationships is to be found in liberty.

Proof of an Idea
And does not experience prove this? Look at the entire world. Which countries contain the most peaceful, the most moral, and the happiest people? Those people are found in the countries where the law least interferes with private affairs; where government is least felt; where the individual has the
greatest scope, and free opinion the greatest influence; where administrative powers are fewest and simplest; where taxes are lightest and most nearly equal, and popular discontent the least excited and the least justifiable; where individuals and groups most actively assume their responsibilities, and, consequently, where the morals of admittedly imperfect human beings are constantly improving; where trade, assemblies, and associations are the least restricted; where labor, capital, and populations suffer the fewest forced displacements; where mankind most nearly follows its own natural inclinations; where the inventions of men are most nearly in harmony with the laws of God; in short, the happiest, most moral, and most peaceful people are those who most nearly follow this principle: Although mankind is not perfect, still, all hope rests upon the free and voluntary actions of persons within the limits of right; law or force is to be used for NOTHING except the administration of universal justice."

Monday, November 16, 2015

Questions for Presidential Candidates

  1. If you were to give US advice in 5 words or less, what would you suggest would be the most important efforts we could make as citizens to unite and improve our Nation.
  2. -3% of the people control 97% of the money
    -60% of US try to live on $3,000 per month or less (considered poverty level)
    -Some estimates say it would take $5,000 per month to replace what some people receive from entitlement programs
    -30% of the gross national deficit is allocated to entitlement programs
    -70% of the funds collected by the government to help the poor never make into the hands of the intended recipients
    What is your proposal to improve the situation?
  3. Every single one of US has a life-sustaining relationship with at least one or more of the following: our doctors, teachers and/or clergymen. 87% of US express a belief in God. Currently only 24% of US vote. I used to have anger issues towards the Electoral College who seemed to disregard the voice of the people, until I realized that by not voting, 76% of US told them they can vote however they want. What I would like to know is the correlation between the percent of voters before our trusted advisers had their Freedom of Speech revoked and they became penalized if they gave us their political opinions, and the current number of only 24%. Despite what I believe to be an obvious answer to that question, because whatever the number is, I guarantee you it is more, consider the following perfect example and question: Schools that have been damaged by the negligence or "malpractice" of a state school superintendent (and I could give you an example but won’t) have no recourse to suggest his removal to the constituency, and many of us might not know what has even happened because our school leaders would be taxed and penalized for expressing themselves. Similar issues exist for health care providers and the clergy. So 2 questions here actually: 
    1. What are you willing to do to help build people's faith in the system again and find a reason to get involved to vote?
    2. Do you have any plans to reverse the mutation of non-profit organizations' ability to express themselves politically? IE: do you have any plans to give the Freedom of Speech back to the people whose opinions we rely on for our lives, health and wellness, our education and our children's education and our spiritual well-being?


Friday, April 10, 2015

Re-inviting the Source of All Intelligence Back into Education

Covey Academy Proposal

                The glory of God is intelligence. The pattern in which suns, planets, moons and stars travel; the makeup of our DNA and the miracle of each human life; the beauty of our planet, the tallest snow-capped mountains, the broad and massive oceans teaming with life, the smallest brooklet, wild flower, and grass covered fields surrounded by majestic trees; the dawning of each new day and dazzlingly colorful sunsets: each of these denote the presence of our Father in Heaven. The organization, the brilliance, the cosmically unfathomable heights and depths of our universe are all orchestrated by the Source of All Intelligence. Bafflingly, the Source of All Intelligence has been legally and politically removed from our public education system, as if it were a wise thing to do on behalf of our children.  We pray our children will gain intelligence at school, but the Source of All Intelligence has been officially barred from attendance, and a stay in this execution is not soon forthcoming.  The blessing of belonging to a free Country however provides that we can make adjustments to the needs in Society without waiting for the sanction of the government.  Let’s create our own system of education that doesn't rely on Federal funding.

                In order to provide our children with an excellent education, not only does it need to include a relationship with the Source of All Intelligence, it ought to provide our children with the social and leadership skills necessary to sustain hope for a better and brighter future, and it ought to be available to everyone. Private schooling is typically unattainable for the average family due to astronomical tuition fees. Perhaps a coalition between Sean Covey’s “Leader In Me” program for goal setting and social and leadership skills; perhaps iSchool Campus for curriculum, and YMCA/YWCA Young Men and Women Christian Association where no child will be left behind for inability to pay, could provide an avenue where no child needs to be held back either, with an end goal that no one moves on without a firm prospect in their niche for contributing to society. One of the primary elements gained from a relationship with the Source of All Intelligence is that everyone matters. It is justly our responsibility to find a way to repair the rift between providing all of our children the opportunity to gain intelligence and inviting inspiration from the Source from whence intelligence springs. The name of “Covey Academy” has been chosen to define this would-be publicly available private schooling system in honor of the late Dr. Stephen R. Covey.

                One aspect this Proposal hasn't yet addressed is funding. Considering this is an extremely preliminary proposal, funding ideas at present are limited to needs based tuition fees with contributions from those who are able. M.O.Makenough Foundation is committed to allocating 30% of all funds raised beyond the initial start up costs, to supporting this schooling option.

                

Thursday, April 9, 2015

US Tax & Contribution Proposal

The difference between a tax and a contribution is that one is compulsory and the other is voluntary. The Country does need funds to operate, but if the amount being required by law is minimal, the incentives for making a contribution may be sufficient to invoke the interest of the populace at large to a degree that may actually be above and beyond what is necessary to meet the needs of the State.

Tax Proposal:

Amount of Tax: 5% of gross income or interest received
When Due:  15th of each following month

Contribution Proposal:

What: “Roth”-type CD Program
Who can participate: Anyone may participate who has paid the obligatory 5% tax
Max contribution: Up to 50% of the same taxed gross income
Benefits: Guaranteed earnings above average, interest earned is tax free, beneficiary naming available
Max amount of time funds may stay in investment or number of terms that can be contracted: No max
Fund designation: money is not age or use restricted like some other types of tax free funds, i.e., IRAs, Educational or Medical Savings, etc. The money may be used in whatever way the contributor would like.

Terms Available
Interest
1 year
2%
5 years
4%
10 years
6%
15 years
8%
Contract completed
2%


The idea behind the Tax Proposal is that most of us will pay less than we are used to per month up front, plus have a great opportunity to contribute more and participate in a great investment. Some of us who have amazing accountants who are expert at helping us pay the minimum tax possible may end up paying a tad bit more, but should be able to reduce the headache of looking for loopholes and will regain responsibility of the majority of our own money—which should be an incentive of its own. As for the Contribution Proposal, over time it is very likely that the funds produced by its incentives will not only reduce the deficit, but with budgeting wisdom, we may even see a surplus for the first time in who knows how long. This has the definite potential to be a major win-win scenario.