Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: A Seven Part Series on the Destruction of America 1

"In the end our society will be defined not only for what we create,
but what we refuse to destroy"
John Sawhill.
All though John Sawhill was talking about the environment, the same
could be true for the following: Society, Community, Politics,
Justice, Corporations, and Government within the United States. In
Comparison to the environment, in my opinion all these other things
are even more devastated and destroyed. They are in danger of being
totally eliminated or totally dysfunctional to whom they were supposed
to serve. In this seven part series, I will be taking a close look at
each of these categories in depth including the environment.
Series One - The Environment:
It is no surprise during the Bush administration that the environment
would take some hits. Is it greed that is helping destroy our
environment? I can't see how it could be anything else. In my opinion
greed and selfishness walk a similar path, one can make an argument
that greed is a selfish act.
The biggest factor and threat to the environment is not global
warming, it isn't oil drilling or leaks, chemical waste, destruction
of forest, or the end of endangered species. The biggest threat to the
environment is special interest groups and lobby money. Because of
lobby money, all these other things are jeopardized. With lobby money,
where the underline factor is greed, things like more oil drilling,
oil spills happen. Air pollution and deforestation continues.
In the 1970's in response to the threat of depletion upon our
environment, Richard Nixon helped pass a new regulatory department in
hopes to protect the environment. This department became known as the
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). This agency was designed to
make sure companies met the guidelines set by legislation and the EPA
to help protect the environment. Over the years like so many agencies
that grew, the EPA became less efficient. They began creating
loopholes in their policies to benefit companies. EPA Lawyers found
ways of not enforcing the regulations set in order to prevent them
from taking a company to court. At the EPA assembly of attorney's, I
was able to sneak into the assembly were I witnessed talk about this
very thing.
Companies also spend millions of dollars in attempt to banish
protection laws or alter them. They spend money to make sure new laws
are not created, they spend millions more in order to have new laws
applied that help them in order to make more profit. A prime example
of this is the drilling on public land owned by our government, this
even includes National Parks. Before the Bush administration;
companies were required to give the government a certain percentage
(10%) of the profit created from it, this not only included oil
drilling, but also mining along with natural gas. This law was
eventually abolished under the Bush administration and no longer are
companies required to pay any percentage to the government. The only
cost associated to the companies is the clean up after they have
finished, however even for these greedy companies that is too much.
They have attempted several times to have legislation passed that
would require only the government to pay and clean up brown fields
left over from companies once they are finished with the land, luckily
so far all these attempts have failed.
If all these things weren't enough, when mining companies buy public
lands they are only paying forty-five dollars per acre under the
United States Mining Act.
The United States have taken steps to make the global warming
situation worse, we rejected the Kyoto Protocol; stating "It doesn't
exist" Companies created false specialist in order to bring doubt that
global warming exist. Companies spend millions of dollars promoting
these so called specialist ideas.
Companies that feel the need to increase profits even more; often move
many of their operations overseas, places like Mexico, Brazil, and
Costa Rica are seeing more pollution, contaminated water, and
deforestation. Countries like Romania and Turkey have lost drinking
water because of mining contamination of the water supply. In India
Coca Cola was producing soft drinks with contaminated water. American
producers moved production plants overseas not only to pay lower wages
to employees, but to avoid environment laws that are illegal in the
United States, this includes for example moving many production plants
to China, which helps contribute to the pollution problem China
already has. Many of these companies receive huge tax breaks from the
United States government in doing so.
American Companies have taken part in paying governments and rebels to
remove people from land that the company desires, if the movement is
met with any resistance, those resisting are often killed.
We continue to allow more and more movement into urban areas inside
the United States, which causes devastation to forest, and animal
specie loss. What was soil now became asphalt, which may contribute to
flooding problems taking place. We have allowed big box stores moving
into these areas and often giving them tax breaks in doing so.
Companies like Weyerhaeuser are now selling land that use to be forest
to developers in order to make more money and nobody is stopping them.
If we want change, it will require not only Americans to seek change
in their Government and Corporations, but it must also include the
world as a whole to seek change in theirs as well, only than can true
change happen.
Series Two: Society
In the United States we grow up thinking we are special, after all,
our Government tells us we are. According to them we are the freest
Country in the world; which is one of the things that makes us so
special. We are also taught that if the United States Government says
it is wrong, than it must be wrong, if our Government says it is
right, than it must be right. These are the messages we are brought up
on, this includes the rights for war, for or against dictatorships, or
even laws against are own people. We even define what is considered
terrorism.
We are taught things like other votes from other countries within the
U.N. council does not count if it goes against this privilege the
United States as for always being right. I don't know how many times I
have seen signs posted on citizens property that stated the United
States should fire the U.N., this after the U.N. voted against
something the U.S. wanted, but it didn't matter because the United
States went ahead and did it anyways. What is ironic about that; is
the fact that the United Nations should have the right to remove the
United States from the council and give them no voting rights at all.
The first reason for this; is the very fact that the United States
doesn't recognize any vote against them, they always go ahead and do
it anyways. The second is the fact that they have never paid the fees
required to be on the council, they are the only country to get away
with this.
Okay, you might ask what this has to do with society in the United
States? In my opinion, I feel this is a perfect example how American
citizens live and act in their own life, and most important of all,
how they think of themselves. It doesn't just stop at people, but also
Corporations. Some can only assume this is because the main body of
any company is made up of people who makes the decisions on how that
company acts; we also see it in Government, Politics, Justice, and
even Religion.
If we are right, everyone else must be wrong, especially if his or her
view differs from ours. We have become self-absorbed in our very own
life. It gives us certain privileges and rights that others don't
deserve because we are special and correct in our thinking and they,
simply put, are wrong in theirs, even some laws don't apply to these
people. Being rude is okay because we are better than anyone else, so
other people's opinions really doesn't matter. "They can just get lost
for all I care" according to this belief.
We didn't start this way; we evolved into it. In my opinion it started
happening at a faster rate when the United States became a super
power. When I was young in the 1970's and 1980's (not to give away my
age), I remember how it was common for people to say to one another
"Hi", and people said "Hi" back, it was considered rude, and impolite
not to. People actually knew their neighbors and often invited them
over for dinner.
Not long ago a U.P.S. man showed up at my door delivering me a
package, I asked him "How his day was going?" in which he seemed
shocked "You are the first person to ask me that" He said. This gave
me an idea for a study. I call it my "Hi" study. I took 100 people in
each age group listed below and began saying "Hi". I wanted to see
what percentage said "Hi" back. I was curious to see if my theory was
correct or not; that the United States as evolved with people becoming
cold and only caring about their own opinions of themselves with a
plain disregard for others. My age breakdown was this, 8-18, 19-30,
31-45, 46-60, and 61+. Could we be bringing up a society who is really
that uncaring enough to not even say "Hi"? Here were my results. Ages
1-18 said "Hi" 30% of the time, 19-30, was only 17%, 31-45, 62%,
46-60, 83%, and 61+, 61%.
I found the age group between 19-30 the most troubling, being
disrespectful with no manners appeared to becoming the norm for this
group. How can our citizens have values for other life, if they only
care about themselves? Is our society promoting selfishness and greed?
A recent study conducted by Yahoo, found that managers and supervisors
were actually promoted instead of punished for abusing the employees.
Our Government allows this. Unemployment is difficult to receive if
fired from a job regardless of the treatment involved in the
situation; they almost always take the word of the employer.
In our justice system for example, we create laws not thinking of
helping all parties involved, but only the victims. Those punished
deserve the harshest penalty and they deserve nothing to benefit
themselves. Often this is a view that most of our society shares until
something happens to them or they know someone that this punishment
happens to.
Our society is divided into three groups of people, the rich, who
deserve everything, the middle class that deserves something's and
doesn't deserve other things, and the poor who doesn't deserve
anything. How our society approaches these groups is based on the
status that we put them in. Certainly this is human nature, many
countries if not all of them do this, the one exception might be our
middle class, who can go any direction, depending on who is judging
them.
We are taught that only the powerful survive, the weak doesn't deserve
to survive. We especially see this in business. Remember that old
saying, "A friend is a friend, but business is business" this is a way
of saying forget value's I don't have any regarding friendship, if you
want to call it that. What is often forgotten about only the powerful
survive theory, is the fact that they often play with different rules,
one often lie's, cheats, and manipulates, the other often uses
respect, and honesty, sadly to say in our society we now think that
honesty and respect as no place in business. Cheating, Lying, and
manipulating is okay if you're not caught, in fact, in business terms
it is often regarded normal and is considered more normal for a
Corporation than honesty and respect is.
For many of these companies it is expected to be uncaring and only
focused on the goal which is often money based, but how about
organizations that are suppose to care and be respectful, you know the
one's, the non-profits, certainly they would be different? I mean
aren't they there to help society in some way? Sometimes it is hard to
think of them caring when a director, or manager makes a huge sum of
money.
I recently did a study about a non-profit; I wanted to see if the
people within the organization and some of the rich people funding
them really cared. I decided to test the water sort of speak. With the
help of a colleague, I had him pose as a homeless person outside of
where a non-profit event was taking place. I on the other hand had an
invitation to the event inside. The event took place at the most
prestigious men's club in Seattle. Everyone except myself was rich,
and only those invited by special invitation were allowed to attend
the event. I was able to get my name on the invitation list by various
undercover means. My colleague had a coffee canister by his side with
a cardboard sign taped to it saying "Money Please". The setup was
simple, the test was for him to say "Hi" to every person entering the
event and find out how many people would acknowledge him in some way.
According to him, nobody said "Hi"; nobody talked to him, or deposited
money into the canister. Many of them even looked away pretending not
to notice him.
Meanwhile inside; I was taking notice of the expensive food and drinks
being served for free to the wealthy guest; all funded by the non-
profit. I also noticed that not one person talked with the wait staff
other than to order more drinks or other request. I was the only
person there talking with them. It appeared that even separation
happens among the non-profits. In the public's eye's they look like
they care, but when the camera is no longer on, the truth comes out.
My final study about our society was to see how many people obeyed the
speed limit. I have noticed a trend of people becoming rude on the
roads, this includes not letting people into their lanes, not letting
pedestrians cross the street, cars riding other cars closely and being
very aggressive, flashing headlights, honking horns, zigzagging
through traffic, or moving ahead when two lanes become one regardless
of who's turn it is.
I took a study out of 1000 cars; here is what I found. 80% of all
vehicles were speeding more than five miles per hour. I than wanted to
know how many cars increased their speed when one lane became two
lanes in order to get ahead. I used a road that went from one lane to
two lanes and back to one lane, with a ½ mile distance. Here are the
results. 65% of the vehicles were speeding more than 20 miles per hour
in the left lane, 27% over five miles an hour, and the remainder of
vehicles five miles over or less. I also wanted to study what happened
when the two lanes became one lane again, for this I needed some
assistance. What my colleague found out was after the speeding cars
passed everyone and the two lanes became one, 78% of those speeding
reduced the speed to under ten miles per hour over the speed limit.
This simple test proves that if you don't get caught, it is okay to do
it, and simply put, I'm special, and I always come first regardless.
My conclusion about the Society within the United States is this.
In order to get ahead you must be hard and cold, you must only care
about yourself in order to advance. You can put up a front saying you
care about life and others, but when the opportunity presents itself
you will more than likely ignore what you said your values were and
your true colors will come out.
The division of classes depends solely on how you are judged and who
is judging you, this includes our justice system. If you are poor, you
deserve it. Advancement is usually based on how well you manipulate
others. Most of our decisions are based on our beliefs that we are
right, therefore we deserve to get away with things that others can't.
It is okay to cut in front of the line; I'm better than everyone else.
If we don't get caught that makes everything we do okay.
The welfare of the State is less important than the advancements of
myself no matter how that advancement took place or who I stepped on
to achieve it. Like in the movie Wall Street, Gordon Geco Said, "For a
lack of a better word, greed is good", I guess he could of said
selfishness as well.
This is how we portray life in the United States and how we perceive
ourselves in order to get ahead of everyone else. Our society will
continue to fall and collapse because of this.
Until we remove selfishness from within our society and start
addressing everyone and everything equal as a whole and be willing to
help, will our society be saved from collapsing and destruction.
Here is a self- test I would like you to take, I'm not watching, so be
honest with yourself.
If a cashier gave more money back to you than you had coming, would
you keep the money, or give it back?
If you decided to keep the money, what if I told you the cashier was
fired because of it, that she/he needed that job to support their
family, that they could not get unemployment and that the medical
benefits needed were no longer available to them, that maybe someone
in their family needed those medical benefits on weekly basis because
of an illness.
Would that make a difference if you kept the money or not? Or is it
the cashier's problem?
How you view our society and your role in it can be found in the
answer to this very simple test
Series Three: Community
Although I believe there is a small movement happening in the United
States towards restoring community back in our society, and it
certainly it helps having people like Stacy Mitchell the author of
"Big Box Swindles" promoting community. Urban Sprawl is destroying the
fabric of our community. Rarely do we see people become involved in
community action. When I was little, my dad used to take me to city
council meetings. The meetings were almost always full, nowadays most
meetings are empty, in fact the majority of citizens in a community do
not know who is on the council and many of them have no idea who the
mayor is.
I remember Ralph Nadar talking about his father and saying "My father
always took the family to the city council meetings, and often would
present problems for us children to solve, things such as solving
parking problems downtown".
We use to see people live near town; they walked, biked, and used
various transit means. Shopping took place in and around where they
lived. This seldom happens today. In the United States it is almost
impossible not to have an automobile for the purpose of going to work
or shop, this contributes to the current crisis of gas prices
increasing as well as the destruction of community.
People have also become selfish and uncaring about others leading to
further separation in community. Many people don't even communicate
with their neighbors other than the occasional "Hi". When this type of
isolation is happening it can carry over in several other areas, all
which hurts community.
Rush, Rush, and Rush. I rush into Wal-Mart; rush out. I rush into
Circuit City and rush out; I rush into Fred Meyers and rush out. When
you build community, which is often related to a neighborhood or
downtown center, rushing is not the first priority. What many areas
are attempting to do; is bring a relaxing environment to the city or
neighborhood. Free concerts, outdoor farmer markets, and neighborhood
festivals. This is also helping local merchants around the area
benefit, but can this movement happen fast enough to save what we have
already lost in community?
Why are we rushing? Big companies like Wal-Mart, Home Depot, and Best
Buy are opening stores in the urban areas causing housing to move
farther from the inner city causing separation from community. People
drive into work, some 20 to 30 miles away from their house, they can
stop by Wal-Mart on the way home, rush in and than rush out, pick up
dinner at McDonalds for them and their family, they need to rush,
because it takes 2 hours to get home from when they leave work, so
they're in a hurry. They are too busy to be bothered by other people;
they don't have the time to worry about other people's problems. They
spend about 4 hours a day commuting.
This is what we have become, and why places like Wal-Mart, McDonalds,
and even Starbucks exist. This is also the very same reason why
Communities are being destroyed. "I have no time to be on the city
council, go to the meetings". People spend longer hours in their cars,
they believe in fast food, always rushing, no longer being able to sit
down and enjoy meals. I remember a time when families use to sit down
and eat together, this rarely happens because everyone is on different
schedules.
Locally owned businesses are the heart of community in my opinion.
Many Big Box companies like Wal-Mart under cut prices taking the
little locally owned business into bankruptcy. These huge
industrialized companies also take production away from much needed
areas and sends jobs overseas. They drive down the local economy by
offering only part time jobs with low pay and little insurance, people
are than forced to work two part-time jobs, causing less time for
community and more rushing. The products being made overseas from
these big box stores are often inferior in quality, yet have a higher
mark up margin. Products do not last as long, making sure another
purchase will happen shortly which contributes to consumerism and
affects many areas in the world, but especially the environment.
It is also companies like Starbucks that have driven out locally owned
coffee shops by buying out leases from under them. Blockbuster video
stores attempts to do away with locally owned video stores by putting
one next door.
It is said a store that is locally owned keeps eighty percent of their
profits within the community, while with chain stores it's the
opposite; only twenty percent of the profits stays within the
community.
Obviously the eighty percent helps contribute to a stable economy,
which includes things like more employment throughout the city.
If people could be honest with themselves and look at their priorities
and see how ignoring the community will eventually lead to a fate of
destruction within the United States, maybe things could change, but
people refuse to take the time to look.
If I could say to these people that someday their shopping at Wal-Mart
will leave them unemployed, or that their husbands job was terminated
because the production was moved overseas in order to satisfy Home
Depot who required lower prices for the products they sell, would that
change their behavior? This is what is happening in the United States
today. Community can't be saved unless people make decisions in their
own life to change their behavior and put the focus and actions back
on restoring community.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/user/204621/troy_prouty.html

 
http://www.associatedcontent.com/user/204621/troy_prouty.html
Series Four - Politics
Many years ago, people would assemble at town halls, pubs, or
churches. They would talk over issues and concerns about their
community. They developed plans of action, and took part in those
actions. When representation was needed outside the city; the people
would elect someone to be the voice of the people. All the decisions
were based on the approval of those who elected the person.
Some people might say our system still works that way. I won't argue
that city, and county council meetings invite open discussions with
the people in the city and county areas. That being noted; most people
have limited voice with their State Representatives, or Federal
Representatives.
Unlike the past, we are left having to go to our representatives in
order to state our opinions or concerns on matters. The
representatives rarely seek enough information from their district
before making a vote. They simply vote for what they believe in, not
necessarily what the people in their district would have wanted.
I did a recent study. I sent in a request to start a bill at the State
level by email to every Representative, and Senator within that State.
I also sent the request to the Governor of that State. I did this in
two separate States wanting to compare the results. These emails
averaged around 80 per State that I sent out.
In the first State I received only feedback four times. One from the
Governor of the State, who stated he could not help me, and three from
State Senators. The second State was worse. The Governor never
contacted me at all, and I only received feedback from one
representative of that State.
The results bothered me so much that I decided to do another study
with a city council. I chose a bigger city of several million people
for this study. I emailed everyone on the city council. Here were the
results, I never heard back from the Mayor, and out of the ten council
members I emailed, I only heard back from two of them.
What this study proves is that even when you contact your
representative, it might do little good. The fact of the matter is
unless you have money to give them, you're more likely to be ignored
with any idea you wish to share with them.
The majority of people feel that those in politics are corrupt, how
can we think otherwise when they continue to take lobby money, and
base their votes on how many perks they will receive in doing so?
Besides giving candidates substantial amounts of lobby money, special
interest groups are now running commercials for the candidate of their
choice; and it is legal. Special interest groups gives millions of
dollars to both parties so they can get favors from either party later
on.
The one thing I think is the most deceitful thing when we talk
elections, are those running in order to split the vote. This is where
someone, be it Democrat or Republican runs independent with similar
ideas and views of one of those they are running against (They are
actually lying about what they stand for), they do this in order to
split the vote allowing the other party (who they actually belong
with) to win. Campaign funds for such treachery are usually funded by
the party they actually want in office. In a study I did which as
taken place over the last 8 years, it became obvious that the
Republican Party does this the most, but both parties have been guilty
of it.
During the 2000 election, the Democrats cried foul towards Ralph
Nadar, the Green Party candidate. They continued to say Ralph Nadar
had cost them the election. In my opinion they should have been more
concerned about Ralph Nadar not being allowed on the property of the
first televised debate in the 2000 election, even though he had a
ticket to get in. Although he received fifty thousand dollars in
compensation afterwards, the amount was not enough compared to what
the corporate world achieved by only having two candidates debate.
It is said that government and people in power often get into office
with questionable means; sometimes those that have participated or
knew about it are killed. How many times have we seen someone close to
the President die from what is called a suicide, especially before a
scandal is starting to be investigated that could expose higher
officials and maybe even the President. When I was investigating all
those who died under Clinton; it appeared around forty or so of the
people died by questionable means.
Another significant problem in politics is the use of riders on bills
in order to deliver on promises to special interest groups. I have
little doubt that the riders are the biggest problem in our system
today and why we are losing control of our government. These riders
rarely have anything to do with the original bill introduced. Some of
these riders for example were tied to war in Iraq, things such as
allowing mining in a certain state (Wyoming) was on the defense bill.
This brings me to another quick point. Democrats point out that they
were tricked in voting yes for an invasion on Iraq. Truth be told; the
Democrats found the perfect alibi to help companies make huge profits
overseas in Iraq in order to make good on past promises and deny their
real role in voting yes for war using the alibi of being tricked. I
can only say "Shame on you Democrats!"
Many people believe that the current oil prices are something that the
current administration is doing for favors to the oil industry that
was promised for being elected President? But; this administration is
not done yet handing out favors. They want to make sure to open new
places for drilling, most famously Alaska. What is often not reported;
is the fact it would take years before we start seeing lower cost from
the drilling, and maybe the biggest unknown factor is that the
majority of what would be drilled goes to Japan. It certainly would
help huge oil companies though, especially Exxon who broke a record
for the most profits in a quarter again. They had held the previous
record.
A recent international study found that the United States political
freedoms lacked compared to many other countries in the world. New
Zealand ranked first for political freedoms of those surveyed. We were
taught growing up that the United States was number one because of our
freedoms; and no country could compare with what we had to offer. This
changed drastically over the last twenty years; amazingly at the same
time Lobby money started having a huge impact on decisions for laws
and elections. I guess it is time to take a close look and be honest
with our selves that we aren't the holy one in the world like we think
we are.
There are several ideas on stopping some of the United States
political problems. In elections for example, we could allow a set
amount of money received for campaigning. This isn't individual
donations, but rather the total sum of all donations. We could abolish
federal funding for the two primary parties, and instead use that
money for third parties until they have caught up with the other two,
than the additional funding can be given to all parties. We could
include free airtime for candidates which includes open debates for
all those running, and having it controlled by government instead of
some private firm made up of one former Democrat head and one former
Republican head, which only allows the two main parties to debate, and
maybe the most important of them all in my opinion is to use the
popular vote with run-off voting instead of the electoral system we
now have. Unless these changes are applied or something similar, our
political system will continue to be destroyed and ineffective for
those it was suppose to serve.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/939657/the_destruction_of_america.html