AMERICA                                       AMERICA                                       AMERICA

          OFF-LINE!!!                           OFF-LINE!!!                 OFF-LINE!!!

          

 Back Story and Introduction:

 The original version of this essay incredibly stretches back more than fifteen years, with a refresh halfway between then and 2017. At inception, historians will recall that AOL was top dog in the unfolding world of e-mail and the Internet, hence the prompt for an idea I labeled America Off-Line (AOFL). After I somewhat polished the first draft, AOFL promptly took its rightful place among a bunch of half-baked, semi-used, and incredibly good potential essays gathering dust in a desk drawer (already you can tell the extent of my technical capabilities; a more current person would have said there was no dust because the essays resided in something called “the cloud” —  which, however, only existed in the skies at that time.)

 Anyway, periodically I do open said “drawer” and rifle through its contents, fantasizing that inspiration will combine with whatever is already on “paper” to produce — something worthwhile! Having previously written  about the false God of Consumption and being somewhat jaundiced about all the benefits of Techno-World, it seemed natural to re-visit the logic of going off-line.

 Thus, trumpets blaring – in my mind anyway, below, after some commentary, is a starting list of rules aimed at going off-line. Think of them as Step One in a Ten Step program to becoming a healthier person — AOFL Anonymous as it were. Readers are invited to make suggestions as to additional rules.  

 In today’s iDevice world, as people scroll for the appropriate application for that moment in their lives, click on their Facebook page, or sit transfixed in their computer cubicles at office or home, everything seems straightforward and easy: a steady stream of data bits somehow arrives in that magical iDevice and is displayed on a screen.

Presto, you think you are with it, informed, ready to interact, have fun, make decisions, do whatever. You are “on-line” with whomever (can be a huge number of strangers, many of whom “like” you without ever having had the pleasure of meeting you) or whatever you choose.

For some people, however, being on-line in this technological/psychological universe is regarded as an endorsement of the lifestyle expectations apparently shared by the vast majority of Americans — even those who voice concerns about excessive debt levels, the deleterious nature of our consumption ethic, and the damage being done to the environment by our adherence to the philosophy of “more is better.”

To anticipate perpetual economic growth in the United States, as most do, one must believe in the continual obsolescence of not only cars and clothes but ideas as well, and — that flood of data on your iDevice, virtually commanding you to do or think — something.

To be on-line in this world is to be a subscriber to a paradigm of constant change and incessant consumerism. It is a perpetual game of gin rummy which one cannot win. To be a subscriber is eventually to be ill at ease, for one can never stay current with someone else’s definition of what one must know, possess and do with one’s time, energy, and money.

It is time to log off of this view of life. It is time for AMERICA OFF-LINE!!!

Creating rules for logging off is difficult — the iDevice world has brought together a whole series of communication/information/entertainment devices that collectively convey a “how-can-we-live-without-them” mentality. Were I to espouse dropping any of these incredible products, then for sure the accusation of “Luddite” would be hurled at this writer. My fragile psyche would be smashed, so I will leave such thoughts to true radicals!

AMERICA OFF-LINE!!! seeks to resurrect a different and more fundamental idea: that what and who you are is more important than how fast you can access what somebody else deems important to you, because that knowledge is predominantly being used by others for the accumulation of possessions, money, and power. (One could say that in some ways, nothing  about historical norms of inequality has really changed, only the mechanism!)

The list below delineates some practical guidelines, in no order of importance. They represent cloth to be cut to your shape. Do not worry: no salesman will call beseeching you to order your very own bound copy of the rules of AMERICA OFF-LINE!!!

Establish house rules with respect to time spent on iDevices. Any set of rules will undoubtedly be superior to an absence of guidelines; if you saw the survey results of how many hours kids spend on social media and juxta-positioned those with international academic test results, you might recognize the need for change.  The American educational system is broken; it is time to establish priorities on how people (of all ages) use their time.

Do not have more than one conventional elevision in your house. Television is an unending advertisement for a singular way of life: consumption—of things and people.

If you have a choice between an interstate highway and a secondary road, choose the latter at least half the time. Johnny’s Hot Dog Stand needs your patronage; McDonald’s has enough.

Do not own more than three credit/debit cards. Reduce consumption, increase spirituality or at least appreciation for non-monetary involvements, cut interest costs.

Have one purchase-free day per week. Try it, you will like it.

When eating dinner at home or at a restaurant with your family, every iDevice must be turned off. Twenty years down the road,  you do not want to say, “I wish I had talked with my kids more when they were with me.”

Per family, own only one car less than five years old. Send a statement you are receding from consumption predicated on envy, guilt, and other negative influences.

You must spend at least one hour per day with each of your children, without any accompanying iDevices. “Quality time!”               

For every minute you use an iDevice to record your child’s activities, you must spend two minutes watching without said device. The memory of the heart has to be more important than that of the succession of digits.

 Lie on your back looking at the clouds once a week. Your spirits will soar at the wondrous sight and you will become better able to keep things in perspective.

 Do not purchase more than one piece of Disney merchandise per year. This stimulates creative and independent thinking by parents, and helps to raise children who will be off-line.

 You cannot text somebody you could be speaking to at that moment. Quick and easy is not at all synonymous with successful interaction or the meaning of true friendship.

 Limit your trips to the shopping mall to once a month. Uh, let’s see: more time to look at the clouds, anti-consumption ethic made operational, etc. etc.

 If a program, whether on conventional television or an iDevice, is showing an activity you could be doing at that time, you must turn off the program and do the activity. This is healthier for the mind and body.

 Process information you need to convey to somebody else in a timely fashion (otherwise known as – do the important stuff first), then mail it through the USPS.  Yes, I know FedEx is easy and perhaps more reliable, for which you pay a price of course. The point is to shift your mentality in the direction of get it done, then relax, not obsess about hyper-delivery speed.

 Ignore the airline’s attempt to stay abreast of all advances in Techno World.  Relax, read a book, even if on an iDevice! (see, I am not am extremist).

 Be direct (not profane, unless selective and made mandatory by the caller’s attitude) with salespeople who contact you at home, especially during dinner. The “telephone” is your line, not theirs; besides, you can somewhat control this intrusion, unlike the automatic marketing pitches which accompany every click on the Internet.

 Dispense with your home alarm and shun living in a gated community. Now that you have dropped the consumption ethic, your fears about security do not need to be actuated.

 Do not use a garage door opener. Along with sensible eating, absence of smoking, and adequate exercise elsewhere, opening the door yourself reduces doctor bills.

 Nix on the car phone. The accident rates are like those of drunks.

 Do not buy externally-branded merchandise. Criminy! There is enough advertising already.

 Eat slower.  Studies have shown that countries which eat faster have higher economic growth, but we no longer want that, do we! — do we?

 Boycott ATMs. It will make you think harder about consumption patterns, which relate to priorities and usage of time.

 Make an annual examination of your iDevice inventory and play the age-old game of “need” versus “want” prior to reducing what you own–or what owns you – or what you thought you needed to buy. P.S. Recycling will never solve the environmental problem; reduction of initial purchases is required.

 Almost forgot, READ. Use of printed materials by young people averages 38 minutes a day.

Books in the house are, duh, correlated with better educational outcomes. Half of heavy electronic media users among young people reportedly have a C average or less, twice the rate of light users.

 Periodically substitute a handwritten letter for an iDevice method of communication. Aw gosh, I’m a real softie — such a format grabs the heart and gets incremental attention and response. Everything good.

 In compiling these rules, I did exclude one suggestion: turn off the internet!

Only kidding; I wanted to get your attention.

I mean, what a totally ridiculous idea. Before the Internet, reading scores for American students were the same as today, pornography was a smaller industry, and excess consumer spending was more difficult to accomplish. Healthcare costs were lower and the federal deficit was a fraction of today’s level. The incidence of wars and human atrocities was similar.

Why would anyone want the pre-Internet world!

Please: no letters, comments, diatribes about the difference between cause and effect, correlation compared with causation, and other intellectual concepts. Relax, take a chill pill!

Understand the real meaning of AMERICA OFF-LINE!!!

It is to get you to stop tweeting and start reflecting on your life!

 

 

Phase One: I sent the open-ended questions below to a half-dozen students.

*How does Google affect your level of curiosity?

*Describe what it is in life that you are most curious about; how do you satisfy that curiosity?

*Is curiosity purely an individual endeavor or can it be stimulated through group discussions?

*Which geographical area of the world are you most curious about?   Why?

*Do you think curiosity among young people is rising, falling, or staying the same? Why?

*What is the impact of social media on curiosity?

*What are examples from your own life that have brought you, or somebody you know, unusual positive or negative results as a consequence of being curious?

Phase Two: I sent the specific inquiries below to four students, whose replies are indicated.

What % of Hillary voters stopped using UBER because of its treatment of women?

4 … 4 … 17 … 7

What % of Trump voters stopped using UBER because of its treatment of women?

2 … 1 … 3 … 3

If zoning laws permitted it, what % of homeowners having at least two acres would welcome a homeless person living there in a separate mini-house (200 sq. ft)?

1 … 11 … 10 … 2

In a gated community, what % of the residents would vote in favor of forced ethnic diversity?

6… 17 … 5 … 7

What % of contributors to environmental groups are owners of multiple residences and cars?

15 … 67 … 40 … 15

What % of the billionaire members of the Giving Pledge would fund a non-profit, healthy food supermarket in a public housing neighborhood?

30 … 28 … 60 … 15

What % of millennials would not buy the newest iPhone because doing so contributes to income inequality (Apple’s leading shareholders get even richer)?

2 … 6 … 35 … 3

What % of the members of the NY Times Editorial Board would welcome a Syrian refugee into their house to live for an undetermined length of time, without asking any questions whatsoever?

45 … 0 … 40 … 3

What % of the media would be fired for using the N-word?

65 … 70 … 30 … 32

What % of the Trump administration would be fired for using the N-word?

0 … 0 … 10 … 7

Phase Three: I sent the specific inquiries below to four students; initially, replies were inadequate . Then I provided bracketed choices: 0-10% (which meant I put the answer at 5%), 11-25% (18%), 26-50% (38%), and >50% (75%). This brought in more inputs.

What % of students regard colleges as businesses?

33 … 18 … 38 …75 … 75 … 75

What % of music executives would reject a song full of obscenities and disrespect to women?

38 … 5 … 9 … 5 … 18 … 18

What % of whites help minorities because the former feel guilty over historical misdeeds?

18 … 75 … 18 … 5 … 18 … 5

What % of Hollywood executives would reject a violent movie theme because they are in favor of tighter gun control?

50 … 5 … 5 … 18 … 5 … 18

What % of people change their minds after learning more about the facts of immigration?

85 … 18 … 5 … 75 …18 … 38

What % of people believe that the Far Left and the Far Right are similar in their likelihood to engage in violence?

90 … 18 … 18 … 38 … 38 … 5

Response to Open-ended Questions (1 of 6)

1: Google affects my level of curiosity in a positive way because whenever I am curious about a topic whether it involves symptoms I may be experiencing to information on other countries I know Google has answers. It makes me more curious to think about anything because it is such an easy access and I know I’ll get the answers in less than a minute and that’s incredible. It makes it easier for me to be curious.

2: One thing I am most curious about is the future, not necessary my future but the future in general. For example, I am always thinking about how much technology will affect generations after me. My mother always says “when I was your age I didn’t have this or that” the this and that is cell phones, google, social media. I am always thinking about what will be my “this” and “that”, what will I say to my children in the future. I feel like we have everything right now, advanced smart phones. Technology just keeps advancing and it makes me thinks how fast and complex technology will get in the future. I satisfy my curiosity by keeping up with technology, at least I try too. I also enjoy watching the show “Black Mirror” the episodes have to do with what the future might be. It is a very interesting show.

3: I think curiosity can definitely be personal however, it can also be stimulated through group discussions. It should be encouraged more because we should be open to other’s curiosity because it can feed our curiosity and or start up other curiosities.

4: I am most curious about Egypt, I always wonder how the pyramids are being preserved and curious about the culture there.

5: I feel like the level of curiosity is staying the same or falling in certain areas (geographically), most teenagers don’t challenge themselves, they just want to follow the crowd and not think for themselves. However, that is not every person, there are others who question everything and that curiosity leads them to good things. I feel like it has to do a lot with who you surround yourself and the experiences you experience.

6: Social Media does have an impact on curiosity, social media can lead to changes in your curiosity. Nowadays, there is so much on social media and that can definitely encourage you to challenge your curiosity and make changes in the world.

7: I have challenged myself to being more curious, and one positive consequence that I have gained from being curious is looking at careers. I know I’d like to work with children and recently I took the time to research careers in the medical field that engage children, I got a variety of careers and it opened up choices. It is also a sort of negative consequence because now I have many more choices and I have to start narrowing it down. Another example of an unusual negative is a friend of my mine was curious about a fight that was occurring outside, she went outside never expecting what would result of her curiosity. As she was outside she received a bullet on her lower abdomen and since then she’s still having health issues due to that day and her curiosity.

Response to Open-ended Questions (2 of 6)  

*How does Google affect your level of curiosity?

Google helps fuel our curiosity because when we search one thing thousands of links appear using different words providing greater information. Google’s settings help predetermine what kind of words people are going to search from the minute they write the first word. This influences the order people choose to search words in as it produces different search results.

*Describe what it is in life that you are most curious about; how do you satisfy that curiosity?

I am most curious about the different kinds of people that live in the world. I satisfy this curiosity by trying to get involved, so that I can meet lots of different people. All the service trips I have been on have taught me so much about how people appreciate different aspects of life and have made me truly admire other cultures.

*Is curiosity purely an individual endeavor or can it be stimulated through group discussions?

I think that curiosity is an individual endeavor that can be stimulated through group discussions. An individual must want to be engaged in conversation in order for them to be intrigued to further discuss a topic. Most times curiosity starts with an individual who has questions or simply wants to learn more about a certain subject.

*Which geographical area of the world are you most curious about?   Why?

I most curious about Africa, I feel that it is one of the most talked about continents, but people know the least about it. I want to learn about the different languages, cultures and the people who live throughout the continent because each country is different.

*Is the level of curiosity among young people is rising, falling, or staying the same? Why?

I think the level of curiosity among young people is falling because of social media. Everyone is so consumed by social media they tend to believe everything that they see without questioning.

*What is the impact of social media on curiosity?

Social media has led curiosity to decrease. We are living in an internet age where people are focusing more on social media sources rather than reading newspaper articles or simply watching the news.

*What are examples from your own life that have brought you, or somebody you know, unusual positive or negative results as a consequence of being curious?

This summer I was lucky enough be an orientation leader. At my own Orientation one of the most impactful experiences I had was watching LINES, which is a student production discussing different issues of diversity and people of underrepresented backgrounds. LINES stands for leaning into new experiences and situations. This performance forced me to look deeper into problems with the LGBTQI communities, a topic I didn’t know much about. One of the most positive things I gained is that it’s important to simply “lean in” and ask questions, engage in uncomfortable conversations and not be afraid of what the results may be.

Response to Open-ended Questions (3 of 6)

1. Google has tremendously affected my curiosity. A plethora of possibilities just at my finger tips. Information available at an instant. Anything I am interested in I can easily obtain information on using google.
2. In my life I am most curious about how to become an entrepreneur. I fuel that curiosity by going to school and doing research for assignments.

3. I believe curiosity can be both an individual and group stimulated. Idea can be discussed in a group environment that may spark greater curiosity in an individual and then used to build on top of what the group is working on.

4. I am most curious about Asia, China in particular. Asia is a whole other half of the world I have not explored and a culture I have not yet experienced hands one. China is one of the world largest economies and I would like to understand how it works and what affects if can have on all other economies.

5. The curiosity in young people is rising and it fuels the mind to keep on wanting to gain more and more information around the things that interest them most in life.

6. Social medial impacts curiosity by allowing people to seek information on what the world around them is up to and giving them access to that information opens the mind to different perspectives of many individuals around the world.

7. In my life something positive that has come out being curious is becoming fit/healthy. Signing up for a gym with no idea on how to properly lift weights has lead to observe carefully on what others are doing while at the gym and doing research online when I’m home. The results lead to significant decrease in body fat and overall better physical fitness.

Response to Open-ended Questions (4 of 6)

Google as a search engine greatly stimulates my curiosity because it provides unlimited answers to endless questions one may have pertaining to any topic or person. It is difficult to pinpoint one topic I am most curious about. I love to study human behavior and the driving forces behind what makes people do what they do. I enjoy learning about structures of power and their relation to one another. Such as how economies function in relation to politics and global affairs. I also enjoy learning about political histories of different countries and political systems in general. As I have already informed you philosophy and recently evolutionary biology. I satisfy these curiosities mainly by reading. Or take courses that pertain to them directly or indirectly.

The middle east is the area in the world I’m most curious currently. I want to have a more in-depth understanding of the different conflicts and divisions within the area. I’m also curious about Sharia law and how it is implemented in all those different countries. I think the level of curiosity among young people is declining. It is my belief that being curious and wanting to discover and create is part of human nature. As disheartening as this may sound, the current education system is what I believe stifles curiosity the most. Of course, this is tied to our business culture and economic system.

For almost every subject especially math and science the way in which it is taught truly kills curiosity for students who are sincerely interested in them. What I want to stress here is the methodology and the removal of practice or application when learning something. For instance, when a student truly loves science, but has a high school geology teacher that structures the class so he has to memorize all these terms for an exam in order to pass instead of creating a hands-on experience lab where the student can learn hands on how sedentary rocks relate to tectonic plates and a desire to learn is cultivated within the student he comes think that what his teacher has presented him is how work is done in science departments.

This carries over to almost all other disciplines. This in effect destroys the curiosity of students. The way in which the subject matter is presented is critical to the cultivation of curiosity. Additionally, many students enter college with the mindset that they must study whatever will enable them to make the most money. Ignoring what they’re passionate about. Social pressures and our capitalist culture heavily contribute to this.

Social media to my knowledge stagnates curiosity only insofar as it distracts people from what they’re studying or learning. Some positive consequences of me being curious have been receiving positive affirmation from my professors. Having them challenge me more critically and expect more from me. This has made a better student. Also, I’ve developed the habit of reading a book or two every month. I’ve never had negative consequences to being curious.

Response to Open-ended Questions (5 of 6)

*How does Google affect your level of curiosity?

I feel it both fuels it and at times squashes it! If I suddenly wonder how many US presidents took a stance on abortion- I can know it in a second. I can foster curiosity and learn about issues, concepts, ideas, people! From any place in the world or any point in history and I think that’s beautiful. I think it’s beautiful I can learn anything from the internet. At the same time though, it’s killed my spelling skills. I don’t memorize new words or how to spell them anymore because I can just google it. It’s made things easier for me in a lot of ways and I know I’ve gotten lazier.

*Describe what it is in life that you are most curious about; how do you satisfy that curiosity?

I’m most curious about the way that people interact with each other in the context of any relationship or lack thereof. I love watching couples, friends, family members, or strangers interact with each other. There’s something so special and strange about the way that people speak to each other and try to understand each other and I love it. It’s a subject that no one will ever fully understand; I think that’s why I write so many films about relationships (friendships and romantic ones). It’s because I’m trying to learn more through writing and analyzing.

*Is curiosity purely an individual endeavor or can it be stimulated through group discussions?
I think curiosity can be stimulated through group discussion because different people can bring up different points of view and introduce new topics that you otherwise might not have been exposed to.

*Which geographical area of the world are you most curious about?   Why?

I’m not concerned with any specific region of the world specifically but I find myself very inspired by suburbs. Not sure if that answers the question but I really find how people interact with suburban life incredibly interesting.

*Is the level of curiosity among young people rising, falling, or staying the same? Why?

I don’t really think that can be measured in regards to age or any other true marker because there’s just millions of young people and people in general. There’s no way to really measure if people are more or less curious. I can only speak to people I’ve met as a whole. I’ve met a lot of people my age who don’t seem to be creative or curious. But I’ve also met people younger than me that are absolute geniuses. I think that the brilliance of curiosity is that it’s individual. Yes it can be stimulated temporarily by others but it’s innate in the fabric of who you are.

*What is the impact of social media on curiosity?

I think social media can open ideas to more people but that it’s also created a way to see what others are doing all of the time. I think it mostly depends how you use social media. Some can use a website or tumblr page to craft inspiration boards, write creatively, or post photos. Others can simply snap photos for likes. I think it truly depends what means you are using it for.

*What are examples from your own life that have brought you, or somebody you know, unusual positive or negative results as a consequence of being curious?

Personally, I found what I wanted to do in life because I was curious. In regards to how I found my start in film, it was essentially following photographers and bloggers online and loving how vibrantly they captured their life. I was curious as to how they seemed so happy and so reflective of their lives. I’d always loved learning about others and finding ways to catalogue my feelings so when I began my journey of filmmaking, I found that it was my passion. It was the perfect combination of everything I had ever loved. And it aided my curiosity because I’m constantly learning- whether that be through writing, editing, or directing, I always have to be learning something. So, being curious has helped me build a future for myself.

Response to Open-ended Questions (6 of 6)

*How does Google affect your level of curiosity?

Due to the existence of Google and the internet, I feel like Google stifles and encourages my own curiosity. I think that because almost anything I can think about is on Google, it takes away the joy that comes from researching a certain subject or question. If I’m thinking about cooking something I can immediately find it online, but when it comes to personal questions about life such as raising a family of emigrating from one country to another, I find that talking to different people from different cultures is more beneficial than Googling the subject.

*Describe what it is in life that you are most curious about; how do you satisfy that curiosity?

The one thing that I am most curious about in life is how far someone’s potential can take them. I’ve always wondered just how far someone can really go whether it be in their personal or professional life (or both). I remember a quote by animator Monty Oum, “I believe that the human spirit is indomitable. If you endeavor to achieve, it will happen given enough resolve. It may not be immediate, and often your greater dreams is something you will not achieve within your own lifetime. The effort you put forth to anything transcends yourself, for there is no futility even in death.” This idea is one that helps me realize that anyone can do anything, it’s solely a matter of if you allow yourself to do so. A lot of times people don’t do what they want because they’re afraid of failure, but how can you fail if you don’t give yourself the opportunity to try?

*Is curiosity purely an individual endeavor or can it be stimulated through group discussions?

I think curiosity is a combination of individual endeavor and stimulation. I think that in order to grow curiosity it needs to be stimulated by group discussion, world news, spiritual questions, etc. but at the same time I think that people can only grow their curiosity if they want to.

*Which geographical area of the world are you most curious about?   Why?

I’ve always been curious about Japan and the Japanese culture. That country has greatly influenced the way we make things and buy things and even look at things. Anime (Japanese animation) has become widely popular here in the United States and has even led to American adaptations for popular anime shows. Moreover Japan has introduced a new level of competition for the United States when it comes to the automotive industry as well as advancing technology and health care.

*Is the level of curiosity among young people rising, falling, or staying the same? Why?

I think it is definitely falling due to the availability of the internet. More and more I see children on their phones instead of looking at the world around them. I think that because of this, younger generations are going to feel overly privileged when it comes to knowledge because anything they could ever imagine is already online.

*What is the impact of social media on curiosity?

Social Media I think is both positive and negative because it allows people to quickly communicate, but because it’s so widely available, people don’t really find themselves thinking or experiencing things. Instead they spend most of their time on the internet.

*What are examples from your own life that have brought you, or somebody you know, unusual positive or negative results as a consequence of being curious?

I remember one time when I was in Boy Scouts I was fishing with a friend of mine and we weren’t catching anything so I was wondering what would happen if I used my hand as bait like in fishing tv shows. Sure enough my hand got bit by a catfish, but on the bright side I caught a catfish and had a nice dinner.

Thank you for your contributions to the Curiosity Project:  Jeffrey, Kim, Fernando, Kevin, Chelsea, David, Emily, Vilma, Cesar, Syane, Bob, Alejandro, Ana, Blasley

 

 

he American economy has been improving for about eight years, reported unemployment — ignoring the different ways to interpret this data point — is at an acceptable level, and inflation is surprisingly low: historically, sharp growth in the money supply has led to higher inflation.

Yet, more than half of all people were reportedly unhappy with their jobs even before the recent Presidential election. And there is a growing body of thought that contrary to the historical pattern wherein jobs lost to robots were not a net negative, as other jobs were created, the situation will be different with the advent of collaborative robots.

Suicide rates are rising for every age bracket except that of your lowly writer, whose cohort always has had a much higher disposition to ending life voluntarily.

Maybe it is time to think radically.

Enter the idea of an unconditional basic income (UBI), cash paid by the government to each and every individual regardless of income or wealth.

A UBI would facilitate the type of freedom which can lead some recipients to:

*go surfing as a full-time activity

*refuse to work at the minimum wage level offered by many current businesses

*move ahead with that entrepreneurial idea they heretofore could not pursue because of the financial risk pertinent to simply starting up

*be able to avoid the dehumanizing aspect of the current welfare system

*no longer engage in petty crime

*rethink the financial interplay between parent and child

*ignore the UBI because it is a small fraction of their financial aspirations and/or accomplishments.

Accompanying a UBI would be these programmatic initiatives:

*a more progressive income tax schedule, coupled with a wealth tax, and a reduction in the estate size which can escape taxation

*a slow phasing down of many aspects of the current welfare apparatus, the emphasis being on more  direct means of assisting those in need – debit cards and trust, with verification annually. Note that no reduction in welfare monies would be caused by receipt of UBI.

*legalized marijuana, with a similar, but modified, set of restrictions akin to those of alcohol and cigarettes, which kill a multiple of the people who die from illegal substances

*other drugs would remain illegal, but the response to use/abuse would be rehabilitation programs, inclusive of educational curricula aimed at career building

*extensive in-prison educational programs

*increased educational programs in the middle skills area, jobs which combine manual skills with a level of computer or technical expertise

*a re-thinking of the educational system so that the focus is on students and lifelong learning

*a recasting of the immigration system to incorporate the following principles:

• current holders of DACA status would receive green cards
• a point system for prospective immmigrants
• no tolerance for undocumented individuals with criminal records
• annual rates for temporary visas like H-1B would only be revisited every ten years
• a two-year window during which undocumented immigrants can obtain a green card by:
• filing a tax return and pledging to do so annually
• passing a rudimentary English test
• paying a fine of $10,000 per tax-filing unit

These are some envisioned results:

*because the tax elements are not draconian — while generating sufficient funds for the UBI (in the context of gradual reductions in the current mishmash of welfare programs, thereby creating less of a budget requirement than otherwise), there would be a decrease in the perception that the American economic system is no longer fair in terms of upward mobility.  There would still be substantial income inequality, but when people know they can do okay for their families, they are less irritated by the visible divergence.

*because of the legalization of marijuana and extensive in-prison educational programs, there would be a reduction in both the initial crime rate and the recidivism rate

*with the above changes and the shift to a rehabilitation policy on illegal drugs, there should be an increase in the proportion of intact families

*with reduced crime, more intact families and a reorientation of the education system, all of which are mutually reinforcing factors, there would be reduced racial tension when it comes to policing, there would be a decreased need for non-profit entities which at present essentially only provide “band-aids for broken legs,” and fewer irritating photo ops of white benefactors with arms around minority kids

*for all but a few, standard diplomas would be replaced by resumes listing credentials pertinent to skills gained and tasks done. With more flexibility through education institution partnerships, both vertical and horizontal, students will be better to evaluate their options and pursue their goals

*a greater sense of freedom and personal control than is currently the case

*If you believe that the surfer to striver ratio will be heavily weighted in favor of the former, yes, a UBI would not be useful to society as a whole, but how many strivers would ratchet down their pace simply because they had a UBI.

 

“Basic Income … A Radical Proposal for a Free Society and a Sane Economy,”

by Philippe Van Parijs and Yannick Vanderborght, Harvard University Press, 2017,

is the inspiration for the above thought process.

The authors propose a UBI of 25% of per capita GDP. In the USA, this would mean $14,400 (GDP of $18.6 trillion divided by 323 million people is $57,600 GDP/capita.)

Selected background material and comments from the book (page numbers) are below:

(85-88) Milton Friedman, an economist closely associated with the free enterprise system, favored a negative income tax in place of what he called “illfare,” i.e., welfare (which destroys incentives), with the rate set low enough to push the person to find work.  Part of his reasoning for the tax was also that the government had put so many regulatory roadblocks in front of people who wanted to start businesses that it owed them something He preferred private charity over said tax, but did not believe it would generate the required funds.

Fredreich Hayek, similarly an advocate of economic freedom, believed that a minimum income should be a permanent part of a free society.

(106-9) Important to the logic of a UBI is that differences in social capital — stored knowledge: technology, organizational know-how, government skills – are accumulated over long periods of time  and represent inherent advantages to those lucky enough to be born into positive circumstances. The offsetting policy idea to the resulting socioeconomic imbalance centers on distributive justice. Note, however, that UBI is not aimed at equalizing incomes but at distributing more fairly the characteristics of real freedom, possibilities, opportunities.

“UBI weakens the cash nexus, de-commodifies labor power, boosts socially useful yet unpaid activities, protects against forced mobility and destructive globalization, and emancipates from the despotism of the market.”

(119) An additional  underpinning for the logic of distributive justice is that all material goods ultimately derive from natural resources which initially were not owned by anyone. The collectivity of these assets justifies the use of a UBI.

(137) In terms of affordability of a UBI, in the United States, non-social public expenditures = 13% GNP, public expenditures on education and health = 12%, and other social expenditures = 10% (pensions are 6% of this). In France, the respective numbers are 17%, 12%, and 22% (12% being pensions).

“If half of the cash part of social expenditures is eliminated with a UBI of 25% of GNP, then the required tax rate [using the above data, which definitionally equate expenditures with tax rate] is 55% of GDP in USA and 65% in France. [55% in the USA represents a 57% increase versus the base of 35%; 65% is only a 28% boost from the current level in France.]

(147-167) As has been pointed out in numerous places [elsewhere in policy circles], capital is taxed at an advantageous rate compared with that applied to labor. This needs to be redressed; moreover, tax policies need to be global or regional because of the mobility of capital. One idea, admittedly a political non-starter in most countries, is that of state ownership of industries, but with said companies privately managed. Another related concept is public ownership of natural resources.

UBI could be partially financed through the printing of additional money (the European Community actually floated such a concept, not connected to a UBI, as a way to dig its countries out of the recent financial crisis). There could be a tax on the circulation of money and an expanded VAT.

The UBI could be modified based on age or type of occupation or cohort group. It could begin with a partial amount. Accompanying a UBI should be enhanced childcare provisions and the complete portability of pensions.

(173) In 2016, Switzerland held a referendum regarding UBI: 23% were for and  77% against. Support was only 10% among >70 years old; it was 22% for <30 years old. There was no significant difference by income level or gender; city dwellers were 32% in favor, compared with 19% for those in rural areas.  Self-employed respondents were 36% in favor.  Those voting Yes believed a UBI discussion should be started; the No voters did not believe that a UBI could be financed.

A 2011 poll in the United States elicited a decidedly negative response, 82% to be specific. On the other hand, a 2015 poll in France had a positive response of 60%. As always, phrasing of survey questions is critical; the French query indicated that UBI would replace most existing benefits.

Added Comment

For every five-year age cohort from 80-85 down to 0-5, the white percentage declines and the non-white percentage rises. At the lowest age bracket, the composition of population is roughly 50-50. These data are not dependent on the beneficial changes to immigration suggested above. The real question then is whether power is transferred peacefully, a rather important factor!

Historians might well be skeptical about our ability to avoid a revolution, as inconceivable as that might seem from the vantage point of 2017. Alternatively, what is taking place without much publicity is that billionaire members of The Giving Pledge (who are as likely to be Democrat as Republican) are dictating much of the social/education reform agenda of this country.

It is not completely clear which alternative is preferable, given the long-term record of smart people attempting to plan the lives of the masses.  Perhaps a UBI would be quite useful as a restraint on “good” ideas carried to disastrous consequences. Note that a UBI itself is not connected to anybody’s Utopian fantasy but aimed at expanding the range of life choices among people who at present are limited in that regard. Living solely on a UBI would be difficult for the vast majority of individuals.

 

BobHowittBooks.com/?page_id=22

When you look at a Russian nesting doll, you can describe it perfectly. Then the outer doll is removed, and with it, your prior accuracy.

When you hold the kaleidoscope to your eye, you can easily describe what you see.  Then you twist the cylinder and the picture is totally different even as the material contents are unchanged.

Social scientists are continually faced with an analytical dilemma: is the issue being discussed  happening more or less often, or is it that data gathering techniques have been improved, or maybe the unequivocal truth was always there and had simply been ignored.

So I ask myself: am I seeing “things” differently or have the “things” changed.

It seems like the world is screwed up: peaceful disagreement is nowhere to be found, but does not a reading of history suggest that horrible stuff is more the norm than the exception.

It appears that this country is completely messed up, but people are working, inflation is low, residents from everywhere want our currency, immigrants (still) want to live here, and the stock market is at record highs.

In the area of education reform that is near and dear to the writer, high achieving schools of choice are reaching more students than ever, but rancor within the reform community has risen and the vitriol from the unionized opposition is uglier than ever.

Bringing it even closer to home, the WKBJ Foundation has had a quarter century of great success but this past year has seen more students stopping out of school (hopefully to return sometime) and more difficult/emotional conversations and decisions than in any prior period.

One factor is that heretofore, in the structure of WKBJ’s various programs, I ignored the multi-level failures of the local high school. More recently the results of these shortcomings are young people in my office who have never been given a whit of guidance, on either college or the existence of perfectly valid non-college paths to successful lives.

Simultaneously, as WKBJ approaches its 2020 expiration date, I might be a bit cranky. For sure, I am less likely to look the other way at completely nonsensical actions (or non-actions), predominantly by adults who should be more aware of the total picture of education, but also including some students.

In any case, WKBJ can no longer take on new students. Meeting young people and being with them for many, many years of their lives has been the heart of my activities, and it has been hugely rewarding, and, equally important, fun!

Meanwhile, I interact regularly with a delightful eight year-old girl. She is energetic, verbal, healthy, strong, happy, fearless, curious, creative, funny, compassionate, a reader, a writer — and I find myself valuing these traits more than various shortcomings in her academic results.

What does that mean, I wonder, about the way I look at education overall. Good question!

Overall, if I am in a funk, is it a function of different specific situations, i.e., something which might be labeled “reality,” or the result of my viewing angles being different, i.e., “perception.”

Oh yes … and what shall I do about my funk?

 

 

Whether playing three card monte with a sidewalk shark or watching the magician levitate an elephant in front of your eyes or attempting to outwit the stock market, the key is what you do not see. The perpetrators of the misconception rely on you to be focused elsewhere, either directly or indirectly.

What is happening right now in Washington can fairly be labeled a tragedy or farce or abomination or some other colorful descriptor.  However, as ridiculous as the scene, the actors, and the screwed-up messaging may be, I think of the whole situation as constituting a diversion from the reality of America (or maybe I call it a diversion because I want to be diverted from the current American world).

The incomplete list below is of on-going challenges to the country that are not being addressed.  This was the habit of prior Presidents as well, and, unfortunately, probably would be mostly true if the losing presidential candidate of 2016 were instead in office.

Social Issues:

The impact of demographic change, which is happening irrespective of immigration policies.

An absence of any substantive discussion about the impact of single parent “familiies.”

The collateral damage caused by a conflicted criminal justice system.

The balkanization of America, as more people live and work with others of the same political views.

A chilling repression of free speech on college campuses and elsewhere.

Education:

The role of social media/technology.

The multiple shortcomings of both the education system and the education reform debate.

Financial:

Entitlements as a rising/unaffordable percentage of government budgets.

Healthcare costs which are double those of peer economies, with drug prices rising 10%++ annually.

Economic:

Rising income inequality and, as important, a reduction in both mobility and the belief in advancement.  (How does one fighting for 2% wage increases relate to a hedge fund manager earning a billion dollars in a single year, to a painting being sold for over $100 million, to a $20 million house in the Hamptons being torn down to build a bigger mansion!)

Productivity increases which do not support a level of economic growth that could mask other ills.

 

 

This is not a guessing game, or a made for social media streaming event. This is really … real!

I am crying inside, and sometimes outside, trying to figure out who this Latina is, who I am!

OK, my given name is Patricia, which can throw people off guard. After all, it does not immediately flag my ethnicity, like “Maria” might for example. Besides, to use the ugly term of this country’s racist past (present), my complexion allows me to “pass.” What I’m saying is this: I can be in conversations with other college students who make offensive comments about immigrants without knowing my situation. Do I speak up?

I am a first generation student. Through this fact alone, I’m frequently labeled a role model by well-meaning adults. Perhaps other young people like this label, but I do not appreciate the extra level of pressure. Besides, this label often evolves into being considered the spokesperson for an entire ethnic category. Yes, this could be really cool and provide me with motivation, to be a flag-bearer, to show others how aspirations can be fulfilled. But tell me, does a white student get asked how whites as a group feel about a particular issue?

Maybe I should not have taken the financial aid package that led me to this well-known private college filled with students who are white and affluent. The latter casually make plans for restaurants and clubs and weekend activities that, individually, would empty my thin pocketbook for the rest of the semester. Yes, I have a few dollars left from my job, and I know that many white kids work hard too, but seriously, do you think that I feel better when one of my new friends offers to pay for something just so I can go along?

My academic advisor is skilled – at glancing at the class schedule I have put together, giving it the smell test, and then signing. Do you think she actually knows me – where I am from, what I value, how I learn? Okay, I admit it, I have not tried as hard as I could to help her know me.

The professors all seem really smart but vary greatly in their attitude toward students, whether they are accessible or even show up for their stated office hours. I do wonder, have they read the studies which demonstrate that different young people absorb knowledge differently? Or have I forgotten that nobody can care about my success as much as I do.

I go to the gym simply to work off my frustrations, or at least try to. Yeah, it is so pleasant to hear guys talking about networking or going into their father’s business when they graduate or ogling the blonde airhead on the next bike, whose presence at the college came through something called the “legacy” route. Is there an alternative to this activity as a stress reliever that is both legal and effective? Or do I put on headphones, shut out the noise, and, without wanting to, disappear further into my shell?

Hungry as I may be after a workout, I cringe at the thought of more bland, seasoning-deprived food from the corporate vendor in the college cafeteria. Mom, where are you when I need you?
Do I verbally react to the guys on the walk back to the dormitory attempting more grab ass than normal, feeling immune to discipline because their man is in the White House?

Some good news … maybe: diversity has been accomplished by my school! All they need to do is add the composition of the sports teams to that of EOP to that of the majority of the student body, and they are able to fill out the ethnic breakdown questionnaire in a manner which passes the test of political correctness. For those keeping a different kind of score, would you like to see the diversity in a classroom where an academically rigorous subject is being taught?

When I manage on an occasional weekend to get home, I have to shift gears once again, explaining to Mom (and once in a while, my mostly uninvolved Dad) how difficult my college courses are, attempting to connect with local friends whose higher education experience is at the nearby community college. How can I not be comfortable here … these are my American roots.

Often the conversational emphasis with these hometown peers is about their boyfriends or girlfriends.  Meanwhile, I have no helpmate to take me out of my funk. How could I be with a guy, trying to figure him out, when I cannot even figure myself out!

I go to my part-time job at a factory. It is virtually all undocumented adults working at jobs far below their educational attainment in their home country. Spanish is the predominant language and Trump tales a common subject of worried conversations; everybody seems to know somebody who has lost his or her job after being loyal employees for a decade or more. Where do I, fortunately now a legal resident, fit in this job setting that brings me the money I need for books and gas?

Maybe I am just caught up in an elaborate pity party for myself. Or maybe I am telling it like it is for many Latinas. Or maybe, the truth is really simple: this is just one person’s point of view.

All is know is that every decision– both education and otherwise, every place where this Latina is temporarily located, every interaction I have, the question never goes away: Who am I?

 

 

 

(I am not sure where the thoughts below came from exactly – and they are not in any particular order: probably the answer is that there were multiple sources, including the writer thankfully.)

The high school student who is on a path to success is one who is proactive.

The people with whom they interact – guidance counselors, parents, mentors, siblings, friends –  are assistants or coaches or supporters, but —  they cannot do what you must do for you.

Therefore, High School students, here are some must-dos:

Practice self-discipline: distinguish between a need and a want; regard real reading as central, not peripheral; recognize that parties can happen anytime, unlike the required paper for school.

Take initiative: do research on college requirements, talk with everybody who can contribute to your understanding of the higher education or job world path, take the time to learn the basics of personal finance and begin to gain an understanding of college debt.

Pick five colleges and gather information on them.

When you are meeting somebody during a college tour or applying for a scholarship or interviewing for a job, arrive early and have some questions for the other person.  You gain more from a conversation than from a monologue.

Create class schedules, beginning in your freshman year, which are compatible with what you hope to study in college.

Get involved on a consistent basis with a school activity or an outside volunteering commitment.

Take responsibility: tell your parents if they are doing too much for you.

Know what these mean:  GPA, SAT, ACT.

Avoid being addicted to social media.

Understand that you are not alone: everybody is nervous about college: time management, becoming independent, roommates, money, homesickness, academics (!), networking, geographic adjustments.

Realize that these same students are like you: eager for new experiences, new friends, new environments, new levels of independence, new subjects of interest, new activities.

Being proactive helps you in two fundamental ways.

First, it means you are taking ownership of decisions which are yours to make. Second, it makes you better prepared for when you need to talk about important issues with those in your support group.

 BobHowittbooks.com/?page_id=22

Follow the trail: taxpayers, through the Federal Direct Loan program, lend money to higher education students, who then turn it over to colleges, who pay their professors and staff.  Upon graduation, students repay the taxpayers. Through the multiple years involved in this process, the only category stressed by the financial schematic is that of students. Conceptually, it is as if taxpayers gave the money to college/professors/staff, providing more than decent livelihoods to the majority of those involved, but then requested the lowest paid sector, newly graduated students, to pay them back.

Maybe this would be okay if the Pell Grant and the above low-interest federal loans covered the cost of college, as they did at the outset, and the early years, of the underlying legislation. Maybe it would be okay if there was a proportional approach of debt repayment to income.

However, in the past 25 years, the cost of college has increased at a rate more than double that of inflation. As a result, it takes a much bigger percentage of income for parents to send their child off to seek a diploma, which, to worsen the picture, only has a 50-60% chance of actually happening.

This escalation of costs does not, as it would in private industry, connote anything with respect to a bottom line. Graduation rates have not been enhanced. The only visible effects from the disproportionate increases in tuition, room and board, and required fees are: more college presidents earning over a million dollars, a sharp increase in administrative staffing, escalation in salaries of professors, and new dormitories which are marketed like fancy apartments but financially have the added attraction, to the school, of being required purchases at a fixed price for students who either choose or must dorm.

Behind this cost growth has been the willingness of the aforementioned taxpayers and other lenders (about 15% is from private creditors) to fund the system. This has produced ever increasing debt levels for students, who, upon graduation, cannot afford their debt repayments for a period of time.

(If STEM majors were up, one might argue that more expensive professors are required; however, STEM majors are down. And, contrary to private enterprise, there is no connection of college costs to something called “supply and demand.”)

And at no time has there been any real pressure on colleges to cut their costs. In fact, they brag when announcing tuition increases that are only slightly above inflation. Like a three card monte scam on the sidewalk, this irritating arrogance shifts attention away from steeper increases in both room and board and a laundry list of mandatory fees.

In the past (not sure what that timeframe might be; it would precede the Great Recession of 2006-08), the progression of at least four-year graduates to full participants in the real economy took place in a fairly predictable fashion. Now, high debt levels prevent this. Besides the rising preference of many young people for rental situations because of multiple non-economic factors, the ultimate non-historical economic outcome is now a sharp growth in rentals of homes, not apartments.

Adding insult to the injury being inflicted on student borrowers is that five years ago, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke encouraged investment firms to buy up houses, and Fannie Mae, which is government controlled, is guaranteeing the debt of the private company that is doing the purchasing (WSJ: 1-25-17). “Fannie Mae’s involvement signals a belief that home ownership will remain out of the reach for many Americans.   As an additional layer of angst, the record on evictions of basically anonymous Wall Street homeowners reportedly is more negative than that of small landlords who, in many cases, have eyeball relationships with their tenants.

So taxpayer money has been transferred to colleges and to Wall Street, courtesy of a debt repayment system which is stacked against the very individuals supposedly being helped by the former to create economically viable lives.

Seems like a big mismatch.

It could be rectified by the federal government (a) basing their indirect funding of colleges (particularly loan monies) on some algorithm that includes graduation rates (initial attempts in this direction have been met with heavy resistance by, guess who, the leaders of colleges), inflation, and average earnings after graduation, and, simultaneously, (b) redesigning the student debt repayment schedule along the lines already in place in various countries. [Note that states are already moving in the direction of (a).]

For example, in Australia, repayments do not begin until the student borrower is earning over $40,000 (American equivalent). Then, the repayment is 4-8% of income, accomplished through a conventional withholding approach. The policy assumption is that 20% or so of total debt will never be collected, for one of three reasons: (1) the student’s earnings never reach the threshold amount, (2) the student passes away before full repayment, or (3) the student leaves the country and his earnings are not subject to the Australian withholding process.

Student debt defaults/delinquencies under the current American system are on pace to exceed the Australian assumption, without two of the three reasons being relevant. Subpar earnings are obviously a factor behind financial problems for student debtors in the United States, even though there is no legislated connection of income to repayment, except on a delayed, long-term basis under one of the multiple, complicated federal repayment programs.

Numerous organizations in the United States have put together their own proposals for revisions in the student debt repayment situation. Perhaps now, with economists and politicians scratching for incremental growth in GNP, there is an opportunity for reworking a system which has become a drag on productive economic activity.

Calculating the offsets of homebuilding/rental activity to any incremental slowness in debt repayment beyond the existing high rate is beyond my pay grade. Somehow, though, a transfer of money from newcomers to the labor market to those who have assisted in the higher education process, i.e., taxpayers, and those who are profiting from the financial mismatch, e.g., Wall Street firms, seems contradictory to the oft-expressed desire for greater, more balanced expansion of incomes.

 

 

 

The young people who are the main characters in this modest essay are verbal, articulate in a somewhat narrowly defined way, with energy and positive personalities. Within their cohort, they are seen as high-achieving, blessed with attractive combinations of talent and grit. With the help of non-profit organizations and EOP or similar programs, each committed to assisting individuals who often will be the first in their family to pursue a college degree, these young people are introduced to the culture of college before they have set foot in a completely real higher education classroom.

All to the good, for sure.

However, all too frequently – after a few weeks of college, these young people discover they have a competitive deficit in their knowledge bases. Their high schools simply were neither comprehensive nor rigorous enough to provide the academic preparation which is the necessary, although not sufficient, requirement for four-year college success. The step up to the educational challenges of college is a geometric change, not arithmetic: abrupt and steep … and often demoralizing. (And the inadequacies of their high school guidance counseling are equally more clearly revealed.)

At the same time, colleges want these very students, often minority and financially challenged young people who are not well represented on the rolls of private universities in particular. They offer major financial assistance, and are willing to put aside as not a substantive impediment, the adverse comparison of the student’s SAT results and the average SAT level at the institution they are attending.

In contrast, the leader of an atypical high-performing public school serving this same constituency insists that “academic preparation is the best path to college scholarships” …and to graduation, I would add.

What should be affixed to this statement is that if a scholarship is not dominated by academic accomplishment (leaving aside athletic or special skill based scholarships) but instead is primarily predicated on a combination of soft inputs—passion, motivation, campus support services—many times that financial aid will be at risk when the deficit in content knowledge becomes apparent.

The result of this combination – good support financially but a sobering realization on the academic side, is that the student may feel the need to downshift his major,  here defined as going from a more rigorous sector, e.g., engineering, to one with less demanding specific requirements, e.g. business administration.

The assumption (perhaps misguided) when a freshman indicates an intended major is that meaningful thought has gone into his or her selection, leaving aside the dilemma that, despite having filled out those career interest sheets, sometimes the student simply does not know what skill sets are associated with a particular major. (Note that this identification of a major should not be confused with that of a much younger student who, when asked by an adult what he or she wants to be, answers with readily recognizable careers like doctor, pro athlete, lawyer [maybe less true today], rock star. Then the adult pats the kid on the head and says, “great,” while inside the former is saying, “lots of luck” or maybe, “you will change.”

Downshifting of majors once a student has had his or her initial immersion in college and its academic rigor becomes a way to hopefully maintain that crucially important scholarship support and avoid the multiple difficulties of transferring to another school to pursue the new major.

The growing use by colleges of predictive analytics (New York Times, “Will You Graduate? Ask Big Data”, February 2, 2017) will bring more attention to this issue, which might be labeled “the right major for the right student” even though that sounds like the match is more knowable than is possible in reality. Schools using analytics have found that certain grades in certain courses are above-average predictors of success and vice-versa; e.g., if a student gets below a B in a “foundational course” in their major, their chances of graduating plummet. (I wonder if the same colleges have run any academic outcome correlations relevant to professors who do little actual teaching, instead mostly telling their students to look up course-related information on the internet.)

Colleges who are using predictive analytics are adding large numbers to their academic adviser rosters. The hope is that in doing so, they will be quicker to catch situations requiring remedial action: signing up for the wrong courses, reluctance to seek tutorial assistance, difficulties with time management — each of which can be connected to identification of the right major for the student.

Again, all to the good, for sure.

At the end of the day, however, it is a struggle to envision well-meaning colleges – analytically oriented or not– and student supportive organizations being able to systemically overcome inadequate high school academic preparation. The efforts of the young people, the contributions of those who are assisting along the way, and the positive intentions of the colleges are a collective effort to patch up the broken legs of subpar high school systems with elaborate band-aids. Success becomes anecdotal, not the outcome of a structurally better preparation for higher education.

 

 

Deep breath – an attempt, before tonight’s speech,  at a dispassionate appraisal of President Trump’s actions regarding immigration.

GOOD: he has kept DACA in place so far. Of course, if you are one of the “deplorables” who believed he should follow through religiously on every campaign vow, you are disappointed.

GOOD: his priority will be to deport the estimated 700,000 illegal immigrants who happen to be felons. Uh, Obama had the same priority, so Trump gets no incremental credit. But it would be nice if immigration advocacy groups applauded the removal of criminals; after all, they adversely affect the optics of the overall immigration situation.

Similarly, advocates might convey an understanding of what is more than a nuance, namely that rates of change affect attitudes, e.g. if the Hispanic percentage rises gradually in a particular locale, there is not the angst that occurs when the proportion climbs sharply. There is an adjustment in the former instance: there is real, everyday human interaction as opposed to ill-informed sloganeering about who is taking which jobs.

BAD: the border wall idea – a lousy return on investment; better, if greater enforcement is the goal, to put money into people (which he is doing as well actually) and technology, not bricks and mortar. Even better, relax a touch, there has been no net immigration from Mexico in the past few years.  That is not to say that the criminality aspect itself is of no consequence.  According to the “Economist” (2-24-17) Latin America and the Caribbean, representing 9% of the world’s population, account for one-third of all murders. There are some 20 million individuals in what the Brits call the “NEET” category: not employed or pursuing education or being trained. Not good.

REALLY BAD: Through multiple actions, telling illegal immigrants that they are not safe in this country, even if they have been here for years. If there was a dragnet pick-up and deportation of ten+ million hard-working people (who often occupy jobs that the rest of us would not take on a bet), inflation would spike and real economic growth would decline, the opposite of what Trump’s economic expansion agenda is intended to accomplish.

Some 41% of Latinos overall now “have serious concerns about their place in America” (Pew Research Center, 2-24-17). A survey from the same source indicates that only 5% of Americans believe that diversity makes the country worse (the number is 10% among conservatives). Both figures, which are counterintuitively below what they were only six months ago, are stunningly low when contrasted with the anti-immigrant energies being deployed by the Trump administration to accomplish something that apparently cannot move the needle much on attitudes.

The United States has capital; it needs to import, not export, people if it wants to have the economic growth level that just might reduce tensions a tad.  Putting billions into an additional 5,000 border patrol and 10,000 ICE agents, adding immigration judges and asylum officers for what purpose? Economically, older people (who skew white) need more younger workers (who skew non-white) to fund the social security coffers which otherwise will run dry.  According to the “Wall Street Journal” (2-23-17), the number of retirees per 100 workers, now 27, will be 48 by 2065. With no immigration, the latter is 56.

In summary, everything Trump has proposed regarding immigration, save maintenance of DACA, works against his desire for faster economic growth.

P.S. Hate does not defeat hate. Civility has been on the decline in the USA for decades; now it is in free fall. Everybody comes armed with an agenda, neatly circumscribed by the size of a poster or the length of a tweet. Productive discourse is minimal. Want to blame Trump – be my guest. The trends were already in place as the country becomes more and more geographically and politically balkanized.

The inability to have dialogue at public gatherings will simply drive even more planning/plotting to closed door deliberations. (Hard to believe in the current environment, but I once picketed a Humphrey rally [Google him—he was an important man] and when he saw me, he smiled and came over, extended his hand, which I shook in a friendly manner.  Full disclosure compels me to add that the person behind me said I was a fascist and tore off a corner of my poster, so it was not perfect civility.)

There is a saying,” liberals love humanity, it’s people they can’t stand.” The latter are not a tidy philosophical construct; they are individuals with their own combinations of beliefs. A person may be against Trump’s position on immigration, in favor of states making their own rules about transgender bathroom access, against further excursions into the Middle East, for a two-state solution regarding Israel and Palestine, and in favor of an economic policy which keeps more jobs in this country. They may applaud diversity while living in a community that scarcely has any. They might think that learning rudimentary English should be a requirement of anybody coming to the USA to stay.

So what! “Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.” (Emerson)