Be A Golden Rule Citizen! 

A Conversation With America & the World
Creating the Future 2012
Where the New World Begins!

My Favorite Place I Ever Worked

I've studied a great number of business models and management styles over the years. It's always interesting to identify what makes an organization succeed or fail.

Menu

	For the Love of the World A  Book
	Site Search
	My Journals
	Vernacular-Chuck's Dictionary
	My Favorite Clipart
	Recommended
	Trip to South Africa 2005
	News
	Books
	Bitter Pills -
	Psychotronics, PsyOps & Illegal Gov't Harassment, Directed Energy Attacks. Please read this for your own sake.

When I was in the second grade, my teacher gave me a test after school one day. I always thought tests were fun, and since this meant spending more time with my favorite teacher ever, I was willing.

The only part I remember was when she showed me a picture of a corner section of a small brick wall, and wanted me to tell her how many bricks I saw.

In theory, the answer was simple to compute simply by counting the actual number of bricks shown in the picture. So I told her. I can't remember the actual number of bricks, but let's just say it was 7.

So , I said "7". And then I paused and looked at her, and said "I can see 7 bricks, but if you wanted to build a brick wall that would support that wall, you'd have to use 11 bricks". I was, of course, referring to the additional number of bricks required for the foundation that would ensure the wall was stable.

She looked at me and said "What's your answer?".

I said, "I see 7 bricks, but it would take 11 bricks to build that wall."

She said, "So do you see 7 or l1 bricks?"

I said "Do you want to know how many I see, or how many it would take to build that wall?"

She said, "You tell me".

This went on for a while, back and forth, until she made it clear she wanted my final answer.

I said "I don't have enough information to answer the question."

She said "Okay, well the test is over".

I thought I was in trouble. Nobody ever said a word about it to me again, and I was glad years later when I realized I had actually done okay on the test.

In a big way, I believe that the citizens of the United States, as well as other nations, are constantly being asked to make decisions without having all the facts or without knowing what the real questions are that would address the root of problems. But, how can you remedy a situation when you don't have the facts to tell you what needs to be remedied?

You can certainly apply a theory, a paradigm, toward the resolution of a problem or issue that should work, but how can you possibly derive a complete plan of governance and national or global wellbeing - in every domain, health to economics - if you can't actually define the problem.

It's like passing a law or having a policy to address an issue, a policy that is allocated funding that turns out to be 10% of what is needed. Or, passing federal laws that must be implemented by states without providing the funding at all. Meanwhile, in public, the reports are that positive action was taken when all that really occurred, regardless of intent or desire, is that an unfunded law was effected and rendered useless, but provided a soundbyte or photo-op that deceives us into thinking things are being handled.

These days, managing and promoting such false images is a skill and an art called politics. I believe it's fraudulent.

I have another story about the corporate business I enjoyed working at most. A business where I believe the work environment was collegial and quite quite comfortable, where the people were, for the most part team players and very professional, where the products we offered and supported were exceptional, and where the leadership, the founder and CEO, was brilliant. Someone I respect a great deal.

He believed in good products and good support. It was an international software development company that delivered on its reputation. But good corporations, like the United States, get into trouble when image means more than substance.

My favorite example was when he proudly installed a knowledge base system throughout the company that allowed us all in support as well as in QA, software development and sales, to access information that could provide instant remedies and fixes for problems and issue people had with software.

It was an excellent system that was also very useful. For example, it would provide us with an answer, down the road, for the mysterious problem that we got 19   support calls for one day that no one had ever heard of before and, to my knowledge, never heard of again after that one day. Anomalies. Difficult problems. The identification of bugs and workarounds.

The CEO issued a policy in the support departments for all technicians to record 10 of these more interesting software issues per week in order to build a more useful and robust database that could be used in the field, or even sold as a product to software developers throughout the world. It was a high priority for about a month, and it was supposed to contain answers for issues not already documented in one way or another.

The problem was, we had this requirement to enter a specific number of items. And some technicians would get frustrated, and simply type in sections of the manual that came with the software in order to fulfill the statistical requirement 

The CEO saw the reports about the number of items being entered and was thrilled, issuing a memo thanking everyone and encouraging us to continue the practice. Unfortunately, the more material that was entered, the less useful and more cumbersome the system became.

In the end, I was directly involved in managing the information for my department, as well as massaging the information from every department for every product, and I can tell you first hand that it was fortunate that I had the authority to discard a great deal of useless information in order to fit it on a CD.

It was a good idea, it had a great deal of good information and was useful, but the truth is, despite meeting statistical goals and appearing to be a great success, it did not actually provide the answers and solutions required to accomplish the missions it was developed to address and resolve. Still, people got promoted for their supervision of the project.

I mentioned all that not as a criticism, but as an observation.

An observation that could apply to many organizations or efforts, and most definitely fits the way that politics and the government of the United States has operated for a  very long time.

The problem, as with the global economic crisis and the parallel economic crunch in the United States, is that despite the public surprise expressed by members of Congress and banking institutions, the economic crisis was quite predictable and not even recently.

Even I was predicting it back in 2002 simply because of my understanding of the goals and methods being employed toward social and economic engineering since the 1950's in order to implement the global plan of the New World Order, primarily organized in the United States  under the auspices of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Tri-lateral Commission with the initial funding and sustained support of the Rockefeller family, guided by the planning and leadership of Jimmy Carter when he designed the Tri-lateral plan that caused so much controversy in the late 1950's. 

It's important to understand that the economic ploys used over the years to enrich what are now the most powerful multi-national corporations, fully entrenched in what Pres. Eisenhower called the Military Industrial Complex that we should now call Corporate Socialism Complex, are always  declared a success to one degree or another because of rebounds in the Gross Domestic Product, or increases in the stock market that reflect speculative corporate activity, ways we have been taught that reflect the health of our economy which rarely reflect the socio-economic conditions of the citizens.

I've been trying to decide how to speak about deficits and fiscal responsibility, looking for that magic number that I think would accurately reflect the fiscal obligations of the government, for everything from long-term entitlements to short-term or year to year operating deficits.

On any given day, I can come up with reports from various sources, including the government, that would tell you for any given purpose that our real national debt is anywhere from $30 trillion to $300 trillion, and more.

The key phrase in all that is "for any given purpose". I could tell you a number and the specific context for using that number, and all it would do is cause  a public debate of one side claiming one set of numbers and another side claiming another set of numbers and the outcome of that debate, as intended, would be nullification of all numbers, and the public would still be purposely uninformed.

I say purposely, cynically, because the truth is, I know there are professionals working in governmental departments who actually know the truth about everything, and void of politics, the problems would be less severe than they could be, but because of politics... the bottom line is, I doubt politicians would dare to tell the truth on economic, and other issues, because so many promises and campaigns have been made based upon conveniently developed economic figures, that to disclose the truth could also lead to their impeachment. Not even because they're lying. But because even they don't know how to find out the real truth without "go along to get along"politics getting in the way.

As I write this, the nation is debating health care, with an over-riding theme being expressed by Barack Obama of  needing to cut costs. Others argue against socialism and government run health care and health care rationing, as well as free enterprise: capitalism.

It concerns me because of the same things I speak of in "Creation, Always Creation".

So far, and I admit I haven't heard everyone talk about it, but I haven't heard one person in elected office ask the most important question of all: what would it take for every United States citizen to receive the health care they need? And go from there. From scratch. From the bottom up, based on need.

And then there's the second question, about cutting costs. We speak of cutting costs in relation to the granting or denial of services. Why isn't the focus on healthier diet and food production partnered with preventative medicine?

Years ago, we would speak of pro-active approaches and 75 year plans.

These days, Obama speaks of "What we can do". Meaning, taking into account all the corporate and special interests, what he can pass in Congress without losing campaign contributions and losing seats in the House and Senate because of retaliatory efforts in upcoming elections.

I find it interesting that it's nearly impossible to have an intellectually honest, adult conversation on this and related subjects because the political discussions, these days, are always economics based with carrot and stick approaches that simply mislead. Never about what the best thing to do would be.

Constantly ending up repairing structures that no longer provide the service they were intended to provide on foundations that will crumble if they are not maintained. Making minute, incremental alterations that make no appreciable difference on a to do list that 's been far too long neglected due to the expediency of modern politics of imagery and false perception.

One says, we'll give you tax breaks and put money back in your pockets. Money back that increases the nation's deficits that we complain about, that make infrastructure repair impossible, and provide "cover stories" to justify tax breaks for individuals and corporations who make campaign donations to politicians.

The other says, we won't increase income taxes, but then turn around and look for ways to covertly nickel and dime you to death with taxes on sodas and juices and other items, that, in the long run, cost you more in taxes than if you had simply paid more income tax.

These are the same "tricks of government" used to manipulate and control the masses for centuries, primarily based on the idea of telling them what you want them to think, not what they need to know.

What I'm trying to express to you, more than anything else, is that we require leadership that not only understands the needs of citizens and the willingness to earnestly resolve the issues we're all facing, directly, honestly and openly with a commitment to see results on the ground.

That leadership will require the ability of a person to work with citizens, the people who know what they need and how to get the job done, to empower them to reduce the size of government without reducing the effectiveness of a government and at the same time, get the job done. I'm certain the victims of Hurricane Katrina and current residents in New Orleans could speak volumes about that.

As adults, I bet we could agree that we can handle the truth about our economy, environment and more, truth that is suppressed for political or economic reasons, truth that would allow us, as citizens, to develop ways to address issues on local and regional levels with accurate information that at least lets us know what we're working with. 

One day, I went to a boss of mine - a very intelligent man I respected. We'd been having talks about how to approach a variety of projects, and he was getting to the point of making decisions about the budget to commit as well as the number of people and technologies to use.

Before the conversation was over, I assured him that whatever he decided, given that I could see a number of ways to approach things, that if we were building a house, and all he could afford was a nickel, that I'd make sure he got the best house a nickel would buy.

Very simply, it's time we took an honest look at what the vision of this nation was, reflect on what the vision of this nation and the world should be, what we agree on and what we must allow for, as well as re-establishing the responsibilities of government to the will of citizens, the foundation of Democracy in this Republic, and the basis for a just society as envisioned by our founding fathers who understood the role this nation could play in the world as it was established based upon the paradigm of the Kingdom of God, as I've come to learn, as my favorite patriot Patrick Henry understood. As remembering our heritage will reveal.

But it all begins with revealing... the truth. Not for purposes of criminality or blame, but to understand the true scope and nature of national debt and resources so that we can determine the first phase in the re-implementation of a   scaleable and time-tested model of governance capable of delivering the "world as it should be" 

Truth that allows us to know what we want and what we have to work with, so the work can begin with the knowledge that it will accomplish the intended result every time.

By empowering the citizens and causing a clean slate in the political system so that the United States is true to its intent, and worthy of being the example, the Lighthouse to the world again.