Yes, this is an opinion piece from everyone's favorite internet wannabe news site, and it's exquisite simplicity and penetrating truthfulness really capture my own feeling on what lay ahead for us in the next 5 or 10 years. This is worth reading, even if you don't agree with this assessment.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=176889

In His Grip,

christian_concern@yahoo.com

I agree that it's a near-perfect representation of what I know about your views. While I think it is prudent to prepare for hard times, I have too much faith in my neighbors, my community and human beings in general to occupy myself with the prospect of defending grandma from being pistol-whipped and robbed by roving bands of welfare-check marauders who have--thanks to liberalism--developed a sense of entitlement to take whatever they want by force. I think that's a fantasy born from right-wing echo-chamber hysteria about liberalism in general and is irrelevant to any scenario involving economic collapse.

Then there's the issue of the supposed inevitability of the collapse. I'm not with you on that one either, but perhaps that's for another thread.

We've been over this topic once or twice before, so I just wanted to drop in these quick thoughts and I'll try not to get embroiled in another long thread on the topic, unless you have questions about the positions I've expressed.

(PS thanks for calling WND a "wannabe news site." I wonder if you actually agree that it's not a legitimate news site, or if you are caricaturing critiques of it.)

I was just saving you and others the trouble because though the particular source really isn't the issue, it usually becomes the issue (i.e. an excuse not to engage in any discussion on the thread topic). I'd rather have a comment that has something to do with the thread, than to read comments about WND. So yeah, I don't believe it's a wannabe news site, but my strategy appears to have worked well. The thrust of your comments had mostly to do with the actual topic of the thread. I consider that a considerable victory. Thanks! I may respond to them later.

In His Grip,

christian_concern@yahoo.com

I’m glad you believe in prudence, as that will put you far ahead of about 95% of other Americans. However, I’m unable to account for your “faith in [your] neighbors”, unless you’re speaking specifically of people you know and have good relations? I agree with you though, you do have “too much faith in [your] neighbors”, particularly if neighbors simply refers to the masses of humanity that live in your area. I certainly hope you are correct, but nothing about what I’ve seen in my 32 years leaves me with the same optimistic attitude, as it relates to a spoiled and lazy country that’s had the rug pulled suddenly out from under it. Katrina and other events should shout to us all that in a time of great difficulty, there will be great chaos, criminality, and suffering. There will certainly be acts of goodness and altruism, but its impactful negatives that we’ll notice the most. That’s always the case. The few car accidents one might have over a 30 year driving career are always memorable, but how many thousands or millions of successful car rides go forgotten and taken for granted? The good or hoped for good behavior will never be as remarkable and consciously impactful as the baser aspects of human nature playing themselves out in real lives and events.



You’re probably right, as there is usually an unwillingness to discuss the topic anyway. Even Paul Krugman is now predicting a “third Great Depression” http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/pau ... /id/363250, and while I consider his prediction more of an alibi for why things went bad even though the government tried stimulus (not big enough for Krugman though), I still think it merits the ear/eye of those who profess to listen to people like him. He knows that the stimulus plans haven’t worked, and from my perspective, he probably wasn’t certain that his idea of giant stimulus would work either. In any case, the Keynesian idols are about to be thrown to the floor in a great morass of economic destruction. Cover your eyes & ears!



I really don’t have too many questions at this stage, though I would like to understand your perspective better. So far, I’ve mostly been waived off in discussions like this on the basis that I can’t give more precise timing, which I suspect no human being can do with large economic problems.

In His Grip,

christian_concern@yahoo.com

Since I know very little about your life experiences, I should not succumb to the temptation to accuse you of being pessimistic as a result of your own circumstances.




You haven't shown this to be true. All you can claim with confidence is that it's impactful negatives that you'll notice the most. And may I add that by planning for "chaos, criminality, and suffering," you may unwittingly be preparing to increase those things at the expense of peace and cooperation.

Happy to help, let me know if additional questions come up.

That’s certainly a concern, as I do think it’s possible for personal experience to unnecessarily bias one’s point of view. I don’t think that’s the case with me, but I certainly leave open the possibility that such a thing might be true. This same accusation can be made of every human being though, so it neither adds or detracts from the statement I made.



My statement should not be taken as a denial of any altruism on the part of mankind. In addition, my statement should also not be related to a situation like Haiti. I would submit that the American reaction to the sudden loss of food, water, electricity, etc…would be taken far differently by comparatively rich Americans, to include the poor, vs. the comparatively and generationally destitute Haitians who have had and still have virtually nothing to lose in the first place. A helpful analogy might be found in the difference between falling off a beam that is suspended 6 inches in the air vs. falling off a beam that is suspended 100 feet in the air. Americans, even the vast majority of our poor, live like kings compared to much of the rest of the world and so we have far further to fall. Physically and psychologically speaking, it would be far more jarring, disconcerting, and destructive to our materially built-up lives than it would be to a typical Haitian who lives in a dirt floor house without running water and who makes salt & clay mud cakes to sell in her neighborhood in order to keep her youngest child in school. A 1930’s American would have a far better reaction to something like Katrina than an American living in 2010 for the very same reasons. They were much closer to having nothing vs. something than we are today, and being so, they had far less of a distance to fall in terms of security and material comforts.



No, I can claim that most people notice the impactful negatives in their lives more than they do the more taken for granted or ordinary successes of day to day life. Think about the person who once in their life might get robbed at gun point. Do you really think they remember all the gun & robbery free days in their life before and after, or do you think they generally get taken for granted or are otherwise mostly forgotten? This is just the way human beings tend to work. Parents usually catch their kids in various acts of disobedience, but it’s somewhat more rare for parents to take the time to catch their kids in various acts of obedience and take the time to point it out and give praise to their child for exhibiting such good behavior. In short, we tend to notice and remember the aberrant, not the normal. If my statements are wildly inaccurate, please explain why. They seem quite non-controversial to me, obviously. As for “unwittingly [increasing chaos, criminality, and suffering] at the expense of peace and cooperation”, I would simply say that you can always gainsay an idea with counter-factuals, but it does nothing to really address the point being made. You might be doing the same thing by preparing your son or daughter to drive a vehicle one day, as they may end up having an accident or killing someone with their vehicle, but that doesn’t mean you’re wrong in preparing them for what is very likely, a necessary activity in their future life. I think of preparing for the future in the same way that many single and some married Americans think about having a condom. I’d rather have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. Given the current circumstances, this makes more sense than it’s ever made in our relatively short history. Never before have so many issues had both the potential and likelihood to go so wrong in such a big way as today.

In His Grip,

christian_concern@yahoo.com

I wonder if poet will take the bait.

Interesting timing.

What "bait" are you referring to? Is what I said supposed to be particularly appealing or unappealing to poet specifically? If so, why?

In His Grip,

christian_concern@yahoo.com

Gomtuu wrote:

The "bait" might be this part. Our procedure as parents, as spblat knows--and he and his wise and wonderful wife practice themselves--was to focus instead on the positive, to let our child know any way we could that positive behavior was truly excellent. Negative behavior was ignored if minor and redirected when possible. Punishment was rare and closely related to the aberration.

I tend to notice and remember the "normal" to excellent behavior in all things--not the occasional lapses (which we all have from time to time). I was never on the lookout to "catch" my kid "in various acts of disobedience"; we sought to minimize lapses. At lunch today, for example, my husband and I were talking about one face-saving way of switching from not so good to better behavior. Our son's nickname was "Easy"--after Easy-Rider and Easy-Reader (Sesame street). "Easy" became a kind of alter-ego--misbehaving child could switch to being "Easy" and we all played along, avoiding unnecessary conflict and hassles. It's hard to explain how this worked, but it did. He was/is a lovely son.

I had thought this bit might have provoked a reaction. Guess not

Gomtuu wrote
I must admit that there is usually so much I disagree with in one of Gom's long posts that I hardly know where to begin, so I missed this bit.

I disagree that abject poverty makes people more resilient and able to survive on very little--as opposed to Americans "who live like kings compared to much of the rest of the world . . . ." In TV coverage of the recent earthquake, I saw a fair number of Haitians passively standing in line or even fighting with one another, not behaving in a poverty induced, noble, self-sufficient manner. Most Haitians, of course, were helping one another, as people do in emergencies whether those people are comparatively rich or comparatively poor. In the U.S. the recent (and continuing) financial crisis has created the spectacle of rich people fending for themselves, even voting against the continuation of unemployment benefits for those out of work. (Fortunately, wiser and more compassionate voices and votes prevailed this week against foolish, self-serving ideology.)

Today I gave a $5 bill to a man in a wheelchair outside my local McDonalds. He was very thin and very obviously disabled; he smiled and said he was hungry, when I smiled at him and said hello. Brought tears to my eyes. Why should this man have to depend on people like me in this rich country? Who are the people who are voting against helping him and others like him? He is not taking advantage of "welfare", obviously. And there are many others who are thin and hungry and need government assistance.

Sorry. A rant. There are good, kind, generous, self-sufficient people. Some of them are rich, some poor, many in between. I don't think the amount of money in one's bank account is a reasonable metric for determining how self-sufficient a person would be under duress.

I could live very happily in a tent (or sleeping on the ground), cooking on a two-burner stove--and have done so, though by choice, rather than necessity. I could do it for quite a long time if needed. And I probably wouldn't qualify as poor, by great good luck, a lovely husband, and a great nation to live in.

I don't think we Americans are a weak, helpless people; I have a much more optimistic view of our future than Gom does. I don't know how much of this difference is because of our very different religious/philosophical views, but I suspect these views are at the heart of most of our differences of opinion.

I just wanted to comment on this, and note how I'm glad that my son is similar in many ways. I always make a point to praise him when he does things right and overcomes hard choices and obstacles. Because lord knows that I never got that from my parents. To be honest, my life mostly fit Gom's description, which seems to be the norm for many people. It's hard to get beyond the negativity for a lot of parents, but you end up with a child full of problems if you don't.

I try extra hard because I am aware of the problems that my lousy childhood created for me. (pretty much my entire 20s was a waste as a result) I'm now 40 and have my life in order again, but it could have been so much easier if I'd had parents like Poet and her husband. So I certainly won't let my son go through what I did. I think it's that perspective that makes it possible for me.

And a comment on your previous post, Poet:
I'm reminded of Ghandi's quote:
"A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members."

I guess I also understand as well, since I've been there as well when I was younger. I said that my 20s was a waste, and it really was an utter disaster, with problem after problem, and tons of financial issues. I've been hungry, cold, and nearly starving more times in my life than most people I know, through no fault of my own other than being young and unfortunate and poor. So I really have to think how dreadfully sad it is when I see people have bad attitudes towards the poor and needy in such a (potentially) great nation as ours is.

An interesting observation about the wealth redistribution during the 1979-2005 time frame.



It would be interesting to see post 2005 factored in as well.

A good cure for that faith is to watch the "celebration" in any city after its team wins a sports championship.