THINGS I WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT
Here are some things I really want to know more about - as in I REALLY want to talk these issues over and get some REAL information as well as some book-learning etc.
1. Autism, FASD and neurological impairments/delays in general (ADHD too). Does it make a difference what causes them because they all seem to manifest themselves in the same kind of handicaps and difficulties? Will their cause effect the treatment?
2. Why are the Autism, ADHD, and Reading Comprehension difficulty rates soaring thru the roof? Someone recently wrote that 1 in 6 students shows some kind of neurological delay. What the heck! Why is this on such a rapid increase?? Is anybody actually TRYING to figure out what is causing it?
3. Economics - who is right - Keynes or Laffer - raising taxes or cutting taxes? You hear the yellow bellied schills barking the mantras but that don't make it so. You never hear a genuine in depth discussion where points are challenged and allowed to be fully answered and PROOF not rhetoric and class warfare is employed.
4. If weight loss is really the magic bullet for most Type 2 diabetes control - why the hell aren't doctors more aggressive about making sure their patients lose weight - instead they just occasionally tell you to lose weight and keep pushing the temporary solution medications that eventually quit working and burn out your body resulting in death.
5. OK - SOMETHING VERY DIFFERENT - I want to know more about the ancient Celts and how they migrated to Ireland, Scotland, England and southern Europe (Asia too I guess). Where did they originate? What are their cultural distinctives? Etc.
6. What truly is the accepted, widely agreed upon definition of the "American Dream?" Has it been hijacked by rank materialism in the 20th century? Is it anathema (as some say) to true spirituality? What is living in Christian community really supposed to look like? Can we do it w/out pulling out of our regular society & culture?
7. How do we deal with the differing ideas and approaches to Christian spirituality - are they to be expected or a sign of error? In other words, are they God's way of protecting the Gospel from system-wide heresy (like the Catholic church of the Middle Ages) or a sign that the enemy of our souls is sowing tares among the wheat - which begs the question - who is wheat and who is a tare? (ouch - fodder for denominational wars)
WELL, those are some the things bouncing around in my head from time to time that I would love to interact with others about - but can never find any takers. Anyone?
posted by Ericosborneo | 10:12 AM
6 Comments:
Economics - I'm no economist, but I do enjoy reading and listening to certain economists (Friedman and Sowell are two of my favorites, so you can see where I'm coming from).
I take what I consider to be a "common sense" perspective on the question of whether to tax more or less (...and thus to spend more or less). Taxes are punitive; handouts (welfare, subsidies, social security, medicare, Obamacare, etc.) are rewards. You get less of the activities that you punish and more of those that you reward. The people spouting out Keynes' ideas today want to punish the producers and reward the moochers. They have different reasons for doing so, but the results are the same.
I have not researched this personally, but I recently saw an interview with Friedman (from decades past), where he said that Keynes' last letter suggested that he had concerns about people taking his ideas too far - that while they were right for the particular situation in the 30's, they were not broadly applicable.
Another thing that strikes me about this discussion is that
the Keynesian side seems to believe that the government is actually good at the job of economic improvement. I don't believe that to be true and I think that recent events have highlighted their inability to understand the consequences of their actions beyond the short term. 537 politicians cannot possibly have the combined knowledge required to make complex economic decisions affecting 307 million people in this country and 7 billion people around the world. They certainly cannot compete for that ability with a free market of producers and consumers (free to succeed or to fail).
I apologize for my lack of proof and my barking of mantras. For me, I see the proof all around, California makes an excellent study of what happens when you tax and regulate businesses and people to death to pay for lavish entitlements. How many businesses have moved to Arizona in the past few years? What effect did the new law taxing Amazon.com sales from CA have (Amazon doesn't do business with CA sellers anymore)?
I'd love to write more, but I must get to work.
If you haven't read it already, I would recommend Thomas Sowell's "Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One".
Thank you for the excellent feedback - you write clearly and, I think, present some serious ideas that need exploring. I will take you up on some of your reading suggestions too! I have always found Sowell's writing and speaking to be clear and powerful. Personally, I think Keynes was plain wrong in the 30s. His ideas and FDR's resulting policies made things worse for as long as they were followed, turning what probably would have been a short 2-3 year recession into a depression lasting well over a decade. And the fact that the current administration is using the similar policies (even identical language & reasoning) shows how dim they really are. And it is WE who will suffer - the fools living in the halls of power are immune.
Sorry, I meant that Keynes thought his ideas were right for the 30s. It's pretty clear that the only thing that brought us out of the depression was WWII.
I suspect that among the current administration there are some that truly believe that taxing and government spending will improve the economy, but that there are also those at the top and behind the scenes that don't believe that at all. They pursue these policies for more nefarious reasons.
I am concerned that we may be currently living in a government-induced economic bubble. They are propping up the housing market (even starting a new round of government-backed sub-prime loans), fiddling with the oil market (release of Strategic Oil Reserve), and above all printing money. Could these things (and others we are unaware of) be designed to cause a collapse of our government when the rug is finally pulled out from under the economy? We can't keep borrowing and printing money forever. They have made nearly half of the American people net tax consumers (moochers). Can you imagine the tantrums that will be thrown when the money runs out? What has been going on in Greece is nothing.
Well, that's my conspiracy theory for the day. I pray that it's not true and that if it is that there is still time to change directions and avoid such a horror.
At least we know how all this is going to end.
Autism, etc. - I am much less a medical doctor than I am an economist. Yet, I wonder if the increase in the reported rate of autism and associated disorders is actually due to an increase in incidence or merely due to an increase in diagnosis and reportage.
If there actually exists an increase in incidence commensurate with the increase in reportage, then we should be able to identify the root cause, whether genetic, environmental, or even a combination of the two(more likely).
After this discovery is made, then comes a truly interesting question... do we begin to select against the "autism gene"? To be more accurate, if we identify the genetic mutation or mutations associated with autism and we have the ability to select sperm or eggs without those alleles, should we do so? Would doing so be doing God's will to be good stewards of the resources bestowed upon us, or would it be an abomination?
On the other hand, if the cause turns out to be primarily environmental, then should we move to "ban" the potential source of the environmental cause? What if it is cell phones? What if it is bleached flour? What if (more reasonably) the "cause" is more of an "influencing factor" that would increase the chances of your progeny being autistic by 20-30% (for example), rather than a strict either/or sick/well effect? Should there be a ban in that case?
Where is the line drawn to protect our population? To protect our freedoms?
... I have more questions than answers, but I am blessed to know the one that holds all of the answers.
When we get to heaven, will God's wisdom be revealed? Can you imagine the joy of such understanding? ...or will we be confined forever to the creation's understanding of the creator? Can our created minds truly grasp the infinite, or only worship it's glory? I hope for understanding but will be satisfied with worship, for I know that to be my primary purpose.
Erron,
Thanks again for the thoughtful responses. I am enjoying them. About the "govt. created economic bubble," I agree. We are moving so far away from a free market system into European socialism. How foolish when we can clearly see the results! Communist systems generally collapsed under their own weight 20 years ago and now their supposedly more palatable cousins are caving in as well. The results are plain to see - esp. in places like Iceland, Greece etc. Why won't Americans wake up? It's like we are a country of 13 year olds thinking "It won't happen to me!" But of course it will...it has to because the whole socialist system rests upon fatally flawed principles and mechanisms. So it will always fail.
With regards to Autism. You make some excellent comments. I would agree that some of the increases are likely from a surge in recognizing and reporting. But there also seems to be more to it than that. As a classroom teacher, I and many of my colleagues have observed a real rise in the numbers in our classrooms. What once was rare - maybe 1 each year is now up to 4 or 5 (1/25th to 1/5th of the class in just 10 years - and this is in a PRIVATE school). The causes: surely in some cases it is genetic. I, for one, do NOT wish to monkey with genetics to "get rid" of that section of Autistic children. However, if there is an environmental cause - I think parents should be made aware of it. I would prefer to get the word out and let parents do their thing rather than drag the gubmint into it and make it illegal. Many of my fellow teachers are more and more considering the cause to be too much TV in the first 5 years of life (I know that sounds loopy). It is also possible that our vaccinations might have some negative effect on a portion of the population and the gubmint just won't admit it for fear of an outbreak of those diseases (making the Autism caused by them to be seen as acceptable losses). Many parents have pointed to this and are convinced but there has never been any serious medical proof (but maybe that's like hoping Communists will find and publish that communism is unworkable!).
The early TV argument rests on the WAY TV bombards the tot, overwhelming them and forcing them to adopt a passive way of dealing with information as opposed to the active way the brain works in reading and imaginary play. This over stimulus is especially damaging in those early years - not so later on.
Another cause that seems to me to be worthy of exploring is the possibility than a large chunk of humanity is just plain allergic to gluten. There does seem to be some medical evidence that problems with gluten can have a devastating effect on the brain. Just cause we CAN eat something doesn't make it really good for us I guess.
And I agree that there is One who knows the answers to all these things. Praise Him that someday we will have our answers. But it's kind of fun to speculate anyway IMO.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/578623/201107181638/Dissecting-The-Demagoguery-About-Tax-Cuts-For-The-Rich.htm
A great 3-part article by Sowell on the reasoning behind "tax cuts for the rich" and the results of such cuts over the past century.
(Each part has multiple pages)
Post a Comment
<< Home