I have been observing the climate of both our churches and the world’s system for some time now. In both realms I have seen an awakening. I have been proclaiming that this awakening would be coming for years now. At the same time, I am in a season in my life where I have dropped back from both scenes in various ways. I have known that this season was coming. I am not sure why, but it has been the case during this stage of my life, so I am rolling with it.
I observed some time ago about how people by the hundreds were becoming disenfranchised by organized religion and dropping out of it, seeking something more. I have run across so many people who had just had enough. Some got bitter, some got better through their ordeals. Many people have maintained their faith through it all and even become stronger in their beliefs and relationship with God as a result. Some have not.
I know from experience that many people feel like they have been ripped off, deceived, lied to, and have a great mistrust of churches, church government, and have their senses heightened to such as a result. Often those who turn bitter have an outcry against the establishment. Those who become better often end up being dynamic teachers to help others in the same situation.
Quite honestly, there are many people in the Church overall who are deceived by false doctrines, have ears that are easily tickled, and are just plain lazy about learning solid fundamentals of their faith. They often are zealous but the zeal is often misplaced.
I have been observing people in the world’s system who have been going through much the same thing. Men and women by the millions have been feeling disenfranchised and angry at our nation’s government. As a result, we have seen people protesting and public outcry like I have never seen in my lifetime. I am not talking about protests against an unpopular war, I am talking about protests against what people perceive as an unfair government, against being used, and abused, and a loss of the basic precepts of our nation.
In the past several years, I have seen some men rise above the crowd who decided to lead by teaching others, by sharing the foundational principles of our nation. There are some men with whom I am often in agreement, some with whom I am not. One thing I do know is that either way, I am grateful that the fundamentals are being revisited.
Like with the Church, when people learn the truth about the foundations of the country, its history, and its principles, they tend to get angry. Having been burned by both sides of the comparison, I have endeavored to work through things within my own self and then reach out.
I decided several years ago to drop out of my pursuit of broadcasting, though I loved it greatly. I have dropped back my pursuit of ministry, though I loved preaching and teaching greatly. I have dropped back from copious writing, though I enjoyed it greatly. I dropped back from doing talk shows, though I enjoyed it greatly and have even been offered opportunities to do a good amount of it recently.
Even when I saw one of the greatest disasters heading towards our national sovereignty in the form of an avowed socialist as President of the United States and a complicit Congress, I remained fairly silent. I didn’t write much about the elections except in this column. Even then, I have refrained from giving most of my opinions. I have felt a cautious restraint in some ways, and I am not sure why. Yeah, I know that some of you are thinking that I am blunt and opinionated, but believe it or not, I have wrestled with this very thing for the four plus years I have been writing this column.
I have seen in the church world, pockets of men and women have gone underground, so to speak. I have seen patriots in this nation do the same. I have seen teachers arise in the church world, and I have seen the same in the world’s system. I have seen angry people be extremely vocal in the church, and I have seen a lot of it in the world. Quite honestly, I believe that people have just plain had enough in both.
There will be and has been a clash coming internal to the Church. I have seen and experienced a sliver of it myself. I have seen a huge clash arising in the world’s system. I don’t know how peaceful it will be, however. When we have seen spiritual movements and anti-world’s system movements cross paths, we have not typically seen peaceful resolutions in this country.
Showing posts with label state. Show all posts
Showing posts with label state. Show all posts
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Column for May 15, 2008
The new state budget sounds good...or does it?
I was reading with great interest about the proposed budget for the State of North Carolina. Governor Easley recently announced the new state budget. Truthfully, if the figures that I have read are accurate, there are some things I like to see in the budget...at least on the surface. Dig a little deeper and you will see the fallacy of the claims being made.
The first thing is that we as a state are looking at proposed surplus a $152 million. Based upon past performance, I wonder how long it will be before our state legislators spend that surplus, just as they have every other one. Instead of applying that surplus towards public debt or other proposed public funding projects, several huge surpluses, some over one billion dollars, have been spent on pork barrel projects or other frivolous spending sprees.
Governor Easley is playing with figures to claim to be providing a pay increase for teachers in North Carolina. Each year we hear about raising the pay of NC teachers to the national average. Here in NC, the average teacher pay is about 6.9% behind the national average. It is an annual mantra we hear in NC, that we must raise the pay of our teachers to match the national average.
Sorry, but by the very definition of an average, there are some higher, some are lower. NC happens to be on the lower side. So what? Teachers, though they often have a difficult and valuable job, only work some nine months out of the year. I don't get three months off every year, nor do the majority of Americans.
Next, the North Carolina average salary takes into account counties such as Martin, Bertie, and other small, poor, rural areas. Obviously, pay in these areas will be lower than say in Charlotte or Raleigh. That just makes sense. To use rural areas with comparatively few students to argue that all teachers should get an increase based upon an average is no different than comparing states like Arkansas against New York for standards of living and pay to form the national average.
The 4% average pay increase proposed for state employees is really a misnomer. It is a numbers ploy. Basically, the 4% is really only a 1.5% increase plus a $1000 bonus. The numbers game is that this should average out to almost 4% for many employees. Again, it is a numbers game and is being falsely represented. Many employees will earn higher, many lower. Ergo, the claim is specious at best.
There are a couple of tax increases set in this budget. What is really onerous about these tax increases is that the proposed budget takes into account the idea that the proposed tax increases will be passed. If the legislature deems it inappropriate to increase taxes, then the proposed budget surplus is moot.
I am absolutely no fan of tobacco use. I know that this region is "tobacco country". I just find there are few things in life more disgusting than cigarette smoking. As much as I find smoking offensive and stupid, I find the concept of freedom something to be protected. Ergo, I am not one to eliminate any and all smoking, much less heavily tax tobacco products. Yet higher taxes on tobacco is exactly what is proposed by the Governor.
The State of North Carolina is often hypocritical in its stances. First, it promotes agriculture here in the state. Farming tobacco is a part of said agriculture. While supporting farmers, the state is at the same time discouraging the use of the very product raised in North Carolina. Further taxation is effectively a further deterrent of consumption. Each pack of cigarettes sold in North Carolina currently nets the state 35 cents in taxes. The proposal is to take that total to 55 cents per pack. The increased taxes on tobacco products will allegedly fund pay increases for school teachers and administrators. When you tax something, you discourage its consumption or often change behavior. Thus, I am dubious as to the validity of this proposal.
On the surface the claim of a $396 million cut in the general fund is a great thing. However, the overall budget is going up by 870 billion dollars. If spending truly is to be cut, then the budget would not increase, especially in an alleged economic slow down. The government is increasing its staffing and budget, yet the economy is supposedly slowing down. Why would the Governor grow the size of bureaucracy when he should be shrinking it?
Another thing that bothers me is that the state is increasing the budget to the UNC college system by $34.6 million. Yet it is Governor Easley himself that is causing the increase in costs to the state collegiate system. It is Governor Easley who is supporting the idea of allowing illegal aliens to attend our college system. This costs the taxpayers money, just as aliens do in our primary education system. We, the people are subsidizing their education, and these costs will only go up. Instead of looking to educate those who do not even belong in this country to begin with, we could be trimming our budget and/or opening such educational slots to legal citizens.
It would seem to me that if we will in deed have a budget surplus, just as I do when I have one, that some bills would be paid off and my cash flow output would be lessened to a degree. Then again, if I spent my money the way the State of North Carolina does, I would spend that surplus on things I do not need and go further into debt for things I should not buy. I would end up bankrupt whereas the state will tax and borrow more money to meet its shortfalls and create false surpluses.
Don't buy the budget claims on the surface level. Read a little bit and do not be fooled by the rhetoric.
I was reading with great interest about the proposed budget for the State of North Carolina. Governor Easley recently announced the new state budget. Truthfully, if the figures that I have read are accurate, there are some things I like to see in the budget...at least on the surface. Dig a little deeper and you will see the fallacy of the claims being made.
The first thing is that we as a state are looking at proposed surplus a $152 million. Based upon past performance, I wonder how long it will be before our state legislators spend that surplus, just as they have every other one. Instead of applying that surplus towards public debt or other proposed public funding projects, several huge surpluses, some over one billion dollars, have been spent on pork barrel projects or other frivolous spending sprees.
Governor Easley is playing with figures to claim to be providing a pay increase for teachers in North Carolina. Each year we hear about raising the pay of NC teachers to the national average. Here in NC, the average teacher pay is about 6.9% behind the national average. It is an annual mantra we hear in NC, that we must raise the pay of our teachers to match the national average.
Sorry, but by the very definition of an average, there are some higher, some are lower. NC happens to be on the lower side. So what? Teachers, though they often have a difficult and valuable job, only work some nine months out of the year. I don't get three months off every year, nor do the majority of Americans.
Next, the North Carolina average salary takes into account counties such as Martin, Bertie, and other small, poor, rural areas. Obviously, pay in these areas will be lower than say in Charlotte or Raleigh. That just makes sense. To use rural areas with comparatively few students to argue that all teachers should get an increase based upon an average is no different than comparing states like Arkansas against New York for standards of living and pay to form the national average.
The 4% average pay increase proposed for state employees is really a misnomer. It is a numbers ploy. Basically, the 4% is really only a 1.5% increase plus a $1000 bonus. The numbers game is that this should average out to almost 4% for many employees. Again, it is a numbers game and is being falsely represented. Many employees will earn higher, many lower. Ergo, the claim is specious at best.
There are a couple of tax increases set in this budget. What is really onerous about these tax increases is that the proposed budget takes into account the idea that the proposed tax increases will be passed. If the legislature deems it inappropriate to increase taxes, then the proposed budget surplus is moot.
I am absolutely no fan of tobacco use. I know that this region is "tobacco country". I just find there are few things in life more disgusting than cigarette smoking. As much as I find smoking offensive and stupid, I find the concept of freedom something to be protected. Ergo, I am not one to eliminate any and all smoking, much less heavily tax tobacco products. Yet higher taxes on tobacco is exactly what is proposed by the Governor.
The State of North Carolina is often hypocritical in its stances. First, it promotes agriculture here in the state. Farming tobacco is a part of said agriculture. While supporting farmers, the state is at the same time discouraging the use of the very product raised in North Carolina. Further taxation is effectively a further deterrent of consumption. Each pack of cigarettes sold in North Carolina currently nets the state 35 cents in taxes. The proposal is to take that total to 55 cents per pack. The increased taxes on tobacco products will allegedly fund pay increases for school teachers and administrators. When you tax something, you discourage its consumption or often change behavior. Thus, I am dubious as to the validity of this proposal.
On the surface the claim of a $396 million cut in the general fund is a great thing. However, the overall budget is going up by 870 billion dollars. If spending truly is to be cut, then the budget would not increase, especially in an alleged economic slow down. The government is increasing its staffing and budget, yet the economy is supposedly slowing down. Why would the Governor grow the size of bureaucracy when he should be shrinking it?
Another thing that bothers me is that the state is increasing the budget to the UNC college system by $34.6 million. Yet it is Governor Easley himself that is causing the increase in costs to the state collegiate system. It is Governor Easley who is supporting the idea of allowing illegal aliens to attend our college system. This costs the taxpayers money, just as aliens do in our primary education system. We, the people are subsidizing their education, and these costs will only go up. Instead of looking to educate those who do not even belong in this country to begin with, we could be trimming our budget and/or opening such educational slots to legal citizens.
It would seem to me that if we will in deed have a budget surplus, just as I do when I have one, that some bills would be paid off and my cash flow output would be lessened to a degree. Then again, if I spent my money the way the State of North Carolina does, I would spend that surplus on things I do not need and go further into debt for things I should not buy. I would end up bankrupt whereas the state will tax and borrow more money to meet its shortfalls and create false surpluses.
Don't buy the budget claims on the surface level. Read a little bit and do not be fooled by the rhetoric.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Column for Jan. 31, 2008
Remember, grant money is not free. We pay for it either way.
Is grant money from the federal government that is awarded to local towns or states free money? How about grant money that is given to private corporations or citizens? Is there any such thing as free money? Of course not. If it comes from our tax dollars one way or another.
I read with interest the news that the Town of Selma was awarded $850,000 in grant money last week. The money is intended for "community revitalization, infrastructure improvements, and the construction of affordable housing". Selma was one of eighteen municipalities that received grants. The money was supplied through U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and was doled out through the NC government. Also, I read that the towns of Pine Level, Henderson, and Dunn were awarded grant money through the Federal Emergency Management Agency for the purposes of safety, operational expenses, and fire equipment acquisition.
Perhaps we would have more ability to do things locally if the federal and state governments did not siphon off so much money into Washington, DC. Second, even though these are "grants", they are still coming from tax dollars. Furthermore, the purpose of the grants are to be for "rehabilitation of housing" and the construction of "affordable housing". The term affordable is subjective. The idea of my tax dollars being taken from me, a man who works a full time, skilled labor job, on the threat of force if I do not comply voluntarily to dole out my hard earned money, and having those dollars inefficiently laundered through the world's largest bureaucracy only to be filtered down to another bureaucracy, then to another, then to private citizens for them to pay minimal money for housing or to renovate their existing homes is just plain repugnant. It is insulting. It is unfair. It is a disincentive to succeed. It is communistic and evil.
There were 18 towns in NC that got the HUD grants and three FEMA grants in the state. Multiply this times hundreds of towns across the country each year and you can see how our tax dollars are being wasted on programs that are not even supposed to exist. Take this program and multiply it by the countless such programs that some communistic or ignorant fools have pushed through Congress, and some well meaning but selfish President who wants to get re-elected and play politics with our tax money have passed, and the amount of money is mind boggling.
Perhaps the only thing more insidious than the idea of a grant from the federal government to a municipality is the concept of the federal government providing a loan to a local municipality other local government for the purposes of infrastructure development and community revitalization. In such instances, we are taxed at the federal level to provide the loan and then get taxed on the local level to pay the loan back to the federal government.
I had an email discussion with a close friend about an article from 1955 in "Housekeeping Monthly". I have a copy of this article on my personal web site. The article was full of tips for women on how to take care of their husbands, how to run the home, how to relieve personal and family stress, and the like. This conservative lady asserted that the article was from 1955 and this was 2008. Below is my response, which is related to my disdain for such government spending.
"In 1955, most women did stay at home and take care of the kids and do the house work. Unfortunately, our tax burden increased substantially necessitating a dual income family. Also, the women's liberation movement only hurt the family structure. The 1960's forward really hurt with the hedonism, atheistic, and hyper libertine agendas. That led to a decline in the family unit, an emphasis on self reliance instead of family reliance, a rise in births out of wedlock, single parent families, divorce, and the need for women to work outside the home." By family versus self reliance, I was referring to the idea of only thinking of one's own self, not supporting the family unit but instead believing that one can and should only rely on one's own self. For instance, a woman can and should be able to stay at home and raise her children rather than paying some low income earner with a different set of values to raise them for her.
It is bad enough that we have a high percentage of our money taken in the form of taxation of various types and from various levels of government. To have my tax dollars, which could be used to renovate my own home (which I have been trying to work on more and more lately) and have them sucked into a giant bureaucracy and given to someone else to renovate their home is a travesty. It angers me, and it should you, too. I believe that I know how to spend my money better than some bureaucrat does.
Is grant money from the federal government that is awarded to local towns or states free money? How about grant money that is given to private corporations or citizens? Is there any such thing as free money? Of course not. If it comes from our tax dollars one way or another.
I read with interest the news that the Town of Selma was awarded $850,000 in grant money last week. The money is intended for "community revitalization, infrastructure improvements, and the construction of affordable housing". Selma was one of eighteen municipalities that received grants. The money was supplied through U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and was doled out through the NC government. Also, I read that the towns of Pine Level, Henderson, and Dunn were awarded grant money through the Federal Emergency Management Agency for the purposes of safety, operational expenses, and fire equipment acquisition.
Perhaps we would have more ability to do things locally if the federal and state governments did not siphon off so much money into Washington, DC. Second, even though these are "grants", they are still coming from tax dollars. Furthermore, the purpose of the grants are to be for "rehabilitation of housing" and the construction of "affordable housing". The term affordable is subjective. The idea of my tax dollars being taken from me, a man who works a full time, skilled labor job, on the threat of force if I do not comply voluntarily to dole out my hard earned money, and having those dollars inefficiently laundered through the world's largest bureaucracy only to be filtered down to another bureaucracy, then to another, then to private citizens for them to pay minimal money for housing or to renovate their existing homes is just plain repugnant. It is insulting. It is unfair. It is a disincentive to succeed. It is communistic and evil.
There were 18 towns in NC that got the HUD grants and three FEMA grants in the state. Multiply this times hundreds of towns across the country each year and you can see how our tax dollars are being wasted on programs that are not even supposed to exist. Take this program and multiply it by the countless such programs that some communistic or ignorant fools have pushed through Congress, and some well meaning but selfish President who wants to get re-elected and play politics with our tax money have passed, and the amount of money is mind boggling.
Perhaps the only thing more insidious than the idea of a grant from the federal government to a municipality is the concept of the federal government providing a loan to a local municipality other local government for the purposes of infrastructure development and community revitalization. In such instances, we are taxed at the federal level to provide the loan and then get taxed on the local level to pay the loan back to the federal government.
I had an email discussion with a close friend about an article from 1955 in "Housekeeping Monthly". I have a copy of this article on my personal web site. The article was full of tips for women on how to take care of their husbands, how to run the home, how to relieve personal and family stress, and the like. This conservative lady asserted that the article was from 1955 and this was 2008. Below is my response, which is related to my disdain for such government spending.
"In 1955, most women did stay at home and take care of the kids and do the house work. Unfortunately, our tax burden increased substantially necessitating a dual income family. Also, the women's liberation movement only hurt the family structure. The 1960's forward really hurt with the hedonism, atheistic, and hyper libertine agendas. That led to a decline in the family unit, an emphasis on self reliance instead of family reliance, a rise in births out of wedlock, single parent families, divorce, and the need for women to work outside the home." By family versus self reliance, I was referring to the idea of only thinking of one's own self, not supporting the family unit but instead believing that one can and should only rely on one's own self. For instance, a woman can and should be able to stay at home and raise her children rather than paying some low income earner with a different set of values to raise them for her.
It is bad enough that we have a high percentage of our money taken in the form of taxation of various types and from various levels of government. To have my tax dollars, which could be used to renovate my own home (which I have been trying to work on more and more lately) and have them sucked into a giant bureaucracy and given to someone else to renovate their home is a travesty. It angers me, and it should you, too. I believe that I know how to spend my money better than some bureaucrat does.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
