Taking Advantage of the System

Taking Advantage of the System

Tony E Dillon-Hansen

Most people can agree they would like not to be poor, underemployed, or unemployed.  When that does happen, we do our best to get out of those situations because we have bills to pay, mouths to feed and simply would like to not worry about how to afford our basic need, the next item or next meal. We would like to be able to work to have more than simple foods on the table. With wages as they are today and life's basic bills, these are real concerns for Americans, especially those trying to get started in the workforce. Yet, there are people that abuse the system for personal benefit, and as a result of some high profile cases, Americans have become suspicious about any government proposals that claim to reduce poverty.  Are the attacks on poverty programs warranted?

We know that there are some people who in those unfortunate situations feel entitled to milk any resources from where ever they are being distributed without care.  There is a plain lazy, selfish and greedy aspect that is driving that set of people.  They provide a great example used by the supposed righteous among us to paint the picture of what all people do with government funds (never mind the actions of those doing this painting.) Selfishness and greed is, however, not a feature only of the unfortunate and the destitute.

It is no mistake that some have hid behind religion to elucidate their motives for abusing the system. Those supposed righteous people then persuade large swaths of the American people (using conjured inferences of facts, distorted media and cherry-picked phrases from religion) to look at the other "sinners" while they pillage the public treasury.

The righteous want a society that is comfortable with exclusion from access or even from recognition. They will divert attention from the pillage by showcasing differences in society (race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation.) They amass great wealth claiming the parable of talents as an excuse to hoard cash and while having contempt for the Sermon on the Mount by suggesting that poor people want to be poor and meek.

You have to wonder about these people doing the complaining because the loudest complainers are likely the guiltiest. There is little doubt that they are taking advantage of the system, but they are blaming the meager ones on the bottom rung of society for their mischievous actions.  There are farmers, landowners, businesses and corporate moguls that will use the levers they have in reach to squeeze out a little (actually billions) more for themselves. They, then, point fingers at families of the lower class that may claim collectively a mere fraction of what a single oil company or family like the Koch brothers will suck from the system.  They use these people that are grabbing after the scraps of society to scare the middle class into voting against middle class. They will have the middle class be more suspicious of the government, which is incidentally the only institution in our society that can guarantee equal access for everyone to quality education, health care, or even safe cars to drive.

Providing help to low-income (poverty) in America including the cost of Medicaid (which primarily goes to elderly and disabled citizens rather than people with children), Federal housing (WIC), TANF, child tax credits, SNAP, free lunch program, and the children's health insurance program (CHIP) combined are no match for the cost of oil subsidies, farm subsidies, and defense spending. Yet, the people receiving the large oil, farm and defense spending want to yell the loudest about others getting taxpayer money because apparently no one should benefit unless you have millions to spend.  The yellers are part of the richest and most powerful elites. They are part of country’s financial decisions, but they want to blame financial woes on those with the least power. Then, they scare the rest of Americans into thinking that supporting the poor will somehow make everyone poorer. Further, there are the people that are supposedly in support of the poor and meek are mishandling the programs, and that provides even more fodder for the critics of poverty programs.

In a capitalist society, no rational person would stop trying to acquire wealth. Regardless of an economic policy or social leaning, there is always an avenue to make money. People are able to become wealthy through strategic planning and use of resources (including people).  Without those resources, people could not get wealthy. The Republican establishment, along with many Democrats, realizes this and realizes that people with money in hand are likely to spend that money when they have some left over after bills. Major companies, like Wal-Mart, base their business model upon this premise. Volume sales require volumes of people with money to spend. The poverty programs help people have something to spend besides necessities of housing, food, education or health care. Additionally, those dollars turn into jobs. The programs also provide the safety net for those that get tossed out of the capitalist markets (e.g. unemployment.)

Further, educated people bring skills to work and tend to spend more money because they theoretically have more money. To deny the masses something like affordable, quality public-education through promotion of private and charter schools instead, like the TEA party proposes, means that families will be limited to basic needs and their children will not be able to afford proper education-the access to the ladder to success.

This can perpetuate a divide in our society between those who have and who have not. Yes, Americans should be cautious of more spending, but all programs should be scrutinized. If we are concerned about welfare fraud, we should be more concerned with the fraud, in billions, blown on companies that do not need the money.

Relating to Discomfort

Relating to Discomfort

August 2013

Tony E Dillon-Hansen

In dreams and fantasies, we would like to live in luxurious settings and lazy beaches or tending to our favorite hobbies every day of our waking existence. We, all, would love to have no problems and no worries. We would love to love, to believe, to act, to talk or to think without distress or pain. Rev. Cameron Barr remarked in sermon, “It’s not love at all if it’s so plain and simple and nice that the truth isn’t welcome.” The challenge is not that we want peaceful existence or how we may characterize good love. The challenge is not to avoid fear, anger, or uncertainty but also how we “relate to discomfort” because there is something to learn in discomfort.

Things left unsaid, undone, half-done, or avoided can be destructive to our own being. If we are constantly avoiding challenges to our lives, we may miss great opportunities to learn what can be improved in ourselves. Uncomfortable things do not have to be always confrontational, but we can choose the manner in which things are questioned. Perhaps, we, ourselves, were subjecting incorrect assumptions upon a situation. Perhaps, what was unfamiliar to us was frightening but something worth more research. By avoiding the questions around the event(s), we would never learn the intricate details of thinking differently. We can challenge our own viewpoints without sacrificing the essence of who we are, and we might just improve how we interpret the world.

Things left unsaid might need to consider if we our taking ourselves too seriously over matters. That is why I like the character Goofy from Disney to remind me that things I do and say are as well goofy. That recognition should also come with a willingness to temper oneself and accept when I am wrong.

We may consider that our words may be harmful to the person(s) causing our current discomfort. We may think that our thoughts may be considered controversial or may “ruffle feathers” that we think should not be. We know many examples of this when working as part of teams. We may observe patterns that are causing issues (may even choose only to reveal our concerns to select people), but then we do not share them with the people that can help to make a positive impact. When we do this, we rob people, or the whole team, of their potential growth. A project can easily get sidetracked or worse if the team lose focus or if team leaders focus upon bad targets. Would the Titanic have arrived in New York if officers questioned the Captain's decisions?

We could see a spouse or significant-other doing or saying something troubling to us. Communication is important here because you could go down the long path of regret and anger over a simple misunderstanding while nothing changes during silence. Also, such matters could get worse.

In some cases, things left unsaid can result in someone else's pain, injustice or misery. Maybe, we do not think our place is to say anything. Perhaps, we should speak up when great injustices are before us. Maybe, we did not believe we had the authority to challenge someone. This can happen when someone with supposed authority or superiority is doing the injustice, and we struggle to find our proper place in the discussion. Yet, we know too well what happens when someone is being abused and no one is there to help. If you have the opportunity to correct an injustice, Time will see that you are vindicated. Clever sounding rhetoric or show of muscle by bullies is no match for the truth that true justice and love brings.

Maybe, we should just quietly live without instigating anything. There are, of course, remedies for forgetting pain through drugs, alcohol, and dangerous behaviors (even conducting our own version of the pain to someone else). Then, we may find ourselves painfully attached to yet another grievance. With these, the path of fear and violence is that of more fear and more violence whether we internalize such or we allow the environment to continue around us. Further, we remove ourselves from the world both in mind and body through the supposed escapes while maintaining our anxiety and angers because none of these techniques results in quieting of the mind.

I, like the minister and most everyone, want people to like me and that throwing a concern into the open may seem to jeopardize those kind views. Yet, maybe that is not what we should want; that to act only in accordance with other peoples’ wishes.

When we do not speak out, we could find ourselves building walls with mirrors around ourselves because we take too much stock in what we currently think. Our ability to learn and to grow diminishes when we do not challenge our own comfort zones.

We do not have to judge others for not also trying, but we can be an example of how this can work as revealed within ourselves to ourselves. Karma has a way of showing these traits to others.

Who we are is what we do, not just what we say (but words can go a long way to help.) We may like pleasantries of nice, professionalism exhibited, or simply to live in peace. Yet, when moments arrive that demand justice, we cannot be in peace if we let them go on without rebuke. We do not need and should not justify our existence or the rights of anyone else, but sometimes we must. Again, we do not have to be confrontational, we should be willing to remind people the value and worth of every soul. Justice deserves its day before the collective good, and anyone not willing to recognize that also does not understand love or justice.

 If we decide to be silent about injustice, we help no one increase their being. That is the absence of justice or love if not utter selfishness. Yet love is sometimes an act of discomfort.

Simple Devotions and Gifts

Simple Gifts

Tony E Dillon-Hansen
July 2013

Question posed to me at recent meeting of church deacons to examine where one finds “God” in our lives. My response is simple and perhaps a shared response via music. In my time, I have studied music theory and composition at university. I have written music and performed music. I enjoy great many different styles of music as a listener of the various tunes belting from both recorded and, especially, live performances.

Aside from a meal, can you think of anything that will bring disparate and politically divided people to common areas or common venues?  One could argue that sports business brings in a ton of money for athletes and the marketers trying to sell the game far beyond an average (or staring artist) can manage. Yet, sports-minded people invigorate prejudices and egos of home teams and favorite players. Yes, many of these have or made their talents be worthy of grandeur; they are still inciting a sense of competition among the population.

I cannot discount the interest in having good competition among people nor that of sports in general (I partake in many amateur sports competitions). Yet, athletes, and the money surrounding some sports, can cause a rise above simple team love into forceful persuasion of beliefs.  Many referees can attest to this.  Even with music, a good performer will find followers and people willing to pay good money to watch a performance.  Some will debate the talent of a particular performer or writer, but when crowds come to see this performer(s), ticket holders (whether paid or free) come with a common interest to hear what that performer can deliver.

American football Super Bowl can be an exhilarating event if you are one of the athletes or if your team is one that is playing. Even among team fans, there could be argued that there is a sense of comradeship that is revealed that is above petty politics or some other gross discrimination for at least the length of the game.

With music, many people of different stripes share an interest in a style of music and a performer. With exception of musicians that have gone “openly” political, audiences go to watch a performance of some piece that became their soul, their song, their passion or their release. A musician brings people together, not just because they enjoy a melody but because the song became a part of them.

Interestingly, sports teams replay Queen’s “We Are the Champions” because we, as fans, want to hear and to ultimately see that music revealed in our teams. Note, however, that Queen gave the fan a verse to sing about love of team. Trumpets and drums are used to summon a call to arms. Even, political campaigns play songs with themes of better times because the orator, especially of lower skill, wants you to have the feeling that what he or she is saying is going to make you feel “better”.  These happen because music invokes common passions and inspires.

Music can bring people of divergent opinions of all sorts together in a venue without a need to be competing with each other.  There might be the occasional impromptu fashion debates or etiquette quarrels. When people come to watch a musician, there is an interest in what that musician delivers to our hearts through performance of the pieces. That is because in that moment of music enjoyment, the competition of the world is quieted for a moment.

We may lead "lives of quiet desperation", but music allows us to live in a moment fully when we find that one song, that one melody, or that one harmony that fills our hearts with all that we were missing. Yet, unlike Thoreau, we do not need to let the music go to the grave with us nor do we need to lose the uncanny companionship that we gain from mutual music interests.

Just as diverse as opinions about politics can be, so also can our passions about music be. Yet, no one would draw a gun over how someone tickles the piano or beats a drum. Even traffic can have a sense of beautiful orchestration when we allow ourselves to be with the world and our senses. Electronic themes over riffs (acoustic or electronic) can be an escape for anyone willing to hear what is being played. What we can learn from music is more than notes on a page, melodies, rhythms, or tempos, but we can even learn how we as humans have mutual interests in different ways from different paths.

There are aspects in our lives that showcase competition among human beings along with community like sports. There are also forms in our lives that show us how things are connected to each other with or without competition. Music is one of those forms, especially considering some of the best music in the world often combines a theme (point) and counterpoint in artful detail. An argument without punches. The confluence of theme, counter patterns, randomness and competition can be found in music, and the good writer leaves some of the work for listener to interpret how that applies to you.

Good artists let you do some of the interpreting, to make the song yours, and thus, the theme can resonate with people of different social or political backgrounds. In this world of polarized communities, is it not nice to see a conductor on the podium who can show how all of this can work together with a whisk of the baton or how a soloist can move an entire crowd to tears with slow ballad? Certain politicians would do well to realize how trivial differences are. 

The world is connected, and music can showcase that connection. Maybe, that is a simple gift, and perhaps, that is an example of how one might find God, which we can always cherish.