From the Village Square

Our country has evolved into a two political party system sharing power in the congress and with a relatively strong presidency that cannot function well without its support.

Therefore these two units of government are involved in the functioning leadership of this country.

The president can point in a direction and sometimes lead the way, but our forefathers made it impossible for him to takeover all the power of governance. If his party is in the majority they can help enhance his power and shield him in many ways.

In most cases, when the president has gone on his own, it has not been of great service to this country. A president can show leadership by being persistent but he cannot take total power and if so, not for long.

Therefore none of the things that our candidates promise today will come to pass, at least not as we expect, once the candidate is elected.

We can only hope that the best action will be taken when the times call for action.

When I started writing this, this morning I had just been watching the sun rise out of Lake Michigan into a partially cloudy sky, this huge ball, the center of our universe.

Now here I sit in Shorewood, an urban place that we call a village, the sun streaming though the window a reminder of the insignificance of human presence here.

At this moment then everyone of this earth becomes equally significant or insignificant. And this is usually how I start my day.

Regardless of the social means devised to make some seem more important than others, whether it is the house they live in, the car that they drive, the clothes they wear, their title or mannerism, they all seem to be equal, except that I'm a little less important because I'm the analyst.

If at times I find myself feeling somewhat more important, I try to picture a starving child somewhere in the world. When congress is asking a CEO about his 300 million take home, if one thinks of a starving child, one will understand what greed is.

Yet greed justifies the fiction of the free market, a concept invented by one as insignificant as the rest of us at another time.

Of course there are great men in the world and the general term men, includes both genders as we view them from different perspectives. Thomas Jefferson is one of my important or great men. But he kept slaves, one it is believed that he took as a wife.  She wasn't freed until after his death.   

Abraham Lincoln was another whose own personal tragedies kept him from giving himself importance.

The third American was Franklin Roosevelt who also had some failings but who kept democracy from dying and even from yielding to communism or fascism.

Yet some could point to the evils of these men and even their insignificance. Then think of the importance of that starving child and that old women sitting in the corner of a dark room, cane in hand. Who and what is important or significant?

Again let's think about those who are more significant by about $300 million dollars and opposed to taxes because paying tax is not necessarily patriotic.

I also get to see the sun set, but it's not as impressive as when it rises out of the lake, when I look out into the universe and first ask how and then why.

I sometimes think that the world is a wonderful place if you have the proper view and a full stomach.

Well, here's one October surprise.

Is today's news about Governor Palin and her first dude in the “ state troopers case” the beginning of her political bridge to nowhere? How does Senator McCain shake out in this one?

Talk about experience and judgment, what's this?

Power brings arrogance with it. And when that arrogance gets out of control we see the glove slip off the iron hand or the type of stupidity that President Clinton displayed in his personal life as a politician.

Here we have examples of both.

It is not likely that Senator McCain will admit any mistakes, as commanders must often do and pick another vice presidential running mate, not at this late date even though she's going to become a drag on his campaign and popularity.

Even if he still thinks her to be a good candidate, shouldn't he tone her down and place more emphasis on himself and what he's going to do in this economic crisis?

Either way, won't it show real political wisdom? McCain is in a difficult situation and needs to give us a good example of real political judgment. There are only a few weeks left.

Of course Governor Palin doesn't believe paying taxes is patriotic.

She lives in an oil producing State where the government pays dividends from its oil proceeds to its citizens. But here in the United States we cannot pump our tax money out of oil holes.

As mayor she must have collected property taxes. Is it unpatriotic for me to continue paying my property taxes here in Shorewood?

And what's going to happen when the limited oil supply of Alaska dries up? Perhaps bridge a piple line to Russia. They have plenty of oil.

If it is not patriotic to pay taxes, why are those who voted against funding the Iraq war considered to be unpatriotic?

Funding the war doesn't come from oil revenue, it comes from those of us who pay our taxes.

Should we reconsider whether paying taxes to fund the war is patriotic? That's a cute idea.

It was sort of a big bang. But in the broader realm it was a small “big bang.” For the moment I'm going to call it the Central Park Theory, inspired by Suzanne's images and her insight and interpretations.

I've always thought of Central Park in New York as an expression, our more recent expression of American culture on many levels. But this big bang takes us to the heart of culture.

And we are all products of culture.  In America we enter that culture from many gateways, all entrances into this central park. Within our overall national culture are thousands of other cultures.

Here at the local level, we have the broader sphere of culture which is the Milwaukee area itself and its influence. And the village of Shorewood has within its sphere its own culture. New York has Central Park to symbolize its culture.

So what was the big bang this morning? That all communities must have their functioning centers of culture. That's the big bang, my Central Park Theory, thanks to Suzanne. Central Park is not a literal concept, it is a centrality, a place where even a culture as the one we experience here in our village can be expressed.

Shorewood's central park must be a place where we come to “hang out” to either express ourselves or watch others doing so—a London Hyde Park, yet not really a park. . These central points are found all over Europe. Our centrality is not found in the basement of the Library nor on any of the floors of Village Hall. We seem to be missing a centrality.

So from a city planning standpoint, from a village design standpoint, from a village development standpoint, we must develop our own centrality, our own Central Park or parks..

How many more personalities are there in our community, people like Suzanne that can be drawn to our central point and how many are there that can supply similar inspirations for the development of our own village culture?

Let's develop a central place for Shorewood, an all-seasons, an all cultures Central Park.

There's only one Susanne, but how many others like her can we draw to our central place. The little big bang provides the central force and energy, the ingredients for our central place, the idea for both development and the expression of our own village culture.

It is centrality that must be at the heart of all our social and government activity. So now, how do we help it to evolve?

The consequence of our emphasis on education within school institutions that have developed over the years turns out to be an ostracism or "a banishment of children from the world of adults," let alone that of the oldest adults. (Hannah Arendt).

On the other hand our perception of older adults as people on the path to marked physical and mental deteriorating conditions steer all generations away from much involvement with the oldest generations.

Our society has succeeded in the actual separation of generations both from a physical standpoint and one where social engagement becomes next to impossible.

School teachers are primarily the only members of the adult society who deal with children. And health care givers are the younger adults who casually deal with older adults. In both cases the relationships with other generations are virtually absent.

Although Shorewood has what might be considered to be the type of normal age distribution found in small towns of rural-like states, even the smallest intergeneration activity likely to occur in small towns cannot be found in suburbs such as ours.

Shorewood's urban character appears to operate against intergenerational activity even more that in some city neighborhoods.

Given this background, if we here in Shorewood are to work more toward intergenerational activity, we need to find the methods or vehicles for achieving these goals both in the short and long run.

I believe that this can best be done at first by the close interaction of those involved in the carrying out of services for older adults together with those in our community's school system. Even the school facilities can become the physical basis and location point and source for much of this interaction.

I would suggest that we establish an Academy for the purpose of implementing integration among people of all ages and go from there. This concept should encourage the development of many ideas, which I of course would like to hear about.

So simply what is being said here is, let's develop some programs within the school system that will bring older adults together with school children on a rather regular social basis.

Early this Fall, I experienced a grandfather overseeing his very young grand-daughter while she was fishing from the pier on a small lake,.

I asked as I boated by, “has she caught any?”

He said proudly, " yes, she had caught 'some pretty good ones'.”

With our life span greatly extended today, we cannot continue to follow retirement standards of the 20^th century.

We should begin thinking of extending our productive lives for another decade or so. Some who could have retired at 65 have instead chosen to carry on their work for another decade and could have been as effective and perhaps more effective for still another decade.

Not everyone would want to do this, but people of former retirement age should not be discouraged from continuing to make their contribution to society. Many people of wealth continue to support their favorite projects or take on new ones.

Although we know that older adults are going to need various service perhaps not as extensively required previously, they could even so, add to the quality of life and give inspiration to those around them.

We must remember that these are the people who have for decades already added to the quality of life of those living here and they had great aspirations for future generations. They will provide a great heritage to those they leave behind.

Their lives have not been wasted nor are they even now without meaning to our total way of life so we should be generous to each other regardless of generation.

It is those of the middle generations of today that must work toward reshaping our society so as to reap greater benefits from and providing a better life quality to those of the ages of our parents and grandparents. There are ways of enriching our society by taking all of these benefits into consideration.

I believe that we can do this in Shorewood and I shall continue to work toward a greater inclusiveness of people of all ages in the everyday living of this community. New ways of interacting with all generations have already begun to develop.

I am certainty going to work with and support the efforts of Shorewood's Connecting Caring Communities Partnership. We are at the beginning of real enhancing changes in the lives of those of us who consider Shorewood to be our own and real functioning community.

I look forward to joining with those who are willing to become part of this early movement. We shall be demonstrating what community really is.

The slow but steady reduction in school enrollment along with the underutilization of our school facilities is significant evidence of this evolving shift.

Our changing demography can also be seen in the kind of redevelopment process and in the home occupancy that is being reflected in an increase in mature households, smaller-sized families and families without children in the household. Many of these families have adult children that are off to college.

The increasing cost of land in Shorewood supported by the expensive high grade maintenance and upscale upgrading of pricey homes and the rising cost of new construction has resulted in the development of condominiums for upper income living and mostly for people without children.

The increasing need for living accommodations for colleges students at our growing institution next door will not be satiated in Shorewood, especially at the cost level of apartment living here. 

Recent approval of an “assisted living for elderly” project will add a couple of hundred elderly and more who have never lived here before. Although this new group may not be as active within the community they will become part of the resident count and perhaps part of the voting population.

There is no evidence that there will be any significant increase in the youngest segment of our population for the next two decades.  We need to concentrate on the impact of this developing, changing situation.   

Therefore, our focus in terms of population growth and the character of our planning for the future will have to place a stronger emphasis on social services and those needs required by an older residency as we shift more toward an aging population.  What is this going to mean for Shorewood's future culture?

Shorewood”s Connecting Caring Communities Partnership is already beginning to instill some changes, such as senior parking spaces in our commercial area and even stepping up intergenerational activities within our school system.

These are all signs of times. And both our School District and Village Hall need to do more than merely  take active notice.  We need to anticipate the impact and learn how it can improve our way of life here in our village. 

The present financial crisis was caused by greedy financiers located on Wall Street and at other financial centers of the world, not so much in Washington D.C., although their lobbyists there were not without influence in their underlying pecuniary mon-omania.

Those who hold the so-called “free market” as a sacred aspect of democracy or of the new global structure have yet to learn of the corrupting nature of government and market when combined in their efforts toward avarice.

The free market purists cannot make themselves go along with the government bailing us out of the mess in which the free marketeers have placed the economic infrastructure of our society and in conjunction with international marketeers, the infrastructure of other nations and that of a would be “normal” global system.

Many could go along with the "free market" purists and let the situation play out to the detriment of those involved, except that today whole societies and masses of individuals are affected, me and you included.

The argument that a government “bail-out” is socialism is as silly as believing that uncontrolled financial institutions and monetary systems of the world should be eliminated because they are government instituted and government controlled. Even Adam Smith, saint of free market and the invisible hand didn't believe that.

I don't believe in a bail-out, socialistic or not. However, we've permitted the disease to go too far without treatment to let the patient die at this point, as all of us are by the collective nature of society the patient. 

Neither the market, the conservatives, nor those politicians, mavericks or traditionalists, claiming to represent free market capitalists can in principle interfere in the free market so blatantly, although they do when its not so transparent.

So what to do. The financial infrastructure of this country is as essential as the physical transportation and communication grid of our society. The question is whether we shall leave the patient alone and follow a natural demise or attempt treatment. The problem is that we don't know the proper treatment and because of the urgency, we must improvise.

It seems that the government will have to lend money to those economic units of our society that are most likely to seriously and destructively affect the function of our society if left to their own means.

It also seems necessary to help finance those who were not properly financed by the lending institutions that led to the situation in which we find ourselves today.

A loan means that both of these elements of society will have to eventually pay back the government institution that does the leading.

The government's involvement will be for two reasons; one, it is essential to maintain a functioning and healthy society and two, that the government is the only element of our society large and forceful enough to engage in this enormous and long term venture.

It is now for the most important economists and the most influential politicians to produce the means for making these loans. It seems that the institutions are there. What is required now is a program with proper administration. And here is where the devil is in the details. Let's try to call God's presence there instead.

Unless the pure free marketers can come up with a more practical approach than this “socialistic' one, we as a society must do this in the same way that we go to war for the purpose of protecting our country. Let's see if we can really put our country first this time.

Our democracy makes it possible to select one from two to act as our leader for a period of four years.

No president has ever been politically removed during his tenure. Only one has resigned. And upon the death of the president, it is the vice-president who takes over.

Regardless of party principles our leaders once elected are accepted by all the people to represent all of us in all situations. However, in preforming their functions as leaders they usually are guided by party principles.

This year's selection leaves us again with two possibilities.

One of our leader possibilities proclaims to be a maverick who also claims not to be wed to his party principles, yet he runs representing his party. He seems to have been a dissenter all his life and often gone by his own rules which seem to develop at the time they are to be applied.

His religion seems to be best expressed in his distain for other countries and the sacred nature of the market place.  And on both these counts he might be considered to be a religious zealot. He has also been described as a decedent of “military royalty.”

The other leader possibility is a younger man. If selected he'd be the first non-white man to be elected. That alone seems to be a cultural problem in this country.  He has no royal family connections and might also be described as a dissenter.  Some believe that all liberals are dissenters and not to be trusted in the same way as conservative dissenters. 

He is guided by his liberal party principles and doesn't seem to dissent from those much but instead seems to embrace them. Born of a Muslim African father and white Midwestern (white) mother, he becomes suspect.  His opponents raise doubts as to his “real” Christianity which also leads them to question his loyalty to this country.

I often question the loyality of TV ministers. especially as to their professed Christianity.  Most of them seem to be the money changers within the temple. I also mistrust the wisdom of their followers.   

What a country! 

The voters of this country are going to vote for one of the two candidates as their leader, pretty much on their consideration of these preceived characteristics.  I believe that I've presented the significant elements on which these two will be judged, everything else will be external to these public perspectives.

Conservatives cannot make themselves vote for a liberal, so we know that  they will vote for anyone not a liberal. On the other hand liberals will of course vote for the liberal.

The split between the two parties is about 45% to 45% of all those likely to vote.  It is the swing voters who count. They are about 5 to 10 % of the voters.

Because of the wars and the economy, that swing vote is expected to vote in greater majority for the Democrats, the out party this time, but a difficult prediction to make.

We don't know which way it will go, especially as one of our states situated between two foreign countries has produced a vice-presidential candidate who is expected to assure the conservative vote and win over much of the swing vote to the Republican party.

What is there to say? Parliamentary governments don't work much better at selecting their leaders either.

But what does it say about our system, when only 5 to 10% of the voters of this country are the real decision makers. They will decide who will be the leader of this great democracy for the next 4 years.  Eight years ago it was a few voters in Florida that made the difference. 

In a nutshell, it is a group of people working to enhance the ability of the older residents to remain in their neighborhoods and contribute to the life of the Village.

Restoring neighborliness is at the core of the project.

The lead organization in the partnership is Shorewood's Elder Services Advisory Board. Funding is provided by the Village of Shorewood.

Four work groups have been formed to address some of the initial concerns of older adults. To date, over 50 people have been involved in the partnership[, including residents, government, churches and businesses.

Elizabeth Price, Director of the Shorewood Senior Resource Center and Sue Kelly, Consultant provide staff support to the project.

In the first four months, the partnership has:

Planned the installation of countdown timer lights, donated by the Shorewood's Men Club for the intersection of Oakland & Edgewood,

Developed a cellphone/text messaging class for seniors through the Shorewood Recreation Department,

Successfully solicited Roundy's Corporation to designate two “Senior Parking” spaces at Pick 'N Save,

Mailed polling place information alerting frail residents of a handicapped-accessible entrance at Atwater School and promoting the use of absentee ballots.

The partnership is working on developing:

“Shorewood Connects,” a morning of yard work on November 8^th linking students and other volunteers with older adults in need of assistance,

A door-to-door outreach program to connect vulnerable. isolated older adults with people and with resources.

Many more things!  Call or send an email for more information about how you can become involved. C/O Shorewood Resource Center, 2010 Shorewood Blvd., Shorewood. WI 53211;   414-847-2727 * src@villageofshorewood.org or shelly1@wi.rr.com.

Let's honor our own existence.

One of Shorewood's goals should be to keep as many citizens already living here remaining here as active members of this community for as long as possible.

The purpose is to keep the social heritage stored in the minds of those who continue to live here actively demonstrated in what we do toward the perfection of the culture of this community.

Newcomers bring new vigor but the residents who live here the longest act as a memory bank of our evolving culture. Therefore the oldest members living here should understand that they can continue to contribute as much if not more to our community as other members may do.

The elders should persist in making their contributions and accept the new inputs of new members coming into our community so that our culture remains in a constant state of growth and evolution, further strengthening its culture base.

It may seem strange to some that action to “create a new culture” finds its focus in the oldest members of Shorewood's community yet still  expected to permeate all age groups.

For the heart of the community is within its culture and the collective memory of that culture.

Nature's function is survival and reproduction of species for their collective survival. Our community's survival depends on the reproductive or long-lived culture of those experiencing life here.

People living together for whatever reasons, find that this survival characteristic is what creates community and the longer they live together the longer they become part of its culture. This is what gives us our identity and our purpose.

The respect that we give our elders then will assist us in developing our very nature. For in honoring our elders we give hope to our future and honor our own existence.

So let's get on with it.  Let's continue to develop the culture that forms the structure of  our community.

The London County Council was involved in the design and the building of New Towns about 25 miles out from the center of London in the late fifties and early sixties.

I was fortunate to be part of the New Towns Section for the County for several years as an Architect/Planner.

We were involved in the “decanting” of people from London to communities that we had designed and built, some around existing villages and where these new families could come to work and to live and become part of a “new culture.”

I haven't thought of the concept of building a new culture perhaps for about half a century until I heard someone use that term at a meeting only yesterday, where those involved in this meeting have actually begun to build “a new culture” right here in Shorewood.

Some of these people live in Shorewood, some work in Shorewood and some provide service to people in Shorewood. Each either has her own concept of that new culture or is on the edge of its formation.

At the core of this new culture is the fulfillment of the needs of people as they become “elderly.”

This group, Shorewood's Connecting Caring Communities Partnership, is beginning to build a new culture around the elderly of our community.  SCCCP is in the process of building a new over-all consciousness. It has begun by using existing entities and services and developing new and initial methods for bringing the elderly into active participation. This will provide a new sense of belonging that also will more readily allow the elderly to accept assistance from a care-giving community. These are my observations and interpretations.

There is a long list of those already involved, working quietly and at some point will be duly recognized. They are only beginning to  build this community within the village and have been enthusiastically active for months. 

It is within this activity of building a new culture that they are developing the nucleus in which all of us living in Shorewood will eventually become a part.  For we cannot honor our fathers and mothers without the whole involvement of community.  And this is what this group has set out to do and I'm sure will accomplish.

There are many elements of community that lead or contribute to its formulation.

One element of community that is going to be helpful for suburbs in their community development is going to be their local energy resources.

Rather than getting on a broader grid, small communities can become their own sources of energy and use the broader grid to supplement their own supply or in distributing any surplus.

They can form their own corporations to handle this in the same way that they handle their own water billing, street repairing and sewer systems.

This economic element will help contribute to the community's economic independence and further its sense of community.

As we find ways of developing methods for solar and wind energy and other energy sources we can and should keep the community at the center of these resources.

I have already developed a few artful ways for gathering solar energy to begin with. We now need to find ways for creating attractive features within our community for developing wind as a source of energy.

I think we can become leaders in this area, if the innovative minds in Shorewood become sufficiently stimulated.

Someone interested in this should run for office, if no elected official is willing to give further strength to this possibility.

This country has evolved into a two party system, a congress and a strong presidency.

It is not possible to vote significantly, if one were to vote for a third party candidate in this country, no matter how noble, and something that I've sometimes considered.

A vote for a relatively weak third party may be worse than deciding perhaps on what might be considered by some to be voting for the least of two evils.

The Democratic Party was once pro-slavery, while the Republicans were abolitionists. Today, most African-Americans vote Democratic. Henry Wallace probably headed one of the strongest third parties which had shown some possibilities of becoming a significant party.

Because I believe that President Lincoln was among our greatest presidents doesn't mean that I accept everything that Republicans believe in today. I believe President Franklin Roosevelt was also among our greatest presidents. This doesn't mean that I support everything that Democrats might believe in today or in the past.

This doesn't make me a maverick. I often think outside my religion and party. I think for myself as most people I know do. Organized thought is for oligarchies.

Both parties believe in a Capitalistic system, of course, depending on how its defined. I do too. This is no great admission. But all things that human beings do must be within some framework of convention of sorts, whether it's religion, politics or business. I'm sure that most people do not believe as strongly in each of the commandments.

Our system which was pretty much named by Karl Marx as Capitalism was when described under Adam Smith run pretty much as a cash system, especially in its early stages. As banks evolved, the system later developed corporations as more extensive organized units of business.

Today the financial structure is superimposed on that system, developed within an uncontrolled freedom like one growing up unrestricted in the forest. We cannot have a social enterprise such as today's financial system operating outside of a controlled and transparent framework. Our economy is part of our whole social and political system.

Today, I don't believe that Obama or McCain are great choices or that either might make great presidents. We won't know until later. But who are the other candidates that we can vote for come November who would be likely to acquire sufficient votes to get elected?

Senator McCain has been in politics for a much longer time than Senator Obama. He's got more experience. He's therefore done more that can be criticized and we know more about him. Just as we have more to criticize FDR about and even Lincoln.

Therefore, Obama seems more innocent for the time being. He's a liberal, whatever that means. McCain says he's conservative, whatever that means. Moreover, he's a maverick, whatever that means.

The question is not which is most competent but which is likely do what this country needs. Those who are going to decide who it is are the voters.

Neither McCain or Obama is superhuman. No one is. We can only judge them as individuals steeped in the principals of their parties and what they say about these principles.

Whatever action either one of them will take as president will not be very closely related to what he is talking about today. So how are we to judge? Primarily by what we as individuals think they will do in whatever future situations that may be presented.

At the present, these situations can only be considered as hypothetical. Most of us will vote based on the principles of the party that we accept and that best represens our thinking.

Human beings not mere species.

Human because of culture, civilization, government and God perceptions.

Human because brain and intellect.

Human beings because of human hands,

Human beings because of hands and intellect.

Human beings because of perceptions of God and Future.

Human beings because eyes and ears with forward direction.

Human beings, soul, heart, spirit and intellect.

Human beings with word linked intellect.

Human beings because of constant thought.

Human communication.

Human being not mere survival.   

Human love and future.

Human because of compassion.

Human perception of internal as well as external.

Human purpose.

Human being asks why.

Human immersed in how, when and where.

Human being creates knowledge. 

Human, God and Religion, organization and government.

“Oh! Why and How the BIG BANG?”

Human being and human purpose.

Human being, with past, present and future.   

Human being not mere specie.

Property tax is as much a fact of life as human survival and reproduction.

Although not in our genes, taxes have been in our lives as much as civilization, for taxes are part of civilization. Taxes have been there even before written history.

And those of us who live in Shorewood know they have been here even before we were.

University students complain about under-maintained apartments and landlords, especially absentees landlords, complain about high property taxes.

There's no avoiding taxes, unless you were "queen of mean," Billionaire Leona Helmsly who also went to jail for not paying her taxes. 

On average, my property taxes have been increasing pretty much at a rate of about 3% per year over the past 35 years.

I don't know how much the tax base has been increasing over that period of time nor whether expenditures have been following a similar line.

This year's increase is again going to be about 3%.

So no matter what those running for office promise us nor what the village does, if we are going to live here, we are probably going to experience the same percentage of tax increase every year, whether we pay it or not.

So talk about reducing taxes or one proposal verus another is much to do about nothing.  But at least, let's try to get the best for our money. 

There's certainly something to the saying of the inevitability of “death and taxes.”  But I prefer "life and taxes." 

As Leona learned, jail is an alternative.

It is pretty well accepted that we are in an economic recession, and the 13^th of September should prove the fragile nature of an unregulated market.

Even Senator John McCain, who is no Wall Street genius, self-admitted, says that these are serious time(s). As one involved in eliminating regulations, he thinks that the market was improperly regulated.

One might wonder what a proper non-regulation might be? He's been active in eliminating regulations but obviously didn't get involved in imposing the “proper” regulation.

In any case, statements of this type serve to further separate him from his buddy President Bush by blaming inadequate regulations on the Republican administration, whatever that nebulous entity is. Yet Senator McCain wants to set up his own Republican administration.

But by being a maverick, he is able to separate himself from the Republican party while remaining within the Republican party, so he's not a real Republican even though running as a Republican. He sometimes votes with Democrats and even talks with them, which proves he is  not a Republican, he is a maverick Republican.

Being a maverick even only 10% of the time proves that he is a different type of Republican. He's a new type of Republican, a Maverick Republican, i.e, although a Republican, not really a Republican.

Another way that he proves this idea is that he is one of the few Republicans and Democrats who seem to put country first and above party, this even more than wanting to become president of what might be a Republican administration.

He proves this again by showing his closeness to Senator Joe Lieberman, a Democratic maverick. McCain's choice for vice-presidential candidate was another Maverick Republican from Alaska.

The logic is, that although a participant Republican, McCain is a maverick, which excludes him from any Republican thinking, such as being against any regulation of the free market. But as a maverick he can call for regulation of the free marker provided it is appropriate regulation.

Is the free market at this time to be regulated, or should it is always remain unregulated? That's the question.

It is unfortunate that the Republican party does not have a candidate for president and vice-president running and representing the Republican party this time and on this question. He or she could then answer this question in these serious times.

What does change mean?

A number of economic events that are occurring today lead us to recall similar events of the Herbert Hoover-Franklin Roosevelt era. Even Senator John McCain, who has always opposed regulaitons is referring to improper regulation in the financial world.

President Roosevelt had to take drastic steps to save the financial system and perhaps the capitalist system of the 1930's. Many of these reforms, these changes have been gradulally repealed as the Republicans and conservative Democrats were given the chance to do so beginning right after the Harry Truman administration.

We have since witnessed an on-going Republican change or the unrolling of the Roosevelt established institutions that created a new cultural basis for influencing the economy..  More recentlyy an attempt to privatize Social Security.   

Today, at least in the financial world there seems to be a willingness to return to some of those Roosevelt-type regulations and institutions. Fanny Mae, was first established as a government institution. We've now seen the call for some of these by economist and businessmen and we've seen the re-establishment of some already. The greediness that brought down the stock market and the financial institutions of the late twenties and early thirties seems to have been at work again

Are we prepared today to bring about changes of the magnitude that were instituted in the 1930's?

At one end there is one type of change that works at the edges and there is one at the other end, a type of change that can be considered to be revolutionary in depth.

I studied under a conservative Republican economics professor, who used to claim that there were many plans stored away in Washington D.C. that would be put into play as soon as we had signs of another depression, this in order to prevent it from happening. These supposed plans were his arguments for a minimally regulated capitalism. I would guess that some conservatives today are ready to unroll some of these stored-away “New Deal” plans, if they are applicable. 

A magnitude of change of old New-Deal proportions is probably not what is required today , but a lot is needed, at least for the next four years. The change that has been called for by McCain is primarily to separate himself from President Bush, it is not the kind of change that we are talking about here.

On the other hand, Senator Obama has not suggested the depth of change that Roosevelt brought about. An underpinning of real change is called for. And if this was understood, then perhaps one or all of the following specific proposals would have already been suggested. These are only examples of a few suggestions:

An education doctrine, that every child in the United States would be required to go through an educating process, with few exceptions, befitting the individual child from age 4 to 22 but toward specific standards. The purpose of that education and those standards would be for learning the best use of the language and to understand mathematics, science and human history but not limited ot this knowledge. 

All educating institutions would establish the highest standards for teaching and teaching would become among the highest rewarded professions.

People wanting to further advance their education toward professions or for the attainment of additional knowledge within organized structures and who meet the requirements of these institutions would be financially supported.

THIS WOULD BE CHANGE, change in attitudes and in culture.

A Social Security doctrine, providing for individuals as they approach maturity that, they would be encouraged to take part in programs that would permit them to continue their present occupations indefinitely or adapt themselves to other work or accept retirement, or move in and out of retirement as they like. They would be entitled, in some way, to remain productive or to live the life of their choice. People who could not support themselves in later years, would be assisted in order to continue to live lives of dignity.

THIS WOULD BE CHANGE, change in business and government approaches to aging.

One more. A Health Care and Services doctrine, like that for education, would make true services available to everyone in the country according to individual need.

THIS WOULD BE CHANGE, a change in our approach to our social investment in lives of our citizens.

Some of these specific social requirements of modern societies, as indicated above are  the kind of elemental changes that ought to be discussed by the presidential candidates.

Otherwise, both candidates should drop the slogan of “change," if they are not going to say what thery are going to specifically change.   

We in this country have lived at a place and at a time that few have ever experienced, a place where we live free of oppressive government.  Of course we must give thanks to our forefathers.

General observation of history indicates that all government tends to be oppressive. It is oppressive by its very nature. All we ned to do is view the rest of world today and in the past.

Most events of the last 200 years however, have helped us in maintaining limitations to these traditionally oppressive tendencies.

We are fortunate too, that in the last one hundred years that we have become the most economically powerful country in the world. We have therefore been able to protect ourselves from other countries who might want to dominate us.

History also shows that all great empires eventually lose their status of greatness and if they are lucky in the process of decline, they become second rate countries. Yet their fall may be even worse.

Russia has become a second rate country now maintained by a substantial oil supply that it is distributing on the world market. The evolving great power of the future is China. She has learned how to sap off much of our wealth to her advantage.

All great powers must have the economic ability to sustain strong military force. China today has the largest army and naval force on the earth as well as an a up-to-date nuclear technology. She is the most populated country of the world.

America is not only helping to build up China's economy by turning over our technology to her, we have also become the resource for the building of her military force as well. Our financial indebtedness to China increases with each day that passes.

I would like to hear our presidential and vice-presidential candidates discuss the approach that they might take to this developing relationship with China within the broad spectrum of a global economy, and with the varous developing international organizations.