Chris' Lounge

Hi friend! I have two new posts for you today!

Remember, to see the posts, click on the link in the column to the right “everything about…” – thank you for your spike today in readership folks!

New post, analyzing the Republican party presidential nominee choices! Use the link on the right column here, to reach the page for my unique analysis!

Hello dear reader; I have migrated some of my blog. What that means, is that to read my new post from today, you can click on the right margin where it says, “Everything about film-shorts.tv and me” etc. Clicking there, will take you to my very important post of the weekend.

Some of you reading my prior most recent post, might have been surprised by my comment in summation: “b++++ better have my money.” Though I quote lyrics from Rihanna, and while you would need to investigate the context for which she sings about that, I can think of no better application of her sentiment, than to scoff at theft.
Is my use of her words, a comment, coming from a sentiment of greed and narcissism? Not anymore than perhaps hers, and just maybe not at all. Overly burdensome taxation is stealing.
Stealing is stealing. Whether stealing from the a rich person or from a poor person, the act of using federal and state law to egregiously apply policies of disproportionately high taxation is unjust; further, to disrupt public trust by having a history of using those dollars in a less than efficient or criminal manner (obscuring proper return of service to the person’s tax collected), penalties (in a just society) would not seem uncalled for. And so, taxation (as looting), is ever more a concern, when it go beyond levels of collected amounts that exceed financial well-being of its citizens and economy. When that which is collected, becomes taken as an act of greed – perpetrated against the servile (instead of judiciously collected and used for all with sensitivity to all), the needs of community which are consistent with genuine and just taxation levels and means become betrayed in the process. The recent history of federal income tax procedures, is also an area in which light must be shined. The facts show, just how much an extension of power our tax collection system has become – as a feudal model, against individuals, families, businesses and organizations.

A woman today (politician or not), was quoted on network radio hours ago, as addressing the public with her stated justification for wanting to undermine state law, in connection with Proposition 13 specifically. Bear in mind, raising taxes anywhere within our state law, is a legislative concern voiced by the public voting block; and not in the interest except of a rogue and malicious (or ignorant neophyte) state politician. The statement on radio, on the 10th of June, was: “Proposition 13 was designed ages ago to protect grandma from losing her home”. And in simliar words but exact case in point: “that it is no longer a modern need”. What this woman was saying, due to lack of sound argumentation, is that in premise “we can afford tax hikes today, unlike old grandma years ago”, and that “there is no justification for protecting today’s public, through laws like Proposition 13”, [from arbitrary and malicious tax hikes to supply state legislation easy street]. Her premise is totally misguided and deceives young or ignorant listeners, who have maybe not investigated the relevancy of Proposition 13 for their own present and future, even today is it continue to protect their interest during and after their parents’ lives. Proposition 13 was, and is still designed, to protect “grandma” today, as it was to protect her own children, and everyone’s “grandma” years ago as it did them then. Are opponents, who support the attack on Proposition 13, somehow expecting us to believe that we have fewer grandmas and grandpas today, than we did back then? Or, that somehow their children will not have mounting and escalating private costs of care for them? Here’s a fact: The “baby boom” generation in sheer numbers alone, is proof that there are huge numbers of seniors now. That is one reason why so many families say “Hands off! There are limits to what we can tolerate!”They/we are affected by sustained economic downturn of the latest century’s dawn. Is this radio interviewee, suggesting that there are fewer numbers today, than there were when Prop. 13 came to law? She needs to fact check her statement and intentions. Are opponents of our law ready to defend the false premise, that there are and will be fewer poor elderly in their family homes now than there were then? Moreover, are opponents of the law, like her, retorting that somehow age matters when it comes to who pays taxes? That would be highly discriminatory and misaligned. No wonder her view is so unpopular.
Proposition 13, my readers, was crafted as a law to protect against tyrannical government. It spares us from a whole spectrum of unpopular taxes that trickle down to every consumer. Ontop of the sufficient taxation we already abide by, some wish for them to keep on going up and up, subsidizing government… punishing family inheritances (and everyone else), despite an already darkly-motivated related law on the federal level: the death tax (which by the way is also being proposed to go up and up if the current president has success of his intent); never mind that alone! Opposing Proposition 13, focuses government and bureaucratic power against all of us who own or rent property, because for the government, amending it [Pro. 13], would take control away from you, and would ingratiate government, with further privilege over you. These opponents’ target, includes everyone who lives under a roof in California. And, by the way, punishing small businesses in the process, might make you think you’re not affected. Think again, it is the small businesses along with private homeowners, who benefit from Proposition 13 in many ways – ask Proposition 13’s local office “how so?”, for more details. They’ll be able to tell you a list of reasons if you only ask, especially if you take time to get on their mailing list. That protection, includes safety for everyone who isn’t hell-bent on tearing down one of the last great institutions that protect private citizens, from government overreach.
So to re-cap and summarize: Proposition 13 protects us from arbitrary and devious financial gouging, by increasing voter control and safety valves anytime a vote increase is requested by the rogues in state power. And, it [Prop. 13] remains as important (maybe even more so today) now, a protection, as it always has been. Just because the law is “old”, does not in any way suggest that it should be thrown away or even amended. Some of the oldest inventions and laws ever made, remain the most fundamentally relevant and needed ones, for ages to come and pass.
So again, in closing, 1.  We have just as many (more) “grandmas” and “grandpas” today who need Proposition 13, some of whom can’t even get to vote on any ballot – and we need our united voice of all ages, to sustain in helping them and us of all age group. The argument that somehow Proposition 13 is not relevant? That’s a bunch of rubbish, a lie. That supposition is just an attempt to undermine quality governance, in order to please an ill tempered minority, that expressly lack compassion or understanding for the law’s fundamental reason for existing. Gouging, under the threats to lack to public service or any other scare tactic, is immoral. A better government will more carefully consider what expenditures it even permit to be voted on by our ballot. 2. The public already has high rates of tax collections; and they need to be better spent, and not spent on bloated or corrupt dealings. The dollars, must be allocated for the “boring” needs that we always have had – all the way up to the priority agenda, as voted on by ballot each cycle. Along with the conservative voting block, we say: “Hands off our houses”. And, “Stop taxing death”. We vote down superfluous laws. So, hands off of our prop 13! And finally, to quote a rap singer out of Barbados: “B**** better have my money!” We’re not talking hundreds of collective dollars; no, were talking a much bigger sum. The roofs over our heads that we have. And if you think I’m overstating the significance of this, on behalf of multitudes of people in the “golden state”, and beyond, think again.

Forgive me Lord if I am in error in posting this: Is it immoral to use prophylaxis other than abstinence or natural family planning methods, in order to share one of God’s most incredible gifts to mankind between man and woman for its dual purpose? Two loving hopeful parents, who wish to conceive, have no need for prophylaxis. But, are those who use prophylaxis sexually immoral? I don’t think so. God chooses who is to produce children, and so, those who don’t yet or forever, are in my view forgiven. I would like to add, that selfishness can be born in the hearts of those who desire having children, just as it can in those who do not, and visa versa. And sex, in itself, is not a selfish act.

I posit, that adults find comfort believing that their numerical age testifies to their level of maturity. A delusion perhaps, that they may be immune from common childhood emotions. In fact, we know, that adults can feel rage in levels beyond that of a child’s capacity, jealousy, or hate. Adults can even humiliate each other. So why all the focus on kids? I’ll comment on that gladly after a few points. Do young parents value emotional intelligence quotients? It’s possible that today, young families are attracted to the values of these ideas which is cause for optimism.

Adults find coping mechanisms, tools, beliefs, and strategies in general, to overcome their difficulties. They should take time to share that also with their own children, by finding outlets that are age appropriate. While we have been battered and bruised in life, tried and challenged, uplifted and encouraged, disappointed and pleased, children have sometimes less at their disposal. Some parents may be offering more assistance of this kind, than their peer classmate is getting at their respective home. Maybe that is why, some emotions spill over? Not always do kids have the luxury or ability to remove themselves mentally, just far and long enough from the emotion, in order to communicate and strategize on how to feel better about the situation. Sadly, in some cases, it seems evident that adults have trouble knowing how to offer compassion to the kids who encounter everyday problems. At best, they need attention. That is very true in cases where values centered on competing, may become more important in the household than building harmony is. The goal ought to be, a family which can share complaints with one another and maybe even about each other, face to face, without retaliation. Sometimes kids see parent’s shortcomings and parents refuse to own up. Visa versa. If there is no aim to work toward resolution, the pupil’s positive growth might result in being inhibited. Or, an incident in a school might occur, with blame to go around everywhere.

And so, it’s every bit as important as learning common subjects is, to receive compassion with regard to learning how to manage the feelings that are valid, no matter how obscure or bizarre they may seem to the observer or socially oriented worker.

In grade school, guidance counselors and psychologists, and/or the school nurse, have an important task in partnership with teachers, in recognizing troubled youth. As the goals intensify, in hurried and vast curriculums; and as emotional outlets might be in a diminish, youth can find their frustrations building… with no optimism that the pressure will decline.

These school employees need to (in my view) not laud over-achievement, should recognize, counter, and caution excessive shyness, should discourage excessive classroom disruptions, and so forth. Sometimes, the counselors or other school staff might recognize that a particular sport, or a music program, is exactly what a particular youth need. Maybe the pupil needs to be permitted to drop a class, or be held back a year? Such school employees should take the initiative to contact the pupil’s parent(s), to suggest emotional outlets that are fitting to the particular student in such circumstances.

Maybe a karate class outside of school, a religious program, dance, or private tutoring, are investments that will truly help to prevent the “water from boiling over” into drastic and tragic events.

And, these employees should also respect the parents’ decisions with regard to extra-curricular activities. It is even perfectly acceptable to home school.

Worried or simply conscientious parents of the very young, might look at a website that seems youth oriented and well-meaning: “operationrespect.org” . Emotional intelligence is a life asset that some adults lack from time to time (as we face certain pressures), but is evermore essential for both adults and youth alike.