A man asked himself the following questions in an effort to discover how he felt, where he stood, and, ultimately what he might be prepared to do- or not do- as an outcome. Amazingly (to him at least) it did not take long to reach a final conclusion.

1. I come face to face with an ISIS fighter who holds a knife to my throat and says “convert or die”. Standing next to me is a Muslim who I do not know. Will that Muslim stand with me, against me, or remain silent? Based upon that response what should the next person in line, behind me, ready to be presented the same ultimatum, do?
2. My wife and daughters are suddenly forced to live under Sharia, or just Islamic law. Am I okay with that?
3. I am no longer allowed to freely practice my Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist religions or beliefs and I am also not allowed to be an atheist. Am I okay with that?
4. I somehow wake up living in a small village in the middle of Lebanon. I am an unmarried, Christian woman who uses birth control and has always worked to support myself. I am told that I have nothing to worry about in my new surroundings. Do I believe what I am told?
5. I am an aspiring young Hollywood producer who has chosen to make my new film “Submission Again” in the middle of Saudi Arabia. I am excited about attending the opening at a theatre in Riyadh but should I be nervous about the reaction?
6. I am an American woman who has married a man from Egypt who has settled in the U.S. Unfortunately a history of domestic abuse and violence is established- not unlike at some other homes in America. I decide I want a divorce and custody of our two small children. Would I tell my husband this in person and would I later do anything beyond what is typical to protect myself and my kids?
7. I am a gay man with a great job at a high tech firm in California but, unfortunately, I have been told that due to cutbacks I will need to choose one of three options: 1) be laid off with an okay pension; 2) continue at my current position at our facility in Austin, Texas; 3) continue at my current position at our just recently-opened facility in Tehran. I have only an hour to make my choice- what will it be and why?
8. I am planning an anti-war protest against our current government leaders along with several other fellow students here at the University of Baghdad. What might I expect?
9. I am watching the evening news and see a clip on anti-Western protests in Gaza. There are signs denouncing and calling for the elimination of Israel and the U.S. I ask myself where the counter-protesters are and why, seemingly, the only Muslim voices raised against such protests seem to be in the U.S. and seem to be far and few between. And I answer…?
10. I am a brilliant political satirist and cartoonist. I have just drawn up the most brilliant and influential cartoon of my entire career and need to submit it for publication in ten minutes. It is a cartoon that uses religion as its basis and can convey the point equally well with either Jesus or Mohammed as the key character but neither would be presented in a respectful fashion- in fact, just the opposite. Who do I show in what I submit and why?
11. I speak with the realtor who is selling the house next to mine. Though she is not supposed to discuss such things she says that there are two equal offers on the table- one from an Israeli family and one from an Iranian family, both families recently emigrated to the U.S. I later encounter my neighbor who is torn as to which offer to choose and asks my opinion. What do I tell him?
12. I am this very day called to Washington to a meeting attended by the President and all of the current members of Congress I am told that the U.S. has just been paid back $1 trillion of the debt owed it by the rest of the world for the last 100 years. I am allowed to (only) target that money for either 1) existing and new social programs or 2) the defense of this country. What do I choose?

Like following the progression of any investment, in this case your time, life, future and family, take a look at the world and this country each and every month and decide whether we are getting closer to or moving farther away from a world order that would make these questions less theoretical or more a matter of real probability.

Your free choice in such matters may indeed be more than slowly fading fast away. If we do nothing you may not have to answer these questions as they will either not be asked at all or will be answered for you.

Think about that for a minute and then tell me how you feel.

Mr. G-Man Goes to Wall Street

I finally dove right in, full body and skinny-dippered, to Facebook.  I had held back from the social media front for some time but my kids chided me into getting into the new century.  Tough to hear for a technology guy but I have sucked it up and submersed myself.

I joined a few groups that are basically of an alumni nature- old schools, neighborhoods, workplaces, etc.  All good and actually fun if an amazing time sink.  Great memories that often serve to highlight how much life has gone by.  Sad in a way but, hey, get ready for it- that’s life!

The issue that I have is that on the SM sites (feel free to use that by the way) the kimonos fly open to reveal the true nature of people- some just a little, others quite a lot.  I guess they feel that they are older or they are safe behind the keyboard (like me, here) or maybe they have always secretly wanted to incite a hyperspace riot.  Dunno, but it is all that I can do to refrain from responding in kind.

This morning, by way of a perfect example, an old acquaintance who I used to have a good deal more respect for shared a piece from his liberal armory that basically decried the compensation of corporate CEO’s.  This is fair enough as I tend to agree but I also happen to think that the system should be allowed to correct itself.  Stockholders have to get more active in terms of voting for the board and the board needs to set more reasonable compensation plans for the top execs.  If they get paid a ton and the company does well and we continue to hold or buy the stock then who is to say it should be changed?  What really irks me is the generous release packages (the so-called “golden parachutes”) that are rewarded even in the aftermath of total failure.  This is the real problem.  I am fine with pay for performance as part of a generous incentive package.  Pay for performance…and whatever…I am not so okay with.

The issue I have with this guy’s posting is that he implies the government helps big biz at the expense of the poor.  Really?  Who “creates or saves” more jobs?  Who helps to achieve (I used that word on purpose) more wealth for invested individuals and also for working folks who have things like pensions and 401k’s tied to the performance of that company and the market?  How does the government compare here?

How come these liberals don’t complain against the uber-rich like Gates & Soros & Buffet?  Did they somehow work harder for their billions than some of the current big-time CEOs worked for their millions?  How about the Hollywood actors and pro athletes?  How about The Oprah?  C’mon.

Ok so here is a new experiment.

Let’s make our political leaders, who mostly have no business experience, take rather-permanent leave from their very challenging jobs of glad-handing, practicing patronage, and otherwise working hard to just stay in office.  Take 50% of their salaries and put it into an interest-bearing account in some socialist country like France- just to keep it safe from the evil, capitalist money-horders and baby-killers (oops, got that last one backwards but you get the point) running roughshod in the good ole USA.

Take your pick of top corp execs so that the numbers are equal.  Do likewise with their salaries.

Now, have the biz guys move into the government and have the DC guys and gals move in the business world.  Sit back and then hit the GO button.  Let’s watch.

How long before the DC folks screw up their companies and send the market into a downward spiral nothing like has ever been seen before?  And with that goes the wealth of all those nasty capital investment barons, the group investment capital for numerous company and school and even government retirement investment plans like pensions funds and 401ks, the jobs associated with those companies (maybe just a few million or so) and the lives and livelihoods of all those people…and their spouses…and their children…and their favorite charities,,,.  My oh my, who will save them Dudley?

How long before the business guys manage to get the government into better shape given that their pay is to be a LOT lower than anything they had seen since maybe their early twenties AND (I forgot to say this) given that they are on an incentive plan that will allow them to moderately enhance their take-home pay if they do good.

I would think this could all be accomplished in 1-2 years tops.

Oh yeah, the final part.

Once big biz and the markets are sunk and millions upon millions have seen their savings and investments go poof and their jobs go poof as well; once the government becomes more effective and efficient (not hard given where it is at now); once that is all in place the Man can then step in and really take over everything and everyone once and for all.

We will then have managed to reach that socialist nirvana that these progressive liberals have worked so diligently behind their keyboards, inside their condos and penthouses within their gated communes of like-thinkers, to achieve.

Way to go!  We are all socialist paupers then.  But at least all that nasty capitalism is gone and we have a government that will take care of us, provide our bread and water, for ever and ever and ever.

Amen.

Another phase.

First, we identify the people in this country that are 1) welfare state proponents and 2) advocates for cutting defense spending to support funding of that welfare state.  If they tend greatly toward socialism all the better.  In fact, those folks should be entitled to a lead place in the US queue.

Next, the EU identifies folks they consider possibly problematic citizens who are 1) against the welfare state and the onerous taxes needed to support it and 2) live in areas considered at high risk for either military or terrorist attack.  If they tend a good bit more toward capitalism than socialism all the better.  In fact, those folks should be rewarded with a lead place in the EU queue.

Third, the amount of money that the US will spend on military presence, defense weaponry, and all associated resources in support of the EU for the next ten years is identified and earmarked.

Fourth, the US and EU finalize an agreement to exchange and transfer individuals from each of the previously identified groups.  Ratios may need to be negotiated.  The EU transplants are placed in economically stressed regions of the US and the US transplants are placed in the areas vacated by their EU equivalents.

It is a key point here that the EU transplants be placed in areas needing economic stimulus from human effort.  Placing them in the areas vacated by the US transplants would more than likely be far too coastly.

Financials are the final step.

The EU transplants into the US are provided with the same welfare benefits received by their transplanted US equivalents but that amount is reduced by 10% per year over a ten year period.  The US transplants into the EU are provided with the same welfare benefits received by their transplanted EU equivalents and that amount is to be maintained as much as possible.  In addition, in order to make the deal more desirable for the EU the US will cut spending on defense of the EU as previously identified by 10% per year over a ten year period.  Half of that 10% will be given to the EU though as a gesture of goodwill.  They are free to spend this on defense, on the transplantees, or on anything they choose.  This stipend does run out after ten years though.

There, done.

EU volunteers?  Great, welcome!

US volunteers?  US?  Buehler?  Buehler?  Buehler?

Seems that the U.N. has proposed a solution to the problems in the Middle East.  They are proposing that Israel move out of the neighborhood with the move being funded by international funds derived primarily from the sale of oil and associated oil resources by the remaining Middle Eastern countries.

Okay, so it isn’t the U.N.  It’s me.  But please bear with me and consider this proposal for just a moment or deux.

Israel would pack up its citizenry and any national resources that could be transported by truck, train, boat and plane.  This would include any buildings, vehicles, national monuments, military equipment, synagogues, religious shrines and essentially anything already transportable or that could be deconstructed to the point of being made mobile enough to join the exodus.  Again, the funds for this move would come from soon-to-be-former neighbors.  It should be worth the price to them I would imagine.

I know this is hard for Israelites to envision or stomach but let’s just call it a temporary experiment.   The land of Israel would be held in escrow for, say twenty years.  No one moves in or in any way lays claim to the empty lands.

And, as such things go, all parties would sign a document to these effects.

Now, where to go?

Well, here I would suggest that some southern are of our own very large country that has a climate somewhat similar to that of today’s Israel (sorry, no Dead Sea).  May I suggest further perhaps that, in the interest of the international tranquility that so many continuously advocate is possible with such seemingly radical approaches as this, the proper authorities in Mexico, California, and Arizona get together to define a geographic region which will, one, support the approximately 8 million new inhabitants, and, two, will offer some ocean access.

The impact to existing residents would be made as minimal as possible.  They could either stay as expats to their current countries and with those associated rights and protections or they could move.  That move would also be funded by the global communities.

Such a large-scale exodus would not be historically unfamiliar to the Jews either so hopefully they might be persuaded to see this as just another chapter in their lengthy book.  They get to stay together as a nation of people albeit not in their more historical lands.

There would be a leasing of land with a right to own after twenty years.  This would be fully subsidized by the U.N. of course but might be offset by giving the re-nation rights to some significant natural resources, both on land and offshore, within the scope of this new deal.  I don’t know for sure; we might get somewhat creative on this.

And, again, as such things go, all parties would sign a document to these effects.

The Jews would naturally be the ones most personally impacted by this but, in general, many could benefit from the deal.  For the rest of the Middle East, no more satan, no more Israel, no more Jews (at least so uncomfortably close that is).  For the global community, no more Middle East problem.  For Mexico and California and Arizona a new, strong, economically successful neighbor and the off-spun economic benefits of the new leasing arrangement for the next twenty years.  For the U.S. in general, having a strong ally closer and also having built-in border protection arrangement implemented as a free part of the deal.  Talk about your serendipity!

And for the Jewish population?  Well, the loss of their homeland would be tough.  But they would then live in a much friendlier neighborhood where they can go to work, go to the store, send their kids to school with much less fear of a missile or human bomb bringing innocent lives to a sudden end.  The release of stress alone would seem quite welcome would it not?

So there it is.

Oh, and the upshot of all this?  Well, I already mentioned the potential benefits but let me think.  Okay.

The only thing to do next would be to watch and enjoy the peace enjoyed in New Israel with its new neighbors.

Oh, and of course the same with the New Middle East.  Though the neighborhood would be identical save the exodus of that grumpy old man who used to chase the kids off of his lawn it would surely enjoy a very welcome and pervasive peace in the region for the next twenty years.

Wouldn’t it?

Here is another mental exercise for us to consider.

Pick some affluent suburb in America.  It needs to be fairly large and it needs to be mostly white.

At the same time pick some poor, underprivileged urban neighborhood.  It also needs to be fairly large and it needs to be mostly black.

Find two similar families in the white suburb.  The two families need to have similar economic situations and incomes and similar homes with space enough for a guest family.  Each family needs to have a set of heterosexual parents and a boy and a girl somewhere between 10 and 14 years old.  For the sake of this experiment only the father in each family works.  The kids are active and are all good students, preferably at the same school.  Those are the similarities.  

The differences are as follows: one family consists of two liberal parents who are agnostic, atheist, or non-practitioners of their chosen religion while the other consists of two conservative parents who are faith based and active practitioners of that faith.

For now, political preferences are not a major concern but neither family should have a professional or personal agenda which is influenced or impacted overly much by political considerations.  Political situations may be important to the family’s existence and success but need to have no discernible effects upon this experiment.

Find two similar families in the black inner-city neighborhood.  The two families need to have similar economic situations and incomes and similar homes or apartments.  Each family needs to have four members but one has a set of heterosexual parents while the other has a single mother and would therefore have two boy and one girl or two girls and one boy.  All kids will be aged between 10 and 14.

The differences here are as follows:  the single-mother family is essentially dependent on the government for its existence and is mostly non-religious, not attending church except when necessary.  The kids go to school but are not necessarily good students and education is not considered important in the household.  The other family has a working father and perhaps a working mother.   The kids attend school because it is considered of paramount importance for them to be successful students, which they are, and for them to be working toward getting into a good college to pursue a useful and useable degree there.  The second family attends church regularly and is, in general, quite religious.

Have you guessed yet what is next?  Good for you!

Yes, the single-mother family packs up their stuff and are transported to the home of the liberal white suburban family.  They will move in and live with this family for one year.  A set of goals and objectives will be created by each family in terms of what they expect from each other and also how they hope to change one another.  These may or may not be shared- it is up to the two families.

And, yes, the two-parent urban family also moves in with the conservative suburban family to live with them for a year as well.  The creation and possible sharing of goals and objectives will be done by them also.

We might also assign an independent panel of sociologists to help monitor but in no way control or even influence the experiment.    

Interaction between the new households, including at school if they do attend the same one, is to be kept at a bare minimum.

So set it up and get it going and then just watch what happens over the twelve months.

Any thoughts on how things will go to in each household and with each family?  Any projections on where things wind up?

Yes, I know that the variations on this experiment are endless and interesting but we’ll just leave those aside…for now at least.

Onward.

For the Left I thought they might initiate the establishment of their new country by using something other than the founding documents of the old United States since they don’t really adhere to or believe in them anyhow.  Around New Year’s Day I came across the following by a Mr. Robert Creamer (do you know of him?  I didn’t…) writing in the Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-creamer/fourteen-2014-new-years-r_b_4518591.html

Now I hadn’t heard of this gentleman but it would seem that these resolutions might be almost immediately adoptable by the new Left America.  Due to immediate adoption it might not involve the struggle he cites as being necessary to his cause but I suppose it could be worked out that the Left would stage some sort of internal conflict so as to help create the requisite struggle prior to adoption.  Whatever works.

That then should take care of our former countrymen and get them going in a direction in which they are most familiar and most comfortable.  Bon voyage.

I like lists so I figured that for the Right  I would propose one for consideration of an initial direction or charter for us:

1. Re-ratification of the original Constitution of the United States including the Bill of Rights but not the subsequent amendments.  This would have to occur for viability.  This would provide for a return to small, limited government.
2. Review and re-ratification of the 27 amendments to that same Constitution.  Failure to re-ratify any or all of these would not preclude viability and any failed amendment would be struck from the Constitution.
3. Pass a Balanced Budget Amendment and initiate an aggressive but achievable plan to start paying down the portion of the $17.3+ Trillion debt that we assumed when we split up.
4. Set term limits for all elected offices and limit the amount of money that can be spent on specific elections.
5. Eliminate all but the most essential government agencies and set strict limits on what rules might be generated by any remaining (few!) government agencies.
6. Allow unions, public and private, to exist of course but allow full fairness and complete freedom in terms of workers electing membership.  Set strict laws regarding political contributions.
7. Pull back all non-critical and non-essential global military presence.  Time to let someone else play world cop- maybe the Left would choose to accept this responsibility.
8. Withdraw from the United Nations- it is a useless, political, anti-U.S. organization anyhow.Strengthen our relationships with existing key allies such as Israel, Britain, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Australia, India, Germany, and a few others.  Re-examine same with Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Pakistan and the like.  Look into a few new, key alliances as appropriate but put all of these to a vote.
9. Roll back all lingering and crippling entitlements.  For example, reform Social Security in a graduated manner that will have minimal impact on existing or nearer-term recipients.
10. Reform the medical system in a manner that makes sense, improves medical care, lowers medical costs, and does not include government involvement.  That obviously means leaving Obamacare behind with the Left.  Bon voyage.
11. Focus on the economy and the generation of new companies, new industries, and lots and lots of new jobs.  At the same time unemployment benefits, and, for that matter, any programs that cause an unhealthy attachment to or reliance on any part of government, are to be minimized and made unlawful to modify, short of a national crisis or disaster, forever.
12. An essential social safety net will be established but will be made minimal and not overly easy to activate and utilize.
13. Pension funds are to be entirely private and privately monitored by persons responsible forever to the participating contributors.   Any misuse or redirection of funds would be considered a first-time felony.
14. No equal opportunity or quota laws or requirements will be allowed.  Proper and satisfactory anti-discrimination laws will of course be upheld.
15. Immigration laws are to be strictly enforced.  The illegals residing in the old United States are free to remain with the Left or go home.  Bon voyage.  If they wish, they may apply for eventual citizenship with the new United States via normal, legal channels.  Worker and student visas will be issued but will not be easily obtained and any overstays will be prosecuted against a strict set of laws.
16. Education reform will be pursued with vigor.  National standards and agencies are to be almost entirely avoided.  Parents are to be allowed vouchers to use their tax dollars for schools of their choice- this will also enhance overall competition. Unions are to be restructured and refocused on the proper end goal of educating our children to be the best in the world.  Period.
17. The tax code will be greatly simplified and can only be modified with extreme effort.  Exclamation mark.
18. Get our nation fit, off the couches, and off both prescription and illegal drugs to a very large extent.  Again, the government would play a minimal to no role in this but would simply get out of the way and work to remove any problem regulations or restrictions as deemed necessary by the private concerns.
19. Keep existing abortion laws on the books but work to educate our young people on relationship and reproductive responsibility.  Establish an open and private non-profit organization dedicated to actually planning parenthood and not just eliminating fetuses as a first or favorable path.  Non-profit does not mean government controlled or even influenced.
20. Recognize legal marriage as being between one man and one woman.  Period.  Attempt to rebuild the nuclear family and make divorce less easy to obtain or less of an attractive option through social and legal means.  Educate parents to parent responsibly and effectively.  This does not mean implementing government programs to accomplish these.
21. Practice responsible use of natural resources and monitor and limit harmful waste products.  Offer to always review any data that indicates man or nation caused climate problems.
22. Establish complete energy independence- oil, shale, refineries, natural gas, fracking, nuclear power plants, and so on.  Solidify primary relationships with other leading energy producers such as Canada.  Eliminate the import of oil from any unfavored nations, especially in the Middle East.  Continue to research and develop alternate energy technologies as feasible.
23. Double down on key military and space research projects.  Limited government to partner with private industry where it makes sense to maximize our international standing in each area.  We need to be the best.
24. Reaffirm and reiterate our basic rights as articulated by the Declaration and Constitution- such as the right to bear arms and the right to free speech.  Re-state and clarify what separation of church and state was intended to mean.
25. Establish the Golden Retriever as the National Dog and require every household to have one.  Statistics show that the good folks with Goldens are better citizens and happier people who are better adjusted to react in a friendly nature to almost all outside stimuli.  Liberals own cats; Conservatives own dogs and those should be Goldens.

I only took a few minutes to generate this list but I hopefully hit some key points.  I’m sure I missed some important items and maybe mis-stated others but you get the idea I hope.  I may edit to improve over time.

The Left could readily use Mr. Creamer’s list of 14 and the Right might start with this list of 25- guess it takes a few more list items needed to un-do all that has been done than it takes to just pile on to the existing heap. 

My goal was to have 25 items but I struggled a bit after 20 due to time constraints so I simply proposed the final one.  Yes, we have a Golden- two actually.  I’m willing to listen to a better idea if you think you have one.

If you disagree with a large portion of this less-than-perfect list then, well, bon voyage.

And please tell Mr. Creamer I said hello and good-bye.

So here is another thought experiment, the new release plan I had mentioned a few days back.  It would be a radically new release approach of the Great American Experiment so I am just dubbing it v.2 for “Version 2”. 

I would like to propose that we split the country and start two new ones. 

The first would be populated by the liberal Left and the second the conservative Right.  The so-called moderates would be allowed to choose one or another but not both.  This is exactly what happens in elections but for the following distinction- once in place one side would not be allowed to use or leverage the resources or successes of the other.  Got that?  It’s important to note because that is certainly not a distinction that is in place today.

Okay, with me so far?  Liberals line up on the left side of the playground.  Conservatives line up on the right side.  The rest of you need to decide which side you will join.  After that we will tally the numbers.

And the playground?  Well, there isn’t a really easy way to do this but my first pass at a solution would be to give the east to the Liberals (east of the Mississippi) and the west to the Conservatives.  We may need to adjust based upon the final tally percentages, the number of developed areas, the amount of natural resources and so on and the dividing line may need to therefore shift east or west, right or left, depending on such mitigating factors.  Let’s just start with the Mississippi, okay by you all?

Alaska & Hawaii?  This is tough but I would say give Hawaii to the Left and Alaska to the Right and then adjust the line again as needed.

The present U.S. Territories such as Puerto Rico, Guam, etc.?  That can be worked out at the table I think, maybe as an outcome of the military resource negotiations.  Strategic location and such. 

I think then that most everything can be divided up based upon the ratios.  Take the following: the national debt; any actual resources that still might exist at the Treasury; the military arsenals including nuclear weapons; military bases; the National Guard, Coast Guard, and Army Reserve; suitable and navigable ports; airports; energy sources such as nuclear/coal/solar/wind power plants (more of the solar and wind to the Left as possible); fire and police and other emergency resources (the personnel would go per individual decisions at the start but the actual non-human resources could be divvied up); military personnel (here, assuming the Right would have more personnel, the Left might wind up with more non-human assets); waterways; train track, rolling stock,  stations and train lines like Amtrak;  you get the idea.

The Left can pretty much have, automatically, the federal buildings; Washington D.C. (except for a few things); NYC; as many wind and solar power plants as possible; the NBA & the NFL; soccer; as many Planned Parenthood facilities as possible; controversial Mosques and other places of worship; pretty and pristine land areas with no useable natural resources but more than suitable for solar and wind farms; pretty much all the existing government agencies and sub-agencies (very unclear how many of these there are but the Right would offer to start over from scratch); a large majority of the trial lawyers; the ACLU and NAACP; the Nation of Islam and similar hate groups; NOW; NAMBLA; the National Teachers Unions and any teachers who want to stick with them; the Liberal Media by default is all theirs; and so on.

We’ll take (I will be on the Right team in case you hadn’t already figured that out) the Founding Documents (the Left doesn’t really believe in them anyhow); the old paintings of the Founding Fathers (I like those); as many key historical documents as possible- we’ll take Lincoln, the Left can have Wilson AND Franklin Roosevelt AND Lyndon Johnson for the most part; as many nuclear and coal power plants as possible; as many Christian churches as possible; the NHL and MLB; as few abortion clinics as possible; the Keystone pipeline and as many oil refineries as we can; shale deposits; as much frackable land as possible; most talk (meaning intelligent) radio; a few agencies like the DoD and Veterans Affairs- we’d start over with our own DoJ, State Department, etc.; and, here to, so on and so on.

We’d have to concede some of the awesome national monuments but we would reserve the right to reproduce these in their entirety in a new location, maybe somewhere in Utah or Nevada.  Same for other man-made treasures such as certain museums and the like.

The Left may need to give up the reefer madness on the Colorado slopes but there IS skiing in Vermont.

So we would have a split in human stock- maybe 55-45 or 60-40 or something.  I suppose that if a particular splinter group, based on a radically different ideology or religion or ethnic underpinning wished to carve out yet another, albeit smaller, nation, that could also be supported.  All key areas, items, and assets would be split along the same lines or be negotiated where this was not possible.  It could take a few months to come to agreement.

There would be a general fund in place to support the relocation of people and assets as needed but this would probably add no more than a trillion or two to the debt so no big deal.  In fact, since they mostly think adding to the debt in such huge chunks is no biggie then maybe the Left could just offer to fund the move- we’ll offer up the volunteer truck drivers with the Harley folks riding along for protection.  See how nice we can be? 

There would be post-split arrangements, on the clock, for such things as border crossings (prior to passport issuance) and free trade and lingering commitments or contracts. 

We’d also have to work out the details of the impact to our international agreements such as treaties and the like but would hopefully both be able to either continue to honor them as they exist or re-negotiate with specific countries as needed. 

Moving forward after the split each side would then be free to hit the reset button and start as desired to re-form their respective new countries.  Cool, huh?

Likely that we, the Right, would move back much closer to the origins as contrived in the founding days of the old United States and then go from there with the added benefit of having a couple of hundred years of practical experience to feedback into the first few years of new development.  We’d know much better what to avoid and write it right into our legal structure early on.

It would be much easier for the Left.  They would just simply pick up from where they left off prior to the split and then continue down that same path but with the understanding that they would no longer be able to siphon anything whatsoever off from the dastardly Right.  Simple enough for them right?  Certainly simple enough for us.

So let’s set it and forget it and then come back, say, every five years and see how things are going for the two new countries.  Just three questions remaining then:

What should we name each new America?

Which will you join?

Which will have the most chance at not depositing itself into the trash heap of history?

Ooops, sorry.  That last one should have been rhetorical.

The next one is pretty straightforward but can have endless variants.

You and your wife, along with your two beautiful children, moved into the neighborhood three years ago.  It is a nice neighborhood of middle class families from several, but not all, walks of life.  A good number are just like you.  The schools are decent and your kids like the one that they attend with the many friends they have made.  The neighbors are nice and fairly open but most seem to appreciate some privacy, like you.  Crime is low but not non-existent.  There are houses of worship for several religions within a reasonable distance.  Most of the things a younger family looks for in a neighborhood are here in your community.

You have a house that is quite attractive if a bit on the small side.  You keep it up nicely and pay extra attention to how it appears from the street.  You and your wife love to get outside with the kids to work on the landscaping- you often seem to be planting or maintaining something and have even been kidded about this by your recent next-door neighbors, the Grants, who just moved away when Bill was transferred with his company.  You also like to spend as much time as possible in the backyard playing with the kids.  There is a fence, it helps to keep in your small and active dog and it offers a touch of privacy but it is still rather easy to see all of your immediate neighbors’ yards and then some.  Sometimes you wish it provided a bit more seclusion and have even done some plantings to help provide that down the road.

The real estate market for this area is good.  It is a suburb but still not far from the urban area, most of which you enjoy visiting, most of which is safe but there are some neighborhoods it is best to avoid and they seem to be getting closer to your neighborhood over time.  The “For Sale” sign was not up for long in the Grants’ front yard before you notice the realtor beginning to show the house.  Fortunately you have taken that week off of work, not to vacation, but to work on your house and yard and are therefore conveniently outside a lot, with your wife and kids, and able to see and meet prospective buyers.

You were not too upset to see the Grants move.  Their kids were much older than your own so your relationship was cordial but not close.  You often wished they would have spent more time taking care of their house and property as it looked a good bit shabbier than your own and you were worried about the impact on your own property value.  Though you hadn’t told any neighbors there is a job you are pursuing downstate and would readily relocate if you landed it so the resale value of your home had become even more important lately. 

The first day the realtor brings by a younger Asian couple- they are probably Chinese- who have two younger kids. They seem nice but speak a lot in their native tongue.  They are dressed cleanly and ask you a few questions about the neighborhood.  They tell you that they are moving from a condo where they lived mainly due to the fact that they liked to have the property maintenance provided- they both work and don’t have a lot of time to spend on much else after work and the kids.  The dad, in fact, tells you he really doesn’t like doing much work on or around the house.

The next day a black couple comes by to look at the house.  They have three kids, two boys and a girl, all either teens or close to being teens, but the kids are not with them.  You find out that they are looking to move from one of the urban areas that you usually try to avoid.  There are a few hints provided during conversation that they may not be married and you start to wonder if the man is the biological father of the kids but there is, of course, no way to find out short of bluntly asking.  He seems nice enough but the woman comes across with a bit of an attitude.  When the realtor mentions that the property could use some outside TLC the couple agrees and both say they look forward to spending a lot of time outside.  In the city their kids have a lot of friends and they are looking forward to having more outside area where the kids and their friends can hang out.

Day three is interesting.  The realtor brings by a family of Muslims in the morning and a family of Jews in the afternoon.  The similarities are amazing.  Both have kids the same age as your own.  The Muslim mother and the Jewish father both appear dressed in the traditional style of those deeply devoted to their religion and, indeed, make references to their respective holy books during conversation.  Their children are quiet and seem to be respectful.  Both families seem well-kept and middle class like your own family.  You find nothing out about their willingness to spend time improving the appearance of the property to a level you would prefer.    

The fourth day finds a white family from Iowa looking at the house.  They have several kids ranging in age from below to above that of your own kids and their kids have accompanied the parents on this house hunting trip- they thought they would visit the big city that dad would soon be working in.  The kids are nice but rather misbehaved and a bit mouthy and disrespectful at times.  The mom seems to be someone who would be a neighborhood busybody given how much she is talking and also how many comments she is making about the folks she has seen in the neighborhood- she even makes a few somewhat forward remarks about your own family who she sees out in the backyard.  They are dressed okay but the kids seem a bit rumpled and your wife tells you later on that the teen-aged daughter appeared a bit on the trampy side and likely has a lot of boyfriends.  They are not a young couple but do emphasize that they like to have a good time and ask about the neighbors and if most like to party.  This would be the fifth house they have lived in and they seem to know a good bit about home maintenance and also about landscaping- they compliment you and your wife on your own house and lot.

On Friday there are two more showings to prospective buyers, once again with amazing similarities.  Both are young single mothers with two very young kids.  Each brings along a boyfriend but it is unclear if he will be a live-in or not.  There is no mention of a biological father or ex-husband.  Both are overweight and do not dress to cover up much of anything.  Each has at least one visible tattoo and one visible body piercing.  Both women talk loudly and appear to be the in-your-face type.  Each mentions how many hours she works so it would seem that there will be a lot of times when their kids will be left unsupervised and it sure doesn’t seem like she will have much time for home upkeep.  You secretly wonder if these last two showings aren’t due to some new requirement for realtors to have to show properties to a certain number of lower class clients but, of course, you say nothing and do not ask such a question.  One woman is black, the other is white.

On Saturday morning you and your wife talk over coffee about the folks who have been shown the old Grant house.  You discuss your observations and impressions; do they seem like nice people?; do they have kids who are close in age to your own and will they be friends?; will they be able and willing to put time into improving the appearance of the house and yard?; what sort and how many visitors will they have?; will the older kids have lots of older friends hanging out and what will they be like?’; will there be a lot of parties or backyard barbeques and will it be noisy?; if they do have a lot of visitors will they park in front of your house or encroach on your property?; will what they do, how will they live, and how will their living there impact the resale value of your own home?  Many such questions are brought up and discussed.

On Sunday afternoon the realtor stops by to ask a question about the Grants property and, as she’s leaving she turns to ask you “so, what do you think?”  This woman is like one of the prospective buyers but not like you.  You give her your answer and also what you think are acceptable reasons for thinking the way that you do.

On Sunday evening you are watching a game on TV with your best-friend neighbor Willy.  He is just like you.  He asks the same question that the realtor asked.  You give him your answer and also what you think are acceptable reasons for thinking the way that you do.

What was your response to each of these fine people?

Hi.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about thought experiments.  They’re pretty harmless right?  Yet they can offer difficult but revealing views of a particular topic, of a moral or ethical conundrum, or even of our friends, neighbors and, most critically, ourselves.

For example one that I remember (and it is pretty unnerving so please don’t read further unless you have a strong enough constitution) is where a terrorist (this is modernized from a nazi or communist) has each of your only two children held captive and at gunpoint.  There is a gun pointed at each and you are standing there, bound and likewise at gunpoint.

“One must die” he says to you coldly.  “You must pick and you have one minute to do so.  Pick neither and they will both be shot.”  Both children look at you but you find it almost impossible to meet their terrified, desperate eyes.

Now you don’t know if he absolutely means or will do what he says.  If you do not choose he will kill both and then may or may not also kill you.  If you choose one child he may shoot that child as he said or shoot the other- maybe he will shoot both no matter what.  If you do not choose he may shoot you first but that would spare you from having to see what would follow so that is unlikely to such an evil person.  Is he testing your love for your children or just a wicked sadist?  Is there a way to stall or somehow get free and save both your children and then yourself?  Could you offer yourself instead and would he accept and honor that?  Honor?  From a terrorist?  (Or nazi or communist?)

Time is ticking so what do you do?

Okay, so this is an extreme example.  I have a few that I want to put out there and I will start with a simple one.

This is 2014, mid-term election year.  Lots of choices right?

How about this.  On your ballot there is a box at the bottom.  There is a bold explanation of this box in all caps just next to it:

“BY CHECKING THIS BOX YOU INDICATE THAT ALTHOUGH YOU ARE CASTING A VOTE YOU ARE NOT     SATISFIED WITH THE CANDIDATES LISTED ON THIS BALLOT.”

So, would you check it?

Now, let’s say the explanation instead said:

“BY CHECKING THIS BOX YOU INDICATE THAT ALTHOUGH YOU ARE CASTING A VOTE YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE CANDIDATES LISTED ON THIS BALLOT  AND ARE WILLING TO BE CONTACTED FOR A FOLLOW-UP TO HELP ASCERTAIN THE REASON OR REASONS FOR YOUR DISSATISFACTION.”

Still check it?

Another:

“BY CHECKING THIS BOX YOU INDICATE THAT ALTHOUGH YOU ARE CASTING A VOTE YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH EITHER THE CANDIDATES LISTED ON THIS BALLOT OR YOUR LOCAL, STATE, OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WILL BE CONTACTED TO DETERMINE THE REASON OR REASONS FOR YOUR DISSATISFACTIONS.”

Still good to check?

Last one now:

“BY CHECKING THIS BOX YOU INDICATE THAT ALTHOUGH YOU ARE CASTING A VOTE YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH EITHER THE CANDIDATES LISTED ON THIS BALLOT OR YOUR LOCAL, STATE, OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WILL THEN BE SUBJECT TO A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW, TO INVOLVE PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION INCLUDING CREDIT HISTORY; GENERAL DOCUMENTATION; WORK AND EDUCATION HISTORY; CRIMINAL AND ARREST RECORDS; COMMUNICATIONS HISTORY AND RECORDS; MEDICAL HISTORY AND RECORDS; AND ANY OTHER AREAS NOT HEREIN INDICATED BUT DEEMED IMPORTANT TO SUCH REVIEW BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THESE UNITED STATES AND/OR ANY OF ITS DESIGNATED AGENCIES.  YOU ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT SUCH REVIEW MAY, BY LAW OR FIAT, BE ENHANCED TO INCLUDE MEMBERS OF YOUR IMMEDIATE FAMILY; YOUR EXTENDED FAMILY; YOUR BUSINESS CONTACTS, CUSTOMERS, AND ASSOCIATES; AND, IN GENERAL, ANY AND ALL RELATIONSHIPS AND OR CONTACTS NOT HEREIN INDICATED BUT DEEMED IMPORTANT TO SUCH REVIEW BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THESE UNITED STATES AND/OR ANY OF ITS DESIGNATED AGENCIES.”

If you are happy with your governments and your candidates then all is well.  But, if not, do you check this box?

Yeah, I thought so.

Welcome to 2014.