"Are You Liberal? Conservative? or Confused?"

Although I have been so overwhelmed by my internship and other jobs during that last month and have not made any time for writing on here, I have still managed to find time to read books, mainly while I was commuting or just waiting for participants of our program to arrive or to be picked up. One of the most recent books I finished was by Richard Maybury (who I've mentioned in a previous post about money.) He writes books as if he were writing letters to his nephew explaining about different topics. He signs his name "Uncle Eric." I've read several of his books including one on economics, on the World Wars, on the war in the Middle East, about justice, and most recently "Are you...Liberal? Conservative? or Confused?" He of course is neither, he calls himself a juris naturalist, like unto a libertarian. In this book Maybury explains basic platforms of the left-right political spectrum, which are of course generalizations, but hold true for most people who claim to be of one camp or the other.

Not withstanding the dominance of the left-right political spectrum in the United States,(which is really rather centralized compared to other political systems around the world, ex. communism is far left and fascism is far right,) Maybury claims that the juris naturalist is in fact not even a part of the spectrum. Here is why:

"Liberals and conservatives both agree that [government] encroachments on you is a fine and necessary thing. They disagree only over the specific details, which can be placed in two categories 'economic' and 'social.'"

He then goes on to explain that in all matters economic such as money, work, production, trade, investments etc the conservatives want freedoms and liberals willingly encroach (force, intrude, restrict, etc). In everything social such as alcohol, tobacco, drugs, gambling, media, sexual practices etc, the liberals want freedom and the conservatives willingly encroach. Another way to look at it is as an issue of privacy in economics (right) verses privacy in social life (left.) Still another way is to say that the right wants to use force to stamp out immorality whereas the left wants to use it to stamp out inequality of wealth. Food for thought, why do the Republicans get the reputation of being "anti-government" when democrats are too, just in a different area of life?

For those who are moderates or centrists, even though they claim to be avoiding extremes, they want to control both economic and social conduct.

The juris naturalist, however, wants liberty in all areas of life. He does not want government encroachment anywhere. That does not mean he supports illegal business transactions or drug use, but he believes that there are other more effective means than government force by which to prevent or eradicate these problems. He therefore does not fit anywhere on the spectrum. No government encroachment.

Therefore what? There are so many angles you could take with this but I guess I would just encourage you to consider your political claim, whether you think government encroachments are necessary, if so where, and be aware of what others mean when they say they are a liberal or a conservative or a moderate, etc.

Untitled...

I don't really have a specific topic yet so I thought I would just write a little bit and see what comes out. It's been awhile since I've written anything so I just wanted everyone to know that I am still alive and thinking about writing on my blog -- I just haven't done it. My not-so-busy life got a whole lot busier when I started my full-time internship a few weeks ago, which is normally more than 40 hours a week plus at least half an hour commute each way, sometimes more depending on traffic. The day after I started the internship the tutoring company that hired me a couple months before finally got a placement for me so I agreed to be a math tutor for a couple of hours each week. Then I also started training a couple of hours every week for a job that I will get after my internship ends. Today at church another person asked me to be a Spanish/geometry tutor for their daughter and I agreed to that so that's another couple of hours of work each week. (But money is money when you only get a stipend for your internship...)

I had said that I was going to write a few posts about the topic of money but I haven't come up with any brilliant ideas lately so maybe I should stop announcing beforehand what I am going to talk about in the next post since that hasn't been working out for me thus far. To not just drag on about nothing I think I will just leave a quote for thought and call it good. This quote was by the American revolutionary Thomas Paine:

"Rights are not gifts from one man to another, nor from one class of men to another… It is impossible to discover any origin of rights otherwise than in the origin of man; it consequently follows that rights appertain to man in right of his existence, and must therefore be equal to every man.” (P.P.N.S., p. 134)

I think about this in the context of "the right to" vs. "entitled to" Does every man have a right to health care or is every man entitled to health care? (or you could choose a different issue such as property or education etc.) Do you think there is a difference?

Ooops...

Is there anyone in your life who is constantly making silly and stupid mistakes? In my life, that person is me. I never recognized it really until I met my husband, oddly enough, so maybe he has somehow influenced me but it seems like he never makes any mistakes. That is really hard for me sometimes because I feel foolish when I make mistakes and it can be really difficult for me to take criticism, which is what I always interpret laughter to be when I am the cause of the laughter. But, because this blog is about doing things that are "scary" and out of my comfort zone, I decided that sharing a personal vignette would fall into that category. Having recently moved to the great Northwest living about 20 miles outside of downtown Portland (where we work and go to school), transportation with just one car between two people becomes an issue. Fortunately, when we first moved here I met a really generous family at church who offered to let me borrow their extra car for awhile. After about 3 months of using their car I felt like it was time to give it back. Then they informed me that they decided to sell the car so I really had to give it back. In thinking about transportation options I decided that I would like to be part of the bicycle commuters community that is HUGE in Portland. So began the bicycle hunt. After agreeing on a price range with my husband we decided that craigslist would be the best route for searching. I started trying out at a lot of bikes but nothing fit me quite right. Then one day I found a super great deal on a nice bike. I tried it out and was instantly in love. Even though the asking price was slightly higher than Ken and I had originally planned on we agreed that it was a good deal. This past Saturday I excitedly picked up the bike, paid the man, and went home. Naturally, that evening I couldn't wait to go out for a bike ride. The bike was super light and a really smooth ride. Everything was going good until I started up a hill. I went to shift down a gear and ...what?! This is a SINGLE speed?! How did I buy a bike without realizing that it was a single speed?! I was so shocked and disappointed and frustrated and any other word you can think of that I might have been. I really don't know how it happened but I can only guess that in my intense infatuation with the bike I didn't realize that I had never checked the gears liked I had done with the many other bikes I looked at. Obviously the bike still work but it really stinks for living on a hill.

I had to try really hard not to be offended when Ken laughed. I know it was funny. I would have laughed at someone else if it had happened to them too. So this is me trying to get over people laughing at my mistakes, especially when they really are funny.

Now your turn; what stupid things have you done lately?

Money is the root of...what?

Once upon a time I read a book that literally changed my life. Until I had devoured "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand I could not have put into words what I already knew to be true about many different topics such as the value of work, what charity is and is not, the role of government and the role of money. This book helped me find clarity on these issues and much more. I think the overall message of this book is what would happen to this country if people were not allowed to use their innate ability to be creative and to produce through hard work. That might seem a bit strange or that it could never happen in a free country but you'd be amazed at how similar a chord this book strikes with the policies that are guiding our nation at this moment. I would highly recommend this book to anyone who is willing to look past a bit of swearing and sexual content. One of the powerful speeches from this book is given by one of the great industrialist characters in response to overhearing a comment that money is the root of all evil. I'd like to devote a couple of posts to elaborating on this topic.

So first, what is money? Money is simply a medium of exchange for goods and services rather than using a straight-up barter system. For example, if I want a loaf of bread from the bakery and the baker happens to need 4 eggs but I only have 2 gallons of milk then I can give the baker money, which he can then use to buy his 4 eggs from another farmer. That farmer may not want bread but he wants some milk so he can take money from the baker and give it to me in exchange for the milk that he wants. I in turn can use that money to buy some more bread or any other product that I happen to be desiring. Money represents exchange of products. Money saves time. With a barter system you would have to spend time finding someone who has exactly what you want and is willing to exchange it for something that you have and that you are willing to give up. This would not be an easy task. By using paper money men trade what they value; they trade hard work, effort, and their minds.

This form of trade by means of money is what Rand calls "the code of the men of good will." It is "the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value." This process of exchange of money for effort and effort for money is in fact the blood life of society. It requires men to recognize that they must work for their own benefit and progression. "Is this what you consider evil?" Rand asks. And to those who say well, actually it's the love of money that is the root of all evil Rand responds that to love is to know and love the nature of something. Therefore, when I acknowledge that money is created only through the power of the best within me, through my effort, then I am a lover of money because I am willing to work for it and I will know that I deserve the money that I make.

Again, money is the life line of the society which we hold dear. It is "the barometer of a society's virtue" or in other words, if a society is honest and hard working then there will be a lot of money and a lot of exchange. Those who are willing to put effort into making money through the power of their mind and their will and their physical labor are those who sustain society. As pointed out by author economist and author Richard Maybury in his book "Whatever Happened to Penny Candy?" the American nation was the first to use the phrase "to make money." (For example, in Spanish the phrase for making money 'ganar dinero' literally translates into 'win money.' You may know more examples.) Our great nation was built on the backs of self-made wealthy men who made money because they worked hard, not because they conquered it. They loved money.

The opposite of those hard workers are the people who expect to receive a lot of money in exchange for mediocracy or privileges in exchange for nothing. They would rather use force (weapons or laws) to steal money rather than to actually put in effort to produce. These are the leaches on society that drain it. These are the people who promote the idea that money is the root of all evil but would sell their soul to get a hold of a little bit of it. They do not truly love money, they hate it.

Therefore what? Let us not be leaches demanding that we receive the benefits of the efforts of those who have rightfully earned their money. We must respect money and the power that it gives us through our honest efforts to produce. Let us be deserving of the money that we make.

For a full script of this spectacular speech click here.

Charity?

I've been struggling to figure out where to go next after my last post, hence it has been over a week since I've posted anything. I'm reading the book that I mentioned in the last post, "Human Action: A Treatise on Economics" and although I find the concepts very interesting it is really dry and written in the early 1900's therefore I do not understand everything. Furthermore, I am on about page 105 of 800 something. So....I am going to take a break from how our actions are calculated to make us happy and talk about something that perplexes me. Charity.

Ok, so it doesn't really perplex me but I think that some people (I mean people who make laws, etc.) really get confused about what charity truly is. Charity is benevolence, or an act based upon a belief in the goodness and worth of other people. In other words doing something for someone because you think he is a human being and should deserve it (even if he hasn't done anything to deserve it), and it is good to give and to help others in need, right? But what if you were forced to help other people? First of all, that negates the true meaning of charity because the action of goodwill has to be a result of an internal belief, not an external force. This is why I disagree with social programs that receive funding from the government. For example, in working at a community center I recently had the opportunity to see the "Fishes and Loaves/Meals on Wheels" program in action. This senior citizen serving non-profit organization's motto is "no senior will go hungry." I completely agree that seniors should not go to bed hungry, but I disagree with the federal government taking responsibility for them all. Why? Because of their source of funding! Government grants that fund 1/3 of the Meals on Wheels program (as published on their website www.moaa.org) and large portions of the vast majority of non-profit organizations comes from taxes, paid by you and me of course. In my mind that means money I am forced to pay (because I will go to jail, etc if I don't pay taxes) goes to feed needy seniors, the homeless, the diseased or others. That means I don't have a choice about serving someone, there is no internal belief or desire to serve this particular person that is receiving a meal at this moment, to give shelter to a particular family, to help find a cure for a particular disease or to help with any other cause because I have no say in exactly where my tax money goes. I am forced to be "charitable" to a cause that I may or may not have empathy for. My right to choose who I serve is essentially taken away from me.

I'm not saying the whole Meals on Wheels program is bad, after all there are only 3 paid employees for the entire city they serve and the rest of the work is done by volunteers, plus the vast majority of the funds come through donations and small fees. It's just the 1/3 that really irks me. By depending so heavily on government funds the responsibility and accountability for our seniors is shifted from the family and local communities of individual seniors to a big government disconnected with the individuals and with those who should be taking care of them. It gives us an easy way out of fulfilling our duty as human beings to personally care for those in need around us.

Therefore what? I am responsible and you are responsible for taking care of the individuals who are in need around us or for the causes that we have empathy for. By allowing the government to take our taxes and make the decision for us of where that money goes we shirk our responsibility. I believe that the proper way to care for those needs would be social programs that are run by non-government organizations (private businesses, non-profits without government grants, etc), or in other words, leave it in the hands of the public. "But could that really work?" a skeptical friend recently asked me, "don't we need those programs?" I agree that it would be extremely difficult to make it work, but we as a people have the goodness within us to take care of those in need if we choose to. If we were not required to pay a large amount of taxes we would have the extra money needed to donate to causes or personally help individuals around us. So where do we start? I think it has to start with electing government officials who would back away from big government and return responsibility and accountability to those who rightfully own it; to me and to you.

Writing Sample

I was recently applying for a job that required a "writing sample." The following is what I wrote. It is a little bit longer than I will normally post but I thought it turned out well and goes along with my last post so I wanted to share it.

Even though I am just finishing up my college career, I do not have any recent papers that I feel would make a good writing sample for this application requirement. Fortunately, I enjoy writing. Being able to say honestly that I enjoy the act of writing is a rather new realization to me. As a youth and even into college I have always done well on my writing assignments but I always assumed that was just because I put in the effort to write how I thought the teacher wanted the paper to be. I thought that I disliked writing, mostly because it wasn’t “cool” to like writing and I did not recognize that keeping a journal, e-mailing, and chatting online were all forms of written expression that I did enjoy and that they were helping me to develop writing skills. Of course I am not writing about this to brag that I am such a great writer, but to demonstrate that (a) life is made up of purposeful actions and (b) all human actions are the result of decision based on calculations, whether conscious or not, to make one happy. Writing and I will serve as the example.

Action is the employment of means to attain an end. As human beings it is impossible for us not to act. Even doing nothing or standing by idly is a form of action because it changes events; it attains an end. According to economist and philosopher Ludwig von Mises, by acting, man is choosing and determining his own destiny. Unlike animals, by living in a state in which man is capable of desiring a better state of affairs, can imagine a better state of affairs, and believes he can

attain a better state of affairs, his action is purposeful. In all actions his purpose is to attain that desired better state of affairs. For example, in writing papers that I supposedly did not enjoy writing you might wonder why I would put in the effort to write it. As I think about it now I realize that I wrote then because I thought that getting a good grade would make my parents proud of me, make my teachers like me, and of course eventually help me get into a good college, which I was told would someday lead to a good job, etc, all of which I believed would make me happy. If did not write the paper then my state of affair would not be satisfactory because of the poor grade and the displeasure it would cause in other people, but I knew that if I acted, if I wrote and wrote well, then my state of affairs would improve.

Admittedly, there was some level of personal satisfaction of doing well, but at the same time I still claimed to dislike writing. The grumbling and complaining to family and friends about writing papers was fairly routine. What was the purpose of the grumbling? To make my peers like me of course. I assumed that my state of affairs would not be satisfactory if I claimed to like writing because the majority of my peers claimed to dislike writing and I would therefore be an outcast. However, by claiming to dislike writing I believed that my state of affairs would improve as my peers accepted me.

The transition from claiming to dislike writing to openly acknowledging that I love to write has been slow. I believe that it developed gradually as I began writing lengthy e-mails in a long distance relationship using the written word as a form of expression for my personal beliefs and opinions. Once that person, who is now my spouse, began to commend me for my writing ability I was able to start accepting that it would not damage my state of affairs to acknowledge that it was not just effort to please others but that I am a good writer as well. Later his encouragement allowed me to acknowledge that I am not just a good writer but that I enjoy doing it too. However, that realization could not come until my belief about what would lead to a satisfactory state of affairs was changed.

It is necessary to point out that even though all of my actions were based on calculations to improve my state of affairs, or in other words, to make me happy, that does not mean that my calculations were necessarily correct. As it turns out, I may have been much happier had I acknowledged openly as a youth that I enjoyed writing, but I did not believe that that would make me happy. Unfortunately, there are many people today, especially the youth who do not realize that their calculations for happiness are incorrect. They seek happiness by doing what others tell them will make them happy instead of listening to themselves. In working for Adelante Chicas it would be my goal to help the girls in the program to look inside and find their true happiness. Life is made up of the actions that we perform everyday. All actions are based on calculations to make us happy; we just have to find the right calculation.

Von Mises, L. (1949). Human Action: A Treatise on Economics. Yale University Press.

Because It Makes Me Happy

Do you ever wonder why you choose one thing over another whether to buy, say, do, or any other action? Why do I buy a certain pair of jeans over another? Why do I speak kind words to one person but gossip about the next? Why do I eat ice-cream one day but not the next (assuming I didn't just eat it all and not buy more...)? A couple of years ago, I was contemplating this very idea and I came to the conclusion that whether consciously or not we always choose what we think will make us happy. For example, I choose the jeans that make me happy whether my standard of happiness is comfort or a certain look that I think other people will like and consequently will make others think well of me and thereby make me happy.

This is not to say that all calculations of happiness are correct or true. If I speak kindly to one person, it may be because I truly want to be nice, or it may be that I think being kind to this particular person will put me in a better position for personal advancement (talking to a boss, etc.) and thereby make me happy. Or, I may think that talking bad about someone else will somehow make me feel better about myself and thereby be happy, but reality is, that never really works. It is a false calculation of happiness that leads to an erroneous decision. If I believe an erroneous calculation of choices to make me happy then I have been deceived...and that is very easy to do.

So why am I writing about what makes me happy or not? I am proud to say that a highly influential Austrian economist came to the same conclusion as I did about making choices based on happiness, though he says it in slightly different terms. He also said that, believe it or not, whether I choose to buy one pair of jeans or another (because it makes me happy) has at least in a small way an effect on how much money I will be required to pay for a gallon of milk at the grocery store. That will be the topic of my next post. Therefore what? For now, consider this question, will what I am about to say, buy, or do or any other action I am about to perform really make me happy or am I just being deceived?

Therefore what?

In addition to just naming some facts or answering a question, my goal is that each post will answer the question "therefore what?" This means, I will try to apply the topic to everyday life and find out, at least for me, why I should care about this topic, and more importantly, how does it affect the decisions I make and the actions that I do each day. I truly believe that life is made up of the choices that I make every day, every minute, every second. No matter how much I wish that my situation was different, nothing will change that has not been changed in my actions. It is true that there are certain limitations to that statement such as changing my height or a disease I was born with, but for the most part, just wishing life was different, that I was in better shape, that I had more money, or that I understood some topic better, will not change until I do something different. My actions give meaning to my life.

The old saying that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result, for me rings true. In my case, for a long time I wished that I could understand better why my country is involved in so many wars, or what the different arguments are for and against taxes and yet until recently I had not changed anything in my actions to find those answers. Just doing my daily routine over and over again got me the same result, not understanding. I'm ready to stop being insane! Now I have started doing a new action, that is to ask questions, to get answers and to ask more questions. I am finally getting a different result and I find it exhilarating. Therefore, I will continue to seek and learn new things about the world around me in order to understand my scary topics and to form opinions based on truth that will affect how I live my life everyday. Why? Because it makes me happy.

What will you DO today instead of just wishing?

With Keys in Hand

This is my first time ever creating a blog. My brother Keith will be so proud! Although some of my posts will give examples from my personal life, the objective of this blog is not as a personal journal but to share what I have learned about what I call "scary" topics in a concise but interesting way. I call them scary simply because for a long time I thought they seemed too hard or too big to understand. These topics may include, but are not limited to: economics, politics, law, justice and other controversial topics. The title of this blog "With Keys in Hand" came to me as I was running to my car after a work meeting with my keys in my hand. I was so anxious to get home that I took the keys out of my purse before the meeting even ended so that I wouldn't have to waste time fumbling for them (in my new big purse that is already messy) once I reached the car. For me I am so often in a rush that I am constantly running with keys in hand to save any amount of time here and there.

More often than not this great rush in my life has prevented me from taking the time to study out those "scary" topics which I just mentioned. Even now that I know I find those topics interesting I still have to push myself to ask more questions and do the research so I invite anyone to tell me what they've always wanted to know about a topic that to them is scary or simply just unknown and I will do my best to find an answer. You are also welcome to leave comments, to give further insight and to agree or disagree. It is also my goal to keep the posts rather short. If a topic needs a longer explanation, then I will just split it up into more than one post.

Perhaps you may already know a lot more about the topics which I will present, but maybe, just maybe, I will bring some new ideas for you to contemplate as in each post I try to answer the question therefore what? Why should I care about this? Come back and read my next post to find out more about therefore what!