|
|
|
| A Larger View |
|
A Bi-Monthly Newsletter of the Inner Outer Partnership |
| Volume X Edition 1 |
January/February |
2005 |
In this issue:
Resolutions: Not Just at Christmas, The United Nations: Anchored Despite Critics, Social Security: The Need For Full Information, The Value of Luxury, Plus Web Site of Interest and To Ponder On.
Resolutions: Not Just at Christmas
Most non-profit organizations relying on voluntary donations receive the largest part of their annual budget, some up to 80%, in December. It is when United Way, for example, conducts parts of its main fund-raising drive. The reason is obviously Christmas and the spirit of giving it is meant to impart. But the realities of the have-nots and the have-less are a year round problem. The need is not seasonal. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 12 million American families either are at risk of not having enough food or concerned that a family member (often a child) may be going hungry. That means that daily 11.2% of all U.S. households have to worry about food.
Should the spirit of giving be limited to Christmastime? The consequences of the Tsunami remind us it is not. The suggested mindset involves donating money of course, but it also calls for far more than that. It calls for our participation and our remembering. It calls for doing what we can all year long, no matter how small, to keep in mind the many millions with less than we have.
The United Nations: Anchored Despite Critics
Ever since the creation of the United Nations, 20 to 25% of the American electorate has not favored the existence of the world body. In the last few months, the UN has had its share of critics, even Kofi Annan the respected Secretary General came under attack when a US Congressman pressed for his resignation over the Oil For Food program in Iraq, administered by the UN. As many readers will undoubtedly have noted, the UN has not been on the administration's list of favorites. After all they did not approve of unilateral action in Iraq and Kofi Annan recently even referred to that kind of war as illegal under international law. In fact, Washington insiders admit that criticizing Annan and asking for his resignation, as was so in early December of last year, was "pay back time." But soon after came a US vote of confidence for Annan. It came through a rather pointed message from US UN ambassador John Danforth. While the US administration did not elaborate on why it felt prompted to support Annan, analysts see the reason as understanding that the war on terrorism cannot be won without the UN. A telling thought! A body representing the international community has become sufficiently relevant that something as central to the Bush administration policies as the war on terrorism makes the UN integral to waging its battles! This reflects something equally significant, that we live in a world where an increasing number of important issues transcend our borders and require the cooperation of many if not all nations. Globalization, for instance, is here to stay. The redress for climate changes is not a unilateral issue. It took China to bring North Korea to the diplomatic table. One of the key issues this year is Iran and its nuclear capability, an issue where the international community is going to have to play a big role if answers are to be found. Despite many divisions and disagreements among its varied members, the UN, whether formally or informally, whether through direct or indirect channels, has, through the force of its own charter, its own principles, its own members, its own history, forged its own gravitas and its own credibility.
Whatever its faults and weaknesses-and it does have them as any organization with 49,000 employees would such as the recent outing of a long standing problem with sexual abuses-The UN is a reminder that the reality of a global governing body is more woven into the fabric of the international community than many seem to realize.
Social Security: The Need For Full Information
It does not take an advanced degree in economics to understand that the US social security fund is not a golden goose. The whole system is rife with problems and requires adjustment if the program is to continue. That may precisely be what the current administration does not want. The program, what remains of the FDR era philosophy, is against the long-term agenda of many social conservatives. They do not believe that aiding the elderly in their retirement is the function of the government. Rather, they believe market forces ought to play a role. The President has proposed privately held accounts whereby people could invest a portion of what they would pay in social security payroll taxes. Sounds good, until one takes a closer look. Privately held accounts are bound to benefit those whose income is already above average and those who are more savvy about investing. Already many are voicing concern that such a strategy would be risky and invite the problems encountered by people trying to manage their own 401(k). The current system, too, favors those with higher income. Still it does so minimally and at the same time maintains a base below which no one falls. Involving the market in this way does discriminate against those who can least afford to lose. The market after all is not meant to reduce inequalities or to allocate resources. But there's another issue. Converting to this system is said to involve about a trillion dollars to make up for lost revenue, a sum that would have to be borrowed thus increasing the national debt. Proponents say better to borrow one trillion now than several trillions down the road when the fund cannot pay the baby boomers. And this is where the whole social security debate becomes strikingly parallel to the arguments for WMD. There, the administration's campaign of one-sided information, and often of disinformation was sufficiently successful that a large percentage of the electorate not only believed Iraq had WMD, but also in the existence of a (still to be proven) link between those WMD and al Qaeda. What worked for WMD, some must reason, ought to work for social security. In order to push their point of view and justify a radical approach, the administration has already begun to present a set of facts which critics plainly call mistaken. The President is indicating the fund will shortly run of money, when others say it will be solvent until 2042. As economist Peter Orszag put it, "It is not necessary to destroy the program in order to save it."
It's not that we owe lower income citizens a continuation of whatever economic protection social security currently provides, although we do, it is that we the people-like markets by the way-require full, correct and truthful information.
The Value of Luxury
We've been talking a lot about values the past few months, and we even attribute the Republican presidential victory to values. What the general public or the media refer to when speaking about values is centered on issues such as restricting the right to choose an abortion to the point where it's easier not to have one or not endorsing gay marriage. In this context values mean the facilitation of what we loosely call a Christian agenda, one where the interpretations of fundamental Christianity guide public and foreign policies. Because this point of view is now being touted as being that of the majority whether it really is or not, it's easy to forgo other and perhaps more crucial aspects of what values ought to mean and how they ought to inform our understanding and choices. Let's take one example, luxury. The luxury business is booming. People from Dubai or Europe, for example are competing for ever bigger yachts. A new 6-stars category hotel has been created and several are opening in various cities. For $870 a night one can stay at the BurjAlArab, Dubai, and enjoy one of the 202 suites as large as 8400 sq complete with dining area and office with laptop computer. The price does include breakfast. One can also stay at the Ocean Club in the Bahamas for $725 a night. The suites have garden views and include your favorite cigars and wine. For $700 a night one can go closer to home to the Amangani in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. The price there includes dog sledding or one of the resort's horse drawn sleigh ride followed by dinner. There is nothing wrong with any of this taken individually or at face value, but as a whole picture, it does raise questions. Do the values of excess, of self- indulgence, and no doubt of the bevy of ego games that must accompany them, speak of a moral fiber to emulate?
Web Site of Interest: Learning About The World - www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook
When it comes to covert operations or the quality of its intelligence the CIA may has many critics, but when it comes to its fact-books, academics and other researchers praise them as reliable and accurate. A simplified but very useful and informative version of the fact-books is online. All one has to do is put in the country one is interested in, and all the facts one might need and many one might not, will instantly appear. The print version of the books have more historical material, still the online version is up to date and helps us infer or know the political status of any number of countries, whether they are in the news of not. It's a helpful site for students, writers, travelers, or for just anyone wanting to know about far off places.
To Ponder On - In The Absence of Fanaticism.......
"What is it about South Africa?
Where does this capacity for reconciliation, even across the most bitter of wounds, come from? It comes in part, of course, from the example of Nelson Mandela, who walked out of prison after 27 years without rancor at his white captors.
It comes in part, I suspect, from the absence of religious fanaticism or fundamentalism to envenom the tension between whites and blacks. Remove rabid religion, and reason has a chance. It comes from some quality of humanity that resides deep in the vastness of Africa and belies all the bloodshed. Beyond all that, it is a mystery and a gift to humanity."
Roger Cohen
In his International Herald Tribune column November 20-21 2004
A Larger View is published by the Inner\Outer Partnership, a tax-exempt educational organization probing how spiritual principles can be agents of individual and societal change. We are funded through donations. Please send yours - as well as any comments - to P.O.Box 1293, Pac. Pal. CA 90272-1293. Also contact us by email at alargerview@earthlink.net or call 310-836-7710 or visit our web site at www.innerouterpartnership.org
To un-subscribe, send an email to alargerview@earthlink.net |
|
