Ideas for cutting the national debt

I've been very disgusted watching the news. Not one person on TV is suggesting any real changes that could work. It's all finding ways to carry on with spending without consequences.

Anyone know anyone who that actually worked for?

Didn't think so...

You know what would make a drastic difference? It's simple: Freeze spending at the current levels.

That's it. You make it impossible for the government to spend any more each year than it already is committed to for this year. That will work out to a huge reduction in debt.

And then you start cutting expenses. I have another idea: if you're a Congress critter, and you're well-off and/or you've got enough interests that you'd be fine without the income from the taxpayers, then you're ineligible for the government worker health plans and pensions. The money that would go toward those for you instead goes to paying off the debt. If they had to go get their own like the rest of us have to, then it's their money paying for their expenses. Not ours.

What about government buildings that aren't really being used? Get those people into other, more used buildings, and auction off the building to private interests. Taxpayers save on the upkeep costs, and the proceeds from the sale also pay something of the debt off.

For that matter, good energy use assessments on the government buildings might shave some more upkeep costs, and pay the debt down a little more...

I know government isn't a business, but if we demanded it take some lessons from how successful businesses are run... Well, we wouldn't have people screaming about the debt.

That might require we start treating the candidates as job applicants, and thinking of ourselves as what we are: the employer and the masters/mistresses of the country. All elected officials - and nominated ones - are public servants, and we need to remember that. We can always send them packing.

Let's do it some more these next elections...

Proactive Thinking: Circle of Influence vs. Circle of Concern

As I was thinking about this post, I checked my news sites. From Arts & Letters Daily, I stumbled onto an article by Richard Perle about what really went wrong with W's policies. On a day that is historic, this got me thinking about the entire message of change that evidently catapulted a senator to become President Barak Obama - and what is likely to happen if the status quo isn't challenged.

Being proactive requires looking at what you can actually do something about, not with things you can't influence (at least at present). So let's think: what can we control/influence? I look at my life, and I see a collection which includes the following items:

• chores
• scheduling
• my health (via exercise, nutrition, and yoga)
• my writing
• actions
• thoughts/feelings
• work duties
  

I might only have a small area that I can directly or indirectly influence, especially on the job, but by focusing there I can do a lot - and potentially earn greater trust and responsibilities. Issues that top the list of "immediate interest" include money (to pay the bills and build savings), having a job, meeting people, and building a writing career. Within each area, I look for specific steps to take to reach my goals or solve the problems at hand. The key is looking for steps that will make progress.

When we push a lever, we expect it to be connected to some particular machinery. Perle's article made me think of some important questions:

1. Who do we think is in charge of what?
2. What do we think they can do in their position?
3. Who do we think is in their way?
4. How accurate are our assumptions?
   

Regardless of your opinion of W, these are important concerns. If there are more obsticles to making anything happen than we realize, then a new method is called for - and not necessarily a new person in the position. The idea is to (try to) determine what is within a particular office's Circle of Influence and what is in the Circle of Concern - which is problematic without considerable research, but not impossible. Also, why overburden any one office? That makes everything take longer.

The challenge is to find small, local-level steps to solving any problem (no matter the scale), and do them yourself. Or organize a group effort - locally. Be willing to brainstorm ideas, get information out, and making even a slightly bigger effort than before. By the end of this year, imagine what might be possible by taking little steps every day...

Habit 1: Be Proactive - Who makes things happen?

With the new year and new administration, I see a lot of people who assume that the new president will make a lot of changes happen. Question is, what are the underlying assumptions? That others are responsible for making things "better" than they currently are? What about our own actions? Why can't we do something ourselves instead of waiting on the perpetually slow government?

I started this blog because I was sick of hearing how this candidate or that candidate was going to be the answer to our troubles. It sounded like nobody wanted to take things into their own hands. Why not let many ideas be trotted out, and see what happens? Some solutions will make more sense for one area than another, so why limit ourselves to a one-size-fits-all package pushed on us by someone who can't possibly know the specifics of our local zone?

Studying proactivity in general fit with my tendencies toward libertarian ideals, and I had to consider what being proactive means as far as responsible liberty is concerned. If we are happiest by actively creating our destiny and making our own choices, then what about doing things bit-by-bit on a local level? I feel that assuming that voting for a candidate will make a difference seems a little too distant to make sure anything happens. It's actually out in the Circle of Concern, that which we cannot control or influence.

I worry about the state of homeschooling - how it gets treated legally, what the public knows about it, and what could be done to make things better. Yes, I can support national organizations and pay attention to legal proceedings, but what about helping on a local level? There are homeschool groups I could give time and money to, and I could directly help some families. I can - and I suspect I will - write about my own experiences with homeschooling and what I know about how people can make it happen. Getting that information out, and making sure that it's as polished as possible, is a proactive action, and withing my Circle of Influence - that which I can directly or indirectly work on.

If there's something we're passionate about, then why not look for something locally based to do to make a difference? Help one or two local families, and perhaps let the information get out if you know writers. Making the environment better? Volunteer for local clean-up efforts, and organize extra ones. If creating work experience for college students is important to you, organizing volunteer efforts that generate work/study opportunities may open all kinds of doors for students. It may also help get improvement projects done sooner, if you can get people to help with the work.

Being proactive means taking action to transform problems into opportunities to exercise creative muscle. If every citizen took some small action locally on a particular problem (say, education), what kind of effect would it have on the state or even national situation? Things happen faster and at lower cost than if the changes are directed from the top - from the government levels. All I'm suggesting is that we look outside of the box to make change possible, and make this year better than any year before. Waiting on our elected officials has been the M.O. of this country for decades, and we're all concerned about government messing our lives. How about a paradigm change?

Also, why let others - especially ones we're not comfortable with - dictate our feelings or actions? That's giving them power over us. It's not empowering. Instead, we're encouraged to be dependent on a "parent figure" who doesn't encourage us to become independent. It's a bigger, stronger state of mind and living. It does take courage to take on the responsibility of running our own lives, and not everyone can do it to the same extent. But I hate being made to pay for the mistakes of others - especially when they are the only ones hurt by their own actions.

Where is the fairness in that? How much is wasted by that situation? Think of a few situations, and make some estimates. And think of things that you could do to change that. If nothing else, you exercise your imagination. That's always worth an effort.

Upcoming posts

With the new year and all of the energy and commotion buzzing in the air, I thought that my posts needed a new focus. I found it in my study of The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, which I began late last year. (Wow, it's really 2009 already...) While I am immersing myself in the Habits, I will share my observations on how they apply to Responsible Liberty.

This is the theme of all of my blogs for this year, but the exact observations are different for each topic. Still, similar ideas will appear across the board. And all will start with Habit 1: Be Proactive. My first post on it will appear as soon as I am satisfied with what I've written.

The need for individual action and asking questions

Like many in America, I am disgusted with the political environment of today. But I think we're not taking the best steps to improve it. And it all starts with you and me; we need to step up to the plate and handle our own problems on an individual and local level instead of at the national level. One size has never fit all, and what might work for a little town outside of Austin, TX will probably not work (at least not in the best way) for someplace like Portland, OR.

What I see happening is the wrong questions are being asked of our candidates. (I'm not religious, but I feel the sting of a book title from 8 years ago: "If God Wanted Us to Vote, He'd Give Us Better Candidates.") We need to remember three key points:

• Our elected officials are our public servants. We can - and should - kick them out if they are failing in their duties.
• Each elected position is like a job, and we are the employers. You never want to hire someone without asking them questions and determining whether you can depend on them.
• Experience in elected office is not necessarily a good thing. It may mean that the person is part of an already bad system and not willing to change anything about it.
  

Our media is failing in these respects. It has not given us an accurate picture, and is no longer checking out everything before they report on it. Here is where we need to do more free thinking rather than listen to what we're told:

• The campaign ads are not how prospective employees would recommend themselves to an employer; it casts doubt on your manners and your integrity. So I believe that they should be ignored completely.
• Like her or not, Sarah Palin is getting the short end of the stick from the media. Lately I can't go to the market without some tabloid - I include People and US Weekly in this category - printing something negative about her. By contrast, Barak Obama has hardly faced any hard questions from the media, or had his past investigated by the "journalists" who dominate the news programs.
  
• Media biases run amok today. I've seen newspapers fail to note when a disgraced official is a democrat and not white. But anything "bad" about a Republican appears, and it's open season. Hardly equal opportunity employment conditions.
• Virtually nothing has been raised about Obama's connections with a minister whose words should alarm the average citizen. Yet I would bet my future children that if John McCain had connections to white supremacists, the media would be all over it.
  

How can it be okay to attack a mother who happens to be a Republican, and not okay to say anything negative about a man whose past is not mentioned in anything except a positive light? Or to make experience an issue with Palin and not with Obama? How can it be right to replace the old double standards with new ones that go in the opposite direction?

I want to see people - everyday people - asking hard questions of our candidates, and researching their records and past. I'm reading about both candidates, looking for the good and the bad about them, to make an informed judgment. I will admit, I'm inclined to vote for McCain and Palin, but I intend to be well-informed about it. I don't agree with some of the positions, and no one can expect us to agree on everything, but what information I have pushes me toward the position that they are the best choice we have available.

I will update this blog as I learn more, and when I see something that should be commented on from the standpoint of acting in the interests of responsible liberty. I started this blog because I felt someone needed to voice concern over how responsibility and individual action have been discouraged. When I have proposals for ways we could be more active and rely less on the government, I will post them.