Various Thoughts XIV

More thought for food. If you hunger for ideas to chew on.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

There is a drug crisis in our country. (Full disclosure – I don't use them though I favor drug legalization, but I've explored that issue before, and I probably will again.) Many of our youth are dying from overdoses, and it has become a standard practice to administer Narcan whenever there is concern about such a possibility.

In most states, drug sales and use are illegal. Yet we offer free treatment by the government, insurance plans, and entrepreneurs without penalty. We pay for the treatment of those who have engaged in illegal behavior. There are other forms of illegal behavior. Should we pay those who engage in them too?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

We're always competing. We always want to keep up with the Joneses. In fact we want to be better than they. Men compete and women compete, though the “playing fields” may differ. We're determined to be one up on everyone else. We want to be best. Even when we give charity we want to be recognized for it, whether by a plaque attesting to our generosity, public acknowledgment of our gift, a ceremony, or some other way to prove that we did better than the others. And there are many who seek to be known and admired for he help they give to the needy. For them, “it's all about me.” Those they help are just the subjects they use to glorify themselves and show their superiority to those who aren't “good” like them.

But there are a few who choose to be the best while not competing for honor. They are the anonymous givers and those who do good deeds because that's the right thing to do. Often they do such things because they feel good from doing them, and it does not matter what others do or what others know about what they've done. There is “right” and “wrong” and they get satisfaction out of doing right. Not like those who do right for honor among their friends, but simply because it is right. Some people, of course, compete to do right more conspicuously or grandly than everybody else, but they do it for its own sake. Doing true good should be, and is, instinctual, and most of the principles are the same in all societies – perhaps it's in the DNA of all people. It functions irrespective of other beliefs.

For some, however, the desire to do “good” is actually a desire to follow religious teachings. Their goal is to follow the the commandments of their Creator. Doing so is superior to simply doing good because it feels good. When they follow the commandments they are competing with no one else. They are showing G-d that obedience is more important than feeling good. And, since G-d's commandments are good, and are not done in reaction to the acts of others or competition with them, the acts of these “saints” demonstrates both obedience and goodness. They're not better than everyone else. They're not competing with everyone else – they're competing with impulses within themselves. Impulses not to do what is good. In Judaism it is called yetzer hara, “the evil impulse.” And they have won.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Let's face it. Bill Gates and his ilk have too much money. Worse, there are many rich corporations that pay their executives obscene amounts for directing their antics while they accumulate power over their workers and over our laws and those of other countries. And because those organizations make money for their hosts, everyone is willing to overlook their faults. Yet these companies may affect foreign policy and tax law, bending it to their wishes or locating wherever it is in their economic interests to do so.

In some industries the profits are very high, and we pay for them. But what else can we do? What else should we do? While we curse their manufacturers, we pay exorbitant prices for sneakers, electronics, and other non-necessities. Life-style, not need, governs our behavior, yet we vilify those who provide for the life-style we seek.

It's not fair, but we've found a way to live with it while we complain. What's the answer? Many localities have laws against usury. They limit the profit on loans. And programs like Medicare cap the payments for various procedures. Of course there are cheaters who game the system, but for those observing the law there are income limits.

Can the same be done with corporations? Can their actions and their profits be limited by law? Would the lack of a reserve from profitable products have a negative impact on the development of new products which are not yet profitable? Would there be a diminished incentive for everyone and a decrease in the speed of progress? Would that be a good thing? Is the weakening of organizations that are more powerful than many nations worth the benefits that would accrue from their weakening?

Wouldn't it be great if we could limit the power of those companies without limiting their incentive?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Chew away.

August 13, 2017