THE ECONOMY GREAT BUT SOME SUFFER
On two consecutive days, the S.F. Chronicle has two conflicting
articles. Below are the two articles followed by my comments. Your
comments are most welcome.
The San Francisco Chronicle, August 26, 1999
In its Business Section, the paper has an extremely short article.:
ECONOMY STILL BOOMING
“Orders for big-ticket manufactured goods vaulted ahead in July, and
sales of existing homes, though pinched by rising mortgage rates, still
managed to post the third-best month ever. The two reports, released
yesterday, reflected a stil-booming economy.”
The San Francisco Chronicle, August 27, 1999
In its Main Section, the paper has the following article:
HOW HUD BUDGET COULD AFFECT THE NEEDY
Proposed cuts in the Department of Housing and Urban Develop1nent's
budget would deprive nearly 400,000 people of new jobs and leave 156,000
families without affordable housing, the agency said yesterday.
In addition, 16,000 families and individuals who are homeless or who
have AIDS would lose housing assistance, the department said.
"This nation is doing extraordinarily well ... but that's not to say
everyone, everywhere is sharing in e success," Housing Secretary Anew
Cuomo said.
A department report titled "Lost Ground: The Impact of HUD Budget Cuts
on America's Communities" details how $1.6 billion in budget cuts
proposed by the House. Appropriations Committee in July will affect
communities in the number of jobs that won't be created and housing that
won't be available to low-income people.
President Clinton had proposed a $2 billion increase for the department
in fiscal year 2000, up from $28.5 billion this year.
Clinton has threatened to veto the committee's spending plan because of
the cuts, but Republican budget writers say they had to make them to
stay within spending caps that were imposed two years ago.
COMMENTS
Placing these articles in juxtaposition and than commenting on them is
time well spent . First we must consider people-in-general and how they
fit into two groups: (1) The first extols the current remarkable
financial success of our socioeconomic structure, our “Price System” and
they are referred to as “conservatives.” This group contends that we are
on a “roll,” that our merchants have found the key to continues growth
and everything is on the upbeat. (2) People in the second group are
usually referred to as being “liberals” and see an entirely different
picture. They mainly focus their attention on those who live below the
poverty level and contend that the “powers-that-be” are actually
responsible for the lot of the poor.
Separating itself from both groups is Technocracy Inc., a scientific,
educational-research organization. Technocracy finds that the two groups
are not cognizant of the true nature of what is driving society today.
Therefore their conclusions are faulty.
Technocracy contends that to understand today’s society, one must have
an understanding of how our age differs from those of yesterday. Part of
the organization’s research: Since the dawn of civilization, mankind has
lived in primitive societies and austerity was an imposed condition that
only a limited few could escape from. Conditions were barbaric with
scarcity of the wherewithal of life as the main controlling factor of
people’s actions. Life was rough and cruel. Working from dawn to dusk
and living short lives at backbreaking toil prevailed. Wars were
constant.
Selfishness and greed were omnipresent. Nevertheless, there never was a
lack of self-rightious people preaching and preaching. They might as
well have been preaching to the wind as far as changing human being’s
behavior. Why?
Technocracy finds that the environment dictates behavior. In scarcity
conditions, selfishness and greed are the major components of the
prevailing drive for survival. Yes, one strived for one’s family to
live. If your neighbor could or couldn’t live, that was up for grabs.
There was hardly a year that some war was not being fought somewhere.
Technocracy advises North Americans that today we have the wherewithal
to turn yesterday’s way of life completely on its head.
Science/technology, not politics, makes this possible. But to turn life
on its head, we have to make a huge change. The change involved has
nothing to do with morality nor with an attempt to bring into existence
a Utopia. Such thinking belongs to dreamers.
We must initiate a social structure that is compatible with modern
times, with our scientific-technological age. Technocracy has laid out a
design of social operation meets modern day requirements. The design is
called Technocracy’s Technological Social Design. Check it out.
