Richard Day: A Philosophical Take on the Elections
PeraclesPlease: Wild and Wilder
To compromise is to make a deal between different parties where each party gives up part of their demand. In arguments, compromise is a concept of finding agreement through communication, through a mutual acceptance of terms—often involving variations from an original goal or desire. Extremism is often considered as antonym to compromise, which, depending on context, may be associated with concepts of balance, tolerance. In the negative connotation, compromise may be referred to as capitulation, referring to a "surrender" of objectives, principles, or material, in the process of negotiating an agreement. In human relationships "compromise" is frequently said to be an agreement that no party is happy with, this is because the parties involved often feel that they either gave away too much or that they received too little
They are right. Not right in the Robespierre sense. I mean correct.
They being the media outside of hate-radio and FOX.
You listen to both sides and you either ask the audience to make up their own minds or you split 'it' down the middle.
Now we find ourselves caught between left and right (even though in my humble opinion the right is almost never right and the left is usually left bemoaning their circumstance).
We find ourselves caught between the repubs and the dems.
We find ourselves caught between the 1% and the 99%.
We find ourselves caught between the irrational numbers and the rational numbers. So I propose a compromise.
Split it down the middle I say!
Here is how it works:
The right does not believe anyone should have food stamps (actually there are no stamps and there have been no stamps for some time; like everything else food subsidies for farmers and eaters amount to some binary code on a card of some sort).
The left says, hey the poor have to eat or they will attack your local supermarkets and fast food outlets and chaos will ensue.
The compromise would go like this.
Half the country is obese; so after the First of January, 2013 fat people lose 75% of all their access to food subsidies; farmers included. To be fair, real real skinny people can receive 25% more in food subsidies. But no drugs legal or illegal denominated as “speed” or “laxatives”are allowed in the formulation!
After all, welfare recipients are like wild animals in a national park!
WAR & IMMIGRATION
The right wishes to stay in Afghanistan (how many words have the series fgh?) go back into Iraq and send our armies into Syria and Iran.
We immediately leave Afghanistan, stay out of Iraq and send all of our illegal immigrants into Iran and Syria. I mean we treat these paperless folks to free military training—probably outside the country somewhere; just to be safe. And after we have conquered this part of the world we let our paperless folks back without any weapons (of course) and give them quasi-citizenship with opportunities to work at McDonald’s and the Pentagon. Well, after they pass a 10th grade English course of course!
The right has an extreme distaste for the minimum wage. Personally I believe that pole dancers should receive at least seven bucks an hour plus ¼ of their tips after the pimps take their share (I mean come on, the pimps have overhead).
We set the minimum wage at $3.75/hour. However, all fast food workers get free fries and 6 ounces of Coke/Pepsi with no deduction from their right to food stamps!
The right does not like any kind of Equal Protection argument unless it applies to multi-billion dollar corporations or George W. Bush as long as folks like Al Gore get nothing out of it.
The left wishes for all people to be treated equally.
So, after January 13, 2013, all women taller than their national mean testing shall have all the rights enumerated in the bill signed by our President in January of 2009. That way, not all women shall be discriminated against. Hey! It's better than nothing!
(Apologies to Mayor Bloomberg!)
The right maintains that rich people should never ever ever pay taxes because they earned what they got.
The left maintains that the workers earn the money and the rich take most of that money and proceed to bribe public officials so that minimum wage miscreants cannot maintain even a faux-middle-class existence.
So we come up with a compromise.
All rich people must keep track of their hours. That is, doctors and lawyers and accountants and tv pundits (I am not sure about tv pundits) have to keep track of their hours and then these professionals must file those records of hours spent and send a decent reproduction of those records to their clients for approval.
The members of Management should present every single demand for salaries after they have properly presented their hourly records to the shareholders.
And then the shareholders shall vote upon the efficacy of that wage sought by their employees!
Now rich folks mostly work for public corporations (that are hardly public in this day and age) and a commission determines how many hours were expended by the rich and by the middle class workers and come up with a formula best suited to the corporate needs as far as payment for the actual work accomplished by management.
(see I even dismissed those hours expended by the minimum wage crews)
But rich people claim that the Citizens of the good ole US of A should receive no help from the government.
So, rich folks must return any and all monies they have ever received through government grants directly or indirectly!
So Dick Cheney, if you can hear me, return all of your wealth. You have two weeks!
Now the Fundamentalists believe the the universe was created some 6,000 years ago.
And those on the left who read books are pretty sure that 13,000,000,000 years is nearer the truth as far as determining the age of the universe.
Let all textbooks in our primary and secondary schools promote the belief that the universe must be at least 6.5 billion years old.
How is that for a compromise?
Just some thoughts.
I shall consider this further!
I always had a bent for statesmanship!