The election cycle is generating a lot of talk about the role of government. Some tell us that it should stay out of our lives and others are asking for help from Washington. But, if we don’t collectively come to terms with what our expectations are from government then with each election there will be a course change that will undo some of the good from before the last election.
In a series that is examining the goals of a successful community, the blog has outlined four concepts that can be found in any successful community. They are protect, educate, innovate and build. Protect and educate have been discussed in previous blog posts. Today we will examine the importance of innovation.
Sometimes while doing research for this blog, a change in the understanding of the topic can come about. This is one of those times. Innovation is not just an invention though many think of it that way. An invention is the manifestation of an idea. Innovation is a change in the way we think about things and the way they get done. At its root, the goal of innovation is to improve, to renew and make better. It adds value to products, services or systems.
Innovation is developing solutions to problems that haven’t been thought of before. Too often, communities look at problems and bring out the very same solution that has been tried many times before. If as a community, we are to succeed, we must attempt to solve persistent problems with new ideas. That means that even if the current solution is working then we need to make sure that a new approach won’t work better.
Innovation means developing new systems for government. Many systems that are currently being used don’t achieve the policy goals established. To continue without challenging the results is foolish. Keep in mind, just because the system developed to solve the problem hasn’t achieved its goal doesn’t mean we should abandon any attempt to solve the problem. We just need to find the right solution.
Our evolution as a species was based not on following our DNA programming, but by allowing our imagination to see beyond the problems to the solutions. By just following the DNA solutions that was programmed into us, we would still be on the ground competing with every other life form. But, because we were able to think creatively, we were able to rise above and build a world to our needs.
Innovation was a key to that.
-----
Responsible Community Working Together in Shared Responsibility.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Education is more than just teaching the acadmics
More people are jumping into the Presidential race in the United States. They all have their positions and say only they have the answers to the ills of the country, assuming of course, there are ills. The role of government in solving these ills will be debated, in some cases with great passion. How will we be able to make any judgment about what government can and should do if we don’t first think about what we expect from our community and its leaders.
In the first post of this series, a broad outline of the what a community should do to be successful was presented. In that post, the pillars of a success community were listed as protection, education, innovation and building. The last post explored the need for a community to provide protection from threats outside the country and from those that live in our community.
Education is the second pillar of a successful community. If the community can’t perpetuate itself, all will be lost. But, education involves more than just teaching the young about the academics, which certainly needs to be done. The community must also teach the next generation about how a good government should work and contrast and compare that to the one we currently live under.
Learning the basics is essential, but so is moving on to higher education levels. Without engineers, scientists, doctors and the many other professions that demand a longer education cycle, we will not be able to sustain our way of life or keep in front of the innovation curve that successful communities achieve.
We also need to have open and honest inquiry about how well government and the community operate. Without educating ourselves on the performance of the varies functions we expect from our community, we may never know if they are operating in the best interest of all.
Finally, as innovation happens, without re-investment in the education cycle for workers pass the traditional school age years, many will be left behind and present a drag on the community’s success. In today’s world, more so than any other time in human history, innovation takes over within just a few years. Technologies are developed, mass marketed and come to the end of their product cycle within a generation. The people that were needed to develop and build these technologies may need to change their skill set a couple times over a single life time. Without the opportunity to retrain and find other work, they will prevent a community from achieving full employment.
Education is more than “reading, writing and arithmetic”. It is also teaching about our way of life. It is also about researching our successes and failures so that this new knowledge can be applied to innovation.
And that is the subject of the next post.
-----
In the first post of this series, a broad outline of the what a community should do to be successful was presented. In that post, the pillars of a success community were listed as protection, education, innovation and building. The last post explored the need for a community to provide protection from threats outside the country and from those that live in our community.
Education is the second pillar of a successful community. If the community can’t perpetuate itself, all will be lost. But, education involves more than just teaching the young about the academics, which certainly needs to be done. The community must also teach the next generation about how a good government should work and contrast and compare that to the one we currently live under.
Learning the basics is essential, but so is moving on to higher education levels. Without engineers, scientists, doctors and the many other professions that demand a longer education cycle, we will not be able to sustain our way of life or keep in front of the innovation curve that successful communities achieve.
We also need to have open and honest inquiry about how well government and the community operate. Without educating ourselves on the performance of the varies functions we expect from our community, we may never know if they are operating in the best interest of all.
Finally, as innovation happens, without re-investment in the education cycle for workers pass the traditional school age years, many will be left behind and present a drag on the community’s success. In today’s world, more so than any other time in human history, innovation takes over within just a few years. Technologies are developed, mass marketed and come to the end of their product cycle within a generation. The people that were needed to develop and build these technologies may need to change their skill set a couple times over a single life time. Without the opportunity to retrain and find other work, they will prevent a community from achieving full employment.
Education is more than “reading, writing and arithmetic”. It is also teaching about our way of life. It is also about researching our successes and failures so that this new knowledge can be applied to innovation.
And that is the subject of the next post.
-----
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
A common defense is the first purpose of government
As the election cycle approaches, those that are running for office including the presidential suite, will be telling us all the things government should or shouldn’t be doing. If we don’t layout a frame work of the purpose of government in advance, we could be pulled in many directions. We will also shift our own positions a dozen times as we hear good words from each of the candidates at all levels.
In the last post we outlined four primary pillars. They are protecting, educating, innovating and building. Clearly, the first, protecting, was the first reason individuals decided to create a community. Living together in an agricultural setting made individuals and families venerable to outside raiders. If everyone in the community came to the defense of any individual, the outside attacks were less likely.
Life in a community has evolved since that time and the definition of a common defense has expanded. Now there is still the risk of outside invaders. A strong military is needed to protect the territorial boundaries of the country. Not only from other countries with their military but also from their business practices, non military invaders, migration and diaspora.
But threats to the individual and the community come from three other areas. First, there is the criminal threat. This threat comes in big and small packages. It, of course, comes with the common criminal that local law enforcement can tamp down, but also from large organized criminal operations. This needs a national law enforcement agency that can move around the country where ever the threat exists.
Second, there is the threat that develops when there is a lack of standards in business, medical, construction and other industries. By establishing and maintaining common practices and standards, those that are honest can depend on them and those are not can be stopped.
Finally, the last is our own civil rights. This not only includes the encroachment of government on the individual’s liberties, but also those that would like to marginalize individuals that don’t fit a very narrow mainstream definition of behavior. It is just as important to enforce laws that prevent criminal activity as it is to prevent marginalizing individuals whose behavior may not be common, but their actions do not cause any injury or loss to any other individual.
As you can see, defense comes in many forms and at many levels. The ability of a community to defend individuals from many threats is the first priority of government. By creating an environment that allows individuals to freely live their own lives is the healthiest environment for the other three pillars.
More to follow on education, innovation and building.
-----
In the last post we outlined four primary pillars. They are protecting, educating, innovating and building. Clearly, the first, protecting, was the first reason individuals decided to create a community. Living together in an agricultural setting made individuals and families venerable to outside raiders. If everyone in the community came to the defense of any individual, the outside attacks were less likely.
Life in a community has evolved since that time and the definition of a common defense has expanded. Now there is still the risk of outside invaders. A strong military is needed to protect the territorial boundaries of the country. Not only from other countries with their military but also from their business practices, non military invaders, migration and diaspora.
But threats to the individual and the community come from three other areas. First, there is the criminal threat. This threat comes in big and small packages. It, of course, comes with the common criminal that local law enforcement can tamp down, but also from large organized criminal operations. This needs a national law enforcement agency that can move around the country where ever the threat exists.
Second, there is the threat that develops when there is a lack of standards in business, medical, construction and other industries. By establishing and maintaining common practices and standards, those that are honest can depend on them and those are not can be stopped.
Finally, the last is our own civil rights. This not only includes the encroachment of government on the individual’s liberties, but also those that would like to marginalize individuals that don’t fit a very narrow mainstream definition of behavior. It is just as important to enforce laws that prevent criminal activity as it is to prevent marginalizing individuals whose behavior may not be common, but their actions do not cause any injury or loss to any other individual.
As you can see, defense comes in many forms and at many levels. The ability of a community to defend individuals from many threats is the first priority of government. By creating an environment that allows individuals to freely live their own lives is the healthiest environment for the other three pillars.
More to follow on education, innovation and building.
-----
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Protect, educate, innovate and build
Let’s back up the bus for a moment. Forget what the left or the right tells you about any issue the community faces and the purpose of government. While most politicians are good people, they do have their own agenda. They will attempt to move things in their own direction. Politicians are elected because in a free society like our own, we want them to just take care of things for us. Because of that, public opinion is swayed more by what the politicians say about the issues than what the facts are about an issue.
The time spend examining how problems should be solved will be a good exercise. The United States has a Presidential election cycle that is developing. (Are you ready?) All those that will be running for office will give you their advice on how to run the country. Unless we have set up our own standards, it will be impossible to examine each of the candidates and their proposals.
Most of the time, we can address on the problems a community faces. What is more difficult is finding agreement on how the problems are to be solved. It is believed that the left tells us that they should be solved by the community’s government. At the same time, critics of the right believe that the same problem should be solved by the individual. (Although, I am using a modern and popular definition of left and right in this case. The real definition of the two have nothing to do with government or individuals solving problems.) The practical answer to solutions is a balance between the two.
The individual can achieve great things for herself and her family. By working hard and making good decisions she is likely to succeed. But, she has little control over people outside of her sphere of influence.
A historical view of community makes it clear that the advancement of the human condition have come not just from the individual making good decisions independent of everyone around them. But, by working together in a community setting. Without community, the individual spends most of her time protecting her world. This provides little time for educating, innovating and building.
So what is the role of the individual and community in success?
The simple answer is to work together on four general issues. They are, protecting, educating, innovating and building. First, collectively, we can all protect each other better than we can individually. Second, we need to educate our children not only about the arts and sciences but also about our way of life and how to protect it. Next, is to innovate. With the freedom that a common defense provides and the knowledge that education provides we can develop improvements and advances in our environment. Finally, once we have developed the innovations we can then build them.
Everything we do as individuals and collectively as a community needs to be focused on the four pillars of any successful society; Protect, Educate, Innovate and Build. When one of them erodes, they all will begin to be washed away.
To follow, more on each pillar.
-----
The time spend examining how problems should be solved will be a good exercise. The United States has a Presidential election cycle that is developing. (Are you ready?) All those that will be running for office will give you their advice on how to run the country. Unless we have set up our own standards, it will be impossible to examine each of the candidates and their proposals.
Most of the time, we can address on the problems a community faces. What is more difficult is finding agreement on how the problems are to be solved. It is believed that the left tells us that they should be solved by the community’s government. At the same time, critics of the right believe that the same problem should be solved by the individual. (Although, I am using a modern and popular definition of left and right in this case. The real definition of the two have nothing to do with government or individuals solving problems.) The practical answer to solutions is a balance between the two.
The individual can achieve great things for herself and her family. By working hard and making good decisions she is likely to succeed. But, she has little control over people outside of her sphere of influence.
A historical view of community makes it clear that the advancement of the human condition have come not just from the individual making good decisions independent of everyone around them. But, by working together in a community setting. Without community, the individual spends most of her time protecting her world. This provides little time for educating, innovating and building.
So what is the role of the individual and community in success?
The simple answer is to work together on four general issues. They are, protecting, educating, innovating and building. First, collectively, we can all protect each other better than we can individually. Second, we need to educate our children not only about the arts and sciences but also about our way of life and how to protect it. Next, is to innovate. With the freedom that a common defense provides and the knowledge that education provides we can develop improvements and advances in our environment. Finally, once we have developed the innovations we can then build them.
Everything we do as individuals and collectively as a community needs to be focused on the four pillars of any successful society; Protect, Educate, Innovate and Build. When one of them erodes, they all will begin to be washed away.
To follow, more on each pillar.
-----
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
You don't have to be a birther to believe in presenting proof
Let’s hope that Obama’s release of the “long version” of his actual birth certificate puts an end to the drama about Obama’s right to hold the office of President.
The Responsible Community never thought for a moment that Obama wasn’t a naturally born citizen. The campaign released documents that supported it. But more than that, someone in the adversarial environment that is part of politics in this country would have found evidence that he wasn’t if it existed. The Republican Governor of Hawaii would have been a national hero in many people’s minds if he would have presented the evidence. But, he didn’t. The financial resources of many individuals, including the Koch brothers, would have purchased such evidence at almost any cost if there was any. But, there wasn’t. Fox News, the most powerful conservative media outlet in the country would have secured a strong position in the market if they could have found any. But, they didn’t.
So, now, let’s move on to the heart of the issue.
Any candidate that is running for the office of the President of the United States should have to deliver proof that he is legally able to hold the office. After all, the Constitution does clearly state that he should be a naturally born citizen of the country. It is not out of the realm of the Congress’ roll to require that candidates present the necessary documents. But, anyone that is running for any office in the United States should also have to prove their eligibility.
You don’t have to be a “birther” to believe that one should have to prove their eligibility to hold office. Let’s make it across the board and be done with the issue.
-----
The Responsible Community never thought for a moment that Obama wasn’t a naturally born citizen. The campaign released documents that supported it. But more than that, someone in the adversarial environment that is part of politics in this country would have found evidence that he wasn’t if it existed. The Republican Governor of Hawaii would have been a national hero in many people’s minds if he would have presented the evidence. But, he didn’t. The financial resources of many individuals, including the Koch brothers, would have purchased such evidence at almost any cost if there was any. But, there wasn’t. Fox News, the most powerful conservative media outlet in the country would have secured a strong position in the market if they could have found any. But, they didn’t.
So, now, let’s move on to the heart of the issue.
Any candidate that is running for the office of the President of the United States should have to deliver proof that he is legally able to hold the office. After all, the Constitution does clearly state that he should be a naturally born citizen of the country. It is not out of the realm of the Congress’ roll to require that candidates present the necessary documents. But, anyone that is running for any office in the United States should also have to prove their eligibility.
You don’t have to be a “birther” to believe that one should have to prove their eligibility to hold office. Let’s make it across the board and be done with the issue.
-----
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Don't exclude a voice
It is a curious thing when one side or the other say that they are adamantly opposed to something, then turn around and use the issue to support their action. It doesn’t matter if it is the left, the right or what seems to be the lonesome middle, everyone does it.
In the book, “The Nine”, Jeffery Toobin documents such an incident. The book is about one of the longest reins of a single group of Supreme Court Justices in history. It covers the years from the late 70’s to the 90’s. On July 1, 1991, George H. W. Bush announces from the summer White House in Kennebunkport, Maine that he is nominating Clearance Thomas to the Supreme Court. Thomas is to replace Thurgood Marshall, the first African American to set on the court. Yet, in the announcement, Bush claims that the fact that Thomas, “is a black and a minority has nothing to do with this” nomination.
Many years later the country would debate if nominees had enough experience as a judge, it any at all, to be a Supreme Court Justice. Yet, Thomas had served as a judge for only a year. Again, many justice nominations later, the country would debate that if it was important for nominees to have experience as an appeals judge. Again, Thomas never served on any appeals court nor argued a single case in front of an appeals court. The country would debate the value of a justice that has not been published – as in writing a book, an article or a legal brief of any magnitude. Yet, Thomas did none of those things and was nominated for the court.
It also caused a bit of trouble in another way that made many Republicans uncomfortable at the time, and may still. Thomas and other stalwart members of the Grand Old Party didn’t believe in preferential treatment because of race. Yet, this nominee and soon to become justice, was selected for nomination because of the color of his skin.
The truth is, in politics we make these same choices every day. If the intention is to exclude a race because the group is unqualified in its entirety, then it is an act of evil. It is a decision that has no basis in fact nor has any virtue at all.
But, if someone was selected, in part, as a sincere attempt to broaden the voices of opinion then it is a sound and valuable process. Regardless if we want to admit it, all races bring a different perspective to any opinion. The various lives that all Americans live may lead us to a common opinion. But, the many paths that were followed may provide a road map for the great diversity of individuals. To not consider the background and the race of an individual given the same ideologies is to deny the wisdom that comes from this American Experience.
Politics and the resulting community that comes from it is not an exact science. It is not like math that always gives the same result for the same variants. Community is a social science. Most of the time we are not making black and white decisions. (Perhaps a curious choice of words given the discussion.) Community deals in shades of grey. A discipline more akin to soft logic then the cold realities of 2 plus 2 equals four.
While there are absolutes that are common to all, communities survive because we consider all of the voices, not because we deny any one of the voices.
-----
In the book, “The Nine”, Jeffery Toobin documents such an incident. The book is about one of the longest reins of a single group of Supreme Court Justices in history. It covers the years from the late 70’s to the 90’s. On July 1, 1991, George H. W. Bush announces from the summer White House in Kennebunkport, Maine that he is nominating Clearance Thomas to the Supreme Court. Thomas is to replace Thurgood Marshall, the first African American to set on the court. Yet, in the announcement, Bush claims that the fact that Thomas, “is a black and a minority has nothing to do with this” nomination.
Many years later the country would debate if nominees had enough experience as a judge, it any at all, to be a Supreme Court Justice. Yet, Thomas had served as a judge for only a year. Again, many justice nominations later, the country would debate that if it was important for nominees to have experience as an appeals judge. Again, Thomas never served on any appeals court nor argued a single case in front of an appeals court. The country would debate the value of a justice that has not been published – as in writing a book, an article or a legal brief of any magnitude. Yet, Thomas did none of those things and was nominated for the court.
It also caused a bit of trouble in another way that made many Republicans uncomfortable at the time, and may still. Thomas and other stalwart members of the Grand Old Party didn’t believe in preferential treatment because of race. Yet, this nominee and soon to become justice, was selected for nomination because of the color of his skin.
The truth is, in politics we make these same choices every day. If the intention is to exclude a race because the group is unqualified in its entirety, then it is an act of evil. It is a decision that has no basis in fact nor has any virtue at all.
But, if someone was selected, in part, as a sincere attempt to broaden the voices of opinion then it is a sound and valuable process. Regardless if we want to admit it, all races bring a different perspective to any opinion. The various lives that all Americans live may lead us to a common opinion. But, the many paths that were followed may provide a road map for the great diversity of individuals. To not consider the background and the race of an individual given the same ideologies is to deny the wisdom that comes from this American Experience.
Politics and the resulting community that comes from it is not an exact science. It is not like math that always gives the same result for the same variants. Community is a social science. Most of the time we are not making black and white decisions. (Perhaps a curious choice of words given the discussion.) Community deals in shades of grey. A discipline more akin to soft logic then the cold realities of 2 plus 2 equals four.
While there are absolutes that are common to all, communities survive because we consider all of the voices, not because we deny any one of the voices.
-----
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Home prices are at their lowest in years, so are property taxes
Home prices in Michigan are the lowest they have been since 1994. Local property taxes that are collected based on the value of the property are, of course, at their lowest in many years. The rise and now the fall of property taxes have placed many local budgets in a crisis. That is why there should be no property taxes based on the value of the structure for individuals or for businesses.
As an example, in Wisconsin, they are running into trouble on the taxes placed on property based on the value. In 2008, a Wisconsin state law allowed local communities to place a limit on the type of challenges that individuals and businesses can make on their property taxes. Local communities were allowed to limit the challenges to the local Board of Review only. But, a large rental property owner sued to have a court review its assessment. The state’s supreme court recently rightfully ruled that individuals and businesses have a right to challenge the tax assessment beyond the local board of review, in support of due process. This means that communities in Wisconsin and around the country are going to have difficulty preparing budgets because there will be challenges to the revenue stream.
Property taxes are one of the most arbitrary taxes we pay. The amount of the tax is based solely on what a local Board of Review thinks the property is worth. The value of any property can’t truly be determined unless it is sold or is used to generate income. But even after a sale, the value of the property may change dramatically from year to year based on issues that are market driven and out of the control of the property holder.
Additionally, those that pay the highest property taxes; homes with high value, homes that have been improved or property that generates income; are those that help the community maintain the overall property values of the community the most. To tax them more, based on arbitrary values, is counter productive.
Communities need stable revenue sources to provided needed services. Even the most minimum of services, like police and fire, will have a consistent cost from year to year, rising with inflation and other factors. Over the last few decades, property values have increased enough to provide communities with a growing revenue source that kept ahead of inflation. But in the past couple of years, that has all changed. Property values are now falling, forcing down the amount of tax revenue received.
Local communities need to base the taxes collected for local services based on another idea. The way to approach this might be on “unit” collection. All property would be valued not on market value, but on size and type of property. All vacant property would have one tax based on the size of the property. Residential housing would have another value based on the size of the lot and the square footage of the structure. The larger the structure, the more tax. Commercial, retail and industrial would have the same concept perhaps just different numbers and taxes.
Details do need to be worked out. But, a stable revenue source for communities would mean that services won’t be cut just because revenues are down. Property owners in a community would also know from year to year what their obligation will be. If the value of their property rises, they will not suffer because of it. Finally, an improvement in the individual housing or business unit property wouldn’t mean that there will be an increase in taxes.
-----
As an example, in Wisconsin, they are running into trouble on the taxes placed on property based on the value. In 2008, a Wisconsin state law allowed local communities to place a limit on the type of challenges that individuals and businesses can make on their property taxes. Local communities were allowed to limit the challenges to the local Board of Review only. But, a large rental property owner sued to have a court review its assessment. The state’s supreme court recently rightfully ruled that individuals and businesses have a right to challenge the tax assessment beyond the local board of review, in support of due process. This means that communities in Wisconsin and around the country are going to have difficulty preparing budgets because there will be challenges to the revenue stream.
Property taxes are one of the most arbitrary taxes we pay. The amount of the tax is based solely on what a local Board of Review thinks the property is worth. The value of any property can’t truly be determined unless it is sold or is used to generate income. But even after a sale, the value of the property may change dramatically from year to year based on issues that are market driven and out of the control of the property holder.
Additionally, those that pay the highest property taxes; homes with high value, homes that have been improved or property that generates income; are those that help the community maintain the overall property values of the community the most. To tax them more, based on arbitrary values, is counter productive.
Communities need stable revenue sources to provided needed services. Even the most minimum of services, like police and fire, will have a consistent cost from year to year, rising with inflation and other factors. Over the last few decades, property values have increased enough to provide communities with a growing revenue source that kept ahead of inflation. But in the past couple of years, that has all changed. Property values are now falling, forcing down the amount of tax revenue received.
Local communities need to base the taxes collected for local services based on another idea. The way to approach this might be on “unit” collection. All property would be valued not on market value, but on size and type of property. All vacant property would have one tax based on the size of the property. Residential housing would have another value based on the size of the lot and the square footage of the structure. The larger the structure, the more tax. Commercial, retail and industrial would have the same concept perhaps just different numbers and taxes.
Details do need to be worked out. But, a stable revenue source for communities would mean that services won’t be cut just because revenues are down. Property owners in a community would also know from year to year what their obligation will be. If the value of their property rises, they will not suffer because of it. Finally, an improvement in the individual housing or business unit property wouldn’t mean that there will be an increase in taxes.
-----
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)