The date was like a dream 

I still cry

Why would a person want to keep a certain doctor or mechanic? We use the word ‘good’ to describe those we like to interact with. There are a slew of derogatory terms for those who we lose respect for. Notice that money isn’t at the forefront when we are describing good. A doctor who is honest, who takes time to listen and has applied himself to study is the kind we want. We are willing to pay more for his services. Someone who is dishonest, gruff and obtuse would be last on our list. These all have to do with character. And a good person wants to interact with other good people. This makes for a good society.

This is the conservative way of thinking. As a person is good and skillful, wealth will follow since people tend to value the interaction. We despise those who put cost first. If a father forced his daughter to go to the cheaper doctor even though he had a history of abuse, we would despise him. Freedom has to do with choice and good people make the best choices among themselves.

Socialists put cost first. Only doctors who conform to their plan can be used. An indifferent panel makes decisions balancing what they feel is necessary with cost. The assumption is made that common people aren’t good enough to provide for themselves and need a government official to make these decisions for them. Good people despise this practice even in family hierarchy. Since good people make the best choices, having a third party involved causes everyone frustration.

Conservatives believe that the focus should be on character although socialists try to claim it. That is why conservatives appear to be moralists. They see that the best way to remain free is for people to be good and posses good judgement. Quality people require less governing. Socialism is based on the assumption that people are all unfair and bad and they need a hero to come to the rescue. It is  a choice between needing government to step in as heroes or make every individual a hero. I chose the individual.

The capitalist verses socialist and the liberal verses conservative arguments can get tiring at times. The reason is that simple logic and actual meanings of words are distorted to make points according to what passions dictate. Lets look at a couple of the concepts.

The word capitalist is applied to people who believe in private transactions. One on one friendships are the driving force. A just value is set by the people who are  involved themselves. Someone who provides something professional is going to be worth more and we are willing to pay more for it. A service that requires little skill that we can do ourselves doesn’t warrant as much money but that doesn’t mean the friendship is less and the transaction isn’t useful. We are willing to pay more for what we perceive as beautiful and the person who produces it is rewarded. They get excited at the evolution of learning skills, showing art and being worth more to others. This is the foundation of a free society; free means the ability to make transactions with each other how we see fit.

A socialist believes that people aren’t capable to transact properly and need a tender. They look at an economy as a static thing. Money is the gauge they use for fairness. If someone has too much, they must have acquired it wrong. A social engineer or shepherd must redistribute it fairly. You can say that money is the driving force for this philosophy. The amount of money one has is examined first and then fairness is determined by the tender. Art and skill is secondary and the the proper application must be taught by them.

People apply terms in a way that they want to be perceived. I think in this case the words are reversed. A free market person is a true socialist since they believe in free and mutual social interaction and wealth is a result. Those who are called ‘socialists’ are really capitalists because they believe that having control of the money is key to producing good relationships in a society.

It was out of the blue

I am a firm believer that each person is gifted with unique personality traits. Although studies into different types and their struggles is interesting and helpful, I absolutely despise labeling people. It is that third party thing from the last post. We shouldn’t feel obligated to follow anyone’s narrative or labels.

When I was in fifth grade, I started out in the class for the smartest kids. My fourth grade teacher had confidence that I belonged there. But my high energy level caused a few teachers to gradually put me into the lowest class where I spent the time making trouble and learned how to be malicious from a couple kids there. When we moved and went into another school, the teachers were amazed and just loved how I would sing, make jokes and imitate people well. They had me c/o the school play with one of my imitations of a popular tv c/o. I earned straight A’s in all my classes. School was a blast for me. But it took people who appreciated the gifts in others.

We can miss out on good things in life when we allow others to define us. It is good to recognize our strengths and weaknesses but it is wrong to allow others to set the bar for us. We all have unique things that make us feel good and settle our minds. Most of the anxiety I experience in life comes from trying to conform to other people’s expectations. When it doesn’t work, I feel like a failure. But what if, as in the first class mentioned, the problem lies in their expectations? What if God gave us all unique personalities to be enjoyed at its fullest potential?

She loves hard, he loves long

It couldn’t be love 

The voice inside of us