I write the poems

It’s all that I can do

With a bitter face 

I have been reading stories on Holocaust survivors lately and was reminded of a story I read years ago…

A true story I read once had a big impact about how I deal with day to day problems. I haven’t been able to find because it was years ago. A reader’s digest story about two men that worked at a factory. The storyteller was a worker who had issues with the frugal German owner of the company he worked for. The writer hated his job and listed all the issues he had with management. There was another worker who seemed quiet and who also did his work. One day the writer unloaded his grievances on the worker. The worker told the writer that he needed to see the difference between crisis and inconvenience. He was a Holocaust survivor and had watched his entire family die in prison camps. The grievances the writer had were normal inconveniences everyone has to deal with in life. You deal with them, make choices and enjoy the results. No one is being put to death. There is no starvation or family being shipped off in trains. Being healthy, alive and having the freedom to move as we see fit is something to celebrate. Everything else is an inconvenience….

When I think of failure

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.