Conservatives, Liberals, and the Great Depression

Just a quick post to share something I find kind of funny. Most of you probably won't, but I'll share it anyway. :)

I was in two facebook status/comment discussions at the same time. With one person I was arguing that government spending did in fact have an impact on the economy and the idea of a stimulus was a good thing. With the other person, I was defending the argument by Republicans that there is plenty of non-economic focused spending in the stimulus bill that shouldn't be there. Then in unison ... they both bring it up - The Great Depression.

Person 1 paraphrase: The Great Depression showed that government intervention works - FDR was a hero.

Person 2 paraphrase: The Great Depression showed that government intervention didn't work - FDR was a goof. We would have recovered much quicker without him.

Hilarious. Same event, and two completely opposite views ... so I did what anyone would do - I googled it. Turns out the real economists are split pretty evenly on this as well. The cause of the Great Depression is generally agreed upon (Money Supply, Gold Standard, etc.) The reasoning for why it took us over 12 years to recover is not. Very good arguments have been made both ways by people smarter than me. It's hard to argue with the fact that we did recover ... eventually. It is also hard to argue with the fact that it was the worst (most prolonged and painful) recovery ever. Oh yes ... and that most all the other countries in the world suffering through the same depression recovered much quicker.

Another interesting note: FDR was viewed at that time much as Obama is now, and Hoover was viewed much as Bush is now. FDR could do no wrong. I ran into a Will Rogers quote, he basically said that FDR was idolized so much that he could burn down the white house and the public would say 'great, look at that, we started a fire!'. Hoover was thought to be market driven and relaxed on government-intervention but his actions in office were anything but. This reminds me of Bush talking about fiscal responsibility and spending a whole bunch of money.

So the lesson here in my humble opinion is to beware of group-think. We all have a certain opinion, then we read things that mostly match that opinion. Look at anyone's blog roll to see this - generally not much diversity there. As we read more, we begin to lean even more in that direction. Eventually we think one side is right and the other side is wrong when the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. If living in China taught me anything, it is that we as humans are not the independent thinkers we claim to be - we are very much a product of the information we take in.

Some Random Thoughts

There is not enough time for blogging lately ... here's what's been on my mind.

1. our congress as a whole is dishonest and disappointing and that is about as gentle as I can put it. This article explains it well: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/17/cafferty.stimulus/index.html

2. excited that the India microfinance ministry my wife and I are helping with will have a story in the KC Star ... Wednesday I think ... look for it.

3. bummed I have to quit school for a while (Sprint cut my funding :) ). I will have to come up with some other kind of project to work on in the mean time.

4. impressed with the coaching job Bill Self did against kstate on Saturday ... assigning lesser players to begin fouling Clemente and Pullen consistently was brilliant (and perfectly legal). Clemente has got to keep his cool there.

5. btw, I think Frank did a good coaching job as well - just has less talent right now. He doesn't have the 'bring everyone up top and then lob a 30 foot pass to the big guy' option.

5. wishing people would stop calling Clemente's frustration hit to the head of Reed a punch. Reed didn't even notice it or turn around. If it was a punch, he would have. Clemente shouldn't have done it ... but it was not a punch. My two year old hits harder than that. Same deal with the elbow ... yes - it was correctly called a technical, no - he was not really trying to hurt him. Again, I've been elbowed more seriously by my two year old in the last 24 hours. :)

6. pondering why Christians have to be so cheesy. Have you listened to KLove lately ... uggh.

7. amazed at the simplicity yet profoundness of Jesus' stories - there is so much meaning packed into simple stories about seeds, wheat, fruit, harvest, loans, sons, daughters, and money.

8. also amazed at the story of Joseph - one of the few old testament men who did almost everything right. Most of the others seem to be blessed in spite of themselves.

9. now you know where I'm at in my read through the Bible in a year effort ... can't wait to blog on Leviticus. Yippee.

Cheney's comments - Scary!!

An excerpt from a report on an interview with former VP, Cheney:

“When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an Al Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do anything they can to kill Americans, then I worry,” Cheney said in the interview published Wednesday.
"These are evil people. And we’re not going to win this fight by turning the other cheek," he said.

Yikes, these are some scary comments. How can a person not be more concerned about values like freedom, and human rights than these quotes show? In my mind the only way you can possibly justify this type of behavior is if you are confident that every person you are interrogating is in fact guilty. In my opinion, there is no way that is possible. We have been torturing innocent people, and the fact is you could make a good case we shouldn't even be torturing the guilty ones!

I personally am willing to sacrifice a bit of safety in order to stand up for American values. If you think about it, we actually do that every day with domestic policy. I have lived in mainland China and can tell you that I have never felt safer than when I was there. However, freedom and human rights are greatly sacrificed there to achieve this safety. They execute people for things we would not. They do not allow any type of firearms at all. Often times you are guilty until proven innocent.

2000 or so people died in the twin towers attack, and that is terrible. But how many people have died due to gunshots? How many people have died because convicted felons are put back on the street? How many people have died because we presume innocence? My guess is it is a much bigger number than 2000 - and yet we are generally ok with it because it preserves our values of freedom and human rights.

We sacrifice our local safety daily so we can experience these liberties. Why should this change when we look at foreign policy? I don't think it should. Treat all people as human, with respect, and value them. This is how we will set an example for the world. If it makes us a little less safe, so be it.

Cut it off!

I'm still spending time reflecting on the Sermon on the Mount. Today I thought of something I've never thought of before. I'm sure someone has somewhere, but I've never heard it.

When Jesus says "If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out," or "If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off," it has always been a bit confusing to me. I've always just accepted that he is exagerating for effect ... after all it would be ludicrous to start chopping off body parts. (and painful!)

Here is my new thought: His point is more literal than that. This actually WOULD be the way to handle it if the parts of your body were causing you to sin, BUT THEY ARE NOT! He is not exaggerating. Instead he is mis-attributing the cause of your sin and taking that to it's logical conclusion so you realize how ridiculous it is! The truth is that at the end of all the chopping, you would be a bloody stump and still have a sinful heart. You've addressed the symptoms, but not the cause.

Your eye is not causing you to sin, and neither is your hand. Sin is not about the body, it is about the heart. The body is only an expression of the heart. This fits in beautifully with his next words equating adultery and lust, as well as his words equating hate and murder. He is telling us that it is not about the outside, it is about the inside. It is so clear, I am not sure why I haven't heard it or thought it before.