PPACA "Obamacare" and the GOP Government Shutdown

For those of you who know me, you already know that I tend to lean Democratic. I don't claim to be bi-partisan, but generally speaking I do hold some very Libertarian and Socialist views also. In fact, I even have some beliefs that are very right-wing. All of that said, the contents of this article will seem very GOP-bashing and/or pro-Democrat. Cest la vie. Get over it. I will present the facts and then my interpretation of those facts.

This article is intended to discuss why our government officials are so deeply divided and what the ramifications are of the Affordable Care Act. So let's get some of the basics out of the way first.

GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT PPACA

WHAT IS: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA)?
PPACA, affectionately termed "Obamacare," is a piece of legislation that was introduced to our government in late 2009. It was sent through to Congress (which was Democrat controlled at the time) and approved. Subsequently, the Democratic Senate also approved this bill and it was ran to our president at the time, Barack Obama, who signed it in to law.

WHAT DOES: PPACA Do?
Well, PPACA does a lot of things. The bill is 2,409 pages long. If you wish to read it yourself please feel free HERE. In the absence of a desire to literally explain EVERY element of that many pages, let me summarize some of the larger aspects of this bill:

1. Pre-Existing Conditions: PPACA forbids insurance companies from denying a person coverage because of existing illnesses. It goes further to say that a given people of a given area that are the same age and non-tobacco users must be offered the same premium. This means that all 27-year-old people (male and female) in or around Minnesota who do not smoke MUST be offered the same premium as myself as I write this.
2. Minimum Standards: PPACA establishes a bare minimum for what a plan can provide you. Among these standards are the following: You cannot be dropped because you got sick, You cannot have price discrimination against you based on gender or pre-existing conditions, all children can stay on their parents insurance until the age of 26, Insurance cannot establish an annual or lifetime cap on essential services (ambulatory patient services; emergency services; hospitalization; maternity and newborn care; mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management; and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.), Essential services ( mammograms and colonoscopies, wellness visits,gestational diabetes screening, HPV testing, STI counseling, HIV screening and counseling, FDA-approved contraceptive methods, breastfeeding support and supplies, and domestic violence screening and counseling.) MUST be covered without copay/co-insurance/deductible
3. A fee is imposed to Businesses that employ 50+ people but do not offer insurance and on those that are not covered by insurance. It gets a little hairy here, but let me get you the basics. Your fee if you have no healthcare? $95/year. A business' fee for not offering it when they have over 50 full-time employees? $2,000/employee/year ($3,000 if they get insurance from PPACA) but both of these fees are scheduled to increase over time. There are subsidies that are available to any family that makes less than 400% of the current poverty line ($11,490 + $4,020 for each additional person in your family - so for my family $94,200) and for small businesses. If you don't make enough income, you are exempt from the law. If your employer only covers you and not your family, you are exempt. If you already get insurance from your provider at work you can opt in and get a subsidy as long as your offered insurance is more than 8.5% of your individual income or 9% of your family income, whichever is higher. WHOA THAT'S A LOT OF NUMBERS!!! Okay, here is the skinny. If you are poor, you are exempt. If you are rich, you already pay more. If you are in the middle and only the employee is offered insurance, you are exempt. Most other cases you will need either the employee plan, a PPACA plan, or you'll pay the fee which is considerably less but still will not cover your medical bills. It's a fee to compensate the rest of America because you are costing them money every time you go to the hospital without insurance.
4. PPACA plans must be offered through each individual state and they are encouraged to expand the Medicare, Medicaid, Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and Tricare programs. Each state will have a Marketplace, where competitive bids from insurance companies will be posted in four tier levels (Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum) of ascending costs and benefits. Medicaid is specifically expanded for individuals and families with incomes up to 133% of the federal poverty level, including adults without disabilities and without dependent children but also allows you to disregard 5% of your income, so it's really more like 138% of the poverty level. The problem is that several states have opted out even though it helps them get better at a lower cost. The Medicare program is improved so as to close up donut holes from Medicare Part D and make payments based on individual care not individual providers (I.E. If I break my arm it covers the fixing of that arm in one payment to the hospital, not 40 payments for the 40 elements that comprised that fix - WAY BETTER).

So that covers the bigger portions of what this does. This isn't by any means a definitive source as to what the exact rules are or even how they all apply, because there is much too much content for that here. Again, you are welcome to read the entire bill at your leisure through the link I provided above.

OUR CONGRESS AND THE HANDLING OF PPACA

So our Congress and our Senate have a problem. When this bill was passed into law, it was pushed hastily through by Democrats seeking to take advantage of a GOP-deficient government. We had the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. We were basically unstoppable. It's like when your brother gets to stay home from school after your mom baked cookies and when you get home the cookies are gone. The Democrats ate all of the cookies and the Republicans got mad. Understandably so. 

MYTHS

1. PPACA will cost us a lot of money: No - PPACA cuts 2 trillion from our deficit over the next 20 years (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/25/fact-check-repealing-obamacare-adds-to-deficit/)
2. PPACA causes our debt to increase: No. Debt is configured as "Gross Domestic Product" GDP vs. Existing Amounts owed. Capital Gains tax and the Bush-Era cuts lower GDP for us. Since capital gains are taxed lower, rich investors typically make their money by purchasing companies, downsizing, shipping jobs overseas (which they get a tax break for thanks to Bush), and then sell the company. That sale is a "capital gain" and is taxed lower than my paycheck but capital gains do not offer more GDP or jobs in America. They lower GDP and job growth, which increases the "indebtedness" to those amounts. Simple version: rich people are getting richer while decreasing jobs and increasing the national debt
3. PPACA Will drain our economy of resources: No. It will only drain the GOP and insurance companies of their resources. 
4. Congress has no reason to be upset: Yes they do. The law means they HAVE to take a plan from PPACA, meaning they no longer get those swanky plans from their providers but they have to pay more like the rest of us. 

SO HOW ARE THEY SHUTTING THE GOVERNMENT DOWN?

Republicans have tried more than five times in the last year alone to pass legislation that either de-funds PPACA or creates exclusions for themselves and other select groups (creating a privileged group). Every time these bills pass the house, the senate has rejected them. Republicans have sought a straight bill that allows people to decline PPACA (rendering it useless), they have tried other bills that say that money cannot go to PPACA, they have tried having bills that say that Congress and those in office do not need to take the PPACA insurance, and several other attempts. Since their other efforts have not worked, they are now working an angle to sneak the legislation about our healthcare into a budget that was already working. When the lawmakers in the senate noticed that they were trying to pass add-ons to the law that delay, de-fund, and leave members exempt they rejected it. Both the President and our Senate have said they will not partially fund our government (because that actually has a huge impact on foreign economy also) and they will not allow a budget law to be abused for personal party agenda such as repealing the effects of a law that passed the House and Senate and was found Constitutional.
As a result, the GOP lead Congress is refusing to assemble a bill that will not begin a systematic disassemble of "Obamacare" and because we passed the fiscal year for 2013, the funds that would be used to fund the basic elements that are shut down are locked up because we don't have an existing law to tell those funds where to go. It's like if you asked for $15 to go to a movie, but you only ask your mom for the $15 without saying what for. Your mom then asks, "What for?" Our government hasn't told mom what it is for, so mommy says no and 800,000 people are out of work, several people are going without WIC support, many headstart programs are shut down and lists taken apart, and other devastating affects while Congress enjoys their $132/day budget for "lunch" and their cozy, uninterrupted six-figure salaries.

WHAT IS THE BIG DEAL ABOUT A DEFAULT?

Well there are a ton of things to consider, but let's get to the most basic version of the problem. If we don't budget our money by a given time (November 1st at the latest) our government runs out of allocated funds to pay for certain things like Social Security, SNAP, Medicare, Medicaid, and interest on existing debt. This part is substantial, but can still be mitigated through existing funds to avoid a "default" but at the same time you are then allocating funds that would be used to preserve the value of our other major value - treasury bonds.

Treasury bonds are considered to have the highest fidelity of any investment in the world as our government has NEVER defaulted. As in, ever. Like, we never actually have gone back on our promises to pay these, because we have simply increased our debt limit and allocated funding for these. It's a great system, but when we aren't furthering our agenda and are spending the money reserved for these on other assets, the power of the dollar decreases, which simultaneously decreases the value of the bonds. This is a normal process that happens at around a 2% margin whenever we increase the debt limit, but the rate of return is higher than that for the bond, so the maturation still exists. Without the increase in the limit, the value of the dollar will dip much further and cause a proverbial "spike" downward in the value of the dollar, which stimulates the sale of these bonds and subsequently a downward spiraling economy.

Now I'm going to get a little bit technical, so bear with it:
In traditional economics, the general model shows that austerity (paying debt) is good for the overall economy during recession because it provides confidence to the general public. This is seemingly logical, but if you evaluate using a new and more accurate (by data) model, it's not correct.

The SFB model for aggregate demand in relation to austerity shows that historically (during WWI and WWII) we had a massive spike in our deficit the likes of which we have never seen. The government actually does a tally of an average amount of money spent out of the american personal income (PCE) and the fantastic part about this is that, historically speaking, when our government runs up massive deficits our people generally have extra money and spend it more. 

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/PCE-Price-Index.php

http://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/spending_chart_1950_2018USb_15s2li111lcn_G0t

So if we evaluate the data from these sources you can see that there are only two instances where the SFB Model for Aggregat Demand in relation to Austerity is proven wrong by the data. One period of time would be 2002-2004 and the other being from 2008-Now. The most common and definitive source to pinpoint with these lack of gains in PCE while experiencing a drastic increase in deficit is our manufacturing.

In the 80's our government (Both Bush Sr. and Clinton) signed into law some provisions that made sending manufacturing jobs overseas easier and cheaper. There isn't a law that specifically gives them "tax breaks" but there is a law that allows them a break for moving companies interstate or out of the nation. This combined with the fact that there are many nations overseas that allow for slave labor at massively lower wages while also doing little to no taxation on those revenues make other nations a safe haven for companies to manufacture and make untaxed revenue that is able to be funneled back to America at a very low rate because of laws that protect over seas revenue of domestic companies from over taxation. Ultimately this meant that more companies were sending jobs and manufacturing overseas.

This also lowers what our nation calls "Gross Domestic Product" or GDP. Coincidentally, GDP versus our existing debt is the primary way that we figure what the National Debt is. So these companies sending these jobs overseas lowers our GDP because we aren't making the product here. The consequence of that is a higher national debt, which concerns people. 

SO WHY ARE PEOPLE FIGHTING OVER THIS IF IT DOES BETTER FOR EVERYONE?

Of the top 20 people who get money from insurance companies, only 5 (FIVE) are Democratic,
one of which hasn't taken office, three of which vote in favor of GOP agenda and insurance
companies every time until it's a hot button issue (Max Baucus, Mark Warner, and Kay Hagan),
and one that outright votes for legislation regulating AHA 5 times, votes to make insurance
payouts for flood victims more difficult, votes against regulating private bribery to congress,and
votes against working Americans.


The fact is, of the top 20 people financed by Insurance companies seeking to dismantle AHA,
all 20 vote to help our government pay insurance companies and against regulating those
costs.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php...

https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/535/mark-warner...

https://votesmart.org/.../key-votes/8749/gary-peters...

https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/21082/kay-hagan...

http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/53315/max-baucus...

Short story? GOP/Republicans are in the pocket of Insurance companies. They get swanky perks from them, boat loads of cash, and some very nice health plans for pennies. Many things can contribute to different parties and that's a good thing. Democrats are largely funded by Lawyers and Lobbyists. The difference here is you don't see Lawyers and Lobbyists poaching on the people of America and you do see Insurance doing that. Additionally you see Congress that is funded by them voting in favor of Insurance companies. Facts are facts. GOP is lining their pockets with Insurance money and they don't want to let go.

The GOP (Republicans) are also very sheepish to mention that their primary financial contributors happen to be Healthcare and Insurance companies who have fought this bill tooth and nail. In fact, the ONLY reason that insurance is mandatory is because those insurance company lobbyists refused to entertain such legislature unless they forced everyone to have insurance

The GOP rep Ted Cruz recently went on record saying that this bill will cause work weeks to shorten to 29 hours for america's top employers. 9/10 of our top employers are slanted toward the GOP through financial investments to lobbyists who, coincidentally, lobby primarily for budget and healthcare. This is more like a threat versus an observation. The GOP has threatened and enacted an economic halt, have failed in legislature more than 40 times to negate the law, and are in the minority.

Sources:
GE Contributions are mostly Republican (http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000125)

YUM! Brands (includes McDonald's) contributions also mostly Republican (http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000029955)

UPS Contributions also mostly Republican (http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000081)

(http://www.forbes.com/.../)

http://shopyourpolitics.com/

http://www.statisticbrain.com/u-s-largest-employers/

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F


Every fiscal year our government sets a budget and that budget means that our debt has a ceiling. This allows for our money to hold a given value and several other purposes. When our government does not have a budget agreed to they typically have a Continuing Resolution (CR) that is passed which basically says, "we're gonna keep doing what we have been until we decide on a new budget." Republicans have made several attempts with the GOP Congress to pass laws that will render PPACA ineffective, including a suit with the Supreme Court, but more than 5 bills have been rejected prior to July 2013 that were designed to de-fund PPACA or leave certain rules/parties exempt and the Supreme Court found the law constitutional.

CONCLUSION

No one party has the whole answer. When Democrats rule, the poor take advantage of the wealthy. When GOP rules there is no such thing as middle class.

My strongest suggestions for improving our economy are the following:

1. Incentivize local manufacturing by lowering taxes for domestic manufacturing and increase taxes on manufactured product that is shipped into domestically located companies. This concept does two things. It creates a more competitive market for small and medium size businesses that originate here while creating opportunity for labor markets and decreased unemployment. The consequences of this being higher GDP and more job growth. The overseas tax should not exceed however the value of the less expensive labor overseas, as foreign trade markets are also volatile. 
2. Re-evaluate Capital Gains law. Large companies have shifted their sights to increasing their personal income through capital gains, or the purchase and subsequent sale of a given item or company. What this results in is companies being purchased and then liquidated for a higher resale value. This combined with the local incentives for manufacturing will promote traditional gains and higher GDP, which improve the overall wealth of our nation.
3. Allow for an expanding deficit in the wake of the enactments of #1 and #2. It has shown historically that when manufacturing jobs and gross domestic product are prevalent in our nation that a boom in Government deficit spurns a boom in consumer spending (PCE). Essentially the SFB model of Aggregate Demand dictates that the burden will either be on the government or on the people. If the people have the burden, money flow stops and the government suffers (recession - where we are now). If the government has the burden, the people spend and the government recoups funds due to taxation (everyone wins). 

Ultimately, I support a whole government overhaul similar to what Iceland did in 2011. In this specific case, I side with Democrats where I think it's absolutely INSANE to hold up a whole nation over something that you have failed to make happen more than 5 times and only oppose because the people who line your wallet oppose it. Although the Speaker of the House, John Boehner-R, and the Democratic Majority Leader, Harry Reid-D, are both dirty and lie to the American people(http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/sip-black-tea/2013/oct/2/boehner-reids-backroom-deal-keep-congresss-obamaca/). I assume most politicians do this and we need to start fresh, regulate incomes, and not allow significant donors from the private sector or influential businesses.

Pistols Versus Pen Strokes

Can someone please tell me what makes people think that the solution to their problems is to pick up a gun and go shoot people? I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would feel like this is a reasonable course of action. While I disagree enthusiastically with concepts of revenge, I can at least remedially understand the concepts of revenge and shooting or stabbing someone who has independently wronged you. It's absolutely heinous in either case, but at least the motivation of revenge against that person relates because we all have wanted to "get back" at someone and those who kill had a switch blow and no longer had the ability to filter the thought that they should get revenge. I get it. I disagree on an exponential level with it, but I get it.

Now why someone would decide that they need to go into a public area with the intent of causing as much harm as possible is beyond me. Was it for some sort of political statement? You just invalidated ANY kind of thought process you have had when you lost the ability to control your temper and gave up inhibitions. Not a single person with rational thought will side with your cause now. Was it revenge? Oh, so you're saying that ALL of the random people in that particular area were somehow doing something against you at that time? Would you say that maybe they were all conspiring against you then? What kind of purpose could you possibly have that would be propelled by doing something like that other than simply causing destruction? If all you want to do is destroy something go hunting and kill an animal. Then you can kill and you can sell the meat or whatever. It's not a good alternative, but ultimately I guess I'm happier with an ill-motivated hunt than killing people. Sorry animal rights activists. It's nothing personal.

Long ago in our country people actually believed that the pen stroke was stronger than the cannon but now we brandish fast-action cannons to write our statements in blood. What are we coming to? If you are making a statement to a larger government you are simply ignorant. We The People are still much stronger than the government because WE ARE the government. If you dislike what is happening so badly and you have the gumption to take a gun into a public place, why don't you start an actual protest? It works. Just ask Iceland. They did it in 2011 and ousted their whole government. Don't tell me stuff like that doesn't work. You can kill as many people as you like but you will only come to one of two points. Either you don't kill enough to have the majority and people lock you up or you kill way too many and people think you are a maniacal dictator.

For the love of humanity can we please start educating people more so we don't have unintelligent ego-maniacs running around with weapons believing they are doing something that anyone cares about? If you're that guy, just know this. There have been too many before you for you to even be noticed. Even if you're successful you will be forgotten about in less than 5 years. Nobody will care about what your name was. You will be nicknamed for the event you created and de-humanized for your complete lack of self-control. Nobody is going to give credence to whatever your issue is even if you paint it on the walls because the thoughts you have are polluted with the vile reek of hatred. Just stop. Rally some people to your side or actually take time to understand the obstacle in your way so you can overcome it, like EVERYONE ELSE HAS TO DO.

I'm Entitled and You're A Liar

Do you want to know what is really irritating? People who claim that Gen Y is "entitled" are irritating. I am a "ripe" 27 years old and I can tell you for sure that I am not "entitled" in the workplace or anywhere else. I have been provided some wrong information my whole life and as a result I was under the presumption that those lies would come to fruition and when they didn't my generation was fed up with it. Let's talk about a few of those lies.

The Lie: Get yourself a college degree because it will make you more money.
The Truth: A college degree is about as good as anything else when you are out of college and you are looking for a general job. Most of these degrees are used in fields that don't even come close to corresponding with their concentration and most of those jobs are NOT starting at the "median" wage you were expecting. Instead you are now in heaps of debt and you are likely starting at the same wage as some kid who just graduated high school and is sitting in the cube next to you. Congrats! You've made it.

A degree does offer you an easier time GETTING a job, but if it's not a specialized degree it's probably going to sit on the back shelf and collect you more debt and dust. If you do go to college, try not to spend a ton of money on a college unless that college can boast connections to a field you want to be in and can back that up. I personally attended a college that doted a program for being one of the best in the nation, and it was, but they offer no connections to that industry and it became more apparent to me in my sophomore year there and I dropped. College can be a good thing and it IS worth the money if the college can connect you with people who can get you places.

All of that said, if you want a job in a specialized field (Doctor, Lawyer, Pilot, etc.) you had BETTER get a degree because you won't be one without the degree.

The Lie: Hard work will take you to the top
The Truth: The concept of ladder motivation in the workplace is nearly non-existent in our day and age. Just because you work hard does NOT mean you will be promoted. It doesn't mean  you will get a raise. It means you will keep your job. Connections and likability are what get you further.  Knowing your value empowers you to make those moves.

I have worked several jobs where I had the "top" numbers and I have worked at places where I was in the middle and on the bottom of the leaderboard. Not one of those places where I excelled promoted me. Not one. Every "promotion" I have had was because I either got fired and demanded more from my next job and got more money or because I realized my company wasn't going to promote so I demanded more from the next place and quit. I worked at a grocery store and they had a program where you get these buttons for your apron when a customer says you were great to a manager. I had several times where I did this. One time I was wearing Crocs in the middle of January and a customer had their car stuck in the foot of snow that was coming down. I went out and pushed them out and they called in to tell the manager how great I was. The manager laughed and looked at her friend and said, "they must have been drunk." I had another occasion where a hispanic man who actually WAS drunk fell back and smacked his head on the floor. He was conscious but there was some blood on the floor. When the paramedics arrived I was roughly translating the paramedics questions to this customer and the paramedic told the manager that I did them an invaluable service. Neither of these occasions earned me one of these pins.

Your hard work and extra motivation will only get for you what you demand of it. If I had demanded my pin for doing those things I would have gotten them. I was soft and weak and in the end those pins weren't worth the fight but it still proves the point. I didn't move anywhere or do anything because I wasn't very good socially with the managers above me and I didn't have that connection. Parents and teachers should be teaching how to create those connections because THAT is what takes you places. That and KNOWING YOUR VALUE. (more on that later)

The Lie: When you graduate you will be able to support yourself.
The Truth: Up until 2008 this was relatively true, but then people realized that the upper class (wealthy) are poaching on the middle and lower classes. Here's how it works. The rich people in our country run businesses. There are many dynamics that dictate our economy, but one of the most basic concepts is the idea of money flow versus rate of inflation of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). What this essentially means is something to the effect of, "How much money are we paying for things versus how much money we are making." When the cost of living increases, wages should increase by the same margin or more to compensate. If wages increase more then money flow increases (because people now have expendable money). If they do not then it remains the same. If wages increase less then the money flow slows down and the economy suffers.

What does all of this mean? It's simple. It started long before 2008, but October 2008 the problem reached it's metaphorical "event horizon" and there was no escape. Gas prices started inflating in the early 2000's exponentially. They nearly tripled actually. The cost of gas (crude oil to be more specific) being so much more puts strains on businesses who need product moved and as such all of these other products hike their costs to offset the expenditure. This is 100% okay when the wages increase for everyone. To the businesses this seems like a one-two punch, but really it's a sacrifice in the short game to make more in the long game. If minimum wage increases in-sync with the gas cost then what happens is the company compensates by inflating their cost and if they can do so in a way that the inflation doesn't exceed the consumer burden (meaning if they can raise prices and pay their employees more) they lose "margin" but make more money. They won't make as much a % profit on any one given item, but because the workforce has more expendable money they sell more product at a slightly smaller profit. Still too confusing? Here:

ABC Company makes Product X for $20 but it costs them $2 to make. That's a margin of about 90% increase. Hooray.

Sally works for ABC Company and makes $7/hr. So she is now reducing their margin to about 55%. They have other expenditures to keep the place open and such, so in reality ABC Company at $20/Product X is probably netting themselves somewhere in the margin of 20-25%. That's actually not bad for a net margin but because it would take people like Sally 4 hours of work (after taxes) just to purchase 1 Product X they only sell say, 1000/ year.

Now let's say that the cost of gas increases and minimum wage is raised to say $10/hr. Well that now drops their margin to a mere 40% and after other costs they are probably closer to 5-10% margin at $20, but they need to mitigate cost so they raise their price to $25.

At $25 they are now back to 52% margin (yes less) but now Sally can buy 1 Product X for only 3 hours of work (after taxes) and have money to spare, so she is happier at work and ABC Company sells more of their product. They sacrifice the 3% to get more business.

Companies don't do this. The rich people say, "oh, you increased my cost? Better fire the people making too much money, hire cheaper labor, send some jobs over seas, and hike the prices. We might be able to even GAIN some margin here!"

All of this means it is increasingly difficult to support yourself out of high school . The average wage in the USA is between $8-$9/hr. and most jobs are now part-time (30-35 hours/week). Assuming the high end of that scale you make $315/week pre-tax. That's a grand old $16,380 a year. So you are working two jobs (assuming you can hold both and keep those hours) and you make $32,760. Well, you're going to spend about $3k of that on gasoline alone. (http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/05/report-u-s-households-spend-record-amount-on-gas-in-2012/). You are going to drop about $11,180 on average for rent (http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/home-front/2012/04/27/rents-rise-while-home-prices-fall). On average you will probably drop close to $6,443/year on food. (http://tlc.howstuffworks.com/family/average-american-grocery-bill.htm). Assuming you were conservative and bought a used car, on average you will spend about $4,212/year on that (http://www.cnbc.com/id/48844052).  At this point you ALREADY need to have that second job or you are under water by about $4k, but we haven't included utilities.... Utilities on average will set you back $1200/year if you live like a pauper. (http://ohmyapt.apartmentratings.com/breaking-down-the-average-utility-costs-per-month-whats-normal.html#b). Average hygeine is likely to set you back about $1k a year and clothing another $1k. You're probably dropping about $500 a year on that cell phone plan, about $1k a year for your TV, about $500 a year on internet, and we haven't even considered that you might have some loans to pay back for your education. Let's assume that you are incredibly fortunate and only pay $150/mo. for your loans. You are now dropping about $1500 a year on that. Car insurance will set you back close to another $1k (probably more if you are actually this young - but I'm being conservative). Your health insurance is likely to cost you close to $4,565 a year (http://kff.org/private-insurance/report/2013-employer-health-benefits/) so now even with the two jobs and working 60-70 hours a week with no other members in your home you are at a negative of $1,643. So you will proably have to cut out that TV, Internet, and probably skimp on clothes because that phone bill is already a minimum plan and you need a phone for safety reasons. Did I mention that all of this was based on your $32,760 being PRE-TAX?

So if you work two jobs making $9/hr and each give you 35 hours a week on average you can break even if you live in a small apartment, don't eat out, don't have TV or Internet, don't spend much on clothes and keep the lights off most of the time.

No. You cannot support yourself straight out of high school or college. Stop saying, "You should be able to." It should be possible to. THAT is an accurate way of saying it because they are saying that it's not the way it should be, and it isn't. Stop thinking that this is the 90's, 80's, or even one of the golden ages before then.

CONCLUSION (I know it's been a long time coming)

To the Gen X'ers and Boomers: Stop telling Millenials (Gen Y'ers) that we are entitled. We aren't entitled. We want the very best like we were promised and it was all torn out from under our feet while most of us were in college. Gen Y'ers now make up the majority of the management workforce in the workplace and we are very concerned with what will do better for us. There is a value for technology and a value for an ability to work smart instead of working harder. If one of us is your manager or you know one of us it's really simple, don't assume we are entitled. Assume we want the very best and if you aren't it then we will find what it is. We aren't a generation that is one to help you become the best. We were bred on the concept that we were all competing to be the best. My high school classes highest GPA was a weighted 5.2. We strive to be the best and expect to be rewarded for doing so. We don't believe in the "everyone gets a participation medal" but we do believe in the "everyone can be #1 and all cultures are important" mentality.

We are not lazy. We appreciate the value of working smart instead of hard when possible because of maximum output. You should value this.

We are not entitled. We understand that you may not understand the technology as it is coming out but we DO think that we can use it in ways that will help improve business while also working smarter and faster. It's not entitled to want an iPad to do my job with if that means I can now do the work of 3 people for you. That's a desire to be more effective. You should value this.

We are not needy. We are constantly on a mission to be better than the other person next to us. We were raised under the notion that we should be the best and we should work the hardest. Since we all want to do better and continuously improve, we want your feedback. I want to know if I am not doing something as effectively as you want BECAUSE I WANT TO BEAT YOUR EXPECTATION! If I have come to you multiple times to get feedback it's because you were so nonchalant the first time around. Give me legitimate feedback even if it's hard to hear. I would much rather hear about how terrible a job I am doing so I can do better than to find out one day I don't have a job.

We aren't narcissistic (clever word you guys but we know what it means). We were promised to have tons of job opportunities with the education we got and they weren't there. We were promised to be paid well and the average income is $8-9/hr in the USA. We want to do the best for ourselves because it is what we were promised. When a millenial is trying to get more for themselves it is because we have ambition to succeed. Mark Zuckerberg (founder of Facebook) is the 2nd youngest self-made billionaire in the world. We know how to succeed and we have lofty goals but we also are inclusive of most cultures and generally want to help and teach others.

We aren't disloyal. We simply have ideas on where we want to be. I have worked a ton of jobs and while I don't necessarily know where every move was taking me, I DO know that every change was an opportunity and between 2008 and 2013 I have aggressively seized that opportunity and dramatically improved my results. If you aren't providing a way for a millenial to get what they need/want they will find another way to get it. Plain and simple. We aren't the type to settle. We adapt and improvise. It's not disloyal. If you explain to me rationally how I can patiently wait and what steps to take to move forward I am happy to be loyal to you in that chain. If you simply do not afford any improvement I will look elsewhere under the notion you don't have anything further to offer, which might I add has proven true several times in my life.

To my fellow Millenials (Gen Y'ers): Here are a few tips on things that you can do to make transitions easier for other people and tips that I have had to learn first hand:

1) Know Your Value - If you only think you are worth $30k/year you have NO RIGHT to ask for a penny more than that because you will not offer them a penny more in value for their money. People who are making more money do so because the services they provide the company warrant it. If the services didn't the company wouldn't pay them for it. If you are worth $200k/year then know you are and own it. Don't accept less than that unless you are in a position where you NEED to (currently unemployed, etc). In those cases you always accept a step up from where you are at.

2) You Are Never Better Than What You Are Doing - If you are working at McDonalds as someone who takes orders, you are never above it. You are never below it. It is what you do to get from A to B. I have done a lot of things in my life (Hospital sanitation, grocery store cashier, gas station attendant, jewelry salesman, collections, staffing, telemarketing, business development, unemployment, bus boy, cook, manager, clinical research test participant, plasma donor, Card Shop Operator, janitor, etc.). I was never above any of those positions even though I thought several times that I was.

3) You Never Deserve To Be Above Your Superior - When you are hired by someone, you have a couple of responsibilities. One of them is to do what they are asking you to in exchange for your pay. The other is to make your manager look as good as possible to the person above them. It doesn't matter if you are SMARTER, MORE TALENTED, FASTER, WISER, or any other "ER" because you haven't put in the time to be in the position that they have. If they don't deserve to be there, the person above them will decide that. If they are the top and they own the place, you have no right to say so anyway because they are doing YOU the favor of employing you. If you do well at your job and you make the person above you look better, eventually when that person is rewarded you stand a better chance of receiving some of those benefits also. They are not obligated to share them with you - so don't EXPECT it. Just realize that they will favor you anyway because you do better for them. At best it means you move up in the company or get more money. At worst you have an excellent reference for your next position.

4) People Who Are Older Are Wiser Than You - Maybe they don't know how to sync everything up on iTunes and maybe they don't know how to access the public WIFI. Those can be taught. They know more about discipline and how to position yourself within the company than you do. Respect them for that. They were where you are at one point and likely have a lot of insight to help you get where you want anyway. Often times I have spoken with people older than me and realized that, while they don't realize the error of their ways while speaking to me, I am able to see the flaw simply because they are telling me the "horror" story of when they were in my position. We may be more tech-savvy but they have more life experience. Credit them for that and learn from them. Value them for it.

5) Sometimes You Need To Sacrifice - I have held several positions and there are several times I have moved up because of a play I made to get what I needed. That said, I do well now because I sacrifice time with my family (I work 60-70 hours a week). I do what I can to enjoy my time with them as much as possible, but EVERYTHING comes with a sacrifice. If you want more money you will give up family and friends to get it unless you are VERY lucky. If you want more freedom you will give up money. If you want a family you will give up some of your own personal ambitions. Sacrifice isn't a bad thing. It's simply a way of measuring what is more important to you. I could aggressively put more time into work and make MUCH more money, but I value my family and I am happy where I am at. There is a balance there as there should be with everything.

Matt 6:21 "For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."


Thanks for reading and God Bless.

There Both IS And IS NOT Absolute Truth

I recently have been speaking with people about morality and how it is defined. I am largely an ethical subjectivist with traces of nihilism in my belief system, though not clouded by the notion that everything is without purpose. I know there's a term for that. I don't know what it is. Sue me.

TERMS

So to really get at the heart of what my thoughts are you need to understand some very basic verbiage or constructs. It's not necessarily the "definition" by English standards that I am concerned about, but the "concept" that underlies that definition so don't get too hung up on the words I'm choosing but more on the idea behind them. Words change based on linguistics but the concept can remain the same.

Objective - Independent of the mind or free of the mind. Essentially it means you don't have to apply any personal reference. This is simply what is observed or found from testing

Subjective - Dependent upon other factors besides an intrinsic nature. Subjective means essentially that the object relies heavily on things beyond itself to define itself.

Morality - This is a basic idea that something is either "good" or "bad" as applied to several fields. It can apply to the best interest of a person, group, ideal, or anything really. (More on this later)

Absolute - Absolute means that something cannot change. It will continually remain however it is regardless of external factors.

Eternal Force - This is my polite way of acknowledging deities. While I believe in Jesus and God, my thoughts regarding this apply unilaterally and thus I'll replace the words "God" or "Jesus" with "Eternal Force" which will represent an eternal force that governs the universe and has values that are absolute as defined above.

Belief - The concept that you have a thought or feeling and you, by way of agreeing to your own, either silently, mentally, or vocally argue that all others are incorrect. (ie. if you believe even that all beliefs are correct then you would say that those who only think there is one right belief are wrong, etc.)

Community - The grouping of people with which you currently have awareness. If you are aware of the people, even if you choose to ignore, they belong to the community.

Power - The ability/inability to further an agenda

Law - Rules given to groups that may or may not be independent of morality

Justice - The concept of weighing moralities against one another in order to "justify" or make a concession for one or the other.

Bad - Painful or Damaging (whether physical, mental, emotional, spiritual, or otherwise)

Good - Pleasing or Restorative (whether physical, mental, emotional, spiritual, or otherwise)

WHAT IS MORALITY?
Here is where I will argue what morality is. I don't suggest you continue reading this if you are a Christian with a weak faith that isn't subject to challenge yet. The thoughts I have largely fly in the face of a lot of traditional beliefs. I by no means mean that to insult you, but the statements I will be making may get you thinking in a way that is counter-biblical, which is not the intent. I fully believe the Bible and this is simply my way of understanding it.

My belief largely corresponds with different escalating levels of community. Here are what I have so far (meaning I am willing to adjust):

1. Self
2. Small Social Circle (Family/Friends/Etc.)
3. Large Social Circle (Friends of Friends/Extended Family/Etc.)
4. Establishment (City/Town/Village/Etc.)
5. State (Where applicable)
6. Region (Where applicable)
7. Nation/Country
8. Allied Nations/Countries (Where applicable)
9. Hemisphere (Where applicable)
10. World 
11. Beyond World (Theoretical contingent upon other intelligent life)
12. Universal
13. Eternal Force (If consented to)

BASIC CONCEPTS:
Everything in life that we can know is subjective. Objectivity being free of the mind or without the mind then would mean that the minute you begin to know something it is no longer objective, because it is tainted by your perspective of observation. If I look at a cylinder from the top, it only looks like a circle and for me that truth is absolute from that point, but it is relative to my position in relation to the cylinder. The basic idea then comes down to this: There is no such thing as objectivity as applicable to mankind. If we begin to know what it is, then by the very idea of what objectivity is then it no longer exists. 

Since Objective Truth collapses upon itself in the face of human observation, morality is then defined by whatever the majority believes in relation to the level of community within which it exists and is re-evaluated whenever the level of pertinence increases beyond the level of the existing group (For example: groups within groups, expanding groups, combining groups, etc.). This then lends that the chain will escalate up as far as the world, but since other-worldly intelligence is yet to be discovered it is then not logical to assume community levels 11 or 12 and you jump straight to 13 if the group as a majority consents not only that 13 exists but also on what/who 13 is. 

For example: Premarital sex by levels of community

1. I individually believe it's "bad" as you can get diseases and it damages it's own value within the context of marriage (escalate to 2)
2. The majority of my immediate family and friends concur (escalate to 3) 
3. Most people who know my friends and family closely also concur (escalate to 4)
4. The majority of the city I live in believes it is okay (either escalate to 13 or stop)
5. (Doesn't apply-already negated)
6. (Doesn't apply-already negated)
7. (Doesn't apply-already negated)
8. (Doesn't apply-already negated)
9. (Doesn't apply-already negated)
10. (Doesn't apply-already negated)
11. (Doesn't apply-already negated)
12. (Doesn't apply-already negated)
13. I am a Christian. I fall subject to the subjectivity of the Eternal Force (God) and the consensus is that it is "wrong" among the believers of this particular deity.

In this case you can see how it is Absolute Truth, where Christians would then be concerned, however it is simply a subjective truth for those who don't believe. If the majority of the city I live in sided with me (even if on an unobserved level) then we now hold morality and it is then escalated to the next level of State, and so on.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?

For Christians: Paul says that we aren't supposed to hold non-christians to the same standard we hold ourselves to. We should be doing what we can to help them come to know what we know, but inevitably it is the Light that draws all men unto itself, not the lamp. Our job is to allow the Light to shine, not to convince other people that it exists or that it is the right thing. Once they have seen and believe the light, we are to hold one another accountable. 

Stop telling non-christians they have to conform to christian standards or they are going to hell. If they haven't seen the light and met Jesus, then according to our belief they are going to hell regardless of behavior. Show them Jesus before condemning them.

For Non-Christians: It is equally acceptable for Christians to say that an Absolute Truth exists and for you to say that it does not. We are simply two separate people looking at the cylinder from different angles. We may see a circle and you may see a rectangle, but in the end neither of us understands fully what we are looking at. Christians aren't "bigots" or "antiquated" for believing the way they do. They are justified in their own beliefs even under the rules of subjectivity and that's okay. 

Stop calling christians ignorant and bigotted for their beliefs. Often times Christians don't feel deep in their hearts that some things are wrong that the bible says but they consent to the will of their deity and as such have compassion for those morals. It's not biggoted. It's not ignorant. It's looking beyond self and considering a larger picture, which is what most non-christians do when they make the argument that religion destroys people.

I'm renouncing my Christianity to follow Jesus

When I was growing up, I was under the impression that much of the world still needed to hear about Jesus Christ. This statement is true, but in reality it's only about half of the story. For generations "the church" has been very focused on reaching everyone in the world because "Jesus is coming back soon."

I want to discuss some of the issues with the way "the church" has gone about doing this.

1) Sacrificing Quality for Quantity
The church often celebrates and hears great cheering when they hear about the volume of "salvations" that they get. If we go to a service and find that 20 people were "saved" at the service we are all emotional. Everyone gets into their own personal Jesus moment and there is a lot of cheering and clapping. The new recruits are treated like fledglings and ushered into the care of some people they have never met and handed some pamphlets and told that God loves them. After about 10-15 minutes of them discussing their personal lives they are then set free to fly on their own. These birds learn to fly in 10 minutes.

You wanna see how this looks from the outside?
Here, we have all these new baby birds! Hooray they look adorable and we are so excited. Let's handle them for about 10 minutes and then we are throwing them from the tree to see which ones fly. Training? No...we gave them a manual (written in complex and contrived language) and they can read it if they need training. We have seminars and groups that do training, but the next one doesn't start for about 3 months so they will probably have to wait. You were born at the wrong time little bird.

We as Christians are so focused on the act of saying you accept Christ but not helping these people develop with Him. Is it because we just don't care about those people or because in reality many of us don't live the "christian" lives that we like to talk about on Sunday mornings? Is it because we are so shy or because we are embarrassed that these "new birds" will see how flawed and misshapen we are if we truly share life together and walk with Christ?

The outside world is bitter from the Church being so one track minded. They are tired of the "you need to accept Jesus" campaign and they are tired of hearing about how great He is but not seeing it. I'm tired of it. The world is tired of it.

2) Using our own language and colloquialisms to explain things
We have very "christian" ways of explaining things. We use metaphors and we use christian idioms to express things. In the Christian subculture it's a very comforting and affirming thing to do. You tell someone that God hasn't answered your prayer yet and they say that "God is never early or late" and that's supposed to make you feel better, so you give up on it. 

The problem with the outside world (non-christians) is that this is simply an unintelligent reply to a legitimate question. People nowadays are tired of the unintelligent expressions. They are tired of the band-aid expression meant to cover the problem but not heal the wound. If God isn't answering  your prayer right away, your friend should be helping you as much as possible. They should probably ask what your prayer is for and help evaluate if it lines up with the will of God. Does your prayer affect someone's free will? God is a gentleman and will not steal away someone's ability to choose. Are you praying for something that takes time? Then why are you expecting it to happen right now? There are several logical answers that still maintain with biblical standards. For instance, how are you living your life? Are you cheating on your spouse but expecting God to hear your prayers? He may, but if your prayers are unanswered you may have an underlying issue to take care of. People need practical answers, not some made up "Christian-ism" that calls into question the intelligence of the christian community.

3) Fear of anything that challenges our faith
Christians, generally speaking, are afraid of whatever challenges their faith. We avoid science because it says that Evolution is real and that the universe started from the Big Bang. We get afraid of these things because the presumption is that then God must not exist and calls into question all of our beliefs. 

For the record, let's go into those two things. Evolution is the theory that things change over time. They do. That's proven. It's not worth arguing. Whether we came from monkeys or fish or not is completely different from Evolution. Evolution as a process may be a theory, but it's widely proven. Don't fight it. God wants us to change over time too. In regard to the Big Bang, realize a simple truth. If everything in the universe came from a single point, then something with equal or greater power than the universe MUST have existed in order for the universe to have ever happened. That's the law of math. If 1=everything and 0=nothing then 1=1 and 0=0, Everything that exists requires a force equal to or greater than itself to exist. If the universe is infinite in space (though not commonly held belief) then by the rules of e=MC^2 and relativity it is then infinite in time and energy also. Under these assumptions it is not only probable that God exists, but inevitable. That's also legitimate reasoning.

Remember this: If we as Christians are afraid to challenge our faith, then what faith do we really have? Do you really believe that Science will ever disprove God? Science is the study of his creation. Do you actually believe it can result in anything but finding God?

4) I'll do this for you, if you do this for me

The church is very focused on the giveaways that require you to do something. You can eat at our free pancake breakfast if you sit through a sermon first. We are happy to feed the poor if we can brand ourselves and label everything with our logo and such. I don't see anywhere in the bible where Jesus wanted to make sure that everyone did something for him before He did for them. We always focus on the bible from one perspective. Take when Jesus fed the 5,000. Everyone focuses on the faith of the boy to give the two fish and the bread. They want to talk about how Jesus will provide, but they don't want to focus on the simple things.
Jesus did NOT require everyone to sacrifice. The sacrifice of one was for the benefit of many. Jesus didn't talk about moochers or even care that they were there. If you think there weren't moochers you are foolish. There were 5,000 people there. There were moochers and Jesus fed the moochers more than they needed. Why? It's not our job to convince a moocher or anyone else that Jesus is the way. We don't do the convincing. His spirit is enough for that. Our job is simply to show his love to people. That's where we miss it.

As a church we want to do so much to build numbers of attendees and we want to add to the ranks, but we have lost a grip on how to show the love of Christ. The world is sick of the marketing campaign where you get to get something if you do or give something. They are tired of the, "you get this great experience for only 10% of your income." I am 100% in support of tithe and offering. If you are a christian and you aren't tithing, shame on you. That said, the focus shouldn't be on the rules. It should be on the Love.

I honestly today am ashamed of the title Christian. Not because of Jesus. I'm proud to know Jesus. I'm ashamed to be associated with people that are seemingly unintelligent, greedy, finger-pointing, and relentless to serve their own needs. That's not the Jesus I know. As it is, I don't think Jesus would be a christian either.

Nobody Tries Anything

I've had a lot of things in life change. I've had ambitions to be a professional artist, musician, and several other endeavors. I had a conversation with my wife regarding the satisfaction level that I have with such endeavors and here are some key points that are huge to understanding ambitions:

1 - There is no TRY; only DO
There is no such thing as trying. If you indeed try, you proceed through failure after failure and get knocked down only to rise again and overcome. The end result is that (provided enough time) you DO what you set out to do. If you are saying to yourself that you are "trying" to do something and not actually doing everything you can to make it happen you are simply fooling yourself

2 - If you WANT something you WILL DO what it takes
Since there is no such thing as "try," when you want something you will do what it takes to attain it. Sometimes there are imbalances in this equation. For me, I wanted to pursue music and other selfish endeavors, but ultimately my want for a traditional family and my own children and pursuing my career weighed heavier on me than my own pursuits. I wanted a family. I have a family. If I had truly wanted to be a musician professionally rather than having it just be a fantasy I would have DONE it.

3 - Repetition is the mother of success

The dividing line between success and failure is simple. The person who quits fails. Don't say you want something if you don't have the willpower/stones to go get it/take it. If you are failing it gives you insight into what does NOT work to get where you want. Re-evaluate, re-position, and keep moving.

4 - "One day" and "Later" simply mean "No"
Do not say, "one day I will be rich." You'll never be rich. I'm not rich, but the concept lies in your pursuit. If you say "one day" or "later" you aren't starting what it takes NOW. Nothing in life that's worth anything comes easy and quick. Being wealthy/successful, whatever your definition, is about goal setting, strategy, and careful execution. The only time "one day" applies is when that day is today.

5 - Good things require sacrifice
Anyone who has anything good will tell you they gave something else up to get it. People who are fit give up eating a lot of junk food. People who are wealthy give up a lot of their time to it. People who are intelligent typically give up social functions to pursue that. Everything is a balance. If you want something badly, you need to be willing to sacrifice to get it. This goes along with point number two. If  you REALLY want it, you will be willing to make the sacrifice. If you aren't willing to make the sacrifice, then you want whatever it is that you aren't willing to let go of MORE than what you think you want. Plain and simple.

WHOA JON - DIAL IT DOWN - GET TO THE POINT!

Okay. Here is my point. I don't regret choices that I've made. I accept that certain things are the sum of equations of what means more to me in life. I'm not rich because I value my family, but we do okay. I'm not famous because I value time with my friends/wife/daughter. I'm not athletic because I value pursuing knowledge MORE than physicality (not that you cannot do both - that's just where MY choices led). If you want to do something truly, then do it. Don't say you will try. Don't say you will do it later. Don't give up because it didn't work the first 50 times. Like Nike says, "Just Do It."

Let's Educate Some Christians

When I was growing up, there was an expression circulated among Christian circles that says something like this:

"If you were to move Earth 10 feet closer to the Sun or 10 feet further away we would all die. God has placed us perfectly where we ought to be."

Recently I have seen someone post this, and then receive much rebuttal from people of the pseudo-scientific community. The problem really lies in that people don't actually apply critical thinking or analytic thinking, they merely see it for face value and demean people over this. It usually turns into the traditional "christian bashing" and someone usually starts talking about the Big Bang/Creation and what they believe to be the fallacy of the bible. Those topics are really for other blog posts. I have yet to attack the legitimacy of the bible, but I have a blog regarding the Big Bang/Creation titled "Jesus Believed in Evolution" if you want a long but actually somewhat thoughtful read.

Let me clear up this expression so we can put to rest the scientific community for demeaning Christians, and empower Christians to not make complete fools of themselves for not knowing what they are talking about:

First, let's get some of the basics out of the way with the facts:
1) The earth moves in an egg shaped ellipse around the sun.
2) Our distance from the sun changes by several million miles (3,106,855.95 miles to be exact) each year.
3) The earth is just under 8,000 miles thick on average
4) In science, the distance from the earth to the sun (92,956,000 miles) is referred to as 1 Astronomical Unit or 1 AU
5) In order for life to exist a planet must reside permanently within the Goldilocks Zone for it's respective star. This is the distance that will allow life to not burn or freeze to death. It varies for each star.
6) The Goldilocks Zone (clever name) for our sun is between .99AU and 1.7AU (http://io9.com/5980232/new-definition-of-the-goldilocks-zone-puts-earth-right-on-the-edge-of-habitability)

Okay, so now that we have the facts let's do some critical thinking. Using Facts 4 and 6 we can determine that the earth (which is at 1AU during it's closest time to the sun) has a margin of .01 to move from that point before we all burn to death. This is much more than 10 feet. To be exact, this is 92,956 miles.

Science Lovers: "Silly Christians. They really think that's true?! No wonder we have problems."

Hold on a second. That's not the end of the thought. Let's move to next-level thinking and not just the face value of the 10 feet. Clearly just the movement of 10 feet wouldn't immediately kill everyone. I've gone on roller coasters and not incinerated, but what happens AFTER the earth has moved this 10 feet?

Well, scientifically speaking, if you push an item closer to the sun it is subjected to a higher level of gravity, which ultimately will change the entire trajectory of the planet. If you figure the math out using Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler%27s_laws_of_planetary_motion) this would actually happen to push us much closer over time than the 92,956 miles because the ellipse changes from an egg shape to more of a "0" shape where the long sides are significantly closer (we burn) and the short sides are drastically further away (we freeze). Conversely, the opposite happens if you push the earth out 10 feet. The gravitation is less and as a result the ellipse is still the same shape, but the bottom wide half of this "egg" shaped ellipse is MUCH closer than we are now. In either case, our planet burns and freezes.

TO SCIENCE LOVERS
If you really like science, stop trying to make Science fight God. Science will never disprove God. Science is not in the nature of disproving ANYTHING, rather Scientific thinking is used to discover new things and prove things to help us better understand the universe. When you posit God against Science you are already limiting your scientific thinking, not to mention that mathematically you can never disprove anything because until we know the entire infinite universe there is always the possibility that what you are trying to disprove exists beyond your reach. Aliens could very well exist beyond our reach, and so could people just like us.

CHRISTIANS
Science isn't the devil. Science is something we were given to help better understand our world and the Creator. As Einstein said, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

If we as Christians are fearful of Science, it's much less of your contempt for Science and much more your fear that they may disprove something you believe. Here's a thought: If God created Science, do you really think that Science will ever be able to prove that He doesn't exist? Do you think that we would be able to prove in the universe things that He didn't intend?

God made the universe. Science is us coming to conclusions based on observation. If we believe both of those statements, then we should 100% support Science because it will 100% of the time verify the very hand of God and make him more tangible to mankind on a very basic level.

JUST FOR FUN:
The reality is that we wouldn't even need to move 93,000 miles closer because the earth is 8,000 feet wide. What this means is that really our planet only needs to move about 86,000 miles closer because even if only one side were too close, the earth rotates on its axis, and as a result we all die in a rotisserie-style apocalypse.

Outside of this, our gravity is what makes certain gasses like hydrogen and liquids like water able to exist on our planet. If we moved that much closer, the strong force constant (gravity) is disrupted to a point that hydrogen can no longer exist at the closest point in our ellipse to the sun, and as a result our atmosphere breaks down and we all die.

How To Properly Debate Via Social Media and Public Forums

Many people debate topics and I am a person who really enjoys a good one. I like the idea of challenging my own thoughts with new information and reforming the way I see the world based on the overwhelming amount of information available. I know not all people share my zeal for this, but nonetheless, here I am.

I have noticed when I am on Facebook that often times people make arguments with the facade of being intelligent about the subject matter and/or having the ability to debate. This in turn leads me into the position of setting up and defending my position, naturally. As expected in any debate format, there are refutes to be given to any one point and subject that comes up, so naturally I roll with the punches, sometimes adjusting my beliefs when I concede they are correct and other times arguing my own side.

Here are some quick tips on debating (How to WIN debates) :

***Disclaimer*** Using these tips may cause people to not like you and/or think you are a jerk. C'est La Vie.

1) When you argue a point, always have some sort of verified evidence to back yourself. Studies done at colleges or by reputable and public sources are widely available on most topics. If using popular media sources, try to use sources from either side of the slant, as many are slanted toward one political affiliation. If you cannot, try to use something independent.

2) If you are joining a "debate" and have nothing to offer besides how you feel, you should simply state that using a simple phrase such as, "I feel like...."  (You cannot debate a feeling)

3) When evaluating the position of an opposing opinion or information, review it in the context of their own usage and your own. While they may not be applying it to YOUR opinion, they likely have systems of beliefs or points that are stemmed from this one, and you should be well equipped to move in that direction.

4) If you don't have anything to refute their argument, just concede. It's far less embarrassing to concede that you may be wrong than to be proven wrong. It also saves you a remote amount of power and dignity.

5) Avoid using derogatory language or belittling statements. It cheapens/weakens your argument, but will probably get a lot of likes on FB.

6) Don't fight questions with questions. If you don't have a good argument, then you don't have a good argument. There isn't any shame in not being able to back a point. It's simply bad form to reply to a question with another question. It doesn't solve anything and moves a productive debate into a hypothetical setting.

7) Redirecting a topic is acceptable once you have acknowledged and refuted a previous topic. You cannot simply ignore the previous argument and presume to be correct. This in effect actually projects a mutually agreed concession.

Now that I have equipped you to be a jerk, use with caution.

Growing Old (Copied from my Facebook Notes)

I hate change. I hate the inevitable feeling where you know for certain you are leaving something good behind you to go on to something else. I hate change.

When I was a child I was a dreamer. I always dreamed that one day I would leave my home and live in a home where I could look over golden fields and enjoy life. I dreamed that I would be doing something I love for a living and that my wife and kids would be completely in tune with what I wanted vice versa so that we all live in harmony. I had a dream that I would leave the small town I grew up in and go somewhere big, do big things, make big impressions, and live a big life. 

When I was a teen I was a drifter. I drifted from place to place looking for someone who could accept me with all of my inadequacies. I drifted from belief to belief wishing that somehow I would come to the right answer. I drifted further from the family that I once knew and drifted even further away from the people who tried to replace them. I let my morals drift from the narrow prism that once held my mind. I drifted from the innocence of childhood into the exploration of youth and adulthood. I drifted from the purity of being naive to the filthiness of knowing the truth.

When I was in my early 20's I was an explorer. I explored the boundaries of the world and the freedoms it had to offer. I explored deeper relationship with my then girlfriend/now wife. I explored my beliefs and dove deep into the core of what they really meant. I explored the pitfalls of disobedience and the tyranny of submission. 

Now I am a man with regrets. I regret not taking advantage of life as a child. I regret spending so much time dreaming rather than living a life that I now know is only possible during that age. I regret wanting to do big things and make big impressions but not taking the immediate steps to do so. I regret my inadequacies and the drifting I did from one belief to another. I regret distancing myself from everyone around me and kedging myself into an open ocean without a true ally. I regret giving up naivety for knowledge. I regret exploring freedom further than what I should have. I regret exploring disobedience rather than training myself up to be strong. 

When I was a dreamer I was protected by the imperfect love of the people that surrounded me, and it felt perfect. When I was a drifter the waves were calmed by the people who paved the paths for me to drift upon. When I was an explorer those who drew near to me were a safety net catching me each and every time I fell, which has already been regrettably quite frequently.

I hate change. I hate when you know you can no longer hold onto a piece of yourself that you have long held on to hoping to have it back. I hate when the flicker of hope that once shined in a far off star no longer shines and you keep peering deeper hoping to find the same light you've known so long. I hate change.

I Don't Love Jesus Enough

I was riding in the car this morning and listening to some worship music when I got to thinking a little bit about the nature of Jesus. I haven't recently been as invested in Him as maybe I would like to be and the reflections of that became evident in my thought. I've been less helpful at home. I've been lazy and slow. I've been less than enthused to help with even the simplest things.

While thinking about all of the things that I do that cause me to fall short every day I was reminded that He loves us anyway. It's something that we all take for granted every single day. It didn't seem "profound" to me this morning either. It just seemed like a matter-of-fact. I mess up. Jesus still loves me. There it is.

When I progressed to the next level of thought I did garner some new inspiration though. I thought about how He loves me in spite of my faults and mistakes, and how that is true love. It reminded me that love is not a feeling that I feel toward someone; it is an action that I exhibit toward the people that matter to me. Instant conviction.

I claim to love Jesus and to follow Him, but daily I misrepresent him when I have a bad attitude or when I a allow my anger to get the best of me. Daily I spit him in the face. How much a friend am I? I don't listen when He calls and often times put other things in front of Him. How can I do those things and still claim to love Him?

Having those thoughts race through my mind I then think about the crucifixion. Jesus said "Father forgive them. They know not what they do." Jesus wasn't just speaking about the hands that crucified him; we do that every day with our "mistakes" that are another pound against the nails. Jesus was speaking to the totality of Christians who fail to comprehend the consequences of their actions and to all of humanity. In that one statement, he asked forgiveness for all of mankind who follows Him.

The Bible says, "Greater love has no man that he lay down his life for his friends," and then, "while we were sinners, Christ died for us." He took it to the next level, beyond what we as people are capable of. He died for people who were not His friends, but He loved us anyway.

If love is an action, then I need to be doing more to act in a way that exemplifies love to the people around me. We aren't called to preach values to other people. I spit on Jesus enough in one day to deserve hell several times over. Who am I to then go to a brother and tell them about their faults? The first step is to reach out to others in love and to show the love that He had for us. That is the great commission. Failing to further his cause is an abuse of His name and leaves us unworthy of it, even though He will perpetually extend His grace.

So what did this all mean to me?
It's simple. If we aren't doing the things that tell people about Jesus with our actions then we aren't acting with love toward Jesus. It's simply a lie to say you love Jesus and do nothing.

Here's the Fee for Your Childhood

I am a video game enthusiast. I have always been and up until now I have always thought that I would be. I recall playing SMB/Duck Hunt on the original NES. I remember Paperboy, Jaws, Karate Kid, Sonic the Hedgehog, NBA Jam, Final Fantasy (the whole series), Paper Mario, Maro Kart, Smash Bros., Halo, Call of Duty, Battlefield, Metal Gear, THPS, Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, and all the other staples that have now been added to the pandect of what many console consumers have dubbed as "Classic" games.

As a by-product of being an avid game player, I naturally seek to own some of the most recent consoles and gaming devices simply because the games that release for them are fun to play and I have an "addiction." That said, I have very fond memories of getting a GameBoy from my parents the year it released. I remember opening an N64 for Christmas. I remember playing Sonic for the first time and sitting in my living room and playing NBA Jam until I was playing against people who could teleport across the screen and slam dunk if I didn't immediately steal the ball once they passed it in.

Part of the joy of gaming is that you can experience some things that you probably would never experience in real life. It's an escape from the daily grind and a way to relax every once in a while. Another part of that joy is to share a game with your friend because you enjoyed the game so much you want them to play too. The next generation of console gaming has completely missed the entire heritage that brings to the face of gaming. Microsoft and Sony were not existent as console gaming companies when I was a kid, so naturally I shouldn't expect them to understand the same way Nintendo or Sega does.

THE NEW GENERATION OF GAMING FROM MICROSOFT

Xbox One

Here is a list of features that are 100% useless from this console that the gaming community will not like.
1. DVR - we all are still paying for cable and probably a DVR box too - this is a waste of tech
2. "Upgraded" controller - nobody was complaining about the last one
3. "Upgraded" Kinect - Nobody cares about your heartbeat while gaming - people play dance games for fun but not for exercise
4. Required to download games to hard drive
             This is actually a two part problem. The first part is that there are several people who will get irritated with the idea that their disk is essentially useless unless they want to go to another machine. The problem that comes into play with that is that when you install the game on another console, your current console will "deactivate" until you insert the disk again - annoying. All of that said, the more concerning problem is this: Xbox plans to charge you a fee if you install a game on a console and intend to play with more than one Gamertag.
             This means if I take my own game (that I paid my own money for) and I decide to give it to a friend because he likes it and I have already beat the game to smithereens Xbox intends to charge my friend a fee to play this game on his own gamertag - because he didn't purchase the game. Well excuse me, but if I am paying $60 for a game I better have the right to do WHATEVER I want with a game.
5. Blu-Ray - not only should it have come standard with the 360, but it's already available on the 360s.
6. New "Architecture" - For the gaming community you are using fancy language to say "We want more of your money." I don't see a benefit to this new architecture because ALL of the benefits you are talking about have NOTHING to do with gaming, but I am sacrificing on the gaming end to get them - hence no backward compatibility.
7. The actual Design - it looks like a VHS player and it's as fat as an NES. Come on guys, really?

OPINIONS
I was skeptical of the original Xbox when it released because I have always known Microsoft to be a very money hungry company, charging you for licenses on software that you already purchased. I originally wasn't very interested in Sony releasing Playstation either, as Sony for the most part was in the world of electronics and movies. Ultimately I did end up owning both consoles, and both of the next gen and the gen after that. I owned PSone, PS2, and my father in law has a PS3 (essentially just a Blu-Ray player now). I have owned an Xbox and an Xbox 360. Additionally I have owned an N64, Gamecube, and a Wii.

I do not see a reason to purchase an Xbox One so they can simply slap me with more fees every time I want to play a game. I will not be using the "TV" features or the music features - I have an "iToy" and a DVR box that covers all of those functions already. I do however see the Xbox One as a HUGE stab at the heritage and culture of the gaming community.

Thus far the PS4 has not spoken word of any fees for playing a borrowed game on your own gamertag, however if any fee like that is released I will probably never upgrade and/or I will probably just upgrade a computer and illegally download all of my games and burn them because I WILL NOT give my hard earned money to people who are out of touch with their consumer base - regardless of industry.

If They Can't Hurt You Then You Don't Love Them

Everyone in the world sees things through the stained glasses of their own previous experiences. People who grew up with abusive father figures have difficulties trusting male authority figures. People who were neglected commonly have the thought that people around them do not like them. Everything we experience taints our experiences for the future and influences the decisions we make.

This morning the thought crossed my mind and then translated into how different groups of people view love. Love is something that is different for each person because we all experience it in different ways. Some people experience love with kind words, some with gifts, some with physical contact, and several other ways for other people. Everyone sees love differently because we all approach it from different angles.

Love from one person to another will invariably entail hurt. When you invest deeply in actions with another person you are forming a bond. Since we know that love is an action rather than an emotion, it is clear that these hurt feelings really don't have much of anything to do with love, however people nowadays confuse the notion of a romantic feeling with the concept of love. I can love my enemies by treating them how I would like to be treated, but I don't need to feel for them like I do my wife.

Everyone in the world is conditioned to think that since love is an emotion that it comes with hurt. Hurt is something that we choose to feel when it is on an emotional level. Nobody can tell you how to feel. If they do something that is offensive or potentially wrong to you, your immediate choice is how you want to react. If you choose to be hurt you are choosing to move forward down that path. Love however, doesn't keep record of wrong doings, and choosing to be hurt is doing exactly that.

Sometimes we need to let things go and realize that love is really an action. Your love from you to another person will always have hurt involved because we as people aren't perfect and cannot avoid either end. We will always hurt the people we love and will always choose to let them hurt us. Christ's love however is persistent and pursues you with fervor regardless of what you have done. Even while you are committing acts that offend His love, He still pursues you. We can choose to be "hurt" by the actions of his love, but remember that hurt is a choice typically predicated on a lack of understanding.

Love shouldn't hurt. We let it hurt because we cannot understand a love that doesn't. Following Christ is a choice to approach a better understanding of that love on a regular basis.

Who Hates Charity?

You know what is really tiring? People's lack of concern for others and still claiming that they are operating in the will of Christ. That's tiring. 

I recently saw in my news feed a post saying that South Carolina has made Obamacare illegal. Not to my surprise I noticed it because someone I have met who is an alumni from a very "republican" college I attended shared it. I had replied to this share with a simple statement that this action seems very "I'm taking my toys and going home" and that I felt that it was wrong to criminalize (and they will arrest anyone using the program) Obamacare when it can help several middle and lower income families. (For the record I am not saying it's for everyone. I feel it should be elective for everyone.)

In another twist, the conversation went toward religion, which was actually quite expected. This person mentioned that they support helping poor people, but that we should teach them to do well for themselves. I couldn't help but think to myself, "Is this what the American Christian has become? Are we now a people that will serve the will of Christ in ways that fit into our own ideological viewpoints?"

Jesus has this to say:

 Matthew 25:34-36 Then the king will say to those at his right hand, "Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me."

The one thing that I noticed in this passage was that this was strikingly different than what I have heard many people who claim Christ say. Many people have heard the idiom, "If you give a man a fish you feed him for a day. If you teach him to fish you feed him for a lifetime." While that's true, most people also forget the biggest lie in that statement and it glares you in the face. If you teach a man to fish and he doesn't have a pole or a hook he is still going to starve and you never fed him in the first place. Give the man the fish and your pole and teach him to fish with it. 

It's very evident in the passage I quoted that Jesus doesn't say "I was hungry and you taught me to get food." He doesn't say, "I was thirsty and you brought me a cup and showed me where the well was." Do you want to know where the fatal flaw in this pattern of thinking? It's two-part. The first part is that you are ignoring the actual words of Christ in the passage when he is talking about feeding and welcoming people. Secondly, Jesus also has this to say:

“But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed because they cannot repay you. For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” (Luke 14:13-14)

More often than not we are overly concerned with the ROI of our charity. That's not the idea of charity. Giving isn't about how much you get back or the "bang for your buck." It's about being selfless and doing what you can for other people because reality is that you probably have it better than they do in the first place. 

How can we be so self minded as to make helping people illegal?

(Coincidentally at the end of this conversation I pointed out some loopholes in the system which this person happened to qualify for that allow you to avoid fees and not have the insurance if you cannot afford it and magically the hostility disappeared.)