"We All Want Change, but . . ."

"We all want change; however, we don't want to change!"

     I would like to claim the aforementioned as my own creation, but I must confess that I recently saw it on a website; the moment I saw it, though, it struck me as possessing power and insight . . . allow me to role play for a few moments.

     First, a quick inventory of what we apparently don't like:

*Over-taxation                                        

*Government intervention                     

*Health care costs

*Cost of schools

*Authority

     Of course, many more additions could be made, but I will focus on these for this discussion. Let's examine society ten years from now by focusing on a life where none of us is forced to change as individuals, but life as we know it changes for us:

*Over-taxation: let's relieve the ever-present tax burden--our property taxes, sales taxes, and whatever other taxes we pay are frozen as of this moment. Of course, to achieve that goal, upkeep and repairs of roads, bridges, highways, buildings, and infrastructure will be done at a 2016 rate and pace as opposed to a 2026 rate and pace. Complaints regarding increased potholes, unsafe bridges, falling buildings will have to fall on deaf ears. Sorry, the price of living "the way it used to be" is steep . . . something has to give.

*Government Intervention: To accommodate the people's wishes, the government will begin to economize by eliminating certain departments such as the IRS, the Department of Education, and the Department of Homeland Security. In 2016, we say that the government has too much control over our lives; thus, the obvious solution is to reduce its role. Consequences? Sure . . . something has to go. Maybe academic standards will be reduced to whatever each community wants with little to no oversight from anyone other than the local school boards and administrators; maybe it will be a flat tax where we all pay the same percentage of whatever our income might be even though services may have to be cut to accommodate that. As stated, something has to give.

*Health Care Costs: To be sure all participants are treated equally and fairly and to make sure that costs no longer are spiraling out of control, perhaps changes should be made so those objectives are met. Here's a possible solution: The following groups (stereotypes) will no longer be eligible for health care coverage due to their financial drain on health care: smokers and obese individuals. Please understand that costs must be contained, so we must accept that health insurance is a privilege, not a right. The burden of taking care of ourselves will fall on the individuals, not the employer or the government. Despite the harshness of this proposal, please remember that to maintain 2016 costs, compromises and hard decisions must be made.

Cost of Schools: To alleviate the increasing cost of doing business in the academic world, certain changes are inevitable. Tax levies for property owners will freeze at 2016 rates, so new construction and building repairs will be done only if "life and limb" is affected. Additionally, salary increases for all employees will be sharply reduced. Consequences are dangerous, of course, such as building maintenance suffering. lead poisoning being a possibility due to dangerously old pipes not being kept up to date, and quality individuals ruling out education as a career opportunity. As for the kids, well, it is a possibility that their education may suddenly be stifled and complaints that American schools aren't that strong may drastically increase (and may be accurate).  But, hey, if it was good enough for me, it's good enough for them.

*Authority: In a world where respect for bosses, teachers, coaches, political representatives, religion, and police personnel is suffering, we need to get this issue corrected. Because we are leveling taxes and are being forced to "do more with less," something, again, has to give. Rather than respecting a level of hierarchy where we acknowledge that certain people have more authority than others, perhaps we should level the playing field a bit. How that can be done is beyond me; I'm more of a thinker, not a miracle worker, but I will suggest this: maybe the family structure will re-emerge as the bastion of morals. Let's hope so; for those who want society to be the "teacher" of morality and values, please remember that we cannot legislate morality--that's on the home life.

     From my seat, here's my claim: people bitch, moan, and complain about how wrong so much is--I hear that. However, to correct those problems, we as individuals must change . . . but we seemingly don't want to hear anything about that. Yep, we want society's leaders to change, but, as is frequently stated, "I'll be damned if 'they're going to change my life!'"

     So, what's it going to be? Where, when, and how do changes occur? Magically? OR The determination  to relinquish for the greater good even though the individual may have to sacrifice? To no one's surprise, no easy solution is out there until we accept that to advance, change, and prosper requires a different perspective. I am reminded of a writing I read years ago. Part of the wording was If there is no change, there is no change--simple words, simple thoughts but simple solutions?

     We all want change . . . but we don't want to change--true?


                                                                     ........
In a response to inquiries, if any reader has missed my postings, the collection may be found at the following: michaelagunther.blogspot.com. Responses may also be sent to my email at mag.gunther@gmail.com or guntherm@roadrunner.com.