Contents 1

Discovering Milton Friedman

After receiving a liberal education, living in liberal New York City, and working in liberal social work, it was refreshing to read the conservative ideas of Friedman in his book FREE TO CHOOSE. He pointed out a number of myths:

• Government must play a dominant role in a modern society.
  (False, as proven by Hong Kong and by l9th century America.)
• The answer to problems is more government.
  (False, the role of government in the U.S. has multiplied ten times in the last fifty years and we are worse off in many important ways.)
• Natural resources are crucial to a nation’s economic success.   (False, as shown by l9th century Great Britain and Japan and by 20th century Hong Kong.)
• There is only so much wealth: when one person gains, it’s at the expense of another. (False, a voluntary exchange between two parties won’t take place unless both believe they will benefit.)
• Free enterprise is a system in which the rich exploit the poor. (False)
• A free enterprise economy is unstable. (False, government is the major source of economic instability.)
• The l9th century was one of exploitation of the masses by the robber barons of Wall st. who conned Main st., bled Midwestern farmers, and fleeced immigrants.
  (False, the standard of life for the common man rose dramatically, the number of farmers rose, as did their property values, the flood of im­migrants persisted, charity and private education flowered, and libraries and cultural activities grew significantly.)
• The Depression was cause by free enterprise.
  (False, it was caused by the government.)
• The Depression meant government intervention was necessary.
  (False, price supports caused surpluses, price ceilings caused scar­cities, and the minimum wage caused unemployment.)
• Government regulations are needed to protect the consumer.
  (False, regulations have brought shoddy postal service, poor elementary and secondary schooling, and poor long distance train service. Little or no government involvement brings the better products, like appliances, shopping centers, and cars.)
• A centrally planned economy is best.
  (False, the socialist countries with this approach [India, China, and East Germany] are far behind the capitalist countries (Malaysia, Singapore, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, and West Germany.)
• The energy crisis was caused by the oil industry, consumer waste, and OPEC. (False ‑ by government price controls.)
• Tariffs protect our industries from “unfair” foreign competition. (False, they keep our industries from having to adjust to the realities of world markets.)
• Improved working conditions over the past 200 years are due to unions. (False ‑ they are due to the free market)
• When unions have won higher wages, everyone has benefited.
  (False, the number of jobs affected has dropped, the price of the product has gone up, and the wages of the rest of the workers have drop­ped.)
• Equal opportunity somehow implies means outcome. (False)
• Equal outcome is a worthy socialistic ideal.
  (False, such efforts drove New York City to the brink of bank­ruptcy. Such efforts in the U.S. brought less production and efficiency, a 25% drop in the employment of senior males, and a rise in crime and welfare. In England, such efforts caused lower production and efficiency, and the emigration of some of its best trained citizens.)
• The high unemployment rate of black teenagers is due to discrimina­tion. (It’s due in part to minimum wage)
• Public education is untouchable.
  (False, it’s an unproductive monopoly which needs to be opened to competition.)

Recent developments have borne out Friedman’s views: deregulation has benefited consumers, the capitalistic U.S. had a far stronger recovery after the ’82 recession than socialistic Europe, socialism is retreating, and communism is in decline.

Our media should balance its coverage with conservative views like these. #

Discovering Thomas Sowell

Having received a liberal education, and lived in liberal New York City, and worked in liberal social work, it was a jolt to run across the ideas of this noted black conservative.  They are profound and staggering in their implications, but most all, surprising, as we rarely hear such views.  Some of them:

• The U.S. is being hindered by the growth of the two classes that brought about the decline of China in the l6th century – intellects and bureaucrats.
• Intellects are anti‑military, anti‑business, and anti‑establishment. They seek ‘social justice’ with no concern for cost effectiveness. They feel years of book learning make ‘experts’ whose modern, sophisticated methods are paramount. The layman’s simple, traditional methods are portrayed as archaic and irrelevant.
• The methods intellects have supported for handling children since the mid 60s have brought unprecedented rises in delinquency, teen suicide, teen pregnancy, and a drastic drop in school performance. Parents have been blamed for delin­quent youth, when it was the intellects who, through the law and schools, took more and more decisions out of the hands of parents.
• We have been told poverty causes crime, but during the depres­sion we never had the crime we have now.
• Minority problems have been described as matters of color, ignoring the element of ‘class’. When new working class immigrants move into a neighborhood, the older middle class moves out. This happened when the old Anglo‑Saxons fled the new Irish, the old Germans fled the new Jews, and the old Blacks fled the new Poles and new Italians.
• I.Q. tests have been described as ‘racially biased’. Not so. Test scores correlate with advancement. As of l930, any number of Europeans ethnic groups in the U.S. had low I.Q. scores. As those groups rose economically and socially, their scores rose.
• We’ve been told the condition of blacks is due to racism. We’re not told West Indian blacks in the U.S. have an average income 44% higher than American blacks, twice as many professionals, and rates of unemploy­ment and fertility below the national average.
• Slavery has been credited with causing the disintegration of black families. However, these families throughout slavery and afterward were male‑headed and two‑parented. It has been welfare that has ravaged families by subsidizing male desertion.
• It is said the high rate of black teenage unemployment is due to racism and discrimination. Not so. Their unemployment rate was 1/5th in the 50s what it was in the 70s. Its increase was due to the rise in the minimum wage.
• We’ve been told busing is a way to promote integration, yet it is opposed by every segment of the population.
• We are told quotas in hiring and college admissions is a way of improving the status of minorities, yet this is opposed by the Voting Rights Act and by every regional, educational, and income group studied by the Gallup Poll.
• We are told discrimination holds back minorities, yet the Japanese and Jews advanced most when most discriminated against.
• Previous to the mid‑60s, not one prison warden had a college degree. By the mid‑70s most had advanced degrees. Murders in prison tripled, gangs in prison gained more control of daily life and of the more frequent riots, and attacks on guards rose, as did their turnover.
• Trying to eliminate poverty has led to more dependency on welfare, while jobs have gone begging.
• Price supports have brought surpluses and price controls have brought scarcities.
• In education the cost per student went up while performance went down. The number of students went down; the number of administrators went up. Sex education was started to combat venereal disease and teen age pregnancy, yet both went up.

At the college level, learning was sacrificed in the rush to fill classrooms (to get federal money). Ill‑prepared minority students were recruited and eventually half flunked out. (One, recruited for his athletic ability, couldn’t read a menu.)

We need to hear more such views. #

Minimum Wage

We have been told that when the minimum wage has been raised, it was done out of “decency, humanity, and compassion”. But who wanted it raised?

• Unions, because the higher it was, the higher the wages unions could bargain for.
• Politicians, as it gained them votes.
• Liberals, who needed to be reminded that:
• A lot of people are not worth minimum wage [due to lack of skills]. They don’t find work and the public doesn’t get their services.
• A person gets his first job to learn work habits. He should have the right to offer his services at any wage.
• Minimum wage is unfair. It isn’t adjusted for tips, student and marital status, training, cost of living, piecework, etc. The government can’t make these adjustments as well as the free market.
• The higher the minimum, the less business has to spend on hiring; so there are fewer deliverymen, parking lot attendants, laundry attendants, movie ushers, gas station attendants, caddies, farm labor, dishwashers, elevator operators, baby sitters, cowboys, nannies, and domestics. One raise of the minimum wage caused 70% of the restaurants to cut their hours, 48% to cut workers, 28% to automate, and 90% to raise prices. Such matters are critical to small business, as they are more marginal; and they are where most of the new jobs and companies are created, raising the minimum hurts the economy. – For every l0% rise in the minimum, unemployment rises 3%, mostly among the handicapped, part time workers, minorities, and teens – especially black teens. (Their unemployment rate was below that of white teens before the minimum wage was raised.)
• When the minimum goes up, employers automate (which hurts the poor), other wages go up, prices go up (which hurts the poor), but production does not go up. This contributes to inflation, a less competitive position for the U.S. in this time of globalization, more companies moving out of state or abroad, and more support for the underground economy – like hiring illegal aliens off the books.
• We’re told raising the minimum is to help the poor, but minimum wage workers that might be the heads of households are less than l% of the work force. Most people making minimum wage are not poor.
• The minimum wage puts out of work those that need it the most – runaways, dropouts, substance abusers, refugees, the aged, the unskilled, and thousands of idle youth with time on their hands, some of whom get into trouble. They need the esteem that comes from a job, no matter what the wage.

Lowering the minimum wage would cause training, service, and the number of jobs and hours of work to go up; and it would cause prices, inflation, unemployment, and welfare to go down. It would get many of the young involved in the real world at an earlier age, teach them work habits, teach them the link between effort and reward, and keep them busy. This might do more to reduce juvenile delinquency than any other measure, and it would give them every reason to make themselves more marketable through training and education.

Lowering the minimum wage would help thrift shops, junkyards, recyclers, and city dumps – low wage workers could fix much of what is thrown out. Some, especially immigrants, are ingenious at this.

Let’s not distort the issue with emotional talk about minimum wage needing to be a ‘living wage.’ That’s not its purpose and rarely the case.

Privatization

With budget squeezes, government agencies have been turning work over to the private sector and with remarkable results:

Housing: Tenant management of public housing in one location raised rent collections l05%, cut vacancy rates l3%, cut administrative costs 60%, crime 75% and teenage pregnancy and welfare dependency 50%. In other cities the same arrangement cut vacancy l8%, robbery 77%, and crime 66%.

Parks: Some have become selfsufficient.

Transit: 300 transit systems contract their services saving 10% 50%.

Fire: One fifth of Arizona’s cities contract with a private firm for about a third the national cost. This has brought better service and lower insurance rates.

Education: Many private schools consistently outperform public schools that have two to five times the money.

Health: The growth of profit hospitals has caused nonprofit hospitals to be more efficient by limiting charity care, increasing collections, and reducing staff.

Justice: There is a rentajudge arrangement in Calif. which is fast and takes some of the load off the courts. There is “mediation” in many states which handles cases in 23 weeks instead of the usual 47 months. It’s not as good as trial justice, but it’s faster, cheaper, and offers greater access. Since it’s voluntary, clients are usually more satisfied. Settling matters this way prevents major legal problems.

Mail: Contracting rural mail to thousands of private carriers has brought savings of up to 2/3rds. The success of UPS and Federal Express is well known.

Sports: The ’84 Olympics were handled by the private sector with excellent results and a great surplus of money.

Travel: Lower rates and more ticket outlets.

Local gov.: 73% savings on janitorial work and 42% on refuse collection.

Federal gov.: Bidding saves 20%

Regulation: The private sector regulate some electrical equipment (through Underwriters Laboratories). This could be extended. A manufacture would choose among private inspectors and have his work inspected at his convenience, which would save money. He would pay for the inspection and pass the cost on to the consumer.

The private inspector would be more honest as his company is liable. To avoid penalties or loss of business, the company would have to do a good job.

Private inspectors would bring order to the chaos of different local, state, and federal codes. The public would get safe products faster, like lifesaving drugs. It would get the benefits of high technology made safe by private inspectors, not what we have now high cost regulation with no sense of safety, and in some areas, a lot of bribery.

Other countries: As of l993, 29 of Africa’s poorest countries had sold 5% of their operations to the private sector. After England sold Jaguar, sales doubled, l000 jobs were added, and the company made a profit.

Most government functions were handled by private agencies at the turn of the century. Returning to this would break up public monopolies, which pay their workers 1/3 more than they would get in the private sector for the same work. It would utilize people who are less credentialed but often more able (as private schools do).

It is opposed by bureaucrats and unions as it threatens their jobs and turf. It’s also opposed by many liberals who are suspicious of profit and tend to think solutions should come from government.

What The Free Market Wants

Those who believe in the free market claim, and can usually prove, that it provides the most benefits for the most people. Their advice is:

Education

• Privatize the management of public schools.
• Admit students on the basis of ability, not color, nor athletic ability.
• Group students according to achievement, not age.
• Hire teachers for ability, not credentials.
• Pay schools on the basis of how much they educate.
• Let parents choose which school to send their kids to. Let them teach their kids at home.

Foreign affairs

• Show the wisdom of “trade, not aid”.
• Show how capitalism intertwines the economies of countries and lessens the chance of war.
• Show that capitalism promotes political stability, which is basic to attracting investment. Capitalist countries progress more quickly than others. The people inside authoritarian countries learn of this and press their governments for more capitalism.
• Promote capitalism in authoritarian countries. This brings greater economic freedom, which makes citizens want more political freedom.
• Show how capitalism has helped Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Japan.
• Show the damage caused by socialism.

Health

• Explore the usefulness of the unlicensed health clinics used by the poor.
• Allow nurses, when qualified, to treat patients. Allow dental hygenists, when qualified, to work on teeth.
• Allow the free market to bring down the cost of health care.

Housing

• Phase out rent control.
• Allow urban homesteading and cheaper, basic housing.
• Privatize public housing.

Labor

• Allow right to work, work at home, and automation.
• Phase out the minimum wage. Then wages would seek their natural level. This would pull down union wages and save consumers great amounts of money.
• Allow many of the working class to leave school at l4 if they have jobs, as it is their orientation to go to work and start a family earlier than middle and upper classes youth. [Laws requiring the llth and l2th grades were supported by unions to keep the young from competing for jobs].
• Hire competence, not credentials nor color.
• Let employers decide when to retire workers.
• Show how the decline of unions has helped.

Minorities

• Show how capitalism helps minorities who are underepresented politically by giving them economic power and representation.
• Phase out the minimum wage. This would bring down the high rate of black teenage unemployment.

Privatization

• Show the success of private management of fire departments, parks, transportation, mail, schools, hospitals, and charities.
• Promote private justice through “rent-a-judge”, mediation, and arbitration.
• Privatize regulation. Private inspectors would bring order to the chaos of local, state, and federal codes. A manufacture would choose among private inspectors [like Underwriters Laboratories which inspects electrical equipment]. The private inspector would be more honest as his company is liable for mistakes. To avoid penalties or loss of business, the company would have to do a good job. The public would get the benefits of high technology and life-saving drugs made safe by private inspectors; not what we have now high cost public regulation with no sense of safety, and in some areas, a lot of bribery.

Social programs

• Phase out the minimum wage to create thousands of jobs for mental patients, runaways, dropouts, delinquents, derelicts, addicts, minorities, refugees, students, the retarded, aged, and handicapped. As one governor said, “The best social program is a job.”
• Consider setting welfare payments below the wage of the lowest worker to get people to look for work (as was done in l8th century England).
• Require those on welfare to work part or full time to “earn” the money they receive.

These three steps would help the poor by making them more responsible for themselves. There would be fewer youths with free time and no work habits to fall into crime.

• Let social agencies make a profit. This would bring better management.
• Let business hire the homeless for sub-minimum wages plus room and board.
• Let the homeless settle next to city dumps, where they could use cast-off material for building shanties.
• Find out why some prisons are almost self-sufficient.
• Find out why many poor immigrants pass our poor.
• Show how capitalism makes the disadvantaged responsible, and how socialism does the opposite.

U.S. economy

• Show where less government involvement promotes better goods and services, like appliances, shopping centers, and cars.
• Show where more government involvement causes poor goods and services: shoddy postal service, poor elementary and secondary schooling, and poor long distance train service.
• Phase out tariffs. This would lower prices and force industries to face the realities of the international market.
• Reduce the capital gains tax [highest in the modern world].

Misc

• Show how the free market could probably alleviate problems in the: nursing shortage, water shortage, solid waste disposal problems, protection of wildlife, medical care, insurance, illegal immigration, lack of science and math teachers, drug abuse, “amateur” sports in college, etc.
• Deregulate, lower taxes, cut back government.
• In farming, phase out government involvement, as price supports have brought surpluses and price controls have brought scarcities.
• Allow paralegals, where qualified, to do the work of lawyers.

Most government functions were handled by the private sector at the turn of the century. Returning to this would break up public monopolies. It would utilize people who are less credentialed but often more able (as in private schools).

All of this is opposed by bureaucrats and unions as it threatens their jobs and turf. It’s also opposed by many liberals in the media and academia who are leary of profit and feel solutions should come from government. #

College Credit for This?

From what I read, community colleges are like they were in the early 80s when I took a writing class. Then the instructor suggested we buy two books, but few students did and no assignments were given from them. Some writing was assigned and almost anything could have been used. It was gone over gently in class. If anyone had done a poor job, it was never brought up.

The classes were mostly discussion; there were few notes taken and no tests. I missed many classes and assignments and easily earned 3 units of credit. (I had worked harder in middle school.)

A feel-good survey from the administration was taken; it was designed to elicit positive pabulum.
Compared to when I was in college in the early 60s, this course was a joke.

How Useful Was College?

In a nation that venerates education, getting a college degree is seen as the ultimate goal. But is it? I’ve looked at what it did for me and my peers. We were “establishment” types who were graduated from private and public colleges in ’63. Here are the results. (Keep in mind the difference professors and books can make.)

Astronomy – waste. Biology – terrible. Economics – could have been terrific. Education courses – infamous. English – essential when practical. Geography – delightful. Government – could have been good. History – good, but left out non-western cultures. International relations – good. Language – useless for most. Literature – could have been good if we’d had authors like Jack London and Ernie Pyle. Logic – waste. Philosophy – waste. Psychology – should have been practical. Sociology – laughable. Speech – no impact.

We had nothing on:

• Resume writing, job hunting, managing money, traditional values, human nature, corruption, politics, military life, religious scandals, the gay world, prejudice, social classes, the fallibilities of professionals, and how to read the media.
• Maturity in relation to: friendship, courting, sex, vice, crime, religion, cults, idealism, politics, parenting, liberalism, and conservatism.

Did college make me and my peers:

• Better citizens? Slightly.
• More cultured? Slightly.
• Aware of various fields? Too theoretically.
• More employable? Not for the effort involved.
• Ready for graduate school? If one needs four years.
• Ready for the real world? No.
• More mature? Not like the real world would have.
• Aware of our creativity? Hardly.
• Was college worth what it cost us, our parents and the taxpayers? No.

After college, we kept few textbooks and never reviewed our notes. We were verbose. Some took jobs requiring no degree. Some went back to school to learn typing. Some sought career counseling as they had been in the wrong field.

Presently many are smart, but not intellectual, and are more subjective and prejudiced than they’d like to think. All are reluctant to consider that half of what we studied we never used, nor even heard of it since college.

Many of the girls went to college to find a husband and never used their degrees.

We were conditioned to be liberal. One professor said as we got older, we would get more conservative (prophetic), but this was never explained.

My degree didn’t help in teaching and writing. In social work, politics, and mental health, it was often a hindrance, as it’s “liberal” bent was far off the mark and it didn’t make me ‘streetwise’. I’m glad I didn’t go to graduate school in those fields.

My real education was: living in slums and in New York City, the domestic version of the Peace Corps, career counseling, running a home for mental patients, renting rooms in my house, being self-employed, the fallible media, and life itself. As it turned out, I had to unlearn much of what college and the media had taught me. Hence my interest in noted author Ray Bradbury’s saying he was “one of the few lucky enough not to go to college.” (Famed Russian author Solzhenitsyn said his “education” was being a prisoner in Siberia.)

College consists of missing information, useful information, useless information, and misinformation. Those who didn’t finish didn’t miss as much as they’re led to believe.

The useful parts were: – Vocabulary and concepts. – Learning to think, speak and write objectively and critically. – Exploding myths. – Independent study. – Writing papers on favorite subjects. – Exchange student programs (tops). – Student government, Model United Nations, and special interest clubs.

College should retain these, but require achievement in:

1. Traditional values,
2. Mental health,
3. Physical health,
4. Career counseling,
5. Internships,
6. Practical courses.

Students could be tested and given credit for achievements in outside activities that fit these categories.

With these steps more families would get their students into such activities. Everyone would gain – the school in providing marketable skills and the parents for their efforts, and the students would get a head start. #

How Useful Was School?

I look back on what the first 12 years of school were for me and the student leaders (in the late 50s):

Reading: We weren’t assigned authors we would have loved like Jack London and Ernie Pyle.

Writing: Spelling, vocabulary, and some grammar lessons were good; but we didn’t write enough.

Math: Besides the basics, what was necessary? Not algebra, geometry, trigonometry – and they didn’t improve our thinking, as was claimed.

Social studies (not social ‘science’) History was interesting for some, but left out most of the countries. We didn’t have enough geography, current affairs, or social problems.

P.E.: Overdone.

Other: We took science and language, but didn’t use them. Art, music, and speech were not academic and could have been after-school activities.

We were told little or nothing about: resume writing, job hunting, managing money, traditional values, human nature, corruption, politics, media bias, religious scandals, the gay world, prejudice, and the pros and cons of joining the military.

We were not told about maturity in relation to: adolescence, friendship, courting, sex, parenting, vice, crime, religion, cults, politics, youthful idealism, and liberal and conservative thinking.

When it came to college, the preparation wasn’t serious. We were too busy having fun and becoming ‘well-rounded.’ The last day of school we tore up our notebooks and threw the pages around the halls in celebration.

At graduation we were inspired and celebrated. People congratulated us. Why? We hadn’t really been challenged. Much of our schooling was busywork while we grew up.

How much was useful? – probably half – the three r’s, some social studies, typing, drivers ed, first aid, and shop. Perhaps home economics was for the girls. Though not academic, the clubs, student paper, student government, and talent shows were useful and great fun.

After-school sports were a superb outlet for those involved, providing conditioning, challenge, competition, recognition, teamwork, discipline (and getting yelled at). For others they provided school spirit, band, drill team, and pep rallies. Could these drives be harnessed for academic or vocational decathlons (and be practical, which is not true of the national spelling bee)?

If I could change school, I would group students according to achievement, not age, use more lay teachers, and provide vouchers to give families a choice of schools. Schools would have to compete for students and teachers.

I would prepare students for the real world not by teaching, but by requiring achievement in:

1. Traditional values (basic to maturity. Students could clean the schools, as in Japan, to learn some of these.)
2. Mental health (courses and counseling – to promote maturity).
3. Physical health (diet, exercise, smoking, alcohol, drugs, pregnancy, first aid, longevity, etc.). Students maintaining good health wouldn’t need P.E.
4. Career counseling (for finding one’s primary interests).
5. Apprenticeships (so students would graduate with marketable skills).
6. Practical courses (geared to the real world).

Many things contribute to these six categories – hobbies, clubs, scouts, sports, student government, TV, reading, travel, living in different regions, a second language, summer camp, volunteer and paid work – the list is endless. Students could be tested and given credit for achievements in these areas. Everyone would gain – the school by tapping the outside world, the parents for their efforts outside school, and the students in gaining a practical education and a head start. #

School in Poorest District Wasted Money

I lived across from Midway City School in Westminster for l5 years. It closed in ’93, but it’s useful to note how it was mismanaged. It threw out desk/chair combinations, workbooks, a pull-down map, toys, bird houses, bulletin boards, games, dolls, records, teaching materials, lumber, firewood, expensive door closers (which adorned my house), a file cabinet, and, on one occasion, hundreds of good textbooks. Lots of yard waste was thrown out, though this could have been used for compost which the school ground desperately needed. The heaters in two classrooms went on during the middle of the night, weekends, and holidays. The automatic lawn sprinklers weren’t turned off during the wet seasons.

One Spring during a drought, the sprinklers were on every night for months. I made many calls, and it seemed to stop. But later the water was on twice a night, most of the week. I made more calls and it finally stopped. The school wasted money in these ways, yet sent its students door to door selling candy to raise money.

Often the sprinklers stuck, flooding some areas. Once l000 square feet were under water. Usually some sprinklers were partly blocked by grass, which wasted a lot of water. The grounds were a mix of soggy, dry, yellow, green, brown, barren, and sand. The parking strips were never watered. Parks and other schools maintained good lawns; the school never did.

Other matters were: broken glass on the grounds for months, litter, kids playing tackle football without padding after school, trash in front of a dumpster half the time, unswept sidewalks and driveway for months, expensive improvements when talking of selling the school, and no lights in the early a.m. almost every night – despite cases of arson next door and at a nearby jr. high.

I called and wrote school officials, school board members, politicians, the PTA, water officials, and the media, and got bureaucratic excuses, good intentions, patronizing, LONG-winded assurances, few results, and NO follow-up. (Private schools wouldn’t dream of this. Vote for school vouchers.) #

Substitute Teaching

I had taught two years in private schools and decided to substitute in public schools in 1974. I went through the paperwork hassle and then to the interview. I was told not to expect school to be the way it was when I was young (prophetic words).

My first job was at Dunbar in Washington D.C., which years ago had an excellent reputation. The head office had an apathetic atmosphere, with the staff going through the motions. The bell rang for the first class and students traipsed in. Others stuck their heads in to make loud comments. I took roll with some difficulty and started a lesson getting minor cooperation. The lesson worked into liberal and conservative comparisons which they found interesting and said they wanted me back. The bell rang. There was a lot of jostling and fooling around between classes. Some students looked strung out on drugs.

In the next class there were hats on, eating, refusals to put out or stop snapping gum. I called the vice principal about some slouchers in back who wouldn’t come up front. They were taken out and I went on with the same lesson as before with the same good results. However, their manners were so bad, I had to strain to get anything across.

The next class had bad actors loud and uncooperative. Only eight students, but seven wouldn’t control themselves. The eighth would put her head down ‘asleep’ when it got loud. Things had been building up and I had had it. I began telling them how school used to be run. They hooted and hollered the gauntlet was down. We began a hot discussion. They wouldn’t stop interrupting each other and me in this room of bad acoustics. We set some ground rules they would raise their hands. It didn’t work. I would walk away or hold my hand up to show I wanted equal time, but they kept it up. Then it got racial, and, of course, whites were to blame.

Lunchtime in the loud and unsupervised cafeteria: we teachers had to almost yell to hear each other. Some looked as though they had been through the mill. (Slowly I began to feel the immense hopelessness I had felt in social work.)

The next time I was called to teach, it was at a Jr. Hi. in a run down neighborhood. The front doors had a prison look – metal with glass slits. The teacher in the next room told me to have the students write or it would be ‘over with’.

Two classes went tolerably well, then I had some problems and called the principal. She got so furious at the troublemakers, the veins on her neck stood out. (What job is worth that?)

During the lunch hour the teachers spoke of how male teachers had to physically handle some of the kids, how this generation was growing up without responsibility, and how everything was reduced to the lowest common denominator.

Final class: the students wouldn’t do a thing big game. I called the vice principal as I was getting hot under the collar. He ejected five students, and he and I began a frank discussion with the students about discipline. They kept interrupting no selfcontrol. Eventually they brought up race; I said that could only account for 510% of the problem. They talked of a different value system. I said the Black Muslims didn’t put up with this, nor would any middle class blacks. They said such blacks were brainwashed. The day ended with some throwing rocks at me. I had to get two teachers to go with me to my car.

I taught another day in a wealthy white suburb much the same. Another time I started to substitute in another state. After l5 minutes of trying to take the roll, I quit. (There were teachers to take my place.)

All the years to become a teacher, all the taxes for a bankrupt system, all the kids losing valuable years, but most of all – all the panels, commissions, surveys, and court decisions ingeniously missing the point traditional values:

Responsibility (the granddaddy).

Foresight (thrift, saving, planning).

The golden rule (reliability, honesty, good faith, fairness, manners, respect for property, authority, elders, and ethnic groups).

Law and order, authority, discipline, punishment.

Self-reliance, family teamwork, hard work, diligence, moderation, restraint, wholesomeness, modesty, self-respect, one’s appearance, practical education, some censorship, some conformity.

Vouchers

Education in the U.S. below the l2th grade in the U.S. is virtually public and the results are often poor. Education above the l2th grade in the U.S. is public and private and the best in the world. If we want better below the l2th, we can privatize a lot of it with vouchers. Parents would shop for schools instead of moving to different school districts. Private schools would spring up according to demand for the disabled, the athletic, vocational, college-bound, English-deficient – whatever. They would hire more para-professionals and aides. Public schools would have to compete by cutting top-heavy bureaucracies, tenured union employees, etc. Those that didn’t produce would lose students. They would lose money but still have the same amount to spend per student.

Parents of private school students would not have to pay twice – once in taxes for public schools and again in tuition for private schools. Many of them are not rich. (Some are teachers in the public schools).

Critics say the new private schools wouldn’t be regulated, but those regulations haven’t helped the public schools.

The church-state issue shouldn’t amount to much because most students in Catholic schools for years have been Protestants. If their parents aren’t worried, it must be working.

The public schools establishment and their unions monopolized education for years with disastrous results; it’s time for that most American of virtues – competition. #

AmeriCorps – idealistic

The siren’s call, AmeriCorps, has beckoned another ‘corps’ to ‘serve’ the country. Young people are to do community work in exchange for help with their education.

An earlier version of this was started in the mid-60s. It was called VISTA [the domestic counterpart of the Peace Corps]. I was a volunteer in one of the first groups. It was quite an experience, but we volunteers didn’t accomplish much – probably not enough to make it worth the cost. Here’s what it was like for me:

VISTA urged me to join in ’65, saying my background would be good for working with migrant farm laborers. (It wasn’t, but they were looking for people.) Volunteers in those days were flown across the country for ‘intensive’ training. Some of them were immature, snide, and anti-establishment. They played their stereos loud when nuns in the dorm (where we stayed) were trying to rest. One named a dog ‘migrant’. Others earned us a bad reputation downtown. (If they didn’t fit in their own culture, how would they fit in another?)

We were asked by outsiders what our training was about and found it hard to answer. We asked our trainers what we were to do when we got to our assignments, we were told, ‘You’ll find out when you get there.’ When we got ‘there’ and asked our sponsors, they said, ‘We don’t know; what were you trained to do?’ (while telling the papers we were receiving ‘in-service, on-going orientation’.)

Only a few volunteers were assigned to migrant farm labor. I heard that some partied all night and got kicked out of town.

My job was ‘community development’, which was made to seem exotic, but was simply working on any feasible project to promote selfhelp. One early project was very successful and the rest of the year was unimpressive.

College degrees meant little or nothing, and the work was anything but ‘technical’. It was the old saw: people wanted something for nothing, a few of them did all of the work, the ones that criticized the most, did the least, you could lead a horse to water, but you couldn’t make him drink.

It was frustrating and disillusioning. I wasn’t surprised to hear that some volunteers accomplished nothing in their year.

I can’t imagine any sensible volunteer becoming ‘radicalized,’ as claimed by one article.

We worked with ‘the poor’, but many were poor in money and rich in everything else family life, friendships, mental health, and a robust, close to nature, lifestyle.

It [VISTA] is now merged with AmeriCorps. If they and the 75 similar programs that exist were studied by realists, it would probably be clear these ‘corps’ are impractical and expensive, and that people who want to ‘serve’ would be better off working for established social agencies with proven track records.

Beware of Idealism

When we are children we are idealistic in planning to be astronauts, cowboys, movie stars – and we grow out of it. When we are teenagers we are idealistic in dreaming of the perfect romance, best school, best job, non-stop success, and changing the world. These dreams should be tempered with realism from our elders, but often they are not.

In college, students are told they can create a ‘new man’, eliminate poverty, level the classes, educate everyone, eliminate prejudice, stop war, ‘save’ the 3rd world, etc. Many of the liberal students believe this, and go into journalism, teaching, or social work.

Some churches contribute to this by preaching: a sublime brotherhood, only positives, good intentions are enough, a cult of personality, etc.

The more immature the young adult are, the more susceptible they are to going off the deep end of idealism. Some join communes, cults, sects, or ill-founded protest movements. Some join the Peace Corps with stars in their eyes, and finish having accomplished little or nothing. (I saw this when in the domestic version of the Peace Corps – VISTA).

Some go to Wash. D.C. to ‘clean up’ politics. But Washington needs ‘cleans’ only temporarily (only at a high level) after a scandal to quell controversy. Once things calm down, they are discarded as Washington is more comfortable with leakers, gamesmen, and backstabbers.

Idealistic young people get into the wrong work or marry the wrong person. Idealistic brokers lose money. Idealistic military officers risk their men in battle. Idealistic parents spoil their kids. Idealistic preachers lead their flocks to disaster (Jim and Tammy Bakker, Jim Jones).

On a much larger scale the greatest danger, of course, is in revolutions. Idealistic intellectuals fan the flames to burn everything down so they can come to power. They are hostile to compromise. They lack maturity and patience, and become more authoritarian than the regimes they replaced. In the past they created communism and fascism. In some they abolished money. In one they persecuted those wearing glasses as they were after ‘intellects’. They’ve purged, committed genocide, and started wars. Other idealists have gone off to fight them, thinking the war would be over in a few weeks.

During the Spanish Civil War, idealists joined the International Brigade to fight for democracy. Later they found their side was autocratic and backed by communists. In China the idealistic young were unleashed as the Red Guards from l966-76, bringing one of the worst periods in that country’s history.

Idealism is the pitfall of youthful inexperience. Older people have an obligation to expose the young to reality at every step of their development so they can avoid such disasters.

Let’s put aside the naive, blind, forced over-emphasis on positives, feeling good, togetherness, relationships-mania, everyone being equal in every way, everyone’s a winner, everything’s ‘new’, and other pied piper rhetoric. Let’s get back to reality. #

‘Professionals’

(James Fallows of the ATLANTIC MONTHLY agreed with ‘just about everything.’)

Having seen amazing incompetence in my years in social work, I’ve wondered if other fields are as bad. A look back gives us an idea: professionals used to tell us men were superior to women, whites to nonwhites, the Depression was permanent, movies would replace radio, TV would replace movies, and we would control the weather.

During each world war they discovered women could do heavy work. Before World War II, they told us the war could be avoided; and a year after it started, they told us the allies were defeated. Later they told us: the 50s were the ‘end of ideology’; the early 60s was the end of economic growth and the start of excess leisure; the late 60s were a time of noble dissent; and by now we’d be on the metric system.

A look at certain professions in isn’t much better:

Education

Open classroom, new math, open enrollment, and grading fads during the 60s & 70s. The number of students went down, but the number of administrators went up. Spending went up sixfold, but test scores went down. Sex education was begun to combat V.D. and illegitimacy, and both went up. Schools had to hire outsiders to show teachers how to discipline. Students classified as retarded in public schools, excelled in a private school. Students were graduated functionally illiterate. Sixty percent of college age youth couldn’t find the Pacific Ocean on an unmarked map. There was anguish over public schools, and successful private schools were ignored.

Social work

Poverty programs began in the 60s, yet welfare rose fivefold. Prisons with problems of rape showed Xrated movies. There were programs to ‘cure’ prisoners, yet crime rose. Cocaine was not considered addictive. Workfare was called ‘genocide,’ ‘slavery,’ and ‘cruel and unusual punishment.’ Social programs hurt the poor more than they helped.

One agency wanted to teach ‘the work ethic’ to Asian refugees people who work circles around many Americans. A child molester was referred to work with retarded kids (and molested them). Sociology courses on TV were laughable. Runaways, mental patients, derelicts, and prisoners gained exaggerated rights. Prisoners (like the Son of Sam), faked being crazy, and got checks for being ‘mentally ill.’ Reams were written on poverty by people who were never poor nor had lived in a slum. Professionals ‘discovered’ pets, plants, and humor were good for mental patients, the aged, and criminals.

My experience in social work was similar: ‘Society’ was wrong; the poor were right and unaccountable. ‘Equality’ dropped everything to the lowest common denominator. There was no discipline, authority, nor negatives. Punishment was ‘medieval.’ Social workers spoke psychobabble and spent months developing ‘relationships’ with the poor in hopes some values would rub off. It was babysitting. There was an amazing lack of basic literature, and what there was, was unreadable or worthless. The poor were portrayed as miserable, when many (I knew) were happier than their social workers.

Often nonprofessionals were more effective in social work than professionals. There was even an example of the people needing help being more effective with each other than professionals were. It was a selfhelp program run by prisoners. It was tough and successful. When professionals meddled, it lost its teeth and failed.

Psychology

Homosexuality used to be considered a mental problem, now it’s not; smoking and gambling were not, now they are. Predicting violent behavior has been only 50% successful. Therapists have been routinely conned by criminals. They end up in bed with 5% of their patients (which an agency had to study to learn was harmful). When one psychiatrist was caught, he claimed he was mentally ill.

Therapists excuse all kinds of behavior and release killers, molesters, and rapists who repeat their crimes. Mental patients leave expensive hospitals not knowing simple housekeeping. Advanced training of therapists counts for little or nothing. Mental health aides are called ‘psychiatric technicians.’

In living with mental patients for two years, I learned the patients were l0% crazy and 90% spoiled, immature, and irresponsible. Professionals didn’t want to hear this.

Religion

Some clergymen sleep with their parishioners. Some priests have molested kids and some of their superiors have covered it up. The U.S. Bishops have denied welfare bred dependence, have been antiworkfare, and have said the U.S. should forgive the debts of many countries.

The World Council of Churches has favored socialism.

Politics

‘The best and the brightest’ gave us the Vietnam War.

Highly educated people created disastrous communistic and socialistic schemes around the world. Yet with the retreat of communism in Eastern Europe, many politicians and economists are sure those countries aren’t ‘ready’ for capitalism and should try socialism.

The media

Journalists are often negative, inconsistent, irresponsible, polarizing, myopic, and liberal. They often distort, over dramatize, and lack taste and perspective.

Professionals like to call problems ‘diseases.’ Violence, earthquakes, and inflation are somehow ‘diseases.’

Many professionals won’t use plain language; and many become elitist and disdain ‘amateurs.’ (The best history is written by amateurs. ) After years of studying, they don’t want to come up with something amateurs can arrive at; they think it should be ‘complex,’ ‘new,’ and better. They favor solutions that make them and their field look good.

The biggest danger is when they are allowed to monopolize for privilege, exclusivity, and protection from competition. This is seen when the Am. Medical Assoc. prevents nurses from giving independent care to patients. It’s cheaper, but it means less business for doctors. The same with paralegals they can serve the public inexpensively, but the Am. Bar Assoc. doesn’t want the loss of business. The same with dentists; they don’t want dental hygienists to be allowed to clean teeth.

Our sense of professionals is skewed. They are as human, fallible, selfish, and political as anyone. Many are verbose, arrogant, irresponsible, overeducated, and miseducated. Many posture with gobbledygook and complication. Many have lost touch with the masses.

To put them in perspective we should take certain steps. Instead of using a deductive approach of starting at the top with the theories of professionals, we should start at the bottom (inductively) and observe how the people who need help, help each other, as in AA. Then we should look at how nonprofessionals help them, and then move up to any other levels that exist beneath the professional level. We should use an overview, traditional values, sensible definitions, brevity, conciseness, plain language, short titles, strict accountability, ratings, and graphs and charts. These would give us an idea of what

is practical – on-the-job training, certain courses and certain books, and what is useless, irrelevant, idealistic, and destructive – jargon, theoretical books and courses, and interference with the free market in providing services. #

Religious Scandals

Earlier version was the lead letter of 11 to the editor on Sun. L.A. TIMES 4/5/87

The uproar among television preachers (Bakker, Swaggert) in ’87 (Pearly-gate) exposed their human stumblings alcoholism, nervous breakdowns, sexual misconduct, hush money, cover ups, deceitful fundraising and accounting, lavish lifestyles, addiction to prescription drugs, mudslinging (among ‘dear brothers who love each other’) and hiding behind biblical language.

Mainstream society is turned off forced happiness, sanctimony, and emotionalism, which get some of the audience so worked up, they cry, jump, and dance about.

These churches want a simplistic world of: a literal bible, answers for everything, black and white choices, a safe catharsis, fantasy, a perfect future life (to compensate for this life?), and to live through their leaders who tell them what and how to think and feel, and who fight their battles for them – ‘Devil, we’re going to give you a licken tonight.’

The followers deny their feelings, go to extremes (not one drop of alcohol, not once glance at pornography), twist history (everything is the 11th), are antiintellectual (evolution), are narrow (premarital relations, abortion, divorce, homosexuals), are simplistic (school prayer, knee-jerk forgiveness without restitution [even before the facts are in]), are backward (women’s lib, civil rights, censorship), and are lonely.

When their leaders stumble over sex, money, or power, some followers continue to follow them blindly (showing a big fact of life: people believe what they want to believe). Other followers, however, become disillusioned. There is more hope for them because such disappointment and deep thought can lead to realizing: we are all human, issues are not black and white, life can proceed without all the answers, the world is pluralistic, not singular (one way, one truth, one course of study, one career, one mate for life), compromise doesn’t have to mean selling one’s soul, each coincidence is not the work of God, there will always be problems, and one should believe in oneself and not put one’s leader on a pedestal.

They can observe what rarely comes up that many adults are not very religious and are quite well-adjusted and happy. The religious can be too by slowly maturing. Not what they want to hear; but the disasters above suggest they need to hear it and to face matters (through sensible therapy or whatever). Then they can gradually grow into more effective and happy people. #

Bungling Iraq

After starting one war in Afghanistan, Bush and the far right started another in Iraq, which they were told could turn into a quagmire like Vietnam. After a brilliant victory, we didn’t have enough troops to stop five weeks of looting, but enough to protect the oil. We disbanded the Iraqi army when needed the most. We said we wouldn’t occupy the country. We didn’t expect so many insurgents to fight us. We didn’t find out why they were so motivated – like Vietnam. We kept training the Iraqi army which never did the job, like Vietnam. We’ve been trying to do it for them – like Vietnam. We pushed democratic reforms, like Vietnam; and the resulting the government hasn’t worked – like Vietnam. We’re rebuilding Iraq, like Vietnam, though it’s going up in smoke. Our government is too secretive about all this – like Vietnam.

We report the total American deaths in Iraq, but rarely guess at the total deaths of Iraqi government forces, civilian deaths or coalition deaths – like Vietnam. We mourn our deaths, not theirs – like Vietnam. Message: Americans matter, others don’t.

We pour over all this with American media and officials, like in Vietnam, and rarely with those from other countries – which says American thinking counts, foreign thinking doesn’t.

It’s said there are 24 groups of insurgents. What do they want? Why do 75% of the Iraqis want us out? What is the role of oil? Why do we rarely hear the views of the UN, of refugees, the coalition, the Kurds or those who predicted civil war. We talk of winning or losing the war when we don’t know what it’s about.

We’re going in circles [and inviting another 9 -11].

Expand the U.N.

It is said that if the League of Nations had done its job, we might have avoided World War II, the subjugation of eastern Europe, and the start of the cold war; and if the U.N. had done its job, we might have avoided many conflicts. These are good reasons for making the U.N. democratic, expanding it, and giving it teeth. This would force all the countries of the world to accept their shares of responsibility for resolving common problems like the arms trade, terrorism, hostages, ethnic disputes, foreign aid, border disputes, human rights, sanctions, refugees, Swiss bank accounts, and chemical, biological, and nuclear warfare. The list goes on.

A more democratic U.N. would reduce the development of blocs [the common market, the Arabs, the west, the 3rd world, NATO, SEATO, OAS, etc.].

When it came to an army, each country could drastically reduce its forces. These would be maintained as our states maintain national guard units. A larger U.N. force would be made up of what each country had to contribute: men, money, technology, or elite forces such as the Gurkas and legionnaires. Such a force would harness the inevitable rise of Germany, Japan and China.

The countries of the world have every selfish, practical, and noble reason for democratizing and expanding the U.N. #

Japan Bashing in ’92

In the early 90s we were told the Japanese had caused our trade deficit, were ‘buying’ America, were getting ahead at our expense, and we shouldn’t take it. But were we in a position to criticize them?

Their high school students studied so much they slept less than 6 hours a day. 20% of ours averaged that for TV. Their dropout rate was 1%; ours was 30%. Their students graduated with 3 more years of schooling than ours; 1/3 of ours graduated functionally illiterate. Japanese adults worked 6 weeks more/yr. than us. They saved; we spent. They produced; we consumed. They had a surplus; we had a deficit. They had little crime; we had a lot.

They studied our language; we didn’t study theirs. We condemned their trade surplus, but not ours with other countries. They had the best manners. They bought our failing companies, saved them, and provided jobs for us. Their cars had caused a big rise in the quality of ours. Their competition had caused us to make better products and become more efficient. They were lst in foreign aid, lst in technology, and chief creditor. All this, yet our problems were their fault.

When the English bought Holiday Inn, no one cared; but when the Japanese invested here, we resented it. We hadn’t resented lobbyists from other countries, but we resented those from Japan. Other countries had conducted hostile takeovers; the Japanese had not. The Dutch owned about as much of the American assets as the Japanese; no one complained about them. The British owned twice as many and no one complained.

Any foreigner could buy here, and they had to conform to our laws. When the Japanese bought our real estate and companies, they were helping us. They couldn’t walk off with real estate, and no one was forced to sell to them at a loss. As it happened, we owned seven times as many foreign assets as foreigners owned of ours.

Some of the Japanese students studied here and returned to produce there. Some of us called in ’91 for Japan to ‘compensate’ by giving us $l00 million.

Our bashing was sour grapes, envy, scapegoating, self-delusion, arrogance, pettiness, xenophobia, hypocrisy, double standards, and prejudice.

The Japanese resented this more than we realized or cared. They and other Asians remember it, as we move toward the century of the pacific rim. Not our best chapter. #

The Liberal Media

The importance of the news media can hardly be underestimated as most issues are decided by public opinion. But how objective and fair are they? We get an idea from a widely quoted survey taken in ’82 of “the prestige media” (NY Times, Wash. Post, Wall St. Journal, Time, Newsweek, the 3 networks and PBS). It said the media have a liberal bias as:

• Three times as many of their newsmen considered themselves liberal as conservative.
• 80% favored affirmative action.
• 79% believed in the welfare state.
• 80% voted democratic from ’64 to ”76.

Why are they liberal (despite the fact most Americans are conservative)? One reason (said David Brinkley) is that liberals tend to go into the media, and conservatives tend to go into business.

What is ‘liberal’? It is the belief in an ideal, equal world we all should be the same and have the same. But since many people have more than others, the old ways [capitalism, smaller government] are bad; and we need new ways [socialism – regulation, subsidies, health care …] to level the classes.

History

• Media liberals say capitalism caused the Depression and government got us out of it. But conservatives say the government caused it and made it worse.
• Many in the media snicker at “status quo” presidents like Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, and Eisenhower. They prefer men of “action” like Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, and JFK.
• Many found the 50s sterile and gloried in the protests of the late 60s.

Anti-business

[Business mostly owns the media, yet:]

The media and business have always been hostile. Each sees the other as dominant; each would like to dominate.

• When profits in business are big, the media complains; when losses are big, silence.
• When G.M. made big profits and closed a plant, it was a conspiracy.
• When more college freshmen than usual signed up for business, it was a rise in the “greed index”.
• When AT&T was broken up and banks deregulated, these “helped the rich and hurt the poor”.
• When capitalism brought great progress to parts of China in the 80s, our media stress the problems. They said the economy there was “overheating” and the government should restrain it. A reporter interviewing a new millionaire there, asked him if his success hadn’t created “inequality.”
• Once there was a report on 20/20 about how much better various businesses did when government got out of regulating them. The reporters, Hugh Downs and Tom Jerrel, were surprised.

The underdog

• The media favor labor over management, tenants over landlords, the poor over the rich, minorities over the majority, consumers over big business, the youth over those over 30.
• The media pity the irresponsible poor without talking to those they hurt: merchants, insurance companies, employers, credit bureaus, teachers, police, etc. They feature the poor who do not work more than those who do.
• The media indulge criminals who have a thousand excuses for their crimes.
• The media interview prisoners more than guards, rioters more than non-rioters.
• Connie Chung did a program on a teenager whose crimes were so bad, he was labeled a “poster child for capital punishment.” (Why “child”?) It was about how the system had “failed” him, not how he failed the system.
• When an incorrigible in prison was put in a diaper and shackles, a reporter called it “draconian.” When another was put in shackles by a guard, a reporter (Tom Jerrel of 20/20) asked if the guard was “paranoid.”
• Mr. Jerrel also did a one-sided report on a home for delinquents, portraying them as victims of a heartless staff.

Rhetoric

Detention for illegal aliens is “dehumanizing.” Confronting a delinquent about his crime is “brutal.” Getting recovering alcoholics up at 6:00 am is “tough.” Spanking is “beating.” Rules are “regimentation.” Teasing is “humiliation.”

Poverty

• A noted author wrote of the 60s and 70s, “White liberals saw the … ghetto through a romantic haze and extolled its music, warmth, aliveness – missing the child abuse, brutality, abandonment, drunkenness, addiction, disease.”
• When the gays, the rich, or immigrants improve a neighborhood, the media say the poor were “pushed out.” When the poor “push” the middle class out, the media don’t say much.
• They assure us being black is hopeless, not mentioning that blacks from the Caribbean in the U.S. are far ahead of American blacks.
• The media run down menial work – the traditional route out of poverty.
• They are sure our poor are “trapped”; yet poor immigrants with limited English pass our poor every day.

Socialistic

• The media favored Castro, when he first took over Cuba.
• Tom Brokaw said congress had to “face up” to providing childcare.
• Another time his program criticized our health system for several nights, then praised Canada’s socialized medicine.

Education

• The media have put more responsibility on schools, while taking away the tools (testing, dress codes, discipline, accountability …).
• The media anguish over the failure of public schools and give little coverage of the success of private schools.

The examples go on in housing, health, legal aid, etc. It’s time we document this bias.

Liberal myths

I received a liberal education (in conservative Orange County, Calif.) and spent years in liberal social work in liberal New York City. Then and since I have steadily read the liberal N.Y. Times, Washington Post or the Los Angeles Times and have found “liberal” is used as the good housekeeping seal of intellectual thought. A liberal is portrayed as “progressive, educated, compassionate, openminded, egalitarian, and generous”.

[A conservative is portrayed as “backward, stingy, mean, rigid, heartless, selfish, narrow, angry, and fearful”.]

But many liberal programs have been disasters because they were based on the false assumptions of:

Ideal

The liberal believes a better world is just out ahead. We need only to be “freed” from the repressive past to “express” ourselves, our good intentions and new ideas, and we’ll create a society of equality, peace, and security. While sounding good in school, it is not the real world.

Negative

Since the world isn’t ideal, he is quick to portray those with less as victims, those with more as guilty, [greedy] capitalism as the cause, and conservatives as guilty.

Old is bad

The liberal faults the past. He runs down the l9th century as one of exploitation of the masses by the robber barons of Wall St. who conned Main St., bled Mid-western farmers, and fleeced immigrants. He’s mistaken; the standard of life for the common man rose dramatically, the number of farmers rose, as did their property value, the flood of immigrants persisted, charity and private education flowered, and libraries and cultural activities grew significantly.

[In disparaging the past he doesn’t learn from it – a fatal mistake. The past contains the wisdom of traditional values gained at great cost, but he believes old is bad and]

New is good

New ideas from new fields are something he can sink his teeth into; psychology, socialism, “modern” economics, and other social “sciences” are “technologies” which can “engineer” a “new man”, New Deal, New Frontier, Great Society, etc. While he might claim to believe in traditional values, he postpones them indefinitely.

Equal

As Robin Hood he wants redistribute the wealth. He wants to push working class people through college, when many are not interested.

He is sure our poor are trapped, when immigrant poor, with limited English, pass them every day.

When it comes to bums and criminals, he has a thousand excuses for them.

Secure

He wants a world free of risk and want. The earlier days of heroism, tragedy, and the free market are to be leveled for predictability and safety. This can only be done through programs that promote:

Socialism

Where socialism [heavy government involvement] has been tried (India, China, and East Germany in the 50s & 60s), development has been hindered. Where it has been held back, development has flourished (Korea, Taiwan, Japan, and West Germany). He doesn’t see this; for most problems, he wants socialism. Thus he tends to be:

Anti-private

He’s not interested in understanding private schools, charity, prisons, nursing homes, fire depts, mail, transportation, utilities …

Anti-business [capitalism, the free market … ]

He sees the high salaries of top executives as great inequities. Henry Ford the 1st put the country on wheels, but the liberal sees that Ford was rich while others were poor, and goes on to support the graduated income tax, capital gains taxes and other measures which penalize the Ford types.

He sees profit as exploitive. If nursing home A makes a profit and clearly does a better job than non-profit nursing home B, A is bad and B is good, because A makes a profit.

Caring

The liberal claims to have the corner on caring and “love.” His is the soapy, coddling kind. It spoils those he’s trying to help. He can’t imagine anything hardnosed or authoritarian as “caring.” He needs to know that coach Vince Lombardi and General Patton were hard on their men because they cared about them.

Permissive

Seeing the past as repressive, believing in psychology, and seeing himself as a “caring” person, he is tolerant of vice and seeks to “understand” crime. He doesn’t believe strongly in authority or discipline, and considers punishment ‘medieval’. When ‘boot camp’ programs help troubled youth, you won’t hear much – it’s outside his frame of reference.

Overly-generous

He spoils children; spoils the poor by paying them not to work; and spoils 3rd poor countries with foreign aid. His programs pay farmers not to grow and the American Indian to be dependent.

The conservative disagrees with the above. He is often older, more experienced and realistic. He venerates the establishment, capitalism, and traditional values; he sees social classes as overlapping, natural, and healthy; his “caring” meets a person only part way; he holds bums and criminals responsible for their behavior; he shows how the private sector has taken over some government functions and done a better job.

Let’s hear more from the conservative side without labeling it “ultra-conservative”. Let’s promote it in academia and the media. Let’s remind our youth, as people get older, they get more conservative because a lot of liberal ideas are idealistic and flawed. #

As much damage as liberals have done, they deserve credit for:

• More rights for minorities, women, gays, the handicapped.
• More openness about battered spouses, the gay world, addiction, child abuse, incest, abortion, impotence, etc.
• More acceptance of ethnic diversity and intermarriage.
• More acceptance of separation & divorce.
• More use of psychology to get to the roots of one’s problems instead of “keeping it all in” and enduring “long suffering”.
• More openness about public figures instead of putting them on a pedestal.
• More open-minded about premarital relations in long term, responsible relationships.
• More questioning of religion.
• Integrating newsrooms with minorities and women [which started in the 70s].

Liberals led the way with these because they challenge old ideas, are open to new ones, and look out for the underdog.

Liberal Psychobabble

One story on T.V. told of a housing project in Chicago. The poor there received many benefits from the government. They wanted the best for their children, but one third of the girls got pregnant by l5. They vowed not to have another child, but did. Many didn’t consider abortion because of an “appreciation for life.” One had seven kids and left them with her mother to “selfmedicate” on drugs. (“medicate”?) She wouldn’t change because “chemically dependent people aren’t ready for help.” (When would she be “ready”?)

Many of the students didn’t have “classroom skills.”

“It never occurs to these people to look in the paper for work because the habits of work aren’t available to them.” (strange logic)

They didn’t look for work because of “psychological barriers” like racism. (It didn’t stop others.)

A bunch of young people looked for work. “One found a job; for the others, there were no jobs.” (assumption)

Many people reached their mid20’s having never held a job. (Many immigrants reach their mid20’s having never had a vacation.)

The people didn’t have the “resources” to visit other parts of the city. (No shoe leather, bicycles, bus fare?)

The young people had “nothing to do.” (There are jobs if others can find them, and in this case, there was a nearby vocational school with a 75% placement rate. Despite recruitment drives, it had many openings.)

The housing projects appeared “hopeless.” (No mention of how tenant management of projects in other cities has performed miracles.)

The people had no “daily management skills” or “support systems.” (What could these mean, but by now who cared? This babble was just excuses.)

Too many professionals use jargon, rhetoric, theories, and twisted logic to excuse the poor from responsibility. Until they use plain language and common sense, the condition of the poor will continue to appear hopeless.

Liberal Spin On Riots

Liberals Facts

• It was a ‘rebellion, uprising, war’ —– it was a riot.
• The looting was ‘payday’, the goods were ‘free,’ —– It was theft.
• Looters were ‘opportunists’ ——— were thieves.
• Their motives were ‘complex’ ——– were greed.
• Rioters were ‘protestors’ ——- were hooligans and thugs.
• Rioters had nothing to lose —— but supermarkets, stores, a post office, a DMV office, a library, and electricity.
• Insurance would pay for the damage ——- and rates would skyrocket.
• It was the only way to get justice —- by making businesses move out and property values go down?
• It sent a message —- by attacking news teams and shooting at news copters?
• It was to get respect — by attacking firemen, paramedics, and school busses?
• Rioters were tired of prejudice —- and did everything to increase it.
• Riots don’t make it right, but make it even —– by burning one’s neighborhood?
• The riot showed black rage, frustration, desperation, fatigue, frustration, hurt ———- in the carnival atmosphere of clowning looters?
• They protested racism — by pulling non-blacks out of their cars and beating them senseless?
• It protested the lack of jobs —– and cost 5000 – 20,000 more jobs.
• It showed nothing had been learned from the civil rights movement and the watts riot of ’65 ——- that violence doesn’t work.
• It protested hopelessness. ——- It’s not hopeless for poor immigrants (of all colors).
• The riot protested discrimination, injustice, etc. —– Other minorities experience these and don’t riot periodically.
• Rioters were getting back at merchants with high prices. —- Prices are higher because it costs more to do business in the inner city (vandalism, theft, security, insurance, staff turnover).
• It paid back Koreans ——- jealous, moronic scapegoating.

We heard a lot about the rage of the rioters, and a little about the rage of those who lost their homes, jobs, and stores or the rage of those who were beaten by rioters. We were told the riot was a matter of class, not race, implying the poor supported the riot. Fraid not. The majority of the poor hated riots, as they were the ones who suffered the most.

Many people felt the government didn’t owe the riot areas a dime to rebuild. (Why should government money go where private money won’t.) But the media did. If anyone believes that, look at former riot areas in big cities.

Most of the media lead us down the liberal path of guilt, promises, idealism, and ‘new’ social programs, which probably failed, increased dependency, self-pity, a victim’s mentality, and the chance for future riots.

We need more attention to moderate journalists and leaders. They channel unrest into legitimate forms of protest: marches, lawsuits, picketing, boycotts, initiatives, referendums, and recalls. They seek progress through:

Avoiding job quotas, charity, subsidies, and preferential treatment.

Supporting work skills, education, business experience, ‘workfare’, right to work, work at home, a sub-minimum wage, and traditional values. #

Media pitfalls

The news media serve us well in many ways, but in other ways, their shortcomings are predictable:

Negative

First inflation is bad, then deflation is bad. The weak dollar is bad, the strong dollar is bad. Higher oil prices are bad, then lower. Automation eliminates jobs (but creates about as many). Americans are unhappy (when polls show them happy).

The reporter at a disaster is doom and gloom, while the victims behind are calm and collected. At one house they are joking while cleaning up, but the camera zooms in on another where a woman is sobbing.

The media report a problem as hopeless in one region, not how it’s been solved in another.

Lacking perspective

They discuss education in terms of public schools, virtually ignoring private schools.

Inconsistent

Now we have too many schools and teachers, now we don’t; college drinking is up, now it’s down the same with education, fitness, family, etc.

Polarizing

Haves vs. have-nots, tenants vs. landlords, labor vs. management, poor vs. rich, young and old, east and west, blacks and whites, students and teachers, business and consumers.

Tasteless

Playing rock music while showing sorrow at the Vietnam Memorial, the legendary rudeness of some reporters, the tactless handling of delicate subjects on daytime talk shows.

Irresponsible about sex

Too much titillation during daytime and early evening. Everyone’s in bed and no one gets pregnant, has their education cut short, or has to raise a child by oneself.

Myopic

Our problems are somehow unique. Our values and methods come first. Every country is compared to ours.

Unbalanced

Cities get more coverage than towns. – The New York press determines what is national news. England was favored in the Falklands War. Whites who oppress blacks (So. Africa) are somehow worse than blacks who starve blacks (Ethiopia). A lot about VE Day, almost nothing about VJ Day, on their 40th anniversaries.

Other stories haven’t gotten their share: l0 million Ukrainians were starved by Stalin in l932; 1/6th of the Tibetans were killed by the Red Guards; slavery is practiced in Sudan and Mauritania. Little about these, yet Israel is covered almost weekly.

Liberal

When AT&T was broken up and banks deregulated, these were reported as helping the rich and hurting the poor.

When the poor are forced out of a neighborhood, it’s a tragedy; when the middle class or a business are forced out, it’s not.

When a youth is spanked, he is ‘beaten’.

Bill Moyers interviewed single parents in Newark which had child after child on welfare despite their vows not to. Was there a suggestion welfare subsidized this? No.

Many young adults in the ghetto have never held and job and don’t plan to. Any ‘judgments’ here? No, because liberals don’t ‘judge’ people, especially ‘underdogs’.

Reporters pity bums and criminals without talking to those they victimize: merchants, insurance companies, employers, credit bureaus, teachers, police, etc.

Reporters focus on the poor who don’t work, not the working poor. They focus on the rioters, not the locals who deplore riots.

The media are made up of fallible, political humans.

On the positive side they are bright, articulate, and good at communicating. They try to be accurate and objective. Their exposés have often been invaluable in bringing reform.

On the negative side they are often negative, inconsistent, polarizing, myopic, and liberal. They often distort, over-dramatize, and lack taste and perspective. #

The Negative Media

On one hand our media draw inspiration from heros; on the other, they look for reasons to give up. On talk shows and in advice columns, we are told: a job transfer brings “pain”, and moving to another country means “cultural shock.” Being “thrown” out of work is “traumatic”, and standing in an unemployment line brings “the stigma of a rape victim”.

They tell us inflation is bad, then deflation is bad; the strong dollar is bad, then the weak dollar; higher oil prices are bad, then lower. Unemployment and inflation make up a “misery index”.

Budget cuts are an “assault” on blacks and the poor, which will cause malnutrition. Canceling school breakfasts will “tear the fabric of family life”. The poor can’t go a week without meat. Living in a garage stigmatizes a child, causing his grades to drop. Not having a phone is a tragedy. There are “few incentives for the poor to give up drugs”. (Throw in the towel.)

A raise in fees of $l00/yr at community colleges is a “threat to education”. “Withdrawal” from heavy TV watching is “painful”; moving to another house is “traumatic”; and cloudy days send people to their therapists.

Even good times are bad: yuppies have to “cope with the stress of success” and lottery winners suffer from “postjackpot depression syndrome”.

Doomsayers run down the our economic system (which pays their high salaries). They run down the country (but are in no hurry to leave). No mention of the immigrants who sacrifice to get here and take “menial” work, no mention of those among the poor who are happy, no mention of the well-adjusted majority.

We only think we have it worse today. Life is basically not more stressful or complex. Discontent, despair, and failure at times are normal and healthy. Being unhappy when the circumstances warrant it, is a mark of good health. Most people emerge from difficulty stronger and wiser.

Let’s Shrink Mental Health

Mental health departments complain they can’t do their job without more money, but are they doing much to begin with? After running a home for mental patients, I’d say not.

Think of the mental health system as five levels:

Non-professionals

1. Patients many don’t want to get well, and the mental health system gives them little reason to.
2. Their relatives – many can be difficult.
3. Nonprofessionals [aides, live in staff].

Professionals

1. Social workers bright and cordial, but often idealistic.
2. Doctors their theories sound good but are ineffective.

The lst three levels have a wealth of untapped information about patients, much of it at odds with the 4th and 5th levels.

The doctors have the power. They set what is ‘normal,’ and they can confine people; but one wonders how competent they are. They used to consider homosexuality a mental problem; now they don’t. They used to believe smoking and gambling were not mental problems; now they do. They have not been able to detect fake patients planted on wards, nor been more than 50% successful in predicting violence. They have been routinely conned by criminals. Many of their studies are irrelevant, obvious, or innocuous (such as whether long commutes on the freeway lead to irritation. ) (And 5% end up in bed with their patients.)

I and other operators of homes for patients deplored the permissiveness of professionals. They virtually entertained patients to lure them into therapy. Patients weren’t confronted nor held accountable. They got room and board, medication, counseling, activities, and spending money, yet weren’t required to work or to make a sustained effort to get well. (Some that got well said they did so in spite of the system.)

• Honesty is needed about the boredom and lack of incentives, mysteriousness, overindulgence, and lack of definition and productivity of the mental health field.
• Plain language, brevity, strict accountability, and traditional values are needed. These would diminish the ‘snake pit’ conditions of some institutions and homes.
• The field should be studied from the bottom up, starting with patients, relatives, and nonprofessionals outside the system, then inside. If done realistically, this should show that much of the mental illness in care homes is l0% craziness and 90% behavior that is spoiled, immature and irresponsible. As unpopular as this is, it offers more hope than present approaches.
• There should be literature for patients and relatives, so they don’t have to learn through expensive therapy what can be easily learned by studying.
• The five levels should rate the literature and the programs. This would aid consumers and funding organizations, and probably confirm what many studies have claimed – that non-professionals are often as effective as professionals.
• Advocacy groups for the lst three levels should seek a parity of power with professionals.
• Everyone’s role should be clearly defined and posted.
• The system should be turned over to competing, private agencies, which should be paid according to how much patients improve.
• Family therapy should be mandatory.
• Adult patients should not be allowed to live with their parents, nor see them often.
• Leading psychologists and clergymen should clarify where their fields agree and conflict and what their positions are on encounter groups and cults.
• Patients who are not motivated should not be allowed to hold others back.

Living With Mental Patients

Most people would be surprised to learn what mental (not retarded) patients are like. I started and ran a home for them (men in their 20s and 30s). I lived with them for two years. It took a lot of time, discussion, and soulsearching to appreciate their characteristics. I concluded they were l0% ‘crazy’ and 90% spoiled, immature, and irresponsible.

I Normal pleasant, aware, noncriminal.

|

II Immature | V Irresponsible

|

Selfcentered …………..|……….. selfish

Past dependence on folks ….|………… cling to folks.

Low selfesteem ……….|………… refuse to take pride.

Unmotivated …………….|………… lazy

Rigid ……………….. |

Unassertive ……… |

Overly sensitive |

Resentful |

| Unhygienic

|

III Mental |

|

Identity problems, buried |

emotions, isolated, private |

logic (the ‘crazy’ part) | } little effort to resolve these five.

|

|

| IV Spoiled

|

|

^ ^

| |

(view of professionals) | (view of nonprofessionals)

I Normal

They had little interest in criminal activity; and were basically nonviolent. Their use of soft drugs and alcohol was minor; and, while they abused property, they didn’t steal it.

They were more normal than you’d think. Although they seemed unaware of things, they were. When it looked as if there was going to be a fight in the house or when a historic event appeared on TV, they emerged from the woodwork to watch and later drift off as if nothing had happened.

Many were nice, gentle, even ingratiating people, who could have gone far on personality alone.

II Immature

They didn’t think they had much to offer, and thus looked for things to come to them. Thus they thought too much of the staff and not enough of themselves. They would take up the staff’s time with matters they could have solved among themselves. They could be easily dominated and manipulated by the staff; they wouldn’t stick up for themselves.

Some of them and their parents were far too close; you couldn’t get them apart with a crowbar.

III Mental

Most had one or more emotion deeply buried and eating away. Many didn’t know where they fit with their families or society. As they lived in their private worlds, they were the world’s loneliest people their own Robinson Crusoes. One got so lonely at home, he called wrong numbers just to talk to someone.

One believed the TV could read his mind, another believed everyone was trying to run him off the road, and others thought they were in touch with spirits. These mental factors are the stuff of Hollywood; but, while often touching and important in some ways, they were a minor part of their behavior. This is important to keep this in mind as too often mental illness is viewed as total craziness. It’s not; after you get to know them and their subtleties, their behavior is fairly understandable. The craziness is minor; most of their behavior is depressed and withdrawn.

IV Spoiled

It was amazing how spoiled they were. Many didn’t know how to hang laundry, mow lawns, mop floors, wash dishes, or other chores, and … were not about to learn! If they wouldn’t do these, they wouldn’t do all the other ‘normal’ things [hygiene, grooming, manners, exercise, laundry, money management, hobbies, etc.]. No wonder they were depressed.

I see this as the first major clue. It is probably not found in psychology books because of the field’s aversion to ‘judge.’ It’s important as it takes some of the mystery out of the work.

Patients felt life was supposed to come to them. When it didn’t, they resented it and spent time twisting their ideas to fill the void. They had far too much time for this. If they had been required to be busy, it would have helped. Work of any kind would have been a godsend; but amazingly, their counselors told them they weren’t ‘ready’.

V Irresponsible

To speak negatively about patients is to stick one’s neck out in the mental health field; but most of their behavior was extremely irresponsible. When this came up, social workers had a thousand excuses:

• If a patient didn’t want to get out of bed, he had a ‘problem’ with this.
• If he didn’t wash or bathe, there was a ‘mental’ factor.
• If he didn’t want to do chores ‘authority problem.’
• He wouldn’t go to his day program ‘withdrawal.’
• Nor take his pills ‘rebellion.’
• He was bored ‘lack of stimulating environment.’
• He fidgeted constantly ‘agitated’ (or 20 cups of coffee?).
• He was uncooperative because we hadn’t ‘understood,’ been ‘compassionate,’ or been a ‘friend.’
• He wouldn’t cooperate with his parents ‘delusional system.’

(It got so you couldn’t look at him sideways without setting off another ‘neurosis.’)

Once you got past the excuses, you could see patients were irresponsible: One damaged a lawn mower. Was he sorry for his part? No. Was he sorry it happened? No. Another wrecked a hammer. Was it his fault? No, it was the hammer’s fault.

Other examples: reading in the front room on Halloween with the house lit and not answering the door when kids knocked; sneezing into the refrigerator; coughing on clean dishes; revolting table manners; never using ‘please, thank you, or excuse me’; and one patient’s dumping a pot of pudding down the drain in front of the rest of us because he needed the pot. In these ways they ‘walked on’ each other and everything the home stood for. They did these things and wondered why they didn’t have friends. There was no excuse for such behavior if they had pride; but pride or shame meant responsibility.

They fled responsibility with their ‘games’:

• I can drive a car (but not make a bed).
• You’re treating me like a kid (though I’m acting like one).
• I’m sorry (but not enough to make up for what I did).
• The hospital, my folks, or my pills caused my troubles. (hardly).
• My Dr. doesn’t want to hear from you. (false).
• I’m 80% disabled. (absurd).
• No one has had it as rough as I. (hardly).
• I am paying to stay here. (The government was paying).
• Too many confrontational house meetings. (too much reality).
• I’m moving. (cause I’m out of games).

Their irresponsibility showed in extreme laziness: they sat indoors in perfect weather, turned down rides to the beach, never made anything in the kitchen that took effort, and would open doors, but not close them. Trying to get them to do a half hour of chores was the worst part of the day.

The average person does more in a day than they did in a month. They were ‘nervous, but had no energy.’ They had big plans, but did nothing. None read a book, few watched TV, most had no hobbies, few looked for work, and most never exercised. They spoiled themselves with coffee, cigarettes, food, sweets, selfanalysis, pleasure, entertainment, and favors. They spent l0l6 hours a day in bed as an escape. None had an alarm clock. They didn’t own or use a deodorant, nor shower daily. Some didn’t change their underwear or socks and slept in their clothes. They would have lived in filth, if permitted. Fresh air had to be let in continually, which ran up the utilities. Allowing smoking inside would have been the kiss of death. They talked of becoming independent of their folks, but went home at the slightest excuse. Some even moved back home where everything was done for them and they slept all day.

Another part of this irresponsibility was extreme selfcenteredness. Many acted like the only person on earth, the only one to have problems, or the one whose problems came before anyone else’s. Their conversation always came back to themselves. ‘I, me, mine, and my’ were sacred pronouns. Two people would be talking and from out of the blue, a patient would interrupt with something about himself.

There were house meetings to discuss these problems. Such meetings gave them some of the attention they craved by spending time on their problems, but also showed they had to sit through someone else’s problems.

They resented this. They resented things that didn’t go their way, efforts to help them, or suggestions they observe basic courtesy or table manners. (Sometime you wondered if they resented the sun coming up.)

On a deeper level, some seemed to unconsciously induce craziness when it suited them. One went into a state of agitation when social workers were present, threatening a brain seizure if he didn’t get his way. I had never seen him like this. Another time, according to an operator of another home, ‘out of control’ patients ‘regained’ control when the police arrived.

These are reasons for keeping good records and collaborating, but at this level neither existed – ridiculous. At higher levels professionals didn’t read records because they didn’t want to be ‘prejudiced’.

Each day of nothingness was excruciatingly boring for patients, but it was easy exactly what they wanted, no matter the price. One, who recovered and started her own home, would tell patients, ‘It’s easy to be crazy, stop playing the ‘sick’ game.’

They weren’t devious, they just didn’t want to grow up. One on TV said he was as afraid of getting well as staying sick. Another said ‘Being this way lets me do the things I want.’

The public assumes they want to get well. Most didn’t, and the incredible games (religious and otherwise) their minds came up with was testimony to the power of the mind. In their ways, each had moved a mountain.

They didn’t want to hear most of their behavior was spoiled, immature and irresponsible. Their relatives didn’t want to hear it, and professionals certainly didn’t want to hear it. It was too simple an explanation for something they had had so much training for. Everyone wanted mental illness to be technical, chemical, biological, or hereditary, which it wasn’t, and which only perpetuated the mysteriousness and hopelessness of it all.

Others who ran homes for patients agreed with this, and even patients themselves agreed. This should be researched, starting with patients and nonprofessionals. Such a bottom-up approach would offer more hope (and put a few holes in the insanity plea).

It would show patients are dying to be stood up to. But no one would; inexcusable behavior was continually excused with theories. Round and round it went a buck passer’s paradise for professionals, a snake pit for the rest. (Who was crazier, patients or staff?) Add to this the empty existence of patients, and a suicide should surprise no one.

The field needs to get down to basics: traditional values (accountability, hygiene, manners, chores, etc.), confrontation, sheltered workshops, and competitive employment. It doesn’t make sense to counsel patients on big responsibilities while ignoring small ones.

My observations fit Dr. William Glasser’s (author of REALITY THERAPY): If there is no organic cause of a patient’s problem, his condition comes from trying to fill his needs irresponsibly. He can only get better by becoming more responsible. He is not to be treated as ‘ill,’ but confronted with reality through group therapy and taught better behavior. He is also to work (which most programs virtually ignore). #

The following could be developed. (It hasn’t been tested.)

Rating Patients

Score	Rating
1-2	Poor
3-4	Adequate
5-6	Very Good

POSITIVE

Mental
Assessment Item	Score (1–6)
Short Term Memory
Long Term Memory
Attention Span
Good Judgment
Common Sense
Alert
Aware
Manages Money Well
In Touch With Feelings
Maturity
Assertive
Realistic
Flexible
Responsible
Confident
Moderate
Active
Positive
Open-Minded
Pride
Empathy
Humor
Foresight
Contributes
Motivation
Work Habits
Self-Discipline
Honesty
Hygiene
Dress
Grooming
General Manners
Table Manners
Takes Care of Room and Belongings
Miscellaneous
Knows Chores
Total A

NEGATIVE

Mental
Assessment Item	Score (1–6)
Deluded
Hostile
Compulsive
Confused
Withdrawn
Preoccupied
Tense
Hyper
Frustrated
Adverse to Physical Contact
Sexual Problems
Gets Lost
Immaturity
Childish
Spoiled
Selfish
Stubborn
Craves Attention
Wants Magical Relationships
Clings to People
Expresses Feelings Inappropriately
Motivation
Lazy
Bored
Spoils Self
Plays Head Games
Postpones
Miscellaneous
Defensive
Resentful
Uses Others
Total B

FINAL RATING

Total A Minus Total B
Final Rating

My Suicidal Friend

I had a friend off and on for 25 years who was always depressed. I believed his stories about his various mental “conditions” and trying to improve. I liked him a lot, but was blind to his parasitical nature. He was always dumping his problems on me and even complete strangers. That’s how he got attention. When I had a problem, he didn’t care.

This went on over the years as he moved around the country going through self-help groups, therapists, jobs, acquaintances, and infatuations. He never seemed to improve. (He didn’t want to.)

He had a high IQ, an ivy league education, and great talent for comedy, but was an en­cyclopedia of misery. He let everyone know how awful life was and made a career of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. He began to talk of suicide.

About then I ran the home for mental patients. They were l0% crazy and 90% spoiled, immature, and irresponsible. Ah ha! My friend was irresponsible. That was why he didn’t take care of his hygiene, wardrobe, car, apt. money etc. It wasn’t ‘mental.’ The same with the rest of his life. If he could blame all of his problems on ‘society’ or ‘these times’ etc., he wasn’t responsible.

His behavior declined. Once we made plans to go out as a foursome, but when he saw his blind date, he wanted to cancel. He went, but ruined the evening. Another time he was invited to a party. He made a play for a much younger woman, who didn’t respond, and left without saying a word.

Later he dropped out of sight for 4 years, and then resumed the friendship with no explanation nor apology. In his 60s now, he chased women in their 30s and 20s. He drove without a license, nor insurance, and had his car repossessed. He got a mysterious inheritance of $2000, spent it on a TV, a VCR, and a bike and gave the bike away.

His depressing stories grew worse. I had no desire to see him, and soon didn’t want him to call. All that was left were the great jokes by mail. They had a richness unequalled. But he didn’t see this nor the worth of a mutual friend, the good times the three of us had had, nor women, work, life, relatives …. He resented everything and wanted his folks to take him in. He wrote I was ‘all he had.’ I let slip something critical of him and he dropped me. Why, if I was “all he had.” Another game.

His unwillingness to accept responsibility and his decline could have been charted on a graph. However “mental” he was, his behavior was increasingly inexcusable. He might fool psychiatrists, but I knew better. All his life he had done everything to keep from growing up and … paid the price.

(I used the same lessons on another friend, who did want help after his nervous breakdown. I kept after him about taking more responsibility for his life. Slowly he did; he got better, and said he owed it all to me. You live to hear such things.) #

Parents of Mental Patients

When discussing mental (not retarded) patients, many people are not aware of what the parents are like. I had a some contact with them when running a home for male patients in their 20s and 30s.

Usually one parent called about visiting the home. (Why didn’t the son call?) The parents and son would arrive (one father in a Rolls Royce with black eyes the son had given him). They would tour the house, sit down, whip out a cigarette, and discuss arrangements.

Usually the mother did the talking. When the conversation was directed to the son, he sometimes bungled it. The parents would fill in; the son would interrupt and bungle it again. There would be smiles and laughs, but underneath smoldered resentment.

One mother said she would be taking her son home on weekends just like that his opinion meant nothing.

When some parents read the rules, I saw them smirk. Here was what they had been trying to get their son to do for years. I thought they would support me, but this was naive.

After one patient had been in the house a while, I complained to his mother about his not cleaning his room. She said, ‘Oh, Tom never cleans his ROOO—OOOOM!’ as if someone had forgotten to tell me.

During the week I would get the patients out of bed, have them take care of their cooking, laundry, chores, and get them off to catch the bus for their therapy. On weekends some parents let them come home, sleep the whole weekend, and did everything for them.

One couple said they would be ‘ever so grateful’ if I could get their son on his feet. But they wouldn’t go to family therapy, they had him home weekends, and eventually let him move home. Nothing was worse. He spent most of the next three years in bed. He wasn’t ‘sick;’ he did it to escape.

While it was easy to fault the mental health system, patients and their parents seemed out to prove the system bankrupt so the son could move home:

‘We’ve had him in hospitals, care homes, and all sorts of programs; no one cares nor can help him.’ (No one could help the patient if he didn’t want help.)

‘It’s been terrible, but he’s home now.’ (what they had wanted all along). Then too, once home the parents got part of the son’s check.

The parents love had smothered their sons over the years, giving and giving, never confronting, nor taking a stand. Once the sons were seen as ‘sick,’ parents felt they had to give even more. The sons could make their parents jump through hoops for cigarettes, spending money, long distance calls, attention, favors whatever. They weren’t devious, just immature. A lot of their behavior was testing. They wanted someone to set limits, but their parents wouldn’t, nor would the mental health system.

The parents ignored the fact their sons wouldn’t handle hygiene, proper attire, chores, manners, work habits, etc. If they couldn’t handle these small responsibilities, they couldn’t handle the big ones involved in getting well. That must be why patients went in and out of hospitals, homes, and programs over the years, costing some parents all their insurance and savings.

When parents found a hospital or doctor they liked, some went overboard describing it or him as ‘so wonderful, caring, warm, dedicated, or fantastic.’ They were looking for magic. One couple talked about their son ‘snapping out of it’. Nothing was further from the truth; progress is slow and painful. One mother held hands with her son during therapy. Another in a documentary brought her son candy and fawned over him, ‘Oh, he’s so wonderful; just look at him. Oh, I love him so

much …’ The son got the candy, turned his back on her, and went back to his ward. He cared less.

Parents and sons were mutually dependent and resentful – sometimes to the point of great anger. Little wonder there was the conspicuous absence of one parent who had washed his hands of the problem. Hence the comments of the remaining parent:

‘He doesn’t have anyone but me. He has no friends; no one cares.’ (There was no point in caring; the parent had made the son a baby, and the system had reinforced it.)

Parents and sons couldn’t be separated with a crowbar. One operator of one of these homes put it in an interesting way – ‘If some patients got well, the parents would divorce, as their son’s problems were the only thing keeping them together.’

Much later I joined a parents group. It seemed to hold promise, but their main interest was more and more ‘care, treatment, services, therapy and programs’ (each word meaning the next). When I said their sons weren’t going to get well without learning responsibility, they didn’t want to hear it. When a former patient said she began to get well only after realizing it was her responsibility as her folks had moved out of the country, they missed the point. They would work for improvement at the higher levels of the system, but wouldn’t look at the nuts and bolts. Some guidelines are in order:

Parent duties

Prohibit adult patients from living with or close to their parents. Lengthy outlines on matters which might have contributed to the patient’s condition. Parents to do nothing for their son he can do for himself. Only one call per week and one day visit per month. Withdraw from major responsibilities in his life. Mandatory family therapy.

Parent rights

To be dealt with in plain language. To periodically rate all agencies, programs, and staffs. To assure records are completed, used, and transferred on time. Some way of assuring that those involved with their son collaborate regularly. Access to the family therapy part of the record.

Access to a descriptions and ratings of all agencies, medications, programs, relevant literature, and key staff. #

The Far Left and Far Right

During and since my years in social work and politics, I’ve always been interested in what people believe, but more importantly why they believe it. As objective as they try to be, they tend to believe what they want to believe; and they want to believe certain things because of how their minds work. The far left and far right go to extremes because they are immature.

It seems the far left (Jane Fonda types in the late 60s) grew up spoiled, irresponsible, unconditionally loved, and learned to get by on charm and rhetoric. They came of age idealistic and unprepared. They found reality too harsh and rebelled radically. They tear down the establishment yet expect it to cure all of society’s problems the way an adolescent criticizes his folks, yet expects them to solve all their problems. They don’t hold the poor responsible because they (the far left) never learned responsibility. They don’t understand how basic it is. They put it aside and look for a world that is secure, loving, socialistic, egalitarian, positive, psychologically oriented, welleducated, and rational. They don’t find it and become cynical.

The far right (John Birchers, Lindon Larouches) are the other extreme. They are immature in a different way. They are repressed. They didn’t develop emotionally, establish their identities, or become fully in touch with their feelings. They never resolved many issues, and are angry and fearful. They feel under siege and don’t know why. They resist change until everything is order. They make fetishes of guns, the bible, the flag, the past, and the constitution – secure beacons in a threatening world of change. They plod through life doing their “duty.” Talking about sex is taboo, homosexuality is an abomination, and issues are black and white sometimes the work of God, the devil, or communists. Security is the biggest military, biggest police force, and biggest gun in the closet. They over identify with their leaders and want them to do their thinking, fight their battles, be macho (and ride a white horse). They don’t find these and remain frustrated, threatened, and angry.

Category	Far Left	Moderate	Far Right
I.Q. & Education	More	Average	Average
Maturity – Identity	Groping	Settled	Stunted
Love is	Everything	Part of life	To be earned
Sensitive	Overly	Somewhat	Lacking
Outlook	Idealistic	Realistic	Reactionary
Believe in	Theories	Practicalities	Dogmas
Orientation	Future	Present	Past
Attitude toward: Social classes	Anti	Accepting	Regimented
Attitude toward: Superiors	Too chummy	Some distance	Obedient
Attitude toward: Traditional values	Anti	Valued	Dogmatic
Attitude toward: Discipline	Permissive	Firm	Repressive
Attitude toward: Responsibility	Pass the buck	Valued	Burdensome
Attitude toward: Sex	Permissive	Restrained	Repressed
Attitude toward: Change	Worship	Accept	Fear
Attitude toward: Future	Revolution	Evolution	Turn clock back
Attitude toward: Leaders	Anti	Work with	Venerate
Attitude toward: Religion	Anti	Neutral	Fundamental
Attitude toward: Social problems	Guilt	Empathy	Intolerance
Attitude toward: Psychology	Worship	Use	Fear
See mankind as	Perfectible	Good & bad	Bad
See the poor as	Victims	Limited	Foolish
See hardened criminals as	“ill”	Childish (by choice)	Evil
Priorities	Social programs	—	Defense
Priorities	“Compassion”	—	Order
Approach	Sloppy	Flexible	Rigid
Approach	Carrot	Carrot & stick	Stick
Lifestyle	Non-conformist	Straight	Too conventional
Appearance	Non-conformist	Appropriate	Unimaginative
Humor	Scoffing	Natural	Lacking
Results	Jaded	Mature	Frustrated
Seen as	Bleeding heart	Mature	Mean

The far right is uptight and often mixes church and state.  The far left is irresponsible, idealistic, patronizing, and too generous.  A close look at each would probably show many in these groups are not fulfilled in their personal lives; they seek it in their beliefs, which become their “family.”  They seek beliefs that provide all the answers and pervade and control most aspects of life.  They want a world that can’t exist.  Both can be arrogant, smug, self‑righteous, and fanati­cal.  One has only to look to other countries to see what happens when either comes to power as “temporary” holders of great power – a Fidel Castro of the left or an Ayatollah of the right.  In an open, democratic society like ours there is room for these extremes to play themselves out.  This helps help keep the majority moderate.

Liberal vs Conservative

‘Liberal’ is portrayed (by the predominately liberal media) as ‘progressive, modern, openminded, compassionate, enlightened, egalitarian, tolerant, and generous’.

‘Conservative’ is portrayed as ‘backward, stingy, mean, rigid, heartless, selfish, narrow, angry, and fearful’.

Liberal	Conservative
Colleges
News Media	Business
Entertainment
Social Work
Psychology
ACLU
Spokesmen for the poor & minorities
18% of the public	40%
Under age 30	Over age 30
New values	Traditional values
Rights	Responsibilities
Socialism	Capitalism
Europe	U.S.
When one person gains, another loses	False
Those with more are greedy and oppress those with less	False

Those with less	Those with more
Tenants	Landlords
Labor	Management
Consumers	“Big business”
Minorities	Whites
Criminals, bums	“Society”
The 3rd World	The U.S.
Under age 30	Over

Liberal	Conservative
Intellectuals are usually right	False
The media and colleges present balanced views	False; they are predominantly liberal
An ideal world is possible	Naive
Since it’s not ideal, blame whatever’s old	False
If old is bad, new is good	False
The old establishment is guilty	The old establishment is praiseworthy
Blame or postpone traditional values	Fatal
People in olden days were simpletons	Anything but
The past is a burden	It teaches wisdom, gained at great sacrifice
FDR and the “New Deal” saved the country	False
The 50s were dull and antiseptic	Some of our best times
The late 60s were noble	Some of our worst
The 80s were a time of greed	Not really
Venerate the young	They have their place
Adults must understand youth	And vice versa
These are new times	Not necessarily
People are different now	Human nature doesn’t change
Generation gap	Not among well-adjusted people
Individualism means greed	False
The masses	The individual
Security	Rugged individualism
Revolutionary reform	Evolutionary change
Change for the sake of itself	Change only when appropriate
Liberals care more	Possibly
Caring means emotion	Not necessarily
Caring means being generous	Not necessarily
Caring means being permissive	It often means being strict
Matters are complex	Not necessarily
People are not responsible for their behavior	They are responsible
Life owes us a living	Self-reliance
Good intentions are enough	Naive
Be positive	Be realistic
School, work, & life should be fun, easy, and feel good	Partly
Love is all you need	False
Don’t discuss negatives and they’ll go away	False
Don’t prohibit something or someone will try it	Laws are a fact of life
Never impose values	Instill them
Tolerate small stuff	Nip it in the bud
More tolerant of panhandling, graffiti, profanity, sexual titillation, gambling, prostitution, drugs, and alcohol	Less tolerant
Authority is bad	Authority is a fact of life
Use a carrot	Use a carrot and a stick
Punishment is vengeance	It’s often justice
Rehabilitate, don’t punish	Punishment is part of rehabilitation
Disciplining kids is mean	Discipline is basic
Teachers, businessmen, cops, and landlords should be semi-social workers	They should do their jobs first
Less emphasis on manners, honesty, and good faith	More emphasis on manners, honesty, and good faith
More rights for students, runaways, criminals, derelicts, mental patients, the poor, etc.	The firmness of the past was better
A day’s pay	A day’s work
Whites have a monopoly on prejudice	Everyone has prejudice about color, age, class, ethnicity, gender, income, education, occupation, race, religion, accents, lifestyles, etc.
Forced mixing (bussing, quotas)	Voluntary mixing
Don’t judge people by their appearance	Appearance tells a lot

Politics

Government is good	Government is a necessary evil
Government is under-taxed	Government is overspent
Government must play a dominant role	False, as demonstrated by Hong Kong and 19th-century America
The answer to problems is more government	The role of government in the U.S. has multiplied over the years, and we are worse off in many ways
Money solves problems	Not necessarily
More foreign aid	Aid promotes dependence, socialism, poverty, inefficiency, waste, and resentment
Don’t export democracy and capitalism	Do

Economics

19th-century robber barons exploited the masses	False. The standard of living rose dramatically, charity and private education flourished, and libraries and cultural activities grew significantly.
Capitalism is taking	Capitalism is giving
Capitalism is a profit system	Capitalism is a profit-and-loss system
Capitalism is best for the rich	Capitalism is best for all
It’s inefficient	But superior to other systems
Capitalism caused the Depression	The government did
Thus government had to get more involved	False
The minimum wage is beneficial	Harmful
Tax substantially	The bare minimum
The trade deficit is bad	False
Tariffs are beneficial	False
Industrial policy	Free market
Price ceilings are beneficial	They cause scarcities
Price supports are beneficial	They cause surpluses
Public utilities have to be monopolies	False
Automation means a loss of jobs	It creates about as many new jobs
Licensing helps workers	False. It overpays some and lowers the number of jobs.
The government should create jobs	False. The private sector is best at this.
Job security	Your security is your skills
Most jobs are created by big companies	By small companies
Improved working conditions are due to unions	To capitalism
When unions win higher wages, everyone benefits	False. The number of jobs drops, the price goes up, and the wages of the rest of the workers drop.
A worker should be able to buy the product he makes	No
If new jobs don’t pay much, something’s wrong	Not necessarily
Help labor	By deregulating
Laws adding 11th and 12th grades were passed to benefit teens	False. They were passed to protect union jobs from teens.
Since communism failed, Eastern Europe should try socialism	False. They should try capitalism.
Corporations have a social responsibility	Not as much as we’re led to believe
Forgive student and foreign debts	That increases the burden on others

Class

Social classes mean people are unequal	Equal but different
Classes conflict	They complement each other
Class lines are rigid	Anything but
Classes are determined by education, income, and occupation	False. By interests, ability, and outlook
Class means snobbery	False
Elites are bad	Not when open to competition
The upper class keeps out others	Always room at the top
The upper class has more success and happiness	False
If the rich get richer and the poor poorer, something’s wrong	Not necessarily
Everyone wants to get ahead	False
The lower class is oppressed	Is carried
The lower class can be helped	False
Equal opportunity produces equal results	Extremely naive
The government should make everyone middle class	False

Education

Social classes mean people are unequal	Equal but different
Classes conflict	They complement each other
Class lines are rigid	Anything but
Classes are determined by education, income, and occupation	False. By interests, ability, and outlook
Class means snobbery	False
Elites are bad	Not when open to competition
The upper class keeps out others	Always room at the top
The upper class has more success and happiness	False
If the rich get richer and the poor poorer, something’s wrong	Not necessarily
Everyone wants to get ahead	False
The lower class is oppressed	Is carried
The lower class can be helped	False
Equal opportunity produces equal results	Extremely naive
The government should make everyone middle class	False

Race

The U.S. is a melting pot	False. It’s a salad bowl of ethnic groups and social classes.
Discrimination is the main obstacle to minority advancement	False. The Japanese and the Jews progressed the most when discriminated against the most.
Being black in the U.S. holds one back	Not blacks from the Caribbean
Discrimination caused high black teenage unemployment	Minimum wage caused it
Job quotas, charity, subsidies, and preferential treatment help minorities	False. They are helped by self-reliance, work skills, education, and business experience.

Crime

Crime is due to poverty	False. Even during the Depression, we didn’t have the crime we have now.
Crime is due to lack of money, education, and opportunity	Then big cities should have less crime than rural areas, but they have more.
Black crime is a protest against whites	Not so; most victims of black crime are blacks.
Riots are a legitimate form of protest	False
Knee-jerk forgiveness of crimes and debts	Restitution
Many criminals had bad childhoods	So did their brothers who did not choose crime.
Find the cause of crime	Enforce the law
A 17-year-old criminal is a “child”	Is a teenager

Psychology

Psychology comes first	Responsibility does
Blame your folks	Take responsibility
Problems come from wrong thinking	False
Self-expression whenever	When appropriate
Traditional values hamper relationships	They enhance them
Getting fired is traumatic	Not necessarily
Flee stress and depression	They are part of life
Avoid problems	Face them
Instant gratification	False
It’s hard to spoil a child	It’s easy and disastrous
Postpone maturity	False
Self-pity when things go wrong	Get on with life
Tough times can break you	Or make you
Mental patients are sick	Many are 10% sick and 90% spoiled, immature, and irresponsible.

Poverty

Anti-poverty work is recent	It’s existed for centuries
There is no dignity in being poor	One’s dignity doesn’t depend on one’s income
An income should be able to support a family	False
Wealth is money	Wealth is morale, ingenuity, skills, and capitalism
The rich cause poverty	False
The rich exploit the poor	False
They are unhappy, trapped, and can’t work	False
They can’t live without welfare and food stamps	Half do
The poor crave work	They’re paid not to
The poor can’t find work	Poor immigrants can
Menial work is unacceptable	False. It’s the traditional route out of poverty, and it’s vital to teenagers for developing work habits.
Slums are hopeless for small business	Not for immigrants
Slum conditions are the fault of “society”	Mostly of slum dwellers
Decent housing brings traditional values	The opposite
Slums are hopeless	Not necessarily
Banks & chain stores owe slums a branch	False
Have kids	Wait till you can do it right
Right to welfare	Welfare benefits should be below the lowest wage so the poor will have every reason to look for work.
Help the needy	The deserving
Be generous	Meet them part way
The poor can leapfrog menial work with education and credentials	Bad advice, as every group that got ahead in the U.S. did so by taking menial work and working harder than the class above.
All social programs help	False: rent control creates inequities and a housing shortage, guaranteed income hasn’t worked, and welfare polarizes and breaks up families.
The poor shouldn’t pay income taxes	False
Redistribute the wealth	Unwise
To redistribute, soak the rich	Suicide, as they are the manufacturers, investors, and the most productive.
Working with the poor radicalizes volunteers	False
Money will cure the slums	False
Mix slums with better areas	False
A social agency should not make a profit	False
Outsiders have no right to impose middle-class values on the slums	False. Such values are universal.

American Poor	Immigrant Poor
Live like kings compared to the 3rd World	Have seen real poverty
Values from the street	Values from the family
Getting ahead means luck	Getting ahead means traditional values
Weak families	Strong families
Become homeless	Don’t
Panhandle	Don’t
Won’t take any job	Will
Often poor work habits	Superb work habits
Unskilled & out of work	Unskilled, poor English, & working
Can’t save money	Do, and send it abroad to relatives
Drop out	Study hard
Reach mid-20s without work	Reach mid-20s without a vacation
Rarely start a small business	Often start one
Look to government	Look to selves
Self-pity, resentment, protest	Gratitude
Are “alienated”	Are the true aliens
Bored	Never enough time
Disprove the American dream	Prove it

Poverty Spokesmen	Immigrant poor
Crowded living is subhuman	Is tolerable
More subsidies	Fewer
Welfare is beneficial	Is a cancer
“Decent living” wages & benefits	Impossible with many small family businesses
The poor are “oppressed”	Have seen little or no freedom of speech, press, protest, business, etc. in their countries
Yell about rights	Quiet
America is discrimination and exploitation	Opportunity
Schools “fail” the poor	The schools are a blessing
Crime, drugs, alcohol, illegitimacy, etc. are due to poverty	No excuse for these

M. Friedman, T. Sowell, G. Gilder, H. Hazlitt, E. Hoffer, R. Price

TRADITIONAL VALUES

Responsibility (the most important).

Capitalism, limited government, the private sector, right to work (nonunion), the individual, selfreliance (rather than a welfare state).

Foresight (thrift, saving, planning).

Golden rule (reliability, honesty, good faith, fairness, manners, respect for property, authority, elders, and ethnic groups).

Law and order, authority, punishment, family teamwork, hard work, discipline, diligence, moderation, restraint, wholesomeness, modesty, selfrespect, practical education, some censorship, some conformity.

Modifications of some traditional values for which liberals get credit:

• More rights for minorities, women, homosexuals, youth, the handicapped.
• More openness about battered spouses, the gay world, addiction, child abuse, incest, abortion, impotence, etc.
• More accepting of ethnic diversity and intermarriage.
• More accepting of separation & divorce.
• More use of psychology to get to the roots of one’s problems instead of ‘keeping it all in’ and enduring ‘long suffering’.
• More openness about public figures instead of putting them on a pedestal.
• More open minded about premarital relations in long term, responsible relationships.
• More questioning of religion.
• Integrating newsrooms.

Recommendations

Realize our society is not as gloomy as liberals like to think.

People in the various ‘classes’ are basically equal, but different.

It’s OK to have more; it’s OK to have less.

Make most traditional values your primary guidelines. Support only charities that promote them.

Shrink government and privatize it.

Go over this with young people occasionally. Steer them into ‘career counseling’, a practical education, apprenticeships, and experience in the real world.

Advice to Immigrants

Many immigrants courageously come to the U.S. knowing little of the language and customs. It takes them a long time to adapt. When I was their English teacher, social worker, roommate and friend, I used to advise them:

• If you have a choice, live between a big city where the jobs are and the country where you’re more of an individual. Try to live near your relatives, your ethnic group, and a good climate (where life is much easier).
• Learn about self-help groups. If you can’t find one, start one.
• For inexpensive legal help, call a paralegal.
• Avoid welfare – the longer you’re on, the harder to get off.
• Some people have more ability than others for learning a language. Progress comes in levels. You’re on one level for a while, seeming to make no progress. Then you make progress to a higher level, stay there for a long time, and later move up to another level.
• The lst generation of immigrants works hard, the 2nd generation gets educated, the 3rd prospers.
• Immigrants who have been here for a long time sometimes resent recent immigrants from their country as ‘fresh off the boat.’
• Older immigrants want to preserve the customs, partly to retain some of the control and status they’ve lost. Sometimes they put too much pressure on their kids.
• Keep in touch with friends and relatives in your country.
• There are differences among cultures – take the best from each. A lot of immigrant values are superior to American values.

Be realistic about the media (TV, magazines, newspapers)

They perform invaluable services, but they often distort and exaggerate, and they are often:

• Inconsistent, arrogant, tasteless, and lacking perspective.
• Polarizing – setting one group against another.
• Irresponsible in using so much sexual titillation.
• Unbalanced – shortsighted, liberal.
• Negative.

They promote the following myths:

Myths	Reality
The U.S. is a melting pot	False, it’s a salad bowl.
Time brings less prejudice	Somewhat.
Being near another ethnic group brings goodwill	Only some.
Discrimination is the main obstacle to minority advancement	False. The Japanese and the Jews progressed the most when most discriminated against.
Being Black holds one back	Not West Indians.
Vocational education helps	False. Students in it change jobs, are out of work as much as anyone, and don’t earn more than those not in it.
Whites are prejudiced	Everyone has prejudices about color, age, class, ethnicity, gender, income, education, occupation, race, religion, accents, lifestyles, etc.
The poor can avoid menial work with education and credentials	Terrible advice, as every group that got ahead in the U.S. did so by taking menial work and working harder than the class above.
All social programs help	False. Rent control is unfair and creates a housing shortage; guaranteed income hasn’t worked; welfare breaks up families and causes them to be resented by the working poor.
There is no dignity in being poor	False.

Social workers

• Some get too emotional – with their talk about ‘compassion, caring, reaching out, dedication, love, etc.’.
• Some get too friendly. Keep a distance.
• Some have no business sense – no address on the building, no sense of time, efficiency, cost, etc.
• Some are dreamers or rebels and have more problems than those they are trying to help.
• Many use doubletalk and talk forever.
• Most don’t believe in traditional values.

A good one is sensible, clean cut, mature, uses plain language, is an agent (not a friend), is empathetic (not sympathetic), has something practical to offer, and meets you only part way.

Advice to the Poor

I spent years in social work. Virtually nothing worked because, social workers didn’t believe in much. Traditional values were postponed while everyone got dewy-eyed over ‘love, caring, compassion, and reaching out.’

Remember many social workers:

• Have never been poor nor lived in a slum.
• Think the government owes everyone a living.
• Put down unskilled work (flipping hamburgers, etc.) as ‘menial’.
• Feel sorry for bums and criminals and ignore decent, working people.
• Are sure poor Americans cannot get ahead, yet are sure poor immigrants will get ahead.
• Try to push the poor into college when they generally don’t have the interest and often drop or flunk out.
• Promise to rebuild riot torn areas, but don’t.
• Get too soapy and buddy-buddy.
• Have no business sense – no address on the building, no sense of time, bottom line, efficiency, etc.
• Don’t look for the difference between poverty caused by bad luck and poverty caused by foolishness.
• Think they are Robin Hood, talk psycho-babble and talk forever. – Know more, but you often know better.

Some have more problems than the poor and promote the following myths:

Myths	Reality
Being near another ethnic group brings goodwill	Some.
Discrimination is the main obstacle to minority advancement	False. The Japanese and the Jews progressed the most when most discriminated against.
Being Black holds one back	Not Blacks from the Caribbean.
Whites have a monopoly on prejudice	Everyone has some prejudices about color, age, class, ethnicity, gender, income, education, occupation, race, religion, accents, lifestyles, etc.
The poor can leapfrog unskilled work with education and credentials	Terrible advice, as every poor group that got ahead in the U.S. did so by taking unskilled work.
All social programs help	False. Rent control is unfair and creates a housing shortage; welfare breaks up families and sets the welfare poor against the working poor.

A good social worker is sensible, clean cut, uses plain language, is like an agent (not a buddy), has something practical to offer, and meets you only part way. He understands your situation, but doesn’t encourage you to feel sorry for yourself,

Beware of the poor who are ‘lowlife’

They choose to remain spoiled, immature, and irresponsible. They never plan ahead; they live for the moment, work only when they have to, are often violent, and neglect and abuse their kids and property. They have little privacy, short adolescence, and little interest in school or public service. They are afraid of failure and rejection, and they prefer to live in the slums. They could get ahead by maturing and taking responsibility, but they choose not to.

Avoid vice: alcohol, drugs, and gambling

The middle class can afford to waste their money on these; the poor can’t. The poor gamble more often and a bigger share of their paychecks than others. Many of them believe getting ahead is luck, and gambling reinforces this. Getting ahead comes from traditional values.

Misc

• Avoid living places (like New York City), where the poor are encouraged to feel sorry for themselves and to look to government. You’re better off where people believe in self-reliance.
• Consider the benefits of being around your relatives, your ethnic group, and a good climate.
• Watch how poor immigrants get ahead.
• If you have to put a relative in a social program, look for the strictest as most are too lenient.
• Learn about self-help groups. If you can’t find one, start one.
• Give yourself credit for raising good kids in bad neighborhoods.
• Use humor – ‘If it wasn’t for my bad luck, I wouldn’t have any luck.’ ‘I got so low, I had to reach up to touch bottom.’ ‘If poverty builds character, I must be a saint.’

Your rights

• To live in a quiet, safe, clean neighborhood.
• To be poor in money and rich in everything else.
• To not be mislead by dreamers who say everyone can finish college, be a sports star, a millionaire, an executive, etc.
• To not be flattered by patronizing phonies who are looking for votes or ways to make themselves look good.

Traditional values

Responsibility (the most important).

Foresight (thrift, saving, planning).

Right to work (non-union).

Self-reliance (rather than looking to government).

Golden rule (reliability, honesty, good faith, fairness, manners, respect for property, authority, elders, and ethnic groups).

Law and order, authority, punishment, family teamwork, hard work, discipline, diligence, moderation, restraint, wholesomeness, modesty, self-respect, practical education (not theoretical), some censorship, some conformity.

Hazlitt On Poverty

After some years in social work, it was with relief I read Henry Hazlitt’s THE CONQUEST OF POVERTY. Published in ’73, his insights are as pertinent as ever. They explode the following myths:

• The amount of wealth is limited. (False, there is a much as people want to create.)
• The poor are trapped. (False).
• The rich get richer, the poor, poorer. (False, both progress proportionately.)
• The rich cause poverty. (False).
• The owners of a business get most of its income. (False, most goes for workers’ wages.)
• Capitalism helps the rich the most. (False, it helps the masses the most.)
• Social programs help the poor. (False, they hurt the poor and society. )

Hazlitt says to gain perspective we should be aware that:

• There had always been mass poverty until the midl8th century, when it was eliminated in the advanced countries by capitalism.
• Individual poverty cannot be eliminated as some people prefer to live near destitution.
• Government handouts easily get out of control. This happened in ancient Rome; and it happened in l9th century England to such a degree, laws were passed to keep benefits beneath the lowest wage so the poor would every reason to look for work.

Hazlitt says in order in order for social programs (and foreign aid) to be effective:

• They have to be keyed to promoting work, saving, and skills, which is best done through capitalism.
• Capitalism depends on the enterprise of the few and the labor of many.
• The large salaries of the few are irrelevant when considering the many jobs and valuable products they create.
• Trying to redistribute the wealth of those few is pointless and suicidal.

He says we have been led astray by social workers who:

• Talk as if antipoverty is a recent effort. Never define poverty. Pity the pauper, but not the worker nor the taxpayer. Insist on seeing the poor as “exploited victims of maldistributions of wealth and heartless laissez faire.” Haven’t faced the disastrous results of social programs.
• Want no loss of dignity for a person when he gets on welfare, but a gain when he gets off. Coddle the poor despite their agency’s policies to the contrary. Work to make everyone equal by leveling down, never summoning up. Preen themselves on compassion. Systematically ignore the reasons for poverty. Don’t learn from the past. Don’t distinguish between poverty caused by misfortune and that caused by folly.

After many jobs in social work, I couldn’t agree more. Why haven’t we heard more of such views? Let’s take a break from liberal guilt and clear the air by challenging guaranteed income, negative income tax, minimum wage, laws increasing union power, government spending, graduated income taxes, opposition to automation, “spreadthework” schemes, and punitive taxes on capital gains, inheritance, and corporations.

Slums And The Solution

I wanted to learn about “the downtrodden victims of society who lived in abject poverty.” I lived in Spanish Harlem and the lower eastside of New York (and later behind the capitol in Wash. D.C.)

Rather than “the pitiful and oppressed poor held down by the establishment,” I found something different. Cars were benches people sat on them, which ground the grit into the paint. Some stood or walked on them. Occasionally a car found itself up on milk boxes in the morning with the back tires off. The next day the front tires and engine parts disappeared, and later kids used it as a jungle gym. Some were set afire.

So much trash and litter filled the gutters, the streets were almost level with the sidewalk, although cleaned every two days.

You knew you were in the slums in New York City when coming up the subway stairs. When your eyes came up to the level of the street, they saw broken glass, litter, and sidewalks darkened by gum and fuel oil. I got so used to it, when I came up the stairs in a clean neighborhood, it was a pleasant shock.

When furniture caught fire or was unwanted, it was thrown on the sidewalk. People “air mailed” trash out the windows. Many phone booths didn’t work, were used as urinals, and were vandalized for change.

I couldn’t get insurance on my apartment. When I had people over, they had to come by cab. Kids didn’t yell when playing; they screeched. You never knew when it was an emergency. The laundromat had plexiglass windows and “iron putty” covering the bolts holding the washers down.

Once I stopped a 7thgrade boy from beating a terrified girl. He couldn’t understand what I was doing.

The local SAFEWAY was the only supermarket in the neighborhood. It had plexiglass windows. Kids ran in and out flirting, chasing, and stealing. People double parked, left their shopping carts in the middle of the aisle, and coughed on you in the slow-motion line.

A nearby social agency sent around flyers saying, “Let’s stop SAFEWAY from abusing the neighborhood,” “Let’s get SAFEWAY to lower prices and improve service.” These came through the mail slot on a regular basis. Then a long interval. Finally one came through: “Since SAFEWAY closed, let’s car pool to the nearest market.” Incredible. Instead of bugging SAFEWAY, the social agency should have been trying to keep it open.

That social agency held dances. The decibels could have taken the paint off the walls. They blasted out of the building like a locomotive, practically shaking the windows across the street. Inside no one could even shout. These were put on with no notice to neighbors and lasted until 2:00 a.m.

The slums had dogs on three legs, blaring stereos and TV’s, babies crying and dogs barking for hours, rockthrowing, windows used as doors, baleful, sullen stares, graffiti, and horn blowing right outside your window in the middle of the night from cab drivers scared to leave their cabs.

The pets were vicious or spooked; and when you told a kid to stop doing something, he took it as a challenge to be smart-aleck.

Many of the poor didn’t like themselves nor each other. Life was cheap. People spat, cursed, threatened, fought, drank, and took drugs. There must have been a higher percentage of accidents.

The mailboxes in some buildings had been broken into so often, people waited out front for their welfare checks. The apathy and the danger affected teachers, police, and other city workers. Some must have done only the minimum amount of work, burned out, or transferred. Chain stores, banks, and supermarkets avoided the area because of: bad checks, shoplifting, phony accidents and claims, shopping cart losses, crime against employees, vandalism to buildings and cars, and time lost in handling food stamps. (I read Ralph’s in Calif. lost money in nine out of ten of its inner city markets.) That is why prices are higher.

The slums didn’t need the peace corps; they needed the marine corps. Everything was down 40 notches. But this isn’t what we hear. Somehow the media and academia are compelled to excuse those who live in the slums and blame everyone outside:

1. Blame “society”: False. Most of the problems are the fault of the poor. Where are ambition and responsibility? In sending to school kids who haven’t bathed in days? In the TV on all night instead of homework? In the empty library, the lack of interest in schools, markets, parks, or voting? How long do you have to live in a slum before losing “understanding and compassion” for people who abuse you, their pets, kids, property, and each other? How long do you believe it is “racial, economic, or political” when you live in such a place?
2. Blame the police: Some cities put their worst cops in the slums, but this doesn’t account for all the nonsense.
3. Money is the answer: False. Millions have been spent on social programs and we still have slums. In fact, many programs have done more harm than good by causing dependence and resentment.
4. No dignity in poverty: Only partly true. Slum living and slum schooling are undignified, but being poor isn’t. I have known many who were poor in money and rich in everything else. Many of our parents and grandparents were poor and didn’t feel they had less dignity or that the government owed them a living.
5. The poor are ambitious: Many people, poor or not, are not ambitious.
6. Mix the slums with better areas: This is idealistic, unfair, and enrages middle-class people of all colors, some of whom have worked hard to escape the slums.

What’s the answer?

1. Look at history:
   • Poverty has been helped more by capitalism than by government programs (socialism).
   • The definition of poverty has been expanded over the years. The American poor have consistently been told they are badly off, when they live like kings compared with the way most Americans lived 80 years ago. Our elderly can tell us about this and how the poor then had more hope and pride.
2. Be realistic: Approach the subject without rhetoric or emotion. Find the literature that describes slums honestly and doesn’t excuse the poor who mismanage their affairs. Learn about them from merchants, insurance companies, creditors, realtors, city employees, bus and cab drivers, and the working and sensible poor. Acknowledge that higher prices in the slums are the result of the added costs. Study how the good elements there raise good kids despite enormous odds. Study how poor immigrants pass our poor.
3. Avoid liberals: Most of those in the media, academia, social work, and the ACLU are liberals. Most have never lived in a slum, nor been poor. They are the “excuse industry.” Even after the facts about many of the poor mismanaging their affairs are glaringly clear, liberals are still turning over every rock looking for “oppression, cultural deprivation, inequity, exploitation, violation of rights,” etc.
4. Plain language: No jargon, rhetoric, psychobabble, or slum jive.
5. Fair share: Of services and competent city workers. This is difficult as better workers gravitate to better neighborhoods, and some cities “dump” their worst workers into the slums.
6. Fix responsibility: For noise, rundown property, abandoned cars, illegal dumping, crime, etc.
7. Law enforcement: The small matters of noise, litter, parking, panhandling, vagrancy, etc. add up. They are symbolic, they affect morale, and cleaning them up causes interest in going after bigger problems.
8. Traditional values: Whether the law enforcer is from the slums or not, he has to understand the slums on one hand, but BELIEVE in society’s values on the other. He doesn’t think noise, threats, screeching, drunkenness, or crime are normal. Such enforcers need maturity, confidence, and conviction as their work is all uphill and totally thankless in today’s permissive society. Such people are usually clean-cut. The disheveled ones are often ineffective. They often have more problems than the poor.
9. Free market: The private sector.

Housing

Turn housing projects over to tenants. In part of Wash. D.C. this raised rent collections l05%, cut vacancy rates l3%, and cut administrative costs 60%, crime 5% and teenage pregnancy and welfare dependency 50%. In other cities the same arrangement cut vacancy l8%, robbery 77%, and crime 66%. Next comes tenant ownership.

Phase out rent control; it creates inequities and a housing shortage. Allow cheaper housing, urban homesteading, and the subletting of rooms.

Work

Allow “right to work” and “work at home.” Allow kids under l4 to work part time. Study phasing out the minimum wage. This would create thousands of jobs for dropouts, delinquents, criminals, derelicts, addicts, the homeless, and others – many of whom need to develop work habits. They should be able to offer their services at a competitive wage.

Education

Allow parents to teach their kids at home and to have a choice of schools. Schools would have to compete for students and teachers.

Misc.

Privatize fire depts, parks, transportation, mail, education, justice, and charity. These have been successful.

All of these would let the poor who are motivated get ahead, and not be held back by those who aren’t. People could live with more dignity and hope – as they did in the past.

The Homeless

Having spent years in social work and briefly managed a homeless shelter, I feel we are being misled. The homeless are portrayed as the “nation’s failure”, the “disenfranchised,” who were “abandoned” by the economy, “never had a chance,” and have “fallen out of the mainstream.” They are “victims” who are owed food, lodging, clothing, and services.

Some are shown on a food line with bizarre mountains of hair and dirty, matted beards. No one would hire them that way; yet they’re never asked to get a haircut and shave in return for meals and lodging.

We are rarely given the views of those who deal directly with them bus depots, blood banks, merchants, neighbors, thrift stores, parks, libraries, burned-out relatives, and burned-out public servants. We rarely hear, “90% of them don’t want help” (from one shelter worker), or “onethird are crazy, onethird lazy, and onethird drunk” (from one who used to be homeless).

We’re told nothing can be done about skid row. We were told the same about prostitution in Los Angeles before it was cleaned up. Free food is supposed to be temporary, yet one patron of a mission didn’t miss a meal in 30 years. Shelters in New York were for temporary housing, yet the average stay was ll months. One skid row drifter won a huge jackpot, blew it, and returned to skid row. Another thought he would “go on welfare, when it began to rain.”

The subject needs coldblooded realists to cut through the rhetoric, emotion, and finger-pointing, to contact the neglected sources above, and to come up with recommendations like:

• Study what has worked in various cities and countries.
• Clarify rights: the homeless have a right to provide their own shelters [in some areas under certain conditions] when the city doesn’t. The public has a right not to be panhandled and not to have derelicts sleeping about.
• Find out why there were homeless during a labor shortage and why few immigrants become homeless.
• Find out why one homeless man said it’s easier to be homeless than to work for low wages.
• Consider returning to the past customs of dealing firmly withvagrants, mental patients, runaways, alcoholics, and addicts.
• Promote private solutions, realizing the government has done a poor job of running shelters and welfare hotels.
• Encourage non-professionals to run shelters. Make it profitable. Let them use campgrounds, farm labor camps, abandoned buildings, parts of military bases, and fallout shelters.
• Let businesses hire the homeless for sub-minimum wage plus room and board.
• Encourage non-professionals to get into the shelter business. Make it profitable. Let them use campgrounds, farm labor camps, abandoned buildings, parts of military bases, and fallout shelters.
• Require each community to provide shelter for only their share of the homeless. Require they be run strictly and fairly.
• Study the shelters that are run by the homeless.
• Study the “poorhouse” in Sacramento, CA. in the 80s. Let the homeless homestead abandoned buildings and vacant land.
• Allow tents and shanties next to city dumps, where the homeless can use cast off material. Waive liability for impure food from restaurants, markets, and other outlets. This would give access to eatable, but unsalable food.
• Permit powdered milk and donated or homemade food in shelters.
• Require work, haircuts, and development of resumes in exchange for food, clothing, shelter, etc.

A stricter approach in general with the homeless would:

• Show some people prefer to live near destitution.
• Make the homeless accountable for their hygiene, grooming, clothing, manners and participation in self-help groups and volunteer work,
• Make shelters safer and less infectious.
• Bring responsibility, which would separate the motivated from the freeloaders.

We shouldn’t be misled by idealists and guiltmongers. They give the homeless reasons for selfpity, and never look for nor credit the few good shelters. They blame society, yet tie it’s hands.

If immigrants with limited English can get ahead, the homeless can, when the responsibility is imaginatively and firmly put on them.

To Reform Welfare

• Turn it over to competing private agencies, who are rewarded for getting people off welfare (like America Works).
• Require fathers be identified and pay child support.
• Set welfare benefits below the lowest wage in the region (so those on welfare have every reason to look for work. This was done in l9th century England).
• If they don’t find work, require them to work (in the private economy, volunteer or paid) in proportion to the welfare they receive. (Lost winter coats and broken furniture would mean more work.) Those with youngsters could work at places that provide child care. Work habits should come 1st, job training 2nd, and only job-related education 3rd.
• Require the older children maintain certain levels in school or do part time volunteer or paid work.
• Allow parents and children, after fulfilling the obligations above, to get side jobs and save money up to a point of self-sufficiency.

These steps would cut down on dependence, resentment, stigma, additional births, and moving to another state to get higher benefits.

Why Immigrants Pass The Poor

With the help of the spokesmen for the poor, we have come to believe our poor are “trapped” in poverty. Yet we know that poor immigrants can get ahead. Our poor are fluent in English and are “left behind”, yet poor immigrants with limited Enlish get ahead. How did we develop these double standards? To find out, let’s compare both groups:

Many immigrants come from countries where they’ve seen: squalor, illiteracy, disease, civil unrest, war, hundreds of homeless kids on the streets, low status for women, and corruption we could never imagine. Some have had relatives taken away. Some have left or escaped through great hardship, been preyed on by smugglers and pirates, and lived in miserable refugee camps.

The American poor, on the other hand, have never had such hardships; but are pictured as “victims of a postindustrial, technical society,” where they have “fallen through the cracks,” and are “left behind,” “caught in a cycle of poverty”.

Some immigrants here live in slums, garages, and converted chicken coops. When Americans live like that, it’s “dehumanizing, substandard, and stigmatizing”.

Many immigrants come from countries where there is no minimum wage, welfare, medicare, poverty “line,” etc. They had to work. Here they pick crops, wash dishes, work on assembly lines, collect newspapers from trash, get parts from junk yards, shop at thrift shops, save pennies, never eat out, etc.

Many American poor thumb their noses as such practices. They are told menial work is undignified and welfare reinforces this by making it impractical. Their work habits deteriorate, and they fall out of the mainstream.

Many immigrants avoid gambling, alcohol, drugs, and crime and illegitimacy. When the American poor get into these, it’s blamed on “poverty, discrimination, peer pressure, boredom, lack of alternatives, stress,” etc.

Immigrants pool their money and start small businesses in ghettos where it was thought impossible. Some work l6 hours a day, 7 days a week. Some of the American poor criticize them, their prices, their not hiring locals, and say these immigrant shopkeepers should give something back. Give back? they provide a service no one else will!

Some American poor harass immigrants, boycott their stores, beat them up, and worse. They’re a scapegoat.

Many immigrant youth are taught respect, obedience, manners, chores, and hard work. They have to honor their folks and retain their culture often going to language schools on weekends. Since their parents sacrificed to come here and hack out a living, they are obligated to get an education they could never have dreamed of in their country.

Some are not allowed to date till their late teens or out of college. Some stand when the teacher enters the room. Some carry a text under one arm and a bilingual dictionary under the other. They crowd the libraries. Some have gone from arriving without English to graduating from high school five years later with top honors. (In their youthful idealism, they only hope to pay back their new country.)

Many American poor fight the schools. They have been told schools should lure them into education, which is supposed to mean social success, mental health, career, and maturity. When they don’t study, drop out, get pregnant, commit crimes, and can’t get a job, it was the fault of the school, “society,” immigrants, or the economy.

Some cry “discrimination,” yet the Jews and Japanese advanced most when discriminated against the most. Some cry “color,” yet the Blacks here that came from the Carribean are far ahead of American blacks.

Immigrants have different meanings for “poverty, family, work, saving, and education”. Little wonder they despair about what the American view of poverty is doing to some of their people.

Bad Neighborhood

After 25 years of a bad neighborhood, I gladly moved. Here’s what I left behind:

Some people left their trash barrels out for days. Some left shopping carts around, sometimes taking sections off to use as barbecue grills. Some didn’t get rid of their gophers or weeds. One left the parking strip next to his property bare dirt for 25 years. Some didn’t water, cut, or edge their lawns for weeks. Some never trimmed their bushes or trees which blocked the sidewalk. Some fences tilted forever; junk cars and debris stayed on front lawns. Some had vehicles in the drive, a boat on the lawn, and an RV on the side. One had six vehicles on the front lawn; another had nine vehicles in the driveway.

TVs, stereos, yelling, horns, and tires squealing. Radios on bikes and motorcycles. Boom boxes, profanity, name calling. Some revved up the car or boat engine they were working on for long periods some without mufflers. Untrained dogs barked for hours with the owners home. Some ice cream trucks came around l2 times a day with brainless music heard 7 blocks away. The sheriff’s deputies and county officials did nothing about this.

Occasionally there was be a tremendously loud stereo or a live band in a backyard, heard l0 blocks away. Outrageous, yet people did not call the police. One was extremely loud; I got in my car, drove a mile home, called the police. They wouldn’t respond unless a call came from THAT neighborhood.

When it was my neighborhood, I called. The deputies they would ask the neighbor to turn it down; but beyond that I had to sign a complaint. Same with dogs when I called animal control.

Lot of wrecks – many hit-n-runs. You learned to rush out to get license numbers.

People abandoned cars, dumped trash on public land, let dogs loose without collars, stole from construction sites, and harassed Asian refugees.

A school across the street didn’t keep up its grounds, wasted heat and tons of water, and threw out desks, lumber, books, and supplies. I called everyone, got few results and no follow up.

Improvement means getting realistic views from realtors, creditors, police, insurance companies, merchants, and others who know such neighborhoods and are never asked. This would point to law enforcement (preferably by private groups like homeowners associations). No theories, psychobabble, nor countless meetings just thankless enforcement of all laws big and small. #

Downward Mobility

We have become used to thinking of the ‘disadvantaged’ as ‘victims;’ however, some of them have done everything to get where they are. I give you Betty:

This mother of 3, ages 7l2, has 4 years of college, claims to speak 5 languages, and has traveled the world. Her father was a high government official and most of her brothers and sisters are professionals. She has a number of good qualities, and there the fun stops.

She was investigated for child neglect, but beat it. She was evicted from one house. One visits her home and there might be a beatup car parked the wrong way or one abandoned in the drive. The front and back yards are usually a mess. A faucet drips making a puddle near the entrance. A smoke detector bleeps for months, needing a battery.

The inside looks like a cyclone hit. It’s crowded with expensive furniture that was shipped at more than it was worth. Everything is stacked and strewn about. There is no place to put anything. The food is left out and spoils. The toothbrushes are in the same glass touching each other.

She asks people to work on things when there aren’t the space, tools, light, manuals, or peace and quiet. When being told simple alternatives to repairs, she doesn’t listen.

Once she had two families living there plus an illegal alien. Usually it’s her family, a nephew or two, a roomer, and some downandouter referred from a church.

Since her place is a disaster, the only people who stay there are nerdowells. She cooks and cleans up after them. Some sponge off her, break things, get into the mail, don’t take messages, run up the phone bill, take drugs, steal things, and move out, owing her rent. She finds another who causes trouble for a while, moves out, and then she finds another as bad. She doesn’t learn.

She is always late, overwhelmed, and unable to find things. She got a ticket, went to pay it, got lost, arrived late, and found out it was the wrong day. When a free washer and dryer were offered, she turned them down as they include installation.

The kids and the roomers run her ragged. Her health and morale break down periodically, and she looks old for her years.

She has no health nor car insurance, yet spent $250 for an answering machine, $400 to bail out a relative (not her responsibility), $l800 for a computer, sent her kids to private schools, and took them across the country. When the family got back, they didn’t have a ride from the airport; when they got home, they had to break a window to get in.

Her messy car breaks down a lot. Her phone and table manners are bad, she uses profanity and ethnic slurs around neighborhood kids, and she dumps refuse illegally.

She yells at her kids all day, lets them stay up late, and can’t get them up in the morning. Her adult video tapes are out where they can see the labels. Apparently the teenage nephews have seen some and stolen others. One of them, l6, had her l2 yr. old boy out till 2:00 AM. The latter calls her ‘mommie’, won’t study nor lift a finger to help, yet she ‘waits’ on him at meal time.

For all of the above, she has a thousand excuses: she is the victim, not the cause, the mess is temporary, the neighbors are low class – not her, others don’t know how to handle roomers – she does, other homes are depressing – not hers, people abuse her – not visa versa [even though they do a lot for her], they are ‘cheapskates’, and she thinks she excels at everything,. She has it all backwards.

The list goes on: impulsive, nervous, irresponsible, unreliable, dumps her troubles on complete strangers – life owes her a living. You feel sorry for her relatives, neighbors, and especially her kids, but not for her.

The public needs to know there are people like this. If they are helped, it should be under the strictest conditions.

Living With Bums

Any discussion of crime, addiction, welfare abuse or other anti-social behavior should involve a realistic look at bums and common criminals. After years of social work I thought I knew something about them, but it took renting rooms in my house for l5 years to find out.

Most of the roomers were working-class guys. If there were problems, things could be worked out because they were self-respecting, mature, and responsible.

There were others, however (who slipped through my ‘screening process’), who were bums and problems could not be worked out because they were immature (by choice). They lacked empathy and wanted lots of favors stamps, envelopes, change, jump starts, tools, etc. They wanted attention – wanted to talk about themselves at their convenience, not mine. They were overly sensitive, defensive, and wouldn’t sit down and discuss things when there was a problem. They got buddybuddy too fast, and expected their messes to be forgotten because we were ‘friends.’ They thought they could find a job and a woman far beyond their reach. They had companions, not friends. They were impulsive in eating, drinking, entertainment, and spending. They ignored the house rules or tested them; if you gave an inch, they took a mile.

Some ate highly greasy food, had terrible manners, always needed a haircut and shave, kept losing things and locking themselves out of the house, left shopping carts out front, dipped into other people’s food, slammed doors or didn’t close them, broke things and denied it, wasted my utilities, wasted their food, clothing, and tools, and seemed to yell or mumble. They got behind with their rent, which brought lots of stories, moving out in the middle of the night, and bouncing checks.

Some put off small repairs on their cars, costing them twice as much. Some told adult stories around youngsters. One hid a motorcycle in his room to work on.

They resented banks, bosses, cops, girls life owed them a living. They wouldn’t manage their weight, diet, health, belongings, or money and drifted from job to job. They drove uninsured cars with no spare or jack, and they ate out always broke, but always ate out. Some stole, gambled, drank, and smoked pot.

Many counselors would say their problem was mental, educational, intelligence, alcohol, ‘deprivation’, etc. False; it was immaturity.

Take Pete: he was 40, had nothing, and promised he would be a good tenant. He had a new job. Save his money and get ahead? No, he gambled and drank it away. His room smelled terrible, he had a bad attitude, and he made messes in the kitchen and bathroom. He loaned his uninsured car for months at a time. He got terribly drunk on a work night, and he fell behind on his rent. I asked him to leave, and he did sleeping in his car in front of the house! The police picked him up on outstanding warrants and put him in prison.

Enter Bob, a divorced 36 year old escapee from a communist country, father of two, with a high paying, skilled job. He was happy, fun, bighearted, and very likable. He had a strong body odor. He knew it, but did nothing about it. He even went on job interviews that way. He was in and out of love every other week with barmaids, one of whom took his money. He went through a number of jobs and ran out of money. He worked around the house for minimum wage, but still ate out.

Once, when totally out of money during an emergency, he worked for me four days, was paid each day, and at the end of the 4th day was broke! He needed a loan for a big date who stood him up to go to bed with someone for $50. The next day he was way down in the dumps. He called his kids, cried, and swore off his night life. Then what? He went out again that night! (You have to see such things to believe them.) Eventually he moved out, leaving a room full of beer bottles and the police on his trail.

If these bums didn’t respect their property, why should they respect mine? If they didn’t respect themselves, why should they respect me? There were thefts, property damage and near fights. I had to ease them out gently, taking a loss so they wouldn’t retaliate. They knew where I lived; I would never know where they lived and couldn’t collect as they didn’t have anything.

Someone else who had been in social work like me, learned the same after having 25 homeless families on her ranch for seven years. It wasn’t until she was personally affected that she understood. You can read, hear, and discuss this, but you won’t understand till it affects your property, your time, and your peace of mind.

These bums and criminals take an enormous toll on society. It can be assumed they were the kind of people who in one survey of St. Paul, Minn, were the 6% of the families that absorbed 77% of the welfare, 5l% of the health services, and 56% of the mental health and correctional services. These are the kind that loot during a riot or natural disaster.

Most middle class people are unaware of such people, but the working class is, as they have more contact with them. They call them ‘riffraff, rabble, trash, deadbeats, animals, slobs, punks, wise guys, lowlife’ and worse. They know what they are talking about. Many counselors, however, are middle class, have gotten their ideas from books, and excuse such behavior, in trying to form ‘relationships’ with them.

Bums and common criminals have chosen to remain immature and irresponsible. Any rehabilitation should meet them only half way and involve lots of discipline and hardnosed counseling. They have the slow, painful job of growing up. Coldblooded realism is needed, not hearts and flowers. Strangely enough … … most of them would agree. #

Traffic School

Long ago I went to traffic school in an affluent part of my county and it was all right. However, more recently I went in a less affluent part and it was dreadful. The lst session was marked by nail-bitters, knuckle-crackers, pickers, figiters, scofflaws, and smart-alecks. Many had to ‘test’ the instructor to see if he drank, bent the law, was hypocritical, etc. There was a lot of joking about booze, drugs, and sex. I thought I was in junior high.

At the second session I moved to the other side of the room. Same thing: scratchers, change-jinglers, ballpoint clickers, and one jiggling his leg so much 6 chairs down, I could feel it. Two talked loudly of going l30 on a motorcycle. Cool, man. Others in the front had their feet up on the paneling. The instructor from the Hiway Patrol did nothing about it or the talking during his lecturing. He tried too hard to be a good guy and to entertain us. He was loud, slammed the table, yelled, ribbed someone continually, put on a lot of acts, and took forever to get to the point. He turned the volume up too high on the video. At the end, when we were dying to leave, he had to get cute about the names his couldn’t read or pronounce.

I don’t want another ticket because I never want to spend eight hours with such awful people.

Terrible Car Auction

I’ve been to a number of car auctions without problems, but one in Garden Grove, CA was miserable. You can get easy credit [at high interest rates?]. You can look over the cars and start them, but not drive, them. They are very appealing. You take notes. Then you enter the auction room, take a seat, and can’t use your brain till it’s over. One guy in dark glasses mumbles a lot of information into the mike. [The thunderous volume in this room of terrible acoustics hurts your ears. One helper and one security guard wear ear plugs.] He introduces the helpers and then the auctioneer who we are supposed to clap for. [Are these new friends?] He mumbles more info and the 1st car is driven in. The helpers slap the fender, kick the tires, jump up on the bumper. Oh boy. The bidding starts, but what is the starting price? Is it real or is there a ‘plant’ in the audience. The auctioneer frantically rattles off his auction mumble and praises the car. [Super hype]. He mentions one price [what is it?] and another. The helpers are jumping all over, hurting your ears by shouting and blowing their whistles and the car horn, making signals that are suppose to be the price, and getting too close to you. You can’t hear normally, you can’t think, everything is happening at once. You can’t understand what they are saying. A car that sold last week is here again this week, cars are sold? at some final? price [what was it?] and driven off. Next car comes in, same ordeal, carefully crafted to separate you from your money. It goes against everything you’ve learned about reasoning, clear expression, calm deliberation, manners, dignity – a terrible experience.

I left the lst and 2nd times as quick as i could. I only returned the 2nd and 3rd times [with ear plugs] as this auction was the closest [and I was naive]. I bought a car. [I think I was tricked on the price.] When you pay for the car, you go into another room of bad acoustics, and face reflector glass you can barely see through. I talked to a foreigner I could sort of hear and sort of understand as she pushed form after form out for me to sign. ‘Only l5 minutes’ became an hour and I got the car.

Why isn’t Ralph Nader having a fit over this type of auction? It cries out for investigative reporting with hidden cams. Then reforms such as: – a large flow chart showing each step and the options. – a maximum level of decibels. – no ‘plants’ in the audience. – no misrepresentation. – obvious declaration as to which cars have been turned down by dealers. – safeguards against artificially high prices. – a large electronic sign that indicates the first [sensible] price, each rise [with intervals between each rise]. – helpers keeping 20 feet from the audience. In this time of consumer rights, the public is not being protected.

Social Classes and Liberals

American liberals strongly resist the idea of “social classes,” assuming:

• Classes mean “inequality,” “stratification,” and “conflict.”
• If the gap between rich and poor grows, something is wrong.
• Those with more exploit those with less.
• If capitalism isn’t the cause, it must be close.
• Government should redistribute the wealth and power [to level the classes]. (Conservatives disagree with these.)

To get a picture of classes, let’s consider what noted conservative Edward Banfield described as the four classes he saw in American society – upper, middle, working, and lower. (I will add my opinions.)

Housing

The lower class of bums, common criminals and the improvident can afford only the worst housing (and they let it run down, as we’ll see). The other classes can afford better housing, but they maintain it. They fight to keep the lower class out. (When this is middle class blacks keeping out lower class blacks, liberals are baffled as they assume all blacks stick together.)

When the middle class moves into a poor neighborhood, improves it, raises rents, and the lower class has to move, liberals complain. When the lower class moves into a middle class neighborhood, wreck it, and the middle class has to move, liberals are quiet.

Education

Liberals consider private schools “elitist”. They ignore their success, and anguish over the failure of public schools. The latter are supposed to be the great equalizer, but, in fact they help the upper class; and, after the 9th grade, hurt the lower class.

The lower class does NOT value education. The working class Archie Bunkers value it somewhat, but not as much as liberals would like to think. Many are ready to leave school at l4, find work, and start a family.

The middle and upper classes want to stay in school longer before working and starting a family. Most liberals came from these classes and thus assume this is better and that others have or should have the same interests. Not so.

Liberals have wanted so badly to help the working and lower classes, they have dropped educational standards. They wanted to include everyone and not have anyone feel bad by getting low marks. The disastrous results are well-documented.

At the college level liberals support taxing all the classes to pay for public colleges. This is one of the great injustices of our system, (says Nobel winner Milton Friedman) as those who benefit are primarily middle and upper class students.

Work

Liberals have anointed themselves champions of the “working man.” They portray him as exploited by management, and thus they fully support unions. But unions cost the country thousands of jobs, raise prices, monopolize, discriminate, and support raising the minimum wage [as then THEY can bargain for higher wages].

Liberals have gotten many people to frown on menial work. They’ve decided it’s boring and numbing, because that’s what it is for them. They have gifted minds and can’t stand menial work. But many working class people are content with it. They raise families on it and their kids often do the same (and they don’t need their jobs put down).

Liberals have made welfare so generous, people have been paid not to take menial work. But such work and working harder than the class above have been the traditional routes out of poverty.

Liberals keep raising the minimum wage; this costs thousands of entry-level jobs for teenagers and others who need to develop work habits.

Business

Various businesses use demographic studies to determine which social classes live where and target their products accordingly. The military uses them when recruiting. Insurance companies use them to “redline.” Liberals would like to interpret this as prejudice, but it’s economics.

When businesses operate in a ghetto, they have to raise their prices as it costs more to operate there (security, theft, vandalism). Liberals call higher prices “exploitation.”

They say businesses in ghettos are “taking money out of the neighborhood and giving nothing back.” Nothing back? They are providing services no one else will!

Liberals continually want business to take on more social responsibility: child care, health insurance, comparable worth, family leave, 60 day plant closing notice, helping local schools etc. Conservatives say if business did less of this, it could do more of what helps the poor most – create jobs.

Taxes

Liberals don’t mind “soaking the rich” through the graduated income tax, inheritance tax, and capital gains tax (highest in the modern world).

Social programs

According to Banfield (and supported by my experience), the lower class is made up of people who choose not to become self-respecting and mature. Education can’t prepare them for work and adulthood. In one city they were 6% of the population, yet absorbed 55% of its welfare, 5l% of its health services, and 56% of its mental health and correctional

services. There is no chronic poverty outside this class.

You don’t hear this from liberals. In ’64 they created a “poverty line,” which gave this class food stamps, Medicare, legal aid, school lunch, rent & heat subsidies, job training and fewer taxes. They were paid not to work (which caused polarization and resentment.)

According to the Henry Hazlitt, liberal social programs have caused more harm than good: rent control has created inequities and a housing shortage, guaranteed income didn’t work, and welfare has broken up families.

Refugees

When early waves of upper-class Cuban or Vietnamese refugees in the U.S. become rich and later waves of working-class refugees stay poor (by our standards), liberals blame our system, missing the point of class.

Conclusion

We believe in equal opportunity, but in the 60s, liberals began thinking this should produce equal outcome. It didn’t: many education programs failed, many public housing projects became notorious, and welfare caused dependency, resentment, and polarization. Liberal permissiveness increased crime.

It’s time for realism. Social classes are general groups that overlap and complement each other. They are natural and healthy in an open society. People gravitate to where they are comfortable. They should be left alone to do so and not be manipulated by liberals, whose programs have left many people worse off.

Social Work In The 19th Century

After spending frustrating years in social work, I came across an article I wished I’d seen long ago. It described social work in the l9th century. In those days social workers saw some of the poor as improvident and irresponsible. If a man came to a social agency hungry, he had to chop wood to get a meal. If a woman came, she had to sew to get a meal. This sorted out those who wouldn’t work, and made those who would feel they had done something to earn their meal.

If a person needed further aid, his background was checked and he was categorized as:

1. Unwilling to work.
2. Willing to work.
3. Unable to work, through no fault of his own, and worthy of relief.

When giving short term relief, the charity gave:

• in small quantities
• the minimum
• what was least susceptible to abuse
• less than what the person could get by working and
• for the shortest period of time.

When the relief was long term, the charity would:

• Restore the ties between the person and his family and friends.
• Get their assistance.
• Assign a volunteer to the person.
• Require the person to work. This helped those who were motivated. Nothing was more demoralizing than loafers or the criminal poor who
  got by or ahead without working.
• Meet the person only 1/2 way. Handouts were seen to be as dangerous as drugs; dependency was “slavery with a smiling mask.” Welfare was the
  worst as it came to be regarded as a right. [In England it had to be set below the lowest wage so people would look for work.]

In those days, knowing when not to give assistance was seen as important as when to give it. (This also helped fund-raising efforts, as donors knew their money was used efficiently.)

These practices continued until the l890s when the “Social Gospel” emerged, claiming:

• None of the poor were improvident, intemperate, lazy, or irresponsible.
• Charity must be universal and unconditional.
• Requiring a person to work for a meal was cruel.
• A person would not change if challenged, but would change when put in a pleasant material environment where his benevolent nature could come
  out. Thus government was to provide agreeable housing.
• Compassion equaled money.
• Raising money through taxes forced compassion from the public.
• Professional social workers were best; volunteers got in the way.
• Private charities were bad as they made it easy for government to evade responsibility.

The l960s accelerated this trend. Welfare was given on the basis of entitlement, not need, with the result that the poor were worse off, with less hope, less pride, less reason to work, and greater resentment of being dependent.

Welfare has broken up families, set fatherless boys on the streets, and polarized those who work against those who don’t. Bad charity (welfare) has driven out good. The list goes on. We’d do well to study the past. #

Social Work Myths

The public would be shocked to learn how little is being accomplished in social work. They’ll probably never know, however, as results are hard to measure and because social workers don’t believe in measuring.

One yardstick, though, is the failure of the War on Poverty of the 60s. We spent millions fighting poverty and poverty won. Social work fails because it postpones traditional values indefinitely. This is how:

Emotion

The poor are portrayed as downtrodden “victims” of bad teachers, landlords, employers, merchants, police, clinics, whatever. They have “fallen through the cracks”, are “trapped”, “down on their luck”, etc.

(Whether they’ve drunk and gambled their money away, committed felonies, or never worked isn’t brought up. Facts don’t count, emotion does.)

Psychology

Each social problem has some deep “psychological” origin….. (This is taken to great lengths which relieves the poor of responsibility.)

Relationships

Only through a very close relationship with the social worker can the poor be motivated to improve. ………….. (This creates patronizing, unreal relationships which often backfire.)

Values are relative

This becomes “Who are you to impose your middle class values on people in the ghetto?” ……… (Sounds reasonable, but middle class values are traditional values; they apply to everyone.)

“Society” is wrong

It is seen as hypocritical, oppressive, exploitive, and racist. …… (This outlook, tolerated in college, is impractical in the real world.)

The poor are victims (if misguided).

They must be helped to come up with values without being prejudiced… …. (This extremely indulgent, blank slate, approach postpones traditional values and doesn’t hold the poor accountable for their behavior.)

No negatives

……. (False if there are positives, there are negatives; if there is reward, there is punishment, joy/pain, pride/shame, love/hate, success/failure.)

No Authority nor discipline, and certainly no punishment. It’s all carrot and no stick … (This creates chaos.)

No “humiliation” Even minor teasing is considered “humiliation.”

Lure the poor

Programs have to be so appealing the poor will want to join, where society’s values might eventually rub off. This is far too indulgent.

“Equality”

Everyone has to be included and everyone has to progress together. ….. (Naive. It allows the bad apple to ruin the bunch.)

An example of these myths is a picnic for poor youths from the inner city. Most of them don’t have the interest nor skills for preparing the food and making the arrangements for the picnic, and they are not asked to. Some show up, some don’t. Some expect everything to be done for them. Some complain. Some of the table manners are awful. If there is a baseball game, there is often profanity, cheating, screaming, and bullying to win. There can be property damage, injury, verbal abuse, a fight, a great amount of annoyance for others nearby which can increase ethnic or class prejudice, the chance of getting kicked out of the park, and embarrassment for the staff (if they will to admit it). The next day, however, the staff laughs off everything and talks about all the “fun”, “growth”, “relationships”, and “colorful” stories.

In my many jobs, social workers spoke psychobabble and spent months developing “relationships” with the youths in hopes some values would rub off. There was a lack of basic literature, and what there was, was unreadable or worthless. The poor were portrayed as miserable, when many were happy (some happier than their social workers). Programs lacked definition and management, and the poor stagnated. The window dressing kept changing, but the work stayed the same (babysitting), and social workers became disillusioned.

There were only a few good programs. They swam upstream against the nonsense above, doing thankless work, and producing results, but were constantly criticized by bleeding hearts in academia, the media, and the ACLU.

The views of one of our best known economists, [of the 50s?] Henry Hazlitt, support my experience. He complained that social workers: never defined “poverty.” pitied the pauper, but not the worker nor the taxpayer. – talked as if antipoverty is a recent effort. never faced the disastrous results of social programs. wanted no loss of dignity for a person when he got on welfare, but a gain when he got off. coddled the poor despite their agency’s policies to the contrary. worked to make everyone equal by leveling down, never summoning up.

preened themselves on compassion. systematically ignored the reasons for poverty. insisted on seeing the poor as “exploited victims of maldistributions of wealth and heartless laissez faire.” didn’t learn from the past. didn’t distinguish between poverty caused by misfortune and poverty caused by folly.

If social work wants to take its place, it should: Drop emotion, guilt, and love and be realistic. Use plain language. Rate programs and literature. Find out how poor immigrants with limited English pass our poor who are fluent in English. Find out why non-professionals are effective in helping the poor. Instill traditional values. Require the poor work before they are eligible for education, job training, and counseling.

How to kill a care home

After years of working for others in social work, I sought to be on my own. I thought I could by running a home for mental patients. It would be for mentally patients (not retarded) – men in their 20s and 30s, and it would be monitored by a county mental health dept. (the kiss of death).

I rented a home, furnished it, and called county agencies to get it licensed. In the rush away from anything “institutional,” social workers stressed making everything “homelike.” Dishes had to match; dining room chairs had to match, etc. No mention was made of what patients would do.

The county mental health dept. sent patients with the barest details, though required to provide a full report. I had to go through hard times to learn what was common knowledge. What I learned was vital, yet therapists and others were not interested. I sent my notes to them and called. After talking a while, they began to see the value of the information. Did they follow up? No.

These frustrations outside the home made me determined to run things properly inside the home. I was gungho and . . . naive. I insisted the patients handle their hygiene, chores, and manners, and go to some sort of day program. The patients met these with lip service, minimum cooperation, and resentment. Responsibility was the last thing they wanted.

I held meetings about these matters as well as which of them was making noise at night, botching the dish washing, missing appointments, tying up the bathroom, etc. Everything was resolved, everything fine; next day, same nonsense.

There was no purpose having a home without these meetings; but some patients didn’t like them, rules, nor authority. They complained to their social workers, who believed whatever they said, and came right out to protest. They tore down meetings, rules, etc., but had no alternatives. They were good with theories, but had nothing for practical matters chores, part time work, manners, getting people up after l2 hours in bed, etc.

Enter one resident who would not complain to social workers, because he rarely talked. He would not cooperate on simple matters. I cut his cigarettes down no cooperation. I cut them further still the same. I cut them off! He collected bottles for money and later got his first job in l2 years. Everyone was amazed. He went on to get other jobs. Much later he told me in the nine years he had been in the system, I was the only one to crack the whip. (You live to hear such things.)

County social workers taught patients arts and crafts when patients didn’t know household chores. They tried to recruit patients for college – extremely naive. They took the side of the patients in all matters, including assault, cheating, and swindling. They gave classes on how to run a home (though none had). (The classes had nothing on paper.) They didn’t get my patients the right pills l2% of the time, which caused serious problems, one of which was a patient putting himself and his mother in the hospital.

One patient had never gotten an artificial leg replaced. I made a few calls and it was done one of the few good moments.

Another patient drove a stolen car without a license, landing in jail. The judge let him off because he was a mental case. His Dr. sought to put him on a more restrictive status. A jury trial over this was narrowly averted, and he was on the new status. What did it mean? Nothing. So why was he entitled to a jury trial? !

Much later he assaulted me over money matters. The police said not to press charges as the judge wouldn’t look at a mental case. A social worker twisted this, saying the patient “had to get the police to get his money.”

Matters were going downhill fast. I had accomplished a lot, but credit wasn’t given. Instead social workers picked away at rules, meetings, turnover, and using powdered milk. Without a hint they stopped sending patients and my business died on the vine.

All this was similar to what social workers did to Roloff’s Homes (seen three times on 60 Minutes). The homes didn’t want a state license nor the meddling by social workers. The homes were some of the best in the country. They were doing the government’s job, doing it better, and doing it without government money. Yet government bureaucrats fought the homes l3 years, jailing Brother Roloff twice.

It is easy to get into this type of work and run a home which only warehouses people. But if one has standards and wants to help people, this is not the place. Incompetent and idealistic, social workers tie your hands, which allows patients to abuse each other, you, and your staff. It’s one of the worst ways to make a living. Like the other jobs I had in social work, there is more dignity in pumping gas.

How NOT To Study A Gangbanger

Some professionals don’t use their heads. One was a woman who wrote a book on gangs. To learn about them, she drove around a hardened l7 year old gang member named Faro, who had 60-year old “graveyard eyes.” (She didn’t think to set conditions about weapons or risks.)

During the ride they pulled up next to two other youths, and Faro said, “I’m gonna look crazy at ’em. You watch what they do.” He did. The other driver glanced over, his eyes widened for an instant with fear. Then he looked away. Faro giggled. When the signal changed, the other driver sped off and turned the corner.

The author asked to see the look Faro gave and saw a nightmare face. She asked him what would have happened if the other driver answered the challenge. Faro said they would have gotten into it and he would have killed him. He had a gun in his shoe. A gun?!!!! She was shocked and didn’t know why. (Does someone have to tell her?) She felt betrayed and was angry. He said if you come into this neighborhood, you can’t get angry if it gets too real for you. (False, but she agreed.) He went on about how young people gangbang as they have nothing to live for. (False.) Gangbanging is a chance to get even with those who hurt your family. (That’s stretching it.) That, if the people you love most are dead, you might as well be dead. (Not really.) That after seeing so much death, you want to die so you don’t have to see any more. (Not necessarily.) She didn’t challenge any of this. (Why not?) She accepted his reasoning, criminal behavior, and immaturity. (Why?)

This is typical of many people who study crime or go into social work. In their rush to show compassion and understanding, they don’t use common sense.

Neighborhood Care Homes

Many people say they believe in homes for the disadvantaged, but “not in my backyard” (NIMBY); and after working in several and starting and running one of my own (for mental [not retarded] patients), I agree. Many of these homes are noisy, boring, dirty, with nonstop TV, no privacy, and mutual abuse among the disadvantaged residents of the home (the retarded, aged, mentally ill, alcoholic, etc). There is a lot of this because of their “rights,” and because it’s easier for staff to go along with it. It’s glorified baby sitting. The residents vegetate and staffs burn out.

Neighbors too. They chafe over parking, yelling, profanity, panhandling, poor grooming and attire, depressed behavior, traffic in and out of the house, etc. [If you’re raising a family, would you want me to move next door with 6 people who need care? Also what about the effect on your property value.

Homes are run permissively despite what is claimed especially smaller homes, as when one of the residents moves out, the drop in income is critical. If the staff of a home wants to do more than baby-sit, they have a difficult and thankless job of working with the disadvantaged, the relatives, sometimes the neighbors, but most of all, permissive social workers (and the media), who take the side of the residents:

Obligation.: The public is made to feel it is their obligation to accept the substandard behavior of the disadvantaged (and possibly lower property values). Not so. It is the obligation of the disadvantaged (with the help of their social workers) to learn how to live in society, find work, and then move into regular neighborhoods. In the meantime these homes can locate in industrial areas, on the outskirts of town, or some other area.

“Family like.”: A myth – no sensible family operates the way these homes do.

Licensing.: This supposedly cleaned up bad homes, but I heard it drove out good homes.

Size.: Since large institutions are supposed to be bad, these small homes are supposed to be good. But small homes don’t have a fraction of the resources and aren’t any more successful. (The real reason the state of Calif. wants these homes is that mental patients can be housed for 1/5th of what it would cost in an institution.)

These homes don’t belong in an upscale single family neighborhood as they don’t fit and they hurt property values. They don’t belong in a bad neighborhood if there is danger. Probably an industrial area would be best, but whatever it is the homes should use a boot camp approach to instilling traditional values. They should be run and monitored by competing private agencies. They should require residents hold part or full time work in sheltered workshops or regular employment. They should require a lot of residents so they have every reason to improve, not hold others back, and to possibly move out.

Why Not Rate Social Programs

During my years in social work and since, I’ve seen a crying need for some kind of ratings. No one has an idea of what are the best programs for addiction, crime, mental illness, or whatever. There is hardly even a directory of them. Many programs sound good, but are disappointing. No one seems to know what works nor why because:

(1) Social work floats on emotion.

We are asked to contribute to some charity because there is a ‘need’ for a ‘disadvantaged’ person and the charity ‘cares’. Whether there are greater ‘needs’, just how ‘disadvantaged’ the person is, or whether ‘caring’ makes a difference, is never gone into.

Millions of dollars have gone into poverty programs without defining poverty or considering cost-effectiveness. Emotion counts; facts don’t.

(2) Social workers won’t ‘judge’.

They are trained not to see the poor person, criminal, or whomever as lazy, greedy, improvident, selfish, spoiled, immature, or irresponsible; that would be ‘judgmental’. Likewise it is ‘judgmental’ to rate a poor person’s progress or a social program’s effectiveness.

Other social subjects have been rated charities, politicians, professors, cities, countries, repressive governments, and schools. Social programs can and should be too.

There is also a need to rate the literature. What are the best articles and books on poverty, discrimination, addiction, adoption, truancy, workfare, etc? Such material is basic, yet when I was in social work, there was none. In agencies dealing with delinquents, there was nothing on discipline. When I started a home for mental patients, there was no manual available.

Then too most of the literature is obfuscated, circuitous, erudite, theoretical, and full of psychobabble.

Rating both programs and literature would show what is available, what is worth considering, how nonprofessionals are often the more effective than professionals, how private programs compare to public. They would show: the effectiveness of workfare, which charities are the most effective, the money that can be saved by going to a good selfhelp group, how discrimination has not held back blacks from the West Indies, how it took two years to get people off welfare in one project, and that one state lock ups more people than another state the same size, yet has a higher crime rate.

Ratings are needed for accountability, definition, a yardstick, a bottom line. Such material is basic, yet when I was in social work, there was none. In agencies dealing with delinquents, there was nothing on discipline. When I started a home for mental patients, there was no manual for this. Then too most of the literature is obfuscated, circuitous, erudite, theoretical, and full of psychobabble.

Rating social programs [ these have not been tested ]

1 point for each if applicable

Agency
Public	Private
Need business	Waiting list
Staff
Young	Older
Cynical or idealistic	Realistic
“Bohemian”	Straight
Overly “professional”	Down to earth
“Psychobabble”	Plain language
Emotional	Objective
Manipulative
Passes the buck	Highly responsible
Doesn’t collaborate with those who know client
Hired more for education than experience
Goals
Abstract	Practical
Glowing	Unglamorous and with a price
Psychological values (awareness, assertion, self-expression, relationships, resolving problems, etc.)	Traditional values (responsibility, work, discipline, manners, thrift, foresight, self-reliance, moderation, cleanliness, public service, some censorship, conformity, and tradition)
Approach
“New”	Traditional
Theory	Common sense
Complex	Simple
Patronizing	Limited concern
Client’s friend	Client’s agent
Sympathy	Empathy
Permissive	Firm
Roundabout	Straightforward, confrontive
Encourage & hope	Bargain and get
Progress is fun, exciting, expressive, warm	It’s slow, unglamorous, hard work
Records are “around”	Records are vital
Clients move together	Slackers not allowed to hold others back
Clients run the show	Staff runs it
Atmosphere
Too loud
Lack of privacy
Overmedication
Overly sheltering
Results
Lots of time	Never enough time
Clients’ affection	Appreciation
Good intentions, meetings, surveys, etc.	Measurable progress
Dependence	Self-sufficiency
Disillusionment	Satisfaction
Review, reorganization, etc.	Steady production
Negative Total A	Positive Total A

Positives – B
Has behavior modification system which is:
	Simple, clear, fair, consistent
	Based on traditional values
	Uses peer ratings
The System Rewards Appropriate:
	Hygiene
	Manners
	Motivation
	Chores
	Employment
It Penalizes:
	Time wasting
	Sponging
	Verbal abuse
	Threats
The Management:
	Imaginative
	Itemized bills
	Open financial records
	Everyone’s role is defined
	Entire program and current list of local opportunities is simple, in plain language, and posted
	Clients are referred and followed up
	Has list of helpful literature for clients and relatives
Physical Plant
	Accessible to transportation and employment
	Clean, ventilated
	Provisions for valuables
	Suggestion box
	Good staff/client rapport
	Neighborhood is conducive to program goals
	Positive attire and morale of clients
	Positive Total B
	Positive Total A
	Total
	Less Negative Total
	Grand Total

American Characteristics

Being separated by two oceans from most of the world, we Americans are somewhat isolated. We tend to see things through our eyes. As the world grows smaller, the competition stiffer, our position less dominant, and we absorb more immigrants, it time to review our traits.

POSITIVE

Fair

No one is above the law (basically).

Police and government officials can generally be trusted.

Minorities and women have gained rights.

More rights are being gained by homosexuals, the handicapped, and undocumented workers.

No spoils system nor nepotism in politics generally.

Due process through the courts (though slow).

Equal

No monarchy, nobility, titles, nor castes.

One person, one vote.

Jury of peers.

First, among modern countries, in feeling youth should be able to attend college.

Opportunity despite social rank.

Free (more important to Americans than equality).

Free to speak, print, assemble, protest, organize, picket, strike, worship, and use initiative, referendum, and recall.

Open

Open to ideas, talent, sharing info, & frank discussion.

Open to immigrants vs. the narrow nationalism or racism of most European and Asian countries.

Open about public figures instead of putting them on a pedestal.

Open about battered spouses, the gay world, addiction, child abuse, incest, abortion, euthanasia, impotence, single parenting, alternate lifestyles, etc.

Open about separation & divorce.

Open to questioning religion.

Open to getting to the root of one’s problem instead of ‘keeping it all in.’

More open-minded about premarital relations in long term, responsible relationships than we used to be.

Limited government (though not as limited as before)

Founded on this.

Least supportive of the welfare state (of the modern countries).

Separation of church and state

Freedom of religion and from religion.

The private sector

A greater share of taxpayer money stays in private hands than in most modern countries.

Pro-business (though our liberals are often anti).

The entrepreneur is the hero.

Opportunity

Education.

Always 2nd chances.

More opportunity to make money, for the amount of effort than anywhere else.

Can move into a higher socio-economic class (though it takes a long time).

Results

First choice for immigrants.

More ethnic groups than any other country.

More refugees taken in than in all other countries combined.

A ‘can do’ confidence.

Success is admired. (In Europe, it’s resented.)

The most Nobel prizes in recent years.

80% of Ams. are confident of their institutions. In Europe 52% are.

7l% of Ams. would fight for their country vs. 43% of Europeans & 22% of Japanese.

America created jobs for 90% of its new workers since ’65, whereas Europe created only 40% for its new workers. (as of ‘94)

Misc

Pragmatic, innovative, energetic, straightforward, uncomplicated, creative, and lst in competitiveness (in ’95).

Individuality is prized.

Americans, as individuals, give the most to charity.

NEGATIVE ===================================================

Spoiled

Have to have the most and always be getting more.

First in amount of trash per person. No other country is close.

Immature

Have to be first in everything.

Think our ways are best.

Think the world revolves around us.

Want to be liked by everyone.

Too concerned with justifying ourselves.

Shallow – somewhat

Hollywood, rock, glitz, glamour, popularity, sex, fun, trends, fads, forced smiles, positives.

Judged by your income.

Old is bad, new is good.

Idealistic

Naive belief everyone should be middle class.

Naive belief equal opportunity should brings equal results.

Tar the upper class with guilt, and try to push the working class and poor through college when most aren’t interested.

Lowered educational standards for ‘social justice’ since the mid ’60s with terrible results.

Exaggerated rights for bums, criminals, mental patients, students, runaways, etc.

Prejudiced (more than we’ll admit, but less than other countries).

Bash Arabs.

Bashed Japanese in early 90s.

Discrimination.

Self-righteous

Savior complex – only we can save the world.

Our ways are best (though our culture is one of the youngest).

Most everyone should be Christian and fluent in English.

Double standards

When Russia shot down a passenger jet from Korea by mistake it was heinous. When we shot down one from Iran, it was a mistake.

Foreign countries have peasants, we don’t.

Their soldiers torture, ours don’t.

Other countries shouldn’t be aggressive, yet we can bully into Greneda and Panama.

Misc

Consume 60% of the world’s drugs.

Increase in sexual titillation in the media.

Wallow in psychology, sociology, introspection, self-pity.

Worship Israel.

Worship youth.

See everything through OUR eyes. Virtually ignore how other nations handle crime, poverty, education, etc.

Encourage other countries to fight, then abandon them.

(Virtually) first in energy consumption per person.

First in contributing to the greenhouse effect.

First in deaths by handguns.

First in illegitimate births (in the modern world).

Poor losers – blame others (immigrants, Japan) for our decline in international business.

Creeping socialism (but less than other countries).

Complacent, overconfident, less diplomatic, less subtle.

Some countries are poor, think poor, and work hard – (China).

Some are rich, think poor, and work hard – (Taiwan & Hong Kong).

Americans are rich, think rich, and don’t work hard. #

The Decline of Values

As a former social worker, teacher and political aide, I think many of our problems can be traced to a decline of values since the mid60s. Before then people were quiet in theaters and libraries; people didn’t disturb others as much with loud radios. There wasn’t as much public profanity; movies didn’t have to be rated, nor Halloween candy checked. Graffiti wasn’t exhibited as art; and drunks, runaways, and bums were dealt with firmly. There wasn’t neighborhood watch. There weren’t livein guards nor metal detectors at schools, nor as much gambling, pornography, and drugs.

There weren’t as many rock concerts getting out of hand, nor young kids involved with drugs, alcohol, and weapons. College kids didn’t pull off girls bathing suits during Easter break. College professors didn’t date nor sleep with their students, nor did cops with civilians. The suicide rate for those under l5 was a third less, as was the number of girls under l5 who had sex.

The number of kids in single-parent homes was less than half of what it is. People in institutions didn’t have so many rights they abused themselves, fellow patients, and staff. People had more respect for teachers and police who had more authority and less burn out.

People had less, but were happier and more hopeful. They led more wholesome lives like “Ozzie and Harriet” and “Happy Days.” Since then there has been a great slide in six areas.

1. Sex: Too much titillation – each year in the media, more bosoms, rears, “naughty” poses, teases, suggestive movements and comments.
2. Work: We are told: menial work is undignified; assembly line work is unforgivable; the laboring man is abused; capitalism exploits people; every wage should support a family; there are no jobs for the poor (yet poor immigrants find them); job security is a right; something is wrong when both parents have to work; and something is terribly wrong if the present generation won’t have more than the past one.What’s been the result this type of thinking? Unions for a long time were getting more wages for less work; jobs have gone begging while we deported illegal aliens eager to work; people don’t take the pride in their work they used to; it’s hard to get good help; service has declined; and some people in the ghetto laugh at the idea of regular work.
3. Crime: The rise has to be traceable to less discipline, responsibility, punishment, and respect for authority, property, and people. Many young people haven’t learned these.They’ve been kept out of work by the minimum wage, welfare, unions, and child labor laws. Some in their mid-20s have never held a job.They are spoiled and immature. They’ve been told life owes them thrills. Their crimes are more violent with less remorse; and this is excused by social workers, mouthing psychobabble. Crime is blamed on poverty, but even during the depression we didn’t have this much crime. Criminals have more rights and police have less power. Police even have trouble stopping loud stereos.
4. Education: We have seen the feel-good permissiveness of open classroom, grading fads, snap courses, open enrollment, dumbed down texts, no dress codes, social promotion, and far less discipline. An issue was made of spanking a student with a ping pong paddle. A “no pass, no play” case was taken to the Supreme Court. Little wonder 41% of the teachers in Los Angeles wouldn’t choose teaching if starting over.Some teachers fear for their safety. Students graduate functionally illiterate, and colleges and employers have to make up the difference.
5. Poverty: It persists because many of the poor are paid not to work, the definition of poverty has been expanded, and social “scientists” have hundreds of excuses for the poor. Great efforts and sums of money were spent on the War on Poverty in the 60s with few results; yet we are constantly told we didn’t do enough.
6. Drugs: We consume 60% of the world’s drugs. This must have some connection to the decline of: restraint, prudence, foresight, thrift, moderation, deferred gratification, facing reality, resolving one’s problems, and getting pleasure the natural way. It’s fly now, pay later. Take a pill, be young forever, the fast lane, no one’s responsible.

The decline of values is worst for the poor and minorities. They used to get ahead through hard work, family teamwork, and hope. Nowadays they are told the government owes them a living, slums are someone else’s fault, they are victims of class, economics, and race. This relieves them of responsibility. Many are of them are fatalistic to begin with; lower values are the last thing they need.

What can we do about the decline?

1. Sex: We could drastically reduce the amount of titillation. Sex education should point out how sex has been cheapened by the media. It should stress restraint, modesty, wholesomeness, and responsibility.Penalties for sexual harassment and misconduct should be increased.
2. Work: We should talk less about a day’s pay and more about a day’s work. We should never disparage menial work. It’s the way many people make a living.We should work toward the freest economy as it provides the most jobs and rewards the best workers. This means reducing tariffs, capital gains tax, regulations, licensing, union power, and minimum wage. The latter would create thousands of first jobs for teens. This would teach work habits, build responsibility, and reduce crime. Young people under 18 should be allowed to work in the trades, and those under 14 should be allowed to work part time.
3. Crime: We could start with quiet in libraries and theaters, no public profanity, boom boxes, verbal abuse, threats, nor panhandling. Runaways, alcoholics, and mental patients could be dealt with firmly. We could put less stock in psychology and hold people accountable for their behavior regardless of their poverty, alcoholism, addiction, or other “diseases”. Court backlogs could be cut through “private justice”.
4. Education: School choice and privatization could bring better and more practical education through dress codes, discipline, parental involvement, tougher grading, career counseling for 1/3rd the cost.
5. Poverty: We could compare our poor to poor immigrants, who, with limited English, have been successful. We could get information from those abused by the poor: landlords, merchants, employers, creditors, etc. We could realize:
   • The poor are not “oppressed” or “trapped”.
   • Discrimination hasn’t held back Blacks from the Caribbean.
   • Poverty doesn’t excuse crime, alcohol, addiction, gambling, promiscuity, illegitimacy, and child and wife abuse.
   • The poor have been hurt by some social programs (guaranteed income, negative income tax, minimum wage, welfare, graduated income taxes, and “spread-the-work” schemes).

   We could consider England’s policy in the 19th century of setting welfare beneath the lowest wage. This would give the poor every reason to look for work. We could avoid job quotas, charity, subsidies, and preferential treatment; and instead promote self-reliance, work, education, business experience, and saving.

6. Drugs: We could close “head shops” and prohibit portraying drugs in a favorable light. We could promote drug testing, and penalize users.

What can we do in a general sense about these six areas? We can stop apologizing for being adults and for traditional values. We can stop relieving everyone of responsibility. We can stop claiming: problems are “diseases”, everyone is a “victim”, everything is “complex”, and any firmness violates someone’s “rights”. We can cut back on selfpity, introspection, and psychology. We can recognize vice as a cancer. We can cut down on cheating, violence, and drugs in sports. We can study why the Japanese have better manners, education, and a far lower crime rate. We can show how success is due to traditional values.

It could be said the decline has been due to liberal leanings toward socialism, psychology, and exaggerated “rights”. They played a part, but a lot of the decline has been simply a long, steady, slide of values. We did it to ourselves.

Traditional values

Capitalism.

Less government – more privatizaton.

Responsibility (the most important).

Foresight (thrift, saving, planning).

Self-reliance (rather than a welfare state).

Golden rule (reliability, honesty, good faith, fairness, manners, respect for property, authority, elders, and ethnics).

Law and order, authority, punishment, family teamwork, hard work, discipline, diligence, moderation, restraint, wholesomeness, modesty, self-respect, one’s appearance, practical education, some censorship, some conformity.

Gambling as a cancer

Many states have turned to lotteries. They are appealing and they can be sold as ‘money for education’ but is this the way to raise money?

Catholics do not see gambling as a vice until excessive. Protestants do, saying it promotes the idea of something for nothing: ‘Lotteries are ‘… symptoms of … selfishness… (they promote) victimization of the poor (and) … give sanction to (a) … wasteful lifestyle …’ said the Ohio Council of Churches.

Noted conservative George Gilder says the urge to risk is natural and healthy when channeled into planning and work, as in starting a small business or prudent investing. But when this urge goes into games of pure chance, the results are destructive. Those who favor legalized gambling say it reduces illegal gambling, but the opposite is the case. The odds in illegal gambling are better and many people find it more exciting. As more forms of gambling are legalized, gambling becomes more acceptable and illegal gambling spreads. This is worst for the poor who gamble more often and a larger share of their income. They believe getting ahead is due more to luck than to hard work, thrift, and foresight, and gambling reinforces this.

Those favoring gambling say Las Vegas pours great sums of money into the Nevada treasury. But there could be a price: Las Vegas has the highest alcoholism rate, one of the highest prostitution rate, and a suicide rate double the national average.

Another consideration in the spread of gambling is the affect it has on the 4% who become compulsive gamblers:

• Ron P.: ‘I degraded myself in every way possible. I embezzled from my own company; I conned my six-year-old out of his allowance.’
• Archie K.: ‘After I woke up from an appendectomy, I sneaked out of the hospital, cashed a bogus check, and headed for my bookie. I was still bleeding from the operation.’
• Irvin J.: ‘I’ll never forget coming home from work at night, looking through the window at my family waiting for me, and leaving to place a couple more bets. I was crying the whole time . . ..’
• Phil K.: ‘Even when you win you still lose because you always want to parlay the money into a bigger win – then you lose it all.’

We might consider England’s example. There one must give written notice 48 hours before placing a bet (to reduce impulsiveness). There are no free drinks at gambling tables, there is no extending credit, and casinos can’t advertise or list their numbers.

We might publicize how losing has affected the many instead praising the luck of the few.

The 20th Century Fund put it well, ‘Gambling’s getrichquick appeal appears to mock capitalism’s core values: discipline, education, work habits, thrift, prudence, adherence to routine, and the relation between effort and reward.’

Pyramids games – for the greedy

A story on TV featured an overweight woman on a jerryrigged bench in a meeting room explaining why she bought into a pyramid game. She ‘really needed’ the money. Perhaps she was one of those who cashed in her life insurance and drove long distances nightly to be in a pyramid.

I went to two pyramid meetings. The secrecy and security measures gave them an uneasy air. The crowd was a mixture of average people with a sprinkling of hard types.

The first meeting started with apprehension; they weren’t finding enough people to join. The mood got better with testimonials and exhortations of how people had made $l5,000. This was appealing, but something was missing.

On to the next meeting a newer pyramid with more people. It buzzed with excitement. The pyramid was explained, many new people bought in and others paid off. They were deceiving themselves as pyramids eventually collapse with 3% winning, 45% breaking even, and 51% losing ALL their money.

These went on five nights a week with a constant need for more people. They were a good way to waste time, lose friends, risk arrest, and, in a few of cases, be robbed by criminals waiting outside.

Who goes to these? The greedy, who have no qualms about profiting at the expense and heartbreak of friends and acquaintances. The others are those P.T. Barnum said are born every minute suckers.

The games got warnings and action from the police and coverage from the media until they collapsed. They must have left a trail of expensive lessons and damaged friendships. Sometime in the future, they’ll surface again in a different and more ‘foolproof’ form, and the same types will go. You have to see it to believe it. #

Traditional Values

The importance of values is critical to any discussion of poverty, crime, illegitimacy, drug abuse, riots, mental illness, or radicalism. People fall into these because they haven’t matured and developed solid values.

When in teaching, politics, and social work, I saw every contemporary value used and every traditional value postponed by ‘liberals.’ The results were disastrous.

Liberal Values	Traditional Values
Psychology
Blame your folks	Responsible for yourself
Traditional values caused today’s problems	False
Permissive	Firm
Self-expression & assertion whenever	When appropriate
“Relationships” are basic to progress	False
Fires, floods, etc. require mental health teams	False
“Recovery” from these is painful	Not necessarily
Getting fired is traumatic	Not necessarily
Flee stress and depression	They are part of life
Problems are the result of wrong thinking	False
Feeling good comes 1st	False
We’re all victims	False
Education
Teachers’ 1st concern is those at the bottom of the class	False
Education is the cure-all	False
Schools are the primary influence on kids	Families are
School should mean social success	Should prepare one for work
Society owes everyone a college education	False
Poverty
Society is wrong; the underdog is right	Hardly
Poverty is unbearable	False
Poverty is undignified	One’s dignity doesn’t depend on one’s income
Entitled to minimum standards	To what one earns
Menial work is undignified	Utter nonsense
Help all of the poor	Help the deserving poor
Provide for them	Meet them part way
Miscellaneous
Generation gap	Not among the well-adjusted
Venerate the young	They have their place
Adults must understand youth, not vice versa	False
New ways and ideas are better	Occasionally
Avoid problems	Confront them
Self-pity	Get on with life
The fast lane	Prudence, moderation, wholesomeness
Instant gratification	Thrift, save, planning
Me first	The golden rule
Equal opportunity means equal results	Absurd
Life owes one a living	Self-reliance
The government owes one a living	Self-reliance
Income and job security	Self-reliance
Problems are “diseases”	False
People are not responsible for their behavior	The absolute worst nonsense
Rights	Responsibilities
More rights for students, runaways, criminals, derelicts, mental patients, the poor, etc.	Fewer
Everything is complex	The principles involved are simple
A day’s pay	A day’s work
Business should provide more benefits	Fewer
Only positives	False
Winning is everything	False
Everyone wins	False
School, work, etc. have to be fun	False
Love is all you need	False
Don’t forbid something or someone will try it	Laws are a fact of life
More tolerant of gambling, pornography	Less tolerant
Tolerance of sexual explicitness is a sign of maturity	Of poor taste
Titillation, lust	Taste, modesty
Never impose values	False
Lower standards for the disadvantaged	That hurts them
Responsibility starts on top (the political, social, economic systems)	At the bottom (the person, family, community)
Authority, discipline, and punishment are bad	False

Traditional values

Capitalism.

Less government – more privatization.

Responsibility (the most important).

Foresight (thrift, saving, planning).

Self-reliance (rather than a welfare state).

The golden rule (reliability, honesty, good faith, fairness, manners, respect for property, authority, elders, and ethnic groups).

Law and order, authority, discipline, punishment.

Family teamwork, hard work, diligence, moderation, restraint, wholesomeness, modesty, self-respect, one’s appearance, practical education, some censorship and conformity.

These became traditional because they worked. Responsibility is the most important and the one so much of our culture has been tried to duck since the mid 60s. Scratch a criminal, derelict, or addict and you’ll find irresponsibility. Scratch those wallowing in self-pity on daytime talk shows and you find irresponsibility. Scratch a socialist and you’ll find an idealistic ‘liberal’ taking responsibility from the individual and the family and putting it on the government.

A footnote: as much damage as liberals have done to traditional values, they must be given credit for changing some of them like:

• More openness about public figures instead of putting them on a pedestal.
• More openness about battered spouses, the gay world, addiction, child abuse, incest, abortion, euthanasia, impotence, single parenting, alternate lifestyles, birth control, intermarriage.
• More open-mindedness about premarital relations in long term, responsible relationships.
• More acceptance of ethnic diversity.
• More acceptance of separation & divorce.
• More rights for minorities, women, homosexuals, youth, the handicapped.
• More questioning of religion.
• Getting to the root of one’s problem instead of ‘keeping it all in.’ #