Houston, We Have a Problem . . . . Unemployment by Craig Covello
As all of you know, I am very fond of the Space Program. I have incredible memories of it from my childhood days and astronauts are still heros to me. Last week, President Obama basically dismantled the program even more than I thought he would. Here is an article from my friend Craig Covello to explain the situation further. Please let me know what you think and let Obama know what you think about the destruction of America's greatest achievement of the 20th Century:
Very soon, approximately 9000 NASA workers will be laid off. Only four years ago, the future looked bright. What happened? In a word: Obama.
You may recall that NASA's Program Constellation was started by the Bush administration and endorsed by former NASA administrator Mike Griffin. Plans were made to have crews in Earth orbit by 2015 and on the moon no later than 2020. Constellation was based upon development of a low-cost rocket specifically designed to safely transport astronauts to the international space station, the moon and beyond after the shuttle program is retired. In order to do that, NASA leveraged all its experience with the Apollo and space shuttle programs. Griffin believed that simply using commercial rockets such as the Atlas 5 and Delta 4 boosters would not be a practical alternative. They were designed to launch satellites, which made them too large and dangerous for manned spaceflight unless significantly reengineered. So the decision was made to move forward with a new design called the Ares 1. But there were clouds on the horizon.
About a year before Obama was elected president, one of his campaign promises spoke of a new educational program with a price tag of approximately $18 billion. He told us that he planned to pay for it by cutting Constellation. The rhetoric, however, subsided by January 2008 because the voting public was lining up behind Republicans who endorsed the program. Predictably, Obama backpedaled on his earlier statements. Then just three months prior to the election, Obama made the campaign promise that he would indeed fully support returning to the moon by 2020. Once he got elected, the story has changed.
Last Thursday, Obama traveled to the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida to break that campaign promise. Also on Air Force One was former astronaut and moon explorer, Buzz Aldrin. Despite the fact that the president was traveling with the second astronaut to have landed on the moon, the public message delivered to NASA was devastating: The Constellation program was terminated. We would not be returning to the moon. Obama cited two reasons –
1. There have been significant cost overruns in developing the Ares 1 rocket.
2. We've already been to the moon, so there is no point in returning.
Obama then proceeded to propose a vague program designed to take us to an asteroid, and then eventually to Mars. It should be noted that there is no timetable for this endeavor, nor any serious funding. Obama is quick to point out that he is allocating $6 billion for the program over the next five years, but officials are just as quick in mentioning that this additional money would barely keep up with inflation for NASA's current annual budget of $17.3 billion. Skeptics also point out that the earliest possible mission would not occur before 2025. So the net consensus is that manned spaceflight to Mars has little chance of becoming a reality. It appears to be nothing more than false hope in order to silence critics.
With the termination of Constellation and the retirement of Space Shuttle, the United States no longer has a platform to launch astronauts into orbit. Obama's strategy is to rent seats on a Russian rocket in order to take American astronauts to the international space station. The price tag is $55 million per seat, per mission.
As if this news was not insulting enough, NASA employees were not even invited to the president's speech at the Kennedy Space Center. Instead, Obama addressed an audience of approximately 200 people flown in from various parts of the country. Most of them were foreign dignitaries and educators. Clearly, this was a staged event meant to put spin on bad news and avoid the possibility of being challenged by the NASA constituency. Obama did, however, communicate one message to NASA when he was away from the cameras. He told 15,000 NASA employees that they could keep their jobs if they voted for him in 2012. NBC's senior science correspondent, Jay Barbree, was on site at the Kennedy Space Center and visibly shaken by Obama's public and private statements. He captured the essence of the situation when interviewed by MSNBC's Alex Witt:
"Barbree: ...I'm a little disturbed right now, Alex. I just found out some very disturbing news. The President came down here in his campaign and told these 15,000 workers here at the Space Center that if they would vote for him, that he would protect their jobs. 9,000 of them are about to lose their jobs. He is speaking before 200........ It's invitation only. He has not invited a single space worker from this spaceport to attend. It's only academics and other high officials from outside of the country. Not one of them is invited to hear the President of the United States, on their own spaceport, speak today. "
After doing some Internet research, it became apparent that this situation is complicated and a bit of a soap opera. But cutting through the noise, here are some pertinent facts that may help explain why we no longer can put astronauts in orbit and we will no longer be going back to the moon:
• In 2006, the Ares 1 program was over budget. Costs increased to $40 billion from an original projection of $28 billion. The rocket also has some design issues, including excessive weight. This may or may not have been a manageable situation, but it's clear that the White House was not interested in allowing NASA to resolve the problem.
• There was friction between the assistant NASA administrator, Lori Garver, and the senior NASA administrator, Mike Griffin. Mike was an engineer through and through. Lori came up through the ranks of NASA as a public relations person with no engineering background. Predictably, Obama exploited the situation and picked Garver to head up his NASA transition team. She is now NASA's head administrator and sided with the White House to scrap Constellation while Griffin has been put out to pasture.
• In response last Tuesday, Neil Armstrong, Commander of Apollo 11; James Lovell,Commander of Apollo 13 and Eugene Cernan, Commander of Apollo 17 sent an open letter to Obama expressing their collective concerns over the decision to scrap Constallation. They cited issues with allowing American astronauts to become dependent upon the Russian space program. They were concerned that over $10 billion invested in Constellation as well as several years of work are being thrown away. They pointed out that this is the first time in half a century that the United States no longer has a way to put astronauts in orbit. Most importantly, they were sad that this action "destines our nation to become one of second or even third rate stature." "Without the skill and experience that actual spacecraft operation provides, the USA is far too likely to be on a long downhill slide into mediocrity."
Former Apollo astronaut Buzz Aldren disagrees. He has aligned himself with the Obama administration and distanced himself from his fellow astronauts and NASA employees in a somewhat confrontational manner. Aldrin was quoted in an MSNBC interview as saying:
"Well, they (Armstrong, Lovell and Cernan) differ with me, instead of me differing with them. Maybe you should get them on TV and ask them why they differ with us. Why they think it's necessary to go back to the moon, and why they think it's necessary to carry on with two rockets that are just not living up to expectations..."
Why in the world would Buzz Aldrin square off with his fellow astronauts, Neil Armstrong in particular? Well, there was one piece of information that hasn't been reported. Alliant Tek Systems has lost its contract to build the Ares 1 rocket. The new NASA administrator, Garvin, would like to see Obama's program for deep space exploration move forward using commercial rockets. Specifically, the Atlas 5 and the Delta 4. And who makes the Atlas 5 and Delta 4? To quote Jay Barbree again:
"You have Buzz Aldrin, who has his oldest son Andrew Aldrin, the chief planner of the Launch Alliance Group, the Delta 4 rocket in the Atlas 5 rocket, and they are the people who are trying to get the job of hauling the Orion spacecraft into space and the going to downsize it so they can put them (astronauts) on these rockets.... they're trying to do that."
My conclusion? Obama has convinced Buzz Aldrin that we are going to Mars on rockets made by his son's company. There's no budget and no timetable, but Aldrin believes it nonetheless. In the process, Obama has dismantled our space program, made us dependent upon the Russians and caused a rift between two heroes from my childhood who landed on the moon. Is there anything of American value, pride or vision that this president can't destroy? Anything?
Related articles:
Labels: Barack Obama, Craig Covello, NASA, Space Program
posted by Frank T. DeMartini @ 2:51 AM
26 Comments:
Craig,
On this one we are in total agreement. Dismantling Constellation was a terrible mistake.
In your article, you talked about leveraging Apollo. I think it is was ridiculous to believe that we could EVER leverage that program since almost all the pertinent engineering and manufacturing data (along with the intellectual capital that made Apollo) was lost once the program was terminated.
Of course Constellation is over budget. Designing rockets for human flight is HARD!!!!!!! You are also right in suggesting that the cost to 'reengineer' Delta and Atlas-class rockets for human flight would also be expensive. Frankly, I don't even think its possible for Delta-4 or Altas-5 to be used for lunar exploration anyway due to payload weight and throw weight limitations (Orion with a crew is pretty heavy and both these rockets are far less capable than Saturn IV). They would need to be radically updated (to something like Aires V).
The one point that you didn't raise was the notion that the Orion capsule be used as an 'emergency escape vehicle' for the space station. This decision was made to save thousands of jobs in Denver (where Orion is being designed and built). You don't need a deep space capable crew vehicle for that purpose.
Why not just invest less money to keep the shuttle flying??????
At the end of the day, dismantling Constellation will result in a further decay of our engineering expertise. Its another example of where we're choosing to import products (in this case rides on Soyuz) because of cost....this is short sited at best!
It's a sad day for the manned space program, NASA, the United States and mankind in general. Hopefully it will not be too late to get the program up and running again in 2012. Till then lets hope the private section can carry the load.
Well...this is a horse of a different color. Let me start by saying lets talk facts then we can fill in the blanks with our best hypothesis.
The Buzz Aldrin think makes no sense as far as the side deal to let his son's company have a contract.
I am doing a documentary right now the on SSFL (The Santa Susana Field Laboratory) above Simi Valley California. This is not only the site of the worst Nuclear Disaster on U.S. soil but it is also the site where all these rocket engines were tested. A huge facility in size and a major reason we won the cold war. Now, having said that I don't believe based on the specs of these rocket engines that a Delta 4 or Atlas 5 could do the job in question. Those engines were designed and work well for other applications but as far as I know they are not usable anyway for an endeavor of this size.
So I really don't think that shot at Obama makes any sense unless you did not post the whole story.
But getting back to the main topic...hmmmm.
I don't think the space shuttle program should be slowed down, shut down or put on the back burner. I feel the Shuttle is useful technology for the future and its capabilities are essential for America.
As far as going to the Moon...well I have posted here before about that to one of your blogs and I still don't feel the urgency. We need to get other things on track first.
Here is a thought for all and maybe I'm just being a Conspiracy Theorist but in contrast to this funding being taken away money is coming from somewhere to build bunkers throughout the U.S. for the possibility of a 2012 disaster. Do your homework on that one. Somebody is taking this very seriously!
It is a sad day indeed when we lack the courage to make the tough decisions in search of excellence. Visit the downward spiral of our state educational system.
It is sad day indeed when there are those of us who cannot or will not embrace the shared sacrifice of economical difficult times.
It is a sad time indeed when we can not revisit and redefine what is the difference between what we want and what we need.
It is indeed a sad time when fiscal conservatism at a personal level, those of us who pay for these great projects understand, we are the government, does not translate into a review, revision, reduction in currently no longer affordable desires, in waste, fraud, corruption and abuse in the public sector and government bureaucracies. A sector in which it has been reported has forty percent higher wages, and five to ten times the retirement entitlements of the private sector. And their health benefits exceed anything even suggested in the newly passed health care bill. Visit the exceptions for the Cadillac plans.
All arguments, emotions and dialogue must first address the fact of “whether we have the money.” This never denigrates a good idea, it only addresses the hard, not for the faint of heart, fiscal reality
An intellectual, honest, fact based, well written, a blog that clearly articulates a point of view, and is an informative dialogue on the issues of the day are, rare and refreshing regardless of your point of view.
And the miracle is it asks for, anticipates and endured opposite points of view. Bravo.
Mankinds destiny lies in the stars not confined to this planet alone. Putting all your eggs in one basic is a sure way to become extinct. We need to build a base on the moon and a colony on Mars and we need to do it all in the next 50 years. One asteroid or comet strike;one global plague or natural disaster and mankind is toast. Our ancestors knew about expansion outward and as a result moved out into a very dangerous and unexplored world. As a result mankind multiplied and prospered. We are quickly reaching the point where the resource on this planet will no longer be enough to sustain our civilization. We know where these needed resources are and we need to get there. This country always seems to find the money for projects it deems important. We found 5 trillion dollars to keep our economic system from collapsing we can find a couple of billion to keep the space program going. Remember after the shuttles retire, and they need to be, we will be paying the Russians 50 million dollars per astronaut per flight, to hitch a ride to space. That's 150 million per flight times ten thats 1.5 billion dollars a year that could have been used to complete the constellation project. What this administration has done is short sighted. Not to mention the 4 to 5,000 workers that will be laid off as a result. In one single stroke of his pen, Obama has erased over 50 years of space advancements by the US and quite possibly placed the human race in extreme danger. Oh by the way if you believe in the 2012 prophesy bunkers won't help.
I didn't say I believed in the Prophecy of 2012 and you're probably right...they won't help.
What I said was that they are building them (they being our Government) so I get the feeling they are thinking differently.
A salient point here was best framed by that wonderful Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Margaret Hilda Thatcher who said “The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money. Money isn’t just found, it is earned. And when one spends more than one earns there is an inevitability.
Ira,
On the private sector question...I think that the private sector is willing to invest in deep space capabilities. However, they will need to see a business that closes on the investment. Unfortunately, I don't see the political will in place to make that happen, and that is a major indictment of the Obama Presidency.
On the other hand, I also think President Bush would of cut the Program out of political necessity. Of course, that's just may speculation.
Either way, this is a very bad state of affairs. To be left without a human capable launch system is beyond my comprehension....we invented manned space flight (the Russians should be thanked for waking us up and motivating us) and are now poised to abandon it, to become a consumer of it!!!!!!!!!
STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES!!!!!!!
Thatcher is absolutely correct.
I think the private sector knows about the money that could be made by mining the moon and Mars. I think the next 2 decades will be a modern day "Gold Rush" on the moon. The private sectors incentive is greed. That always seems to work. Where's theres money to be made you can bet corporate America willbe leading the way.
If one believes that the private sector incentive is greed, and that will cause progress, revisit the S&L Crisis and the Wall Street melt down. The incentive for the private sector, with the exception of non profits, is profit. Profit comes from doing the “right” thing correctly. Greed is the excessive, repeat excessive, desire to acquire or possess more material wealth than one needs or deserves. Greed is a corruption of the capitalistic system. If one balances incentives with the common good, there can be a beneficial balance. To suggest that Bill Gates or Warren Buffet are greedy because of their enormous, excessive success, material wealth, acquiring much more than they certainly need, is to miss the wisdom with which they seem to have balanced that capitalistic gift. Excessive wealth is required for profound projects. To suggest that great things only come through greed is almost sad.
Back to Frank's point, Obama talks about the future and creating a better, more independent one for our country. History proves that the Space programs benefits far out weigh it's costs and are dynamic. The few billion put into the space program is almost nothing in a rapidly approaching 4 trillion dollar federal budget. That's the point!!!!
Back to Craig's point, Obama talks about the future and creating a better, more independent one for our country. History proves that the Space programs benefits far out weigh it's costs and are dynamic. The few billion put into the space program is almost nothing in a rapidly approaching 4 trillion dollar federal budget. That's the point!!!!
Greed like any other emotion comes in different levels. Buffet and Gates are driven by profit, that in itself is a form of greed. When greed is taken to the excess, like any other emotion, it becomes a bad thing. Greed, in it's lower level is what drives a capitalist system. The almighty buck. And where there's a chance to make the almighty buck corporate america will be there. Within 5 years we will have a reliable, working private launch system that will regularly be taking people and astronauts into space because there is a profit in it.
Ira,
I like your last post...and the fact that you always try to keep your head and look at the issue as an issue and have the ability to make a Party less conclusion.
I am wondering though and may be you can answer. If we end up in a private citizen type space race where rich people like MR.VIRGIN AIRLINES himself are offering trips to outer space what would happen if a guy like him decided to go mega corporate and go to the moon without our Government. What if he started harvesting helium 3 and whatever else is there and selling it as a private company? I'm not sure I like this. I don't know what the laws are for outer space travel but shouldn't a part of it be considered Military? I mean if all goes private the temptation of greed and corruption could turn into selling the planets valuable resources to the wrong people or even dropping off a few military spy pieces or worse for profit. Who will monitor what is going on up there and what is coming down and who decides if we can go there as individuals and take the resources for our own profit and gain. And how will the Government tax the booty taken from another planet? It sounds like a possible regretful situation to me to let this become private but I am looking forward to other people’s views on this one....
Profit is not greed unless you wish to redefine it. The capitalistic system does not need greed to succeed. In fact it is its downfall. Wake up. You have identified the cancer but you won’t operate on it?
Man is a noble creature created in a complex, meaningful and potentially magnificent image you fail to comprehend. The intrinsic and greatness is the gift of free will which is a necessary attribute for man to earn his destiny and perform to the level of greatness allowed, expected and more often the norm. Free will allows man to make mistakes. It does not cause him to be a fool. Man makes mistakes, mistakes do not make him anything. If greed is good, then by the same rational, except if you choose to make an exception, genocide must be good to save the planet from over population. Some of the natural extensions of your ides are self serving at the best.. Those who feel as you do would sell their soul for I buck? I prefer to believe man is better, much better than that.
Look not to a rebuttal, I fear you will have only a limited following, but search your soul for why you feel this way. There is a puzzle piece missing in this representation of your normally worthy ideas.
I know you are better than this so I reject your premise and the sloppy rational. At the very least you insult the intelligence of those people who respect your gift as a thoughtful articulate person. Bu know that you as I can often be very wrongheaded. This time I pray it is you.
Greed is defined as an excess such as wealth or power. As in all things there are levels of excess. The higher the level the worse it becomes. Very few people go into business to lose money. None of us work for free, though sometimes it may feel that way. We need to make a profit to survive. That need to make money, profit, is what drives the economy and in reality for now, the world. This is neither the right way to do things or the wrong way it is simply the way things are done today. Corporations and anyone in business constantly "needs" to increase their profits, their wealth, which in itself is a form of "greed". As far as mans greatness is concerned. We witness that greatness everyday by the images of help pouring into Haiti, Chile and Africa from all over the world. By the unknown good samaritan who helps an injured person or child. You said that mankind is complex and that is true and our potential for greatness is astronomical but we are composed of both good and bad, ying and yang if you like and one will not work without the other. We are all human and we all have our faults. That is what being human is all about and if we need something bad to happen for the greater good to prevail that's not bad thats just being human. Disease drives medicine forward and as a result we're healthier and live longer. War drives technology forward allowing us to live more comfortably. But when disease and war are no longer a factor it is profit which propels us forward.
Now regarding the moon and all it's wealth. I'm sure the government will find a way to regulate and TAX what ever the corporations dig up and process on the moon. They always seem to find a way to get their cut. But I feel if the U.S. want's to make the moon a military platform then they are the one's that need to find a way to get there. Of course they could pay for the technology. Yeah right. I look at the moon in the same light as western america during the early expansion. Eventually government regulators found their way out there, followed by the military. But it was the private corporations, the railroads, stage lines and wagon trains that lead the way. I think it will be the same thing with the moon, Mars and the rest of space.
I logged onto this article last night and found so many counter-thoughts to mine I opted to just refrain from commenting. Today I decided to venture back and explore the commenting. I must say, per usual, I love the dialogue in spite of disagreeing with most of it. However, I have re-read the last poster's submission three times, (anonymous posting @8:12 AM), and found myself enthralled by his musings. In spite of our differences I have come to the conclusion it would be fascinating to spend an hour in the same room with all of you. There are some really great minds here and while I don't always share your visions I certainly applaud your literary talents as well as your desire to seek a better world. In this moment, I am humbled :-)
Thanks Deb. Glad you finally have seen the light. (Only kidding bout the light stuff :-) )
??????????????
The crook will say ‘there is no legal controlling authority.” The honest man says “if I did something wrong, something that violates the laws of nature and nature’s God, then I need no approval or disapproval from man, I follow my intellect and conscience, accept responsibility and accountability and if I have done wrong I will make it right. This is the creed of an honorable capitalist. And the scoundrel, the crook, and the hypocrite needs to be sent to the wood shed.
And the author who wrote this latest blog must be either smiling or frowning. It he does not care than why write? He has caused discussions centering around, whether we agree or disagree, unemployment, recession, space exploration, weapons delivery systems, profit (greed), and in some cases “I think my ideas are better than yours.”
There is eloquence in the capturing of the premise that profit (greed if you wish) is an answer to what, failed capitalism? Has anyone heard about the “character” of man?
Some suggest that money can be found, where I am not sure, for the solution, of which (one problem at a time please) I am unaware, for just about everything that supports my (your) point of view.
Are we all too timid to address the question of “need” over “want?” Of what we can afford and when. Man can engage in commerce without profit as a main pillar of transaction. It is sometimes called “barter.”
And finally has it occurred to any of us that these distractions, as legitimate as they are, are convenient, clever and seem to lead one to a centralized control for the social good? Or did we miss that “Never let a crisis go to waste” thing.
For sure, in every family, well at least in my family, there are times when ones gets past the “want” and right down to “either/or” of somethings we “need.” And the argument is we cannot do without either. But we can’t have both. Do I steal from my neighbor? Or do I suffer as the price of morality. It is that wealth distribution thing. Yes, we make hard moral choices. And when we do this correctly, man is better for it. Things do get difficult to near impossible but ‘What doesn’t kill you, makes you stronger.” Can we talk about that?
And in every socialistic endeavor, the people at the top, managing the affairs of businesses, the corporations and nations have so far, for most if not all of eternity, have been acting like, living like, maybe they are, corrupt capitalist. And these people hate bankers, business, car companies and Wall Street and anything capitalistic (not really they just want to own them). Do they hate themselves? No! But maybe they are certainly misguided, operating on flawed principles.
And we all stumble around seeking a little sanity. Someone framed it well with “it is like Lucifer trying to explain how Hell happened.”
Some of us would be interested, very interested, in what the author of this particular blog took away from these many comments, if anything at all. Did he frame the discussion or did we run a ground on preconceived ideas?
Houston we have another problem.
It was Tuesday April 27, 2010. And just when the administration was telling us the worst was over some sobering news hits the ether.
GM said it has paid back all of the money used to bail it out when the government destroyed the bond holders equity. Well, that is not exactly correct. Someone suggested that GM took money from TARP to pay “off” this debt (they still owe some 62 billion, no?). But that doesn’t prevent the new GM President from damaging his credibility. And the news gets worse.
Greece inches closer to financial Armageddon. Greece’s debt is now rated at junk status with nobody touching it for less than a 10% premium on 10 year bonds. Portugal, Spain and Ireland’s equivalent financial vehicle interest moved higher.
"Spain has to issue new debt plus roll over existing debt to the tune of 225 billion euros this year. Forty-five percent of their debt is held by foreigners so they are dependent on the kindness of strangers.” And China comes to mind.
On 4/27/10 leading stock indexes across Europe plunged by 2.5 to 6 percent, and the euro fell to a recent low, for a 13 percent decline against the dollar since December 2009. The Dow Jones industrial average slumped 213.04 points, to 10,991.99, a fall of 1.9 percent.
If the global recession is over or even on the mend this may not be a problem, and who believes that, at least just yet? So watch George Soros and the hedge funds. Watch how they are betting. Like Goldman Sachs these folks make fortunes off of selling short. Translated that means they are betting the world will fail. Why? Because as a nation we, and the rest of the world, are spending more than we earn. Jobs are scarce, real unemployment is in the high teens.
With European budget deficits worsening, investors are now worried that — like American homeowners who borrowed too much in the last decade — some countries may have a hard time paying off their debts. And by the way, American budget deficits are worsening also.
The 45 billion euro Greece rescue package put together by Europe has done little to calm global markets. Goldman Sachs, yes, that Goldman Sacks, suggests that it will take 150 billion over three years to help weather the financial hurricane. If the crooks are worried shouldn’t we be worried?
These debts, like the unfunded 100 trillion American public sector entitlements are massive and unsustainable. Barclays has estimated the global exposure to be huge. It is Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterns redux.
And if things fall again, is the administration going to take over Lloyds of London et al. Couldn’t this be the perfect storm for crowning a global king? In developed countries, like America(?), our debt is considered safe because we can raise taxes and fees. That is as long as American people have any money.
As the European Union and the I.M.F. debates the politics of Greece laying off civil servants and persuading its doctors to pay income tax, it is becoming apparent that the international community may need to come up with a much larger sum (this number is huge) to backstop not just Greece, but also Portugal and Spain. Portugal is looking for 40 billion. Spain is looking for 350 billion. The I.M.F. is talking a comprehensive package of 200 billion which nobody, repeat nobody thinks is enough.
The Maastricht Treat of 1997 is in danger of collapse. Pressure from this will cause austerity measures which will cause civil unrest everywhere which will be manipulated by the usual misery merchants. America is in for a bumpy ride.
The realist looks at debtclock.org and knows the day of reckoning is not far away.
Houston we have problems bigger than unemployment. There is a global fiscal storm on the horizon and we may not be able to land safely.
Nothing you have said in your last answer is a surprise to anyone following the news. As you said. "what doesn't kill you will make you stronger". To those who really knew what they were talking about said the European alliance would never last. That was twenty years ago. The world is evolving both fiscally and politically and what will emerge when this is all done will be a stronger more connected planet. Where you see armageddon I see growth but having said that you always need some armageddon for growth to exist. No one really thought this fiscal apocalypse was over. Most people still realize we have a long way to go and still must suffer some before we really see the light at the end of the tunnel. The storm is not coming it is already here and has been here for some time. We just need to find the strength to weather it. We will.
Most of us are fearful of the casual nature of “Nothing you have said is a surprise to anyone following the news” when in fact history is replete with what happens “when the good people who knew did nothing.” The Holocaust comes to mind.
Sometimes doing nothing is the only course of action you have. Todays world is so complex and inter-connected most people are overwhelmed and can only hang on for the ride. That is not necessarily a good thing but for some but it is the only thing. This does not hold true for an event such as the holocaust in Germany or the Kurdish slaughter in Iraq or the Armenian Genocide in Turkey. There is no excuse for doing nothing in situations like that.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home