Reblog: The Mandatory Future

What do you think about this outlook? Do you agree or disagree?

Chartwell West

A long time ago, I was the AUXO. That’s what people called me and that’s what I answered to. It’s one of the fun quirks of serving as a naval officer on a war ship. People just call you what you are instead of who you are. And I was the Auxiliaries Engineering Division Officer on a guided missile destroyer. The Auxiliaries Engineering Division-“A Gang” for short, owned just about every part of engineering equipment on the ship that didn’t actually turn the shaft. Which means my team had to know how to operate, maintain and repair just about anything from industrial grade maritime air conditioners to hydraulic steering units to the toasters in the galley. And they had to do it well, like people’s lives and the national interests of America depended on it. Because they did.

As the officer in charge, I never looked at my enlisted men…

View original post 1,121 more words

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “Reblog: The Mandatory Future

  1. I think the author understood that people want to be respected for what they can try to do. The fact is not all start out at the same place or have the same assets, but all want to feel if they work hard and do their best they will be respected for it. As for the rest of the post, he is correct. We were a nation built on manufacturing and others wanted what we built. In the 1950’s to about 1970’s we were the nation of innovation and new products. Others wanted them. Then we became a nation of service industries. We stopped making anything other than pharmaceuticals, and we started doing jobs that served others. Caregivers, waiters, cleaners, all jobs designed around providing a service others could buy, even if that few was smaller than in the past. We stagnated as big money in old industries tried to keep things the same as they had been so they could get a few more not needed dollars to their names. It is more about power and influence for them now than money I think. So we do need a radical change, a new space mission, a new time when NASA invented things we were stunned about that could be used in everyday life. We need a new power generating tech that we all can build and get behind like we did Nuclear when it came out. We need that spirit of adventure of leaping off the cliff into tomorrow to see how far we can fly. Sadly that will take the government at this point to turn from the old and embrace the new. When the Obama administration tried to do so , jump start new tech and new ways, the GOP congress crucified him. The GOP in congress is not about to give up the wants of the old tech and fuel interests that pay them now. So we spiral down. Each generation less able to provide for itself, the standard of living going down, the life expectancy going down, as the old guard tries to blame everyone but itself, trying it best to deceive their way out of accountability while trying to get that last dollar for themselves before it also is gone. The fact of what was done to Hillary with no reason, no fact, no cause other than political, the idea that the least educated did not want the truth or the facts, and instead insisted the facts did not matter and voted for trump, these things lead me to figure there is no real hope for us in the short term. The truth I fear is the entire upper generation must die off first. The 60 to 90 year olds that cling to what most of us did not live through and do not have, and they still insist is important. They had company paid retirement plans, free life time health care, and other things few of us younger people ever saw. But they voted as if that was the issue today. We need to wait until their influence is gone. Then we can rebuild. But by then it will be rebuilding from the ashes. I hope I am wrong but that is how I see it. Hugs

    Liked by 2 people

    • Thank you for this, Scottie. You’re really on a roll! 🙂

      You wrote, “It is more about power and influence for them now than money I think.”

      Money is power … which is why the 1% has so much influence on what happens in this country. Sad but true.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Very true Nan. You see so much of the world so clearly. I am not sure if to envy you that trait or to feel glad I do not have it my self. I am not sure if I could take seeing the world I live in more clearly, understanding it better. Yet to not to try makes me a victim, and I have had enough of that in my life. Still it has to be hard seeing it as you do, and having others not see it as clearly. Thank you for being yourself, thank you for being such a grand person. The world needs much more people like you. Hugs

        Liked by 2 people

  2. There was some good stuff there but some of it is bogus. The charts show real data, that manufacturing and agricultural jobs are on the decline while finance, insurance, real estate, and professional and business services jobs are increasing. But look at the difference. Farmers and manufacturers actually made goods. The finance industry, well, if you include the damages done by financial bad-doers, the financial industry is a net negative, that we would have been better off if it didn’t exist. And real estate jobs? Really? Business services? Guys employed to help make sure businesses don’t pay any taxes?

    Hedge fund managers make billions in income and don’t really make anything. Health insurance companies push paper at rates several times higher than Medicare (one of those inefficient guvmint services) does and that is all they do.

    We have replaced jobs that actually produce things of value and created jobs that add up to intellectual masturbation. Business close US business because labor cost are high. So what? Is the company profitable? Is it doing well? What real benefit is there is a company makes more money for its shareholders if the cost is more and more Americans who can’t afford to buy even cheaper Chinese imports that replaced made in America goods. You can’t eat money!

    Liked by 2 people

  3. I thought there were threads of truthiness, but overall I thought (and felt) he was pigeon-holing two groups or classes of Americans or people: workers (robots) and designers (robot-builders). 😮 I much prefer to flow between several/many fields of human endeavor — Humanities, Science, Literature, Human Rights, Law, Medicine, Economics, Paleoanthropology, etc, etc. — sometimes as a guest-student, sometimes as a resident-teacher. I damn sure do not want to be told I can only be A or B.

    I also thought (and felt) that his paradigm was very microscopic… narrow. Why must “greatness” only be by and from Americans!? Geezz, how many times did he use the word (reference) America(ns)? By the way, in the fields of mental health, addiction, and incarceration the U.S. blows EVERYBODY, every nation out of the proverbial naval water like a missle! 😉 Is THAT not a sign, symptom of not-such-greatness!? Hahaha….umm, HELLO!?

    As I often say, QUIT saying what you are or what race or nationality you are from — to borrow his look-at-me quote — and try something a little more evolved, progressive… like “Hello, I am ______ and I am from planet Earth. How can we not go extinct together?” 😀

    Enough with hair-splitting delineations already!

    Liked by 2 people

    • Thank you, Professor T, for your usual thoughtful comments.

      I’m not sure I totally go along with your thinking. Perhaps I didn’t examine what he said as closely as you did, but from my perspective I felt he put forth some good ideas … and I tended to line up with much of what he wrote. But I’m certainly no expert.

      To me, one comment he made summed up the gist of his post. Speaking of his sons, he wrote: But if they choose to enter the professional life, the “management class” then I want them to understand that the life my generation chased, finance and law and computer innovation, won’t change the world the way our future needs it to.

      I also liked this comment towards the end of his post: Because we’ve decided once again, to stop trying to solve new problems and focused instead on making more money solving old ones. (my emphasis)

      You mentioned he referenced Americans on numerous occasions. Isn’t that basically what his core writing was about? Or did I miss something?

      Anyway, I do appreciate your thoughts. That’s what I asked for. 😀

      Liked by 1 person

      • As always Nan, when you and I don’t exactly line-up in perspectives or opinions, you do such an exceptional job in tactfully expressing alternative ideas or thoughts, not to disrespect or demean my POV, but to encourage FURTHER dialogue, thinking, and discussion! This is why I keep coming back here! 😉 So… thank you Ma’am. ❤

        …one comment he made summed up the gist of his post. Speaking of his sons, he wrote: But if they choose to enter the professional life, the “management class” then I want them to understand that the life my generation chased, finance and law and computer innovation, won’t change the world the way our future needs it to.

        Though it might be the gist of his post and M.O., I disagree with him. I realize my opinion here may seem to oversimplify the significant factors and causes leading to his perceived futile chase in finance, law, or computer innovation, but I do not see the necessity to LIMIT or terminate ingenuity or adaptation in ANY field of labor, IMHO. I do feel like more Americans need to become MORE self-sustaining rather than being corporate consumers in areas they are uneducated in, gardening and or farming being a big one. 🙂

        I also liked this comment towards the end of his post: Because we’ve decided once again, to stop trying to solve new problems and focused instead on making more money solving old ones. (my emphasis)

        That is indeed a one of the threads of truthiness I agreed with as well. 🙂

        You mentioned he referenced Americans on numerous occasions. Isn’t that basically what his core writing was about? Or did I miss something?

        Agreed Nan. It may very well be his core, but what I perhaps didn’t articulate too well in my original comment was Why be exclusive when humanity’s problems are ALL of humanity’s problems? I would contrast his American-core with the reality of non-American nations (particularly European, especially northern European nations) are already doing and have been doing what he speaks of. Why are they not considered great, with great leaders and workers to model? I find what he advocates has already been started years (decades?) ago by nations like Germany, Holland, Finland, Sweden, etc, By implying that the U.S. must be the one to take the initiative, to me, indicates a narrow lens, an American-only lens.

        Am I making more sense now? LOL 😛

        Liked by 1 person

        • Oh, PT, you always make sense! Not to worry. 😀

          I probably didn’t see the article through the same lens as you because I’m, quite frankly, not as well versed in what’s taking place in other countries. I pretty much looked at what he said from an “American Citizen” point of view — and perhaps that’s why much of what he wrote seemed to make sense to me.

          I felt he was, in a sense, taking America to task for their outlook on progress.

          In any event, your points about him failing to take a more “universal” approach are valid. But perhaps this was not the point of his essay?

          Thank you once again for contributing. Oh … and for the very nice compliments in your first paragraph. ❤

          Liked by 1 person

Take Some Time To Share Your Thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s