March 1, 2020—Part II: Establishing a Basic Floor of Thriving: Partial Repost with Alterations from September 18, 2017 originally entitled: Awake, Focus, and Come Together

There will always be a 1% and a 99% in whatever category we choose.  Belonging to a category is inevitable. However, we might use caution about attributing value of lack thereof.  Hoo-nōs

What if we establish a non-permeable floor of thriving which we will not go below, along with a very permeable ceiling where folks can get rich, etc.?  That might work if:

  1. No one entity gets to own or control resources having to do with the basic floor or threshold of thriving.  No one entity gets final control of resources, including political or corporate or religious power, agriculture, health, pharmaceuticals, oil, water, transportation, monetary exchange, information, and so on.  And no one gets to take away that floor.  Why can’t one entity control basic units of thriving?  Another very sacrosanct pillar:  checks and balances.  It’s a good idea to have regulatory principles to ensure that the basic floor and principles of thriving remain in place.  That is what the three branches of government are supposed to be doing and the fourth branch—us—should be paying attention to! 
  2. We worry more about the basic floor of our commitment rather than the so-called privileged 1%.  After all the basic floor of thriving is the threshold we will not go below.  The ceiling of opportunities is very permeable.  How many resources can one have?  Simple, whatever works for such entities within the limits dictated by #1 above.
  3. We fund the difference between the costs of maintaining #1 and allowing #2 above.  In other words, we’re contributing taxes, work, effort, etc., within our means, to the basic principle of a minimum threshold of thriving.  For example, we agree to fund the rights for #1 and #2 above—for everyone, not just those who have resources that puts them in the 1%.   
  4. We realize that the gathering of resources beyond the basic floor of thriving does give such folk a certain privilege beyond those with fewer resources.  We get over that and let it be.  For instance, the wealthy do not get better health care, better education, better protection, better water, better air, etc., then the rest of us simply because they have more available resources.  However, those folks can get luxury items like costly experimental health care, premium transportation, premium food, premium clothes, premium homes, etc., and we will not begrudge it as long as the floor of our ability to thrive is intact.
  5. We practice the fundamental pillars for all human beings who are in our country or territories, not just citizens and not just for the economically advantaged.  The rights of citizenship still exist, including voting, education, traveling, comprehensive medical care, and any other considerations that put citizens more in the front of the queue, but we do not dehumanize or forego due process or innocence before guilt for anyone, including non-citizens.  And we consider that wealthy citizens are not better citizens or that the less wealthy are worse citizens—each are citizens, just wealthier or not.

There is likely more, but we can figure it out if we focus.  In the meantime, it is critical we stop the “us versus them” rhetoric—including the notion that folks can live like they want, as long as they do it somewhere else.  That last part is called forced segregation and it is not what we are about.  Stopping divisive actions does not mean stopping constructive criticism.  It does mean we stop engaging in destructive dehumanization and class warfare—of anyone.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.