The Pragmatism of Love

A regular reader and friend wrote this comment recently, and I loved what he wrote so much that I am posting it for discussion. I did not ask permission to re-print this, but assumed the right to do it. So, David, if you’re bothered by it, just let me know. Otherwise I publish what I believe to be such wonderful intentions.

Renaissance Guy and David Rochester were discussing what to do with unwanted children. RG commented that, outside of Christian ethics (because Christianity, like Judaism, mandates the care of orphans), there’s no real moral mandate, other than human decency, for caretaking orphans and other neglected, unloved children. David replied:

There’s more to this than human decency, though certainly that’s a component. It’s pragmatism, as well. The world will be populated with these emotionally neglected and deprived kids. They will be at higher risk for substance abuse, for self-destructive acts, and for making choices that lead to more unwanted kids. The world is suffering from unconsciousness, and the more we ignore the population never given a chance to attain it, the more we’re all going to pay for that, in my opinion.

I think everyone is capable of making some difference to children who aren’t getting what they need. There’s not one person who couldn’t volunteer with a literacy program, or volunteer as a mentor, or at least contribute financially to support those programs. Not everyone is in a position to adopt or foster a child — I’m not, myself; I’m still a neurotic crazy mess, and completely unsuitable as a full-time guardian. But I do volunteer. And one of my goals, hopefully within the next ten years, is to stabilize my own life sufficiently to allow me to take in at least one foster child. Whether I’ll get there, who knows. But I’d like to.

I loved that David saw love as sensible and pragmatic. He connected the dots and drew the line of responsibility for consciousness (and therefore love, I infer) directly to the individual. We each have a responsibility. And, lest anyone be overwhelmed by the idea of being a foster or adoptive parent, he pointed out practical ways in which each of us can do his or her part.

I agree that not everyone can or should foster or adopt a child. People used to say to me, “You have a calling,” and I hated that because I thought it was hogwash. Yes, I have a calling, I’d think… the same calling you have if you’re a Christian, which St. James called “pure religion, and undefiled—to care for and visit the widow and the orphan in their distress.” The only question is, “in what way will you care?” if you are a Christian.

And not all suffering, neglected children are orphans or in need of foster care. Many have to go home to a hellish existence every day. Being adopted or fostered aren’t options for such children, and the world is full of them. Your local school or church no doubt have their unwanted children, living at home with mom or dad. How do we reach out and love these kids?

David shows us how. Even if we are not Christian, he suggests. Even if you are a world citizen. Yes, you. You have a responsibility you can take. You can contribute something.

I’m perhaps too optimistic when I suggest that each one of us does something to help. I think we do. I’d like to think that there’s not one reader passing by who has not or will not do one thing regularly to relieve the suffering of neglected, unwanted, unloved children. But, just in case there is someone so caught up in his or her own life that you’ve done nothing to relieve such suffering, here’s a question: what are you doing?

I love that David has a vision for himself and others. And I just wanted to repeat what bears repeating and say thanks, David, for making it all so practical.

And loving.

Where do you draw the line?

The woodsy smell of the fire my husband had built in our gathering room suffused the house and gently goaded me to consciousness. As I waited for the water to boil for tea, I shuffled outside with the dogs. The air was as sharp and crisp as Vermont cheddar cheese. As I looked out over the pasture, one of my first coherent thoughts of the day was a question: What’s the difference between a Republican and a Democrat, a conservative and a liberal? Where are our differences?

I poured the tea and remembered the weekend I spent with my friend Sandra, the facilitator of a Jungian group in a nearby state and a staunch Democrat. She is one of the kindest, most interesting and most hospitable women I’ve met, and I’ve met a lot of women in half a century. One of the best words I can think of to describe her is “delightful.”

Most of the group that Sandy has met with for over a decade are Democrats, and one holds political office. I fit right in with their group, though, as often happens when I go around people, for I am interested in and curious about people, and I find something lovable in everyone. They were much the same—caring, friendly, warm, intelligent. Warmth has no political party, and so we all got along.

A few years ago, Sandra’s son, Ben, had a near-fatal car accident that left him a quadriplegic. As we drove to Ben’s house to visit, Sandy told me the story of his suffering and the toll it had taken on the whole family. It was a difficult story to hear, but Ben had adapted and is an active, interesting man who is always busy doing something useful. He had bought a lovely home on the lake, but was having problems with a local businessman, whose property Ben has to go through to get to his house. This businessman has piled the access road to Ben’s house with all sorts of salvage and junk, usually in defiance of the city codes. He wants to buy Ben’s property, they explained, and so is making life as difficult as possible for Ben in hopes that Ben will give up the fight and move. Sandra pointed out that Ben’s special van or an ambulance can barely make it through the access road, so great is the businessman’s encroachment. In a life that has already been full enough of suffering, Ben had one more fight on his hands.

We had to slow down as we approached Ben’s property through the jumble of junk piled along both sides of the access road. The very sight of it incensed Sandra, who exclaimed, “Those damn Republicans! They care nothing about anyone else!” I, her shocked Republican house guest, said nothing, for I too was appalled by this man’s terrible behavior. Even so, Sandra’s sense of outrage was no greater than the offense I felt over being lumped in with an asshole who used his power and money to make life miserable for a quadriplegic.

This moment has stayed with me ever since. When my emotion rises and I think a thought that begins with, “Those damn—!” I know that I’ve already gone past the point of reason and am dealing with others out of my pain and frustration. Pain and frustration can transform us, but they also have the power to alienate us and drive us to see our pain and the cause of it everywhere. This is where bigotry and prejudice often arise. Prejudice does not see individuals, it only sees collectives.

What, exactly, divides us by political party, by label, by outlook? Have we worked out what we mean by our political party affiliations, whatever our nationalities? What do you mean to communicate with your vote? What values are behind it? What makes us so passionate about our politics, if not our closely-held beliefs?

Sandra’s entirely understandable fury against the politics of greed has changed me in a subtle but significant way. I know now that my Democrat friends may well see Republicans as greedy, mean-spirited or exploitive people. I understand that Republicans tend to see Democrats as lazy and amoral. But I wonder what it is that really divides people. I suspect only a handful of so-called social issues divide us, and most of them are not as much social as they are moral: abortion, gay marriage, and money. Isn’t this what all this fuss boils down to? If not, what else would you add to this short list?

I’ve been wondering. So I looked up some demographics, and I’ll be writing about those because what I learned was interesting and sometimes even surprising. We are alike more than you’d think. I suspect so much of this is about money, the haves and the have-nots. I suspect that I may find that Jesus was right again when he said, “Where your money is, there will your heart be also.”

In the meantime, I thought I’d ask you: What do you think divides political parties and people? What values do you believe you have that the opposing political party does not share? Is there one issue in particular that decides whether you are liberal, conservative, libertarian, Democrat, Republican, Independent, moderate? Where do you draw your line, and why?

Our Collective Internal Revenue

Everyone is talking about the middle class, the taxpayer, the common man. I wrote earlier this week about “the forgotten man” of the Great Depression, and how he was used as a scapegoat or hero figure in what may well have been a manifestation of the nation’s collective dysfunction as much as it was the result of greed and overblown spending. I think one danger we’re in now as a nation is a similar tendency toward polarization and scapegoating.  In healthy families and collectives, there is no need to demonize people or paint them into one-dimensional roles. The fact that we are finger-pointing on a national level indicates to me that we are in danger spiritually as well as economically. Without some galvanizing outer event to bring us together, we will continue to splinter until we succeed at demonizing one segment while glorifying another. Theoretically, we may generate a world war, a national disaster, or an economic depression to achieve for us what we will not do for ourselves as a nation, which is to unite. I fear that we will take the wrong course and continue to blame and reject the “other,” and unconsciously bring disaster among ourselves until we can finally realize what we’ve done.

Joe the plumber

Joe Wurzelbacher is the Ohio plumber whose name has become a household word and a metaphor for the American dream. At an Obama rally outside Toledo on October 12, Wurzelbacher asked Barack Obama why Obama wants to punish him through higher taxes on the small business Wurzelbacher hopes to buy. Joe was mentioned several times in the most recent presidential debate, and has galvanized many small business owners and others who have struggled to get ahead and provide for their families to protest against Obama’s “spread the wealth” plan. In an already failing economy in which taxpayers will be footing the bill for a massive bailout, business owners are scared. What if they can’t keep their doors open? What if they can’t make their payroll? What if they can’t provide for their children? What if they lose everything they’ve worked for?

Many small business owners like my husband and I have survived two recessions during which we nearly lost everything we had. That bakery you buy from, the dry cleaners who clean your clothes, the restaurants you eat at, and the shop where you have your watch or auto repaired are all run by small business owners. They have a perspective that comes from starting with nothing and working their way up to becoming business owners—what we call “The American Dream.”

On the other hand we seem to have a lot of Americans who are angry with small business owners and large ones. They say business people are all greedy, that they’re selfish and have too much. They resent the fact that the middle class and upper middle class can drive better cars that get better gas mileage, can live in nicer neighborhoods and send their kids to private schools. They’re angry that their kids have to compete at school with children who have more stuff, wear more name brands, and whose iPod is more expensive. There are angry, hard-working Americans who want that stuff, too. And although the welfare and many of the working class pay zero in federal taxes, they want the people ahead of them to pay more so that they can get more free stuff that they didn’t work for, perhaps because no matter how hard they work or how many hours, they can’t get ahead. They want someone to help them along. They don’t always want to be the guy on the bottom, supporting the guy at the top so that he can buy his daughter the more expensive iPod.

It seems to all be about stuff and jealousy, and our human refusal to be content with what we have. And some level of discontentment can be good when it goads us to achieve. But when it goads us to achieve at another’s expense, or to generate a sense of entitlement that we think gives us the right to take what someone else worked for, what then? Are we even thinking about our assumptions?

John and Jane Q. Taxpayer

McCain and Obama alike refer to the taxpayer, to the middle class, to the American living on Main Street. But who is this American taxpayer? Based on statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau, the majority of Americans work at small firms and make under $50,000 a year. Over half of all Americans employed in the private sector are employed by small businesses, which produce more income and more jobs than the large business sector. Yet small businesses pay more per employee for government regulation and intervention than do large firms with over 500 employees, a fact published by the U.S. Small Business Administration.

The American taxpayer is you and me, and it’s probably also your boss, unless you work for a large company (500+ employees) or the local, state, or federal government. Our economy is run by small businesses and by middle-class Americans who are already struggling to make their payroll, their payroll taxes, their high business and unemployment tax payments, their outrageous comprehensive, liability and vehicle insurance premiums, as well as their personal mortgage payments, tuition for their kids, and contributions to their own retirements. After all, we small business owners don’t have guaranteed retirement as do our legislators. We don’t have government-backed retirement plans like government workers. In the past week alone, my husband and I lost 33% of the value of our retirements, money we saved all by ourselves and which is not guaranteed by anyone. How selfish is it of politicians to tell Joe the Plumber that he is making too much money when they themselves are multimillionaires with guaranteed retirements and health insurance?

How is that loving your neighbor as yourself? And if our lawmakers are not acting out of real love, then from what energy are they acting? Do we want to know?

It appears to me that the bailout bill and the economic plans being proposed do little to improve things for the segment of American businesses or citizens who actually produce the most jobs and income for most taxpayers. It appears to me that the new taxation being proposed against small businesses and the middle class will do nothing to help those of us who have already done more than our fair share. Instead, it aims to penalize us for working so hard. It aims to force us to “spread the wealth around” before anyone even asks whether there is any “wealth,” and whether the current tax scheme is fair. Why do we not ask more questions about fairness, when the word “fair” is being bandied about by both candidates for the American presidency?

there’s a top line, and a bottom line

As the co-owner of a small business, I’m concerned about how a new tax-and-spend congress and president may affect the future of our country and our own business. With only half of our umpteen children raised, we cannot afford to go bankrupt. My husband is almost 55 years old and has literally worked with his hands all his adult life. Like many other small business owners who have Subchapter S corporations or LLCs, any business “profit” we make—even money we set aside for the business so that we can pay our payroll and keep our workers employed when our contractors do not pay us or pay late—is taxed to us as individual income. What we actually live on and what the business makes are two different things. Right now, in spite of a so-called conservative congress and president having been in power for six of the past eight years, we pay enough in business-related taxes to employ 4.5 additional workers who we can’t hire due to the prohibitive costs of doing business. Instead of hiring new people, my husband works almost every Saturday. So when I see Joe on television, I want to pat Joe on the back and say, “Joe, I understand.” Lots of us work 10-12 hour days and have everything we own at risk as we run businesses that are being bled dry by a burgeoning welfare class and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.

Most people do not run small businesses and don’t know what it takes to run one successfully. Over the years, we have had several employees who had similar attitudes to those expressed by so many bloggers, commenters, and others who are criticizing Joe the plumber for “making over $250,000 a year.” They say Joe is rich if his business makes over $250,000 a year. They say they deserve a cut, too, and they go out and start their own business, and most of them fail. They fail because many people don’t have the right combination of work ethic, determination, intelligence, experience, ambition, and hope to be able to open and maintain a small business successfully. But they direct jealousy and hatred at those who do, and they say that Joe the Plumber must be rich if his business makes $250,000 a year.

I have news: They don’t know what they’re talking about. And over the next few days I’ll be explaining how Joe’s plumbing business is most likely to operate based on government statistics gathered from people’s tax returns, and why revenues of $250,000 to a plumbing business by no means make Joe “rich.” I’m going to explain the top line and the bottom line of an income statement and a tax return so that people will (I hope) stop accusing Joe of being “rich,” when what he actually said was that he hopes to buy a plumbing business that makes $250,000 to $270,000 a year (that’s gross, my friends).

My hope is that people who shop and do business every day at small businesses will be more aware of just how many services they use are provided by people who own small businesses. Even that restaurant chain you eat at is actually owned by a small business owner who bought into a franchise, borrowing what he hoped to be able to repay through incredibly hard work. When you stop and think about how Bill and Betty the Business Owners are the ones who have to go in and work the 8-hour shift whenever someone they hired doesn’t show up, or how they borrowed against the home they live in to be able to open the doors of that business, maybe you’ll think twice before you assume you know how “rich” those people are or how selfish and greedy they must be.

And maybe, just maybe, we will start saying, “I’m not sure,” and maybe we’ll ask more questions of the people we do business with. Maybe we will pay as much attention to the internal revenue of our spirits, looking to our own hearts and our level of judgment and anger with as much vigor as we judge our neighbors.

One can always hope.