February 27, 2009 · Adam Ydstie · archive: txp/article

AY: Spirit of Abundance

Well, I don’t know if you heard, but the economy isn’t doing so well. I guess the stock market dropped again? Supposedly it has dropped fifty percent from just 16 months ago. Basically, what I am hearing is that our publicly owned business economy has been cut in half over the last 16 months. Our nice little tower of Babel that reached its pinnacle less than two years ago has already crumbled. It seems like this fluid system has gone and dried up. Why? Perhaps it was the leadership of a right-wing patriarchal legacy, perhaps it was our greedy use of fanciful plastic money. Perhaps there are intricacies involved that we will not understand for years. Whatever it is, we are seemingly left to wander in a desert of financial instability.

I often hear this countercultural message in our community that we should lean into a spirit of abundance rather than a spirit of scarcity. Now, I say countercultural because I believe that we have been operating in a false sense of abundance which has been shrouded in scarcity. This hidden and subversive idea that there isn’t enough to go around leads to hoarding or immediate consumption. Which, in my opinion, is what we as a nation have been doing for far too long. All the while we were being told that we were in a time of abundance, we were using those gains for individual gain rather than building a truly abundant, equitable society. This spirit of abundance that I am talking about is a belief in abundance that allows us to evenly distribute funds and not hold on to what we deem “rightfully” ours.

So where does this lens of abundance fit into all of this disturbing talk of a collapsing economy? How does one live into abundance when there is seemingly so much scarcity among us? It seems like in a time like this the last thing we need to do is step into an “every person for themselves” mentality. A community should support its members in trying times such as these. Are we doing this? Perhaps our current financial condition gives us reason to support each other, not support our own selfish agendas.

I just started reading a book called, Passing the Plate that states if one third of the Christians in this country released 10 percent of their gross income they would generate a $46 billion surplus of money. What if we as a whole society were more willing to part with a small amount of our pay for those less fortunate? What kind of a stimulus would that be to the economy?

We hear news of a coming stimulus package from the government. I don’t know whether I can have hope in that or not. Only time will tell, as I am confident it will take time for the stimulus to resuscitate our economy. What I do hope is that the citizens of this city have a genuine community pride and care for fellow brothers and sisters. It is difficult in such a time as this. I catch myself pulling back from the community of support around me and caring only for my own stability and future. So I guess maybe I am just writing this to try to comfort myself. I need to remind myself that my own existence is inextricably bound up in the existence of my fellow community members. What path will I choose? The path of scarcity, fear, self indulgence and preservation? Or, the path of abundance, hope and a sustaining, equitable community? I will choose to find hope and strength in solidarity with my community. I will choose to help where I can and share in the pain when I can’t and it will be through this solidarity that we will not have to wander through this desert of financial instability alone. May we no longer live in scarcity, but may we equitably prosper for the sake of our community.

Filed under: Adam-Ydstie, General

31 comments

Jesse February 27, 2009

So… you’re saying that those with abundance should share it with the less fortunate so there’s enough for everyone? Is that what you’re getting at?
David Koch February 27, 2009

“if one third of the Christians in this country released 10 percent of their gross income”…

If you ignore the “Christians” part, it sounds like he’s saying EVERYONE “should share” for a common abundance for society. Though “those with abundance should share it with the less fortunate” sounds more in line with the “Christian” aspect.

Did you know that Washington has an Income Tax of 0%? That means sales pay for our government, which disproportionately puts the tax burden on the lower half of our society. So if by “those with abundance should share it with the less fortunate” you mean “those with abundance pay a more equal portion of their income in taxes for the good of society,” then I certainly hope he’s saying that.
Mofo from the Hood February 28, 2009

In paragraph 1 the use of the term “right-wing patriarchal legacy” stated as a probable cause for U.S. economic problems is pretty thin considering that the agents who founded and governed and built this country did so within the parameters of patriarchal elite system.

As much as I love women, even though most of them exist (and are groomed by women’s studies college majors) to control men, I’ll never be convinced that what America needs is a matriarchal government.
dolly varden February 28, 2009

@2: If our Governor and state legislators had any guts, they’d use the current crisis to revamp the tax system creating a progressive income tax and reducing the sales tax. Sales taxes aren’t only harder on the poor, the revenue they produce collapses in a recession. Which means cutting needed services from social services to infrastructure to environmental protection and restoration.

But I’m not holding my breath — the big Democratic majorities in Olympia are scared of their own shadow.
RR Anderson February 28, 2009

Dolly, your’re my kind of trout!

deep 6 the sales tax, ‘nationalize’ the wealthy!
Thorax O'Tool February 28, 2009

This is how I see it.

You, me, RR Anderson, et al are all humans, we’re all people; a bunch of psychotic bald apes with a strange knack for acquiring self-destructive habits.

It was the worst of our habits that got us into this mess: ignorance, apathy, complacency and greed.

But we’re more than our bad habits, we’re stronger than the sum of our worst trials. Nations and cultures may buckle under the deadly recipe mentioned above: it’s all over history.
But down here on the person to person scale, we can do better. When times are tough, the human race has this amazing ability to pull together and get through it.

I’m not a clairvoyant, I never claim to be. We all know my opinions by now on the ~~lack of~~ stimulus, on the mess that is the economy, et cetera. I can’t tell you that this depression (and yes, it is one by many metrics, especially housing markets) will end whenever or however.

What I can tell you is that we can put aside the stupid ways we try to divide ourselves (race, class, religion, etc). We can help out our families, friends, neighbors, strangers in whatever ways we can because it is the right thing to do. Because together we are stronger than the greatest storm. Because alone in all the life on Earth we have empathy and compassion. Because we are better than the sum of our worst parts.

If we all would just treat each other with compassion an empathy, it would not matter how much the market has crashed. It would not matter how much deeper in debt the boneheads in DC want to make us. It would not matter that Citibank is being nationalized.
If we just reached out a hand to our neighbor, we would make a meaningful and lasting difference.
David Koch February 28, 2009

@3: “(females) exist (and are groomed by women’s studies college majors) to control men” That was sorta funny, but I don’t think it was meant to be. I don’t think anyone was advocating for a “matriarchal government”. I’m going to assume your post was a joke so I don’t have to bother empathizing.
Mofo from the Hood February 28, 2009

@7: Unless I hear otherwise from the author of the article why he included the term “right-wing patriarchal legacy,” I will stand by my conclusion, giving the author the benefit of the doubt, that the term was included for a reason.

Looking at the term in the context that it was written, the author states that a probable cause for U.S. economic problems is “the leadership of a right-wing patriarchal legacy.”

The author does not explain his terms and therefore puts the burden of interpretation on the reader.

Either the author is promoting confusion or he is not. Whether the inclusion of “the leadership of a right-wing patriarchal legacy” undefined was intentional or not, the effect is the same–the burden of interpretation is on the reader.

People may not like my interpretation of what the author’s term implies, but based on the content, or lack thereof from the article, my interpretation offers a highly plausible truth judgement. It may be assumed to be a joke, but take it from Socrates and put into practice the habit of questioning assumptions.
David Koch February 28, 2009

@8: Your conclusions over the author’s use of “right-wing patriarchal legacy” is a bit of a leap. Being ANTI-patriarchy doesn’t mean you’re PRO-matriarchy. Both patriarchy AND matriarchy implies an oppressor class and an oppressed class. Your assumptions are based on warped notions of feminist theory. Feminism = social and legal equality for women and men. It’s about equality, not reversed dominance. Women who still think men should have all the power far outnumber the women who think women should have all the power. Luckily, a vast majority prefer equality.
Mofo from the Hood March 1, 2009

@9: Nowhere in my previous statements does it say that I concluded that AY was either anti-patriarchy or pro-matriarchy.

As for my statement @3, from my experience with women, I haven’t yet met one that hasn’t tried to control a man either directly or indirectly. That characteristic of women is a law of nature. I’ll appeal to the Biblical book of Genesis to support that claim. In Genesis 3:6 one can read about the first act of the first submissive man.

Equality for women? I see women as equal but different.

As for my conclusion about AY, I said that his use of undefined terms puts the burden on the reader to make probable truth judgements.

AY, paragraph 1: “Perhaps it was the leadership of a right-wing patriarchal legacy” [that is the cause of U.S. economic problems].

My interpretation of that quote: idle speculation. The author’s statement may have been made for a reason but the reader must draw his own conclusion, until the author states what his intent was.
Adam Ydstie March 1, 2009

@8

In no way was I implying a matriarchal society. I was merely referring to the Bush patriarchal legacy. I will often leave many aspects of what I write up to interpretation, in fact it is impossible to write and not have people interpret it through the lens they choose. I write to engage dialogue so thank you for conversing. But, I will clarify for sake of getting back on topic.

By “right-wing patriarchal government” I was referring to the Bush family “legacy” as he has often been a scapegoat for our financial fall from glory. Perhaps rightfully so, perhaps not. The purpose of this column was not in any way meant to jump to a conversation about whether we should be a society run by women or men. It was meant to foster dialogue about whether or not we will be a society that cares for individual personal achievement or for the achievement of everyone that makes up our society.

I am sorry if there was confusion. I do appreciate your input.
Mofo from the Hood March 1, 2009

AY, thanks for the clarification.

I’ve read that the Bush administration made decisions that contributed to the decay of the U.S. economy.

The question now: Can the radical left-wing Obama patriarchal administration contribute to the restoration of the U.S. economy?
Thorax O'Tool March 1, 2009

Even though I agree that Open-checkbook Obama is making a huge error following the Keynesian “spend your way out of debt” belief, even I think this is going off topic.

______________________________________________

I still believe that we are a society that cares about the individual more than the collective. It’s been like that all along. The concept of personal liberties. Personal service. Personal computers. One car per person. The transcendentalism of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The lonesome Cowboy on the Range. The uniquely American concept of the “rugged individual” (a la Jedediah Smith).

We tend to idolize the individual, even at the expense of the collective… just look at the Robber Barons of the last century and those of now. It’s tragic how we admire people who lie cheat and steal their way to the top… after all, it’s about just the individual, right?
Ryan Ingersoll March 1, 2009

I am struggling to find a significant amount of scarcity in America. I hear the numerous news reports about the lack of jobs everywhere and the many corporations laying off workers, reducing wages, and requiring furloughs. I know it took over six months for me to find a job and my wife finally hired this past week after eight months. But there is still an abundance.

I can’t speak for Tacoma, but here in Minneapolis there is an abundance. I was walking in the Mall of America (a gross reality of America’s consumerism) and it was packed. I was shocked. Thousands upon thousands of people buying to their heart’s content. Where is the lack of abundance?

I have no idea how people were purchasing their items, but I suspect it all may have been with the infamous plastic cards.

Maybe is it all a fake abundance. Maybe that is what plastic has done to the fabric of the American financial systems. An outward apperance, but really deep within a hurting system, now being unraveled before our eyes. Years of corrupt systems, corrupt people, and even myself.

Can we stand together? Push the money aside and really come together? I’ve been to Mexico numerous times on mission trips and there is always one thing that constantly astonishes me. Their joyful life. They have hardly anything. A cardboard hut with a bag of flour and some dirty water basins, but they come together in community and work together.

Maybe it is time for America to put the differences aside, rely less of “personal” everything and think about the community of people. This doesn’t always mean sharing money. How do you share money when you don’t have any to begin with. Maybe a change to share a meal and a conversation with one who lost their job. Maybe it is time to stop spending money you don’t have. Maybe it is time to watch your nephew a day a week so your sister, a single mom, can save some money on daycare.

Maybe now is the time for America to really become the United States, forgetting the differences of wealth, race, religion, age, and come together to pull through this difficult time.
Thorax O'Tool March 2, 2009

@ Morgan & Everyone else who wants a state income tax:

Sure, on paper a state income tax will finally make the likes of Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos “pay their fair share”… which they’ll weasle out of anyway.

When it really comes down to it, our fearless leaders in Olympia will pull what Arizona did: keep the sales tax along with the new income tax.
The crew in Oly has proven they can’t be trusted. If they manage to pass an income tax, I’ll bet dollars to donuts the sales tax won’t change or go away.

Then we’ll really be hit, both coming and going.

Nextly, @ Ryan: It seems like there is no problem sometimes. I still see people shopping like crazy at the mall.
But in the last 6 months, my dad lost his job at the News Tribune, my GF got laid off from Microsoft, my bro-in-law just got a layoff notice from Boeing AND the door factory I used to work at closed it’s doors recently. So yeah, there really is bad s*it brewing right now.

So, between credit card companies raising their rates and the U-6 being over 13%, it’s likely a lot of people are maxing out their cards, knowing full well they’ll file bankruptcy soon… my sister just did it, and I’m sure she’s not alone.
Steven March 2, 2009

First, An Income Tax would require an amendment to the state constitution.

Second, to borrow a phrase, the only thing worse than Capitalism is everything else. As much as the We-Are-All-In-This-Together feels good, the reality is it won’t support itself. There are those willing to work, and those willing to let them. I certainly believe a just society can provide base support (health care, education, quality food, etc), but must be careful not to sink itself with too much. What is needed is balance.

Steven
Cromletch McHammer March 3, 2009

We are not only one of (if not the most) heavily taxed states, but also our deficit is only about $55 less per capita than the mess Cali got itself into:

WA: $1230.77 per capita, $8b deficit, 6.5 mil population

CA: $1285.71 per capita, $45b deficit, 35 mil population

Not only will adding an income tax in an era of layoffs and mandatory wage reductions fall flat, but it cannot solve our problem: the people we elect in Olympia are too dumb to balance a checkbook. When the going gets tough, you cut programs, not increase spending.
Look at California. Our problems are just a smaller version of theirs, running 12-18 months behind them. We’ll see similar shiz-hitting-the-fan soon. Mark my words.

Speak of, we really need to start now the push to get every incumbent in WA to lose their seats in the next 2-4 years.
Thorax O'Tool March 3, 2009

I don’t like those numbers at all.
RR Anderson March 3, 2009

you wanna solve some problems? repeal women’s right to vote. I read some of the crazy literature in City Arts the anti-women voter people put out and it has all come true.

Our government is on the verge of collapse. Our banking system, like mofo from the hood’s toaster is kaput. Right now we’re going through the motions of pretending to do something to fix it, when in reality all wee’re doing is giving the RICH PEOPLE a head start to get away (floating KALAKALA Scientology fortress).

THINGS YOU CAN DO RIGHT NOW:

- stock up on gold bullion – stock up on ammunition – stock up on MRE’s – start taking multiple wives – plant as many blueberry bushes in as much TAGRO as you can find.
Thorax O'Tool March 3, 2009

Stock up on as many TO’T original posters as you can! After all the world’s currencies fail and the rich steal your bullion (they with the help of FDR did it once already) we’ll be reduced to using bits of string as money. And as everyone knows, my posters are worth 3 full spindles of yarn… the good quality yarn too, not that made-in-China-laced-with-lead kind.

Purchasing my posters with your savings isn’t just smart, it’s an investment for your future and the foundation of your wealth! Remember, poster prices never go down!
Whitney staff March 3, 2009

Ummm… hello? Can we get back on topic please?

… to foster dialogue about whether or not we will be a society that cares for individual personal achievement or for the achievement of everyone that makes up our society.
Mofo from the Hood March 3, 2009

Nothing has been said about the kind of society that would result from a bunch of aimless achievers.
RR Anderson March 3, 2009

Dear Whitney,
I cannot understand anything this new crop of guest exit133 columnists writes… how is somebody like me supposed to know what the heck the gosh darn topic is!?

I hate how we have to stay on-topic now that the holy new york times might be reading (as I echo from an anonymous constituent).
Mofo from the Hood March 3, 2009

I suspect that two E133 guest columnists, Adam Ydstie and Daniel Blue have successfully achieved a Vulcan mind meld.
Whitney staff March 3, 2009

@25 RR Anderson

All of our columnists are chosen because they represent various perspectives from around Tacoma. Adam clearly asked a number of questions as well as offered an overall theme. Our request to stay on topic is nothing new, (to the anonymous constituent: no the NYT has nothing to do with this) and is clearly outlined in our commenting policy. While we are happy to indulge many wandering Tacoma discussions, every now and then we need to correct the course.

If you do not understand the article please feel free to ask questions of your fellow readers or the author to help you understand. Also, there is plenty of other content for you to peruse and offer your thoughts on.

We appreciate your readership and participation in this community. You certainly keep us on our toes.
Thorax O'Tool March 3, 2009

Yet when you try to be on topic, the conversation still runs off on a tangent.

Which bears asking: Is the off-topic problem due to the people who post here on 133 or is it due to the articles themselves?
David Koch March 4, 2009

We are the topic. POWER TO THE PEOPLE!
Thorax O'Tool March 4, 2009

Though I am being off topic by talking about being off topic, I have to ask: is it such a bad thing?
Human conversation, in case no one had noticed, tends to wander from topic to topic sometimes covering very broad ranges of things. Dunno about you, but I tend to find the most satisfying conversations are the ones that migrate organically from one topic to another, into places I would never have thought to go on my own accord.

Now pardon me, I’m off to go to work. We have a new contract from the Starfleet Academy _{(Nyota Uhura went to UPS which is an affiliate of Starfleet in 2199)} to retrofit the NCC-1702 Kalakala with a new Anderson Warped Drive for training missions.

Just sayin’.
RR Anderson March 4, 2009

in awe of TO’T‘s swaggering audacity.
Thorax O'Tool March 4, 2009

Swaggering Audacity?

That’s a phrase I’ve never had applied to me before.
tressie March 6, 2009

I’m sure Mr. O’Tool has had the “swaggering” remark applied to him before on many occasions……..someone said …“Nothing has been said about the kind of society that would result from a bunch of aimless achievers.”…..Well, from my view, aimless achievers always get us into Big Messes like this…………..and even tho last time I looked, I’m a female, there is hardly anyone more boring to listen to than a feminist……as bad as a neo-con or a Rush-head…..