#voting #voters #elections #economics #politics #jobs #FinancialWellBeing Voters feel as if they’ve lost control of their lives, and no politician(s) are going to be able to give it back to them. That point was made during a discussion among Katy Tur, Catherine Rampell and Mark McKinnon on Tur’s show “The Moment” on MSNOW Sept. 22, 2026. Rampell, an economics commentator on MSNOW, and McKinnon, a political consultant, were discussing how voters may react in the upcoming midterm elections. The Republicans this cycle have made promises, but didn’t keep them. In past cycles, Democrats did the same. With gasoline, grocery, housing and health-care prices skyrocketing, with employment prospects uncertain as artificial intelligence comes to the fore, it’s no wonder people are feeling as if they have no control over their lives. In more cases, young people feel destined not to do as well as their parents financially. In past decades, the opposite was true in most cases. When you have to buy clothes for work, gas up your car to get you to work etc., it may cost some people more to go to work than to stay home, if they work for low pay. For these folks, hope isn’t going to cut it. Tomorrow will be a better day rings hollow. Becoming better off over time is, well, a fallacy – or, perhaps, fantasy. Still, when evaluating whom to vote for, one has to rely on promises. When politicians break those promises, regardless of party affiliation, voters get discouraged. When they get discouraged, a gut reaction is to not vote for anyone. But, almost every time, when one doesn’t vote, the result is disappointing at best, disastrous at worst. Voting is an act of faith. Therefore, when voting, one has to assess the person’s record, affiliations and overall personality. As with many life choices, one has to choose something. Making the best choice sometimes is hard, but making a choice often is bold. Avoiding a choice is, well, chickening out. All decisions have consequences. If no decision is a decision, it WILL have consequences. If you can stop the immediate bleeding by making a decision, that is bold. Sometimes, voting decisions are based on having nothing left to lose. Though it may be tempting to make an emotional decision in the voting booth, it’s best to go into the booth armed with real evidence. A good rule of thumb on which to base one’s voting decision: look at who is most benefiting from the status quo, and who is not. If you are not benefiting from the status quo, vote for change. Certainly, if change comes, it may not be everything you want. But, if the status quo is not giving you much of what you want, change can be better. The 1940s and 1950s are viewed by many as the best years for America. It’s impossible to go backward. It’s inevitable to move forward. If whom to vote for is not a cut and dried decision for you, make the best decision possible. If it is cut and dried – at least in your mind – think about why that is. To borrow from a Lee Ann Womack lyric, if you have the choice to sit it out or vote, I hope you vote. Make a plan to vote, based on the rules in your jurisdiction. But, please vote. Don’t sit this one out. Peter
#hypocrisy #honesty #HonestHypocrisy #human #advantages #SmallBusiness #cheating Is there such a thing as honest hypocrisy? Consider this Tower of Power lyric: “I can’t stand to see the slaughter, but still I eat the meat. I can’t stand dishonest people, but still sometimes I cheat.” Or, this advice from a small business owner to a friend considering starting a business: “I know you’re an honest person, but if you don’t cheat a little, you won’t survive.” By such standards, honest hypocrisy might be defined as being honest about one’s hypocrisy. But, as humans who want to do the right thing all the time, one may face times when “the right thing” may not be the best thing to do at the time. In the above examples, “the slaughter” is ordinary meat production. Animals are raised specifically to be eventually killed for their meat. Of course, no one really likes the idea of killing animals, but even in nature, one animal kills another to feed itself. Also, it’s human nature to want an advantage, even when you may have been told that taking that advantage is wrong. Look at demographics as an example. In recent decades, certain demographic characteristics gave some people an advantage over others in the job market. As much as many politicians want to take away those demographic advantages today, they are still a reality. Those who hire people often use them. Applicants who possess those advantages often include a photo to prove they match certain demographic groups. Of course, they also have to be qualified for the jobs they are seeking. Cheating on one’s taxes, even a little, is against the law. But, there are some parts of the tax code that some may consider “wrong,” with respect to struggling small businesses, or even struggling individual taxpayers. They see it as right to cut through that “wrongness” by cheating a little. No one really gets hurt by such action, the rationale goes. But, when cheating becomes a way of life, as with some with all the advantages in the world to begin with, it can rile “honest” hypocrites. Because we are human, complete honesty at all times can be illusive. That’s why the term “white lie” came into being. Do you want to know how honest you really are? Ask yourself: If I found a $50 bill on the ground in a crowded area, what would I do? Would I put it in my pocket, as in, “finders keepers, losers weepers?” Or, would I ask people in the area whether they had dropped it, knowing that anyone can lie and say it’s theirs? It may depend on your personal financial situation. It may depend on how you would feel if you had dropped it. Or, it may depend on how guilty you would feel if you’d kept it. Most of us grapple with life decisions all the time. None of us is perfect, but most of us consider ourselves virtuous. Being an honest hypocrite may not always make a person feel good, but, sometimes, it may feel like the right thing to do at the time, as long as no one else gets hurt. So, as you go through life, be as honest as you can. Try not to be a hypocrite. Peter
#AI #GoodUseOfAI #BadUseOfAI #ThreatsOfAI #AIRegulation Some people who are working on AI research are blowing the whistle on its unchecked development. They are saying that AI could kill off all humanity in a few short years. Some AI companies are offering options for how best to regulate AI to only do good. But something that powerful in the wrong hands, or even left to its own devices unsupervised by humans, could be devastating. Some of us might sit back and say the hyperbole is just that. Others might curl up and think the worst is inevitable. Uncertainty can activate impulses in one’s imagination, but it’s best for rational thinkers – even if they don’t yet know fully what AI can or can’t do – to plan the ultimate AI rollout with the proper vetting and, yes, imagination. First, establish what AI can do, how best that function can be used for good and pass rules and regulations preventing the bad things from occurring. That’s easier said than done, of course, but a good start might be to make the developing companies responsible for what their product(s) does and causes. They reap the rewards and cover the damage(s). That may confine research, and it won’t stop every bad actor. Still, it’s a good start, considering the uncertainty. Every tool developed over time has its good and bad applications. A hammer used on nails is good. A hammer used on, say, people, is bad. But, a hammer is a simple tool. AI is much more complicated. The good potential that it has is combined with as much or more bad potential. Having just celebrated the 25th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, we see the good and bad things airplanes can do. Airplanes can do much more good, and much more evil, than a hammer. The perpetrators of the Sept. 11 attacks wanted to kill us all. They killed some of us, but didn’t kill us all. AI is much more complicated than an airplane. It must be rolled out with caution, careful consideration and with proper guardrails. We cannot leave the creators to their own devices. Remember, the creators have incentives to be careful. If their product kills all of humanity, who will pay them for their work? As the average person, it’s important here to get a grip on AI. Just as it is unwise to presume that the better angels will prevail as it rolls out, it’s also unwise to believe that ONLY bad actors will control it. Make sure you do all that you can to elect people who have courage to encourage the good and stop the bad. This is no time for laissez-faire attitudes. Whether AI destroys humanity may not be in the hands of its creators and users entirely. It may be in the hands of those who set boundaries for the creators. As with anything, bad actors can create weapons from very useful things. We must be diligent in making sure as few bad actors as possible get their hands on this technology. What happens to you personally may not always be in your control. But, if it doesn’t kill you, it could make you stronger. Peter
#FlockCameras #surveillance #SurveillanceAbuse #AI #AIManipulation #privacy Someone is always watching you. Or so it seems with the proliferation of Flock cameras. These devices are license plate readers that police in various jurisdictions, also perhaps private security operations, are placing throughout an area to read license plates. For police, they seem to be a great law enforcement tool. If a crime is committed in a certain area with a surveillance camera, it’s easier to find and capture the criminal. But, recent news reports are showing that police officers themselves, perhaps spying on an ex-spouse or significant other, are abusing the advantage the cameras give them to fight crime. And, to take it a step further, these cameras can be used to spy on any of us, for any reason. We, as Americans, value our privacy. We should be free to undertake normal life activities sight unseen by law enforcement – unless we are actually breaking the law. In the 1960s, a TV show called “Candid Camera” secretly filmed people doing funny (read: stupid) activities that were set up for them without their knowledge. They not only didn’t know what they were about to get into, they had no idea they would be filmed doing it. It was all in good fun, and provided some amusing entertainment. Most of those filmed were not in places they were not supposed to be, and most actually got a kick out of it. It makes one wonder, though, whether there were any objections to being filmed, and whether those people forbade the show from airing them. But, as discussed last week, AI, data centers and now surveillance cameras are giving government and other big entities a leg up on getting information about people in general. There’s no doubt in most people’s minds that this gathering of information is going to be used for purposes not in keeping with the free American life. Big Brother, from the novel “1984”, is watching. But, they may not be watching to look out for everyone’s safety. There are certain activities that most people would call “wrong,” but are not illegal. If such activities get filmed, entities can use that information against the person being filmed. Should police departments decide to become corrupt, they cannot be trusted with such information. Someone with access could have a swindle side hustle selling that information. Of course, there are those who argue that if one isn’t doing anything wrong, what’s the problem with filming them? They might be doing something embarrassing, but not necessarily wrong. Combining AI manipulation with unnecessary surveillance, a situation can look a lot worse than it is. The person involved would have no way to disprove or refute it, even though he or she did nothing wrong. America and the world is coming into a new age. We may go kicking and screaming, protesting the “advantages” of technology. But, once the capabilities are created and meshed, it is tough to stop it. We would all be better off presuming that whatever we are doing, even inside our own homes, could be filmed. Because we are human, perfect behavior will not be the outcome. It’s been said that a person can be judged by what he or she does when no one’s watching. Now, we have to believe everyone’s watching. There are degrees of “wrong.” Inflating those degrees through technological surveillance and manipulation is the real sin. Peter
