“Silence is our real nature. What we are fundamentally is only silence. Silence is free from beginning and end. It was before the beginning of all things. It is causeless. Its greatness lies in the fact that it simple is. In silence all objects have their home ground. It is the light that gives objects their shape and form. All movement, all activity is harmonized by silence.
Silence has no opposite in noise. It is beyond positive and negative. Silence dissolves all objects. It is not related to any counterpart which belongs to the mind. Silence has nothing to do with mind. It cannot be defined but it can be felt directly because it is our nearness. Silence is freedom without restriction or centre. It is our wholeness, neither inside nor outside the body. Silence is joyful, not pleasurable. It is not psychological. It is feeling without a feeler. Silence needs no intermediary. Silence is holy. It is healing. There is no fear in silence. Silence is autonomous like love and beauty. It is untouched by time. Silence is meditation, free from any intention, free from anyone who meditates. Silence is the absence of oneself. Or rather, silence is the absence of absence. Sound which comes from silence is music. All activity is creative when it comes from silence. It is constantly a new beginning. Silence precedes speech and poetry and music and all art. Silence is the home ground of all creative activity. What is truly creative is the word, is Truth. Silence is the word. Silence is Truth.
The one established in silence lives in constant offering, in prayer without asking, in thankfulness, in continual love.”
Jean Klein
To hear silence, and sound - please visit - http://www.myspace.com/frommonumenttomasses
and listen to deafening.
Monday 5 November 2007
Friday 2 November 2007
Sociology 101
I stumbled across two articles on The Onion which I found hilarious.
Sociology 101 Assignment Stretched To Incorporate '70s Punk Rock
Sociology 101 paper on the theories of 19th-century French sociologist Émile Durkheim was stretched to incorporate the 1970s British punk-rock scene, sources close to the paper's author, University of Missouri freshman Justin Hoyer, reported Monday.
T.A Spotted at Bar
Drew Phelan, 26, a Penn State University graduate student and teaching assistant for History 107: Introduction To Western Civilization, was spotted at the Bulldog Brew Pub last weekend, Section Four sources revealed shortly before class Monday.
Thursday 1 November 2007
H
I got into an argument with an individual yesterday regarding the proposed federal mini-budget. The fight wasn't so much over the budget, but over an article which 
appeared in the Toronto Star (I regretfully do not have a link) which criticized the government for not addressing poverty. This individual claimed that it was precisely our high taxes and high national debt which were contributing to poverty, and thus, that the 1% decrease in the gst is in fact an anti poverty measure. I strongly disagree.
From my point of view high taxes and the national debt load have little, if anything to do with individuals living in poverty in our country.
Our high poverty (and especially troubling Aboriginal poverty rate (individuals who do not even PAY one of our taxes) are due to in affordable housing, insufficient minimum wage and social assistance rates (which I realize are a provincial jurisdiction)
This tax cut and tax break are going to do little to combat poverty. Who do you think is going ot benefit most from this gst cut? the guy who buys his couch from the Salvation Army or the guy who buys a yacht? Tax cuts and tax credits mean very little for those without money.
We've got record surpluses, yet there is nothing in the proposed budget which will substantially help those with the greatest need.
In opposition to the notion that higher taxes are bankrupting our citizens, I point to a comparison between highly-taxed (Nordic, for example) countries, compared to our low taxed country. Countries that have higher tax regimes happen to have stronger performances. A study by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives found that countries with higher taxes, such as Finland, Sweden, Norway (ect) have significantly lower rates of poverty across almost all social groups. Not only that, income is distributed significantly more equally. (Brooks, Hwong (2006) The Social Benefits and Economic Costs of Taxation. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives)
So, I ask you this question: what are your opinions on the mini-budget? What would you have liked to have seen the government do with our record surpluses? Are you going to buy a yacht? You'll save yourself a shitload.
appeared in the Toronto Star (I regretfully do not have a link) which criticized the government for not addressing poverty. This individual claimed that it was precisely our high taxes and high national debt which were contributing to poverty, and thus, that the 1% decrease in the gst is in fact an anti poverty measure. I strongly disagree.From my point of view high taxes and the national debt load have little, if anything to do with individuals living in poverty in our country.
Our high poverty (and especially troubling Aboriginal poverty rate (individuals who do not even PAY one of our taxes) are due to in affordable housing, insufficient minimum wage and social assistance rates (which I realize are a provincial jurisdiction)
This tax cut and tax break are going to do little to combat poverty. Who do you think is going ot benefit most from this gst cut? the guy who buys his couch from the Salvation Army or the guy who buys a yacht? Tax cuts and tax credits mean very little for those without money.
We've got record surpluses, yet there is nothing in the proposed budget which will substantially help those with the greatest need.
In opposition to the notion that higher taxes are bankrupting our citizens, I point to a comparison between highly-taxed (Nordic, for example) countries, compared to our low taxed country. Countries that have higher tax regimes happen to have stronger performances. A study by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives found that countries with higher taxes, such as Finland, Sweden, Norway (ect) have significantly lower rates of poverty across almost all social groups. Not only that, income is distributed significantly more equally. (Brooks, Hwong (2006) The Social Benefits and Economic Costs of Taxation. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives)
So, I ask you this question: what are your opinions on the mini-budget? What would you have liked to have seen the government do with our record surpluses? Are you going to buy a yacht? You'll save yourself a shitload.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
