Unimpressed with the IRS

I am not prone to political commentary, but, after getting my second notification from the IRS, I am deeply disappointed in how the Tax Stimulus was handled. Sure, I'm happy I get some money. It's much needed. But, as of 2007, the US population was 301,139,947. Of course, it's grown since then, but, working with those numbers, and the average US household size being 2.61, as of 2006, that averages out to about 115,379,290 households in the US. Assuming printing, mailing costs and overhead for the IRS to mail these notification, as a country we spent, between the two mailings, $115,379,290.04 to inform ourselves of something everyone already knew as a result of mass media. So, why did we spent $115 million dollars to do something that had already been done? That's just bad business and worse governing.

Divine nerves

Years ago I had read some oriental literature discussing an idea relating the cosmological and the quantum. "As above, so below", the saying goes. With this in mind a possible connection between urban growth patterns and nerve cell structures came to mind. Below are two images, a nerve bundle and a high level overview of a city.





Nerve tissue





Urban sprawl

Notice how the road patterns resemble the random directions of nerve tissue. Obviously, the analogy only goes so far. Urban sprawl is essentially a two dimensional pattern, even though geography allows some 3 dimensionality. Nerve tissue is a 3 dimensional form. Nonetheless, I began to wonder about this pattern, centralized, outwardly expanding natural patterns. In addition to the relationship between nerves and urban sprawl were trees, rivers, fractal patterns, glacial and ice movements. These all had the same kind of branching physical structures. In reality, these are more self-similar than the urban development-nerve pattern. That being said, this pattern repeats so much, I just found it fascinating and keep noticing how it keeps reappearing across a wide range of scales, from the cellular to the geographical.

So, with the pattern being noted, I began to wonder if, assuming the scale of space and time are similar, nervous tissue is microscopic and develops very quickly. Likewise, the urban sprawl patterns would grow over time very slowly in proportion to the massive scale of cities. In the two pictures shown above, a nerve bundle is about 100 micrometers. A city, such as New York, is roughly 100 kilometers across. So, the size relationship is 1 to 100000000000. So, if that is the case, the amount of time it takes for full urban development should be proportional to the length of time it takes for nerves to form. Still looking for that number.

Just some interesting observations...

"Everything is permissible"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible"—but not everything is constructive. -- Paul

When I was growing up my dad instilled in me a great sense of hope. Until a few years ago, an untested sense of hope. As I grew up I was not a very athletic kid, but, I loved activity. When I got into 8th grade I started running cross country at a new school just to do something I was terrible. Over the years I got better, even got a small scholarship to go to school in Tennessee. Throughout college I was obsessed with the sport and focused on it to the utter demise of my academic potential. I did manage to graduate, but, obsessed as a I was, merely saw graduation as the opportunity to train unhindered by school. This went on for a few years. In 2002, I was running 110 miles a week hoping I would make some Michael Jordan-like breakthrough, becoming something I had longed to be for years.

It never happened. I realized, in this pursuit, it was something that would take away from a more important decision in my life: marriage. I saw a choice, love my dreams or love my wife. There was only one choice: I chose to love my wife. Pursuing my dream would have been selfish and cost me the greatest person I have ever met. I got married that summer and came to realize, or rather, accept, that I was not as gifted as I hoped. Around that time my dad, in one of our conversations, said, "It's okay to pursue your dreams until you realize they are only dreams." For me, this was a major challenge. I had truly believed that anything was possible. In this case, if I ran enough, if I did the right things, if I was perfect in my execution, if I exerted enough will, I could become what I dreamed of being. I had completely believed, "anything is possible". Running was the grounds upon which I tested this belief and came up realizing it was not true. Or, at least, not the way I thought.

A few weeks ago while driving to work, I realized as I reflected on one of our pastor's sermons that is not quite true. Indeed, all things are permissible. It is in the Bible. However, just because, as Paul said, something is permissible, does not necessarily mean it is for the best. The sermon discussed a woman who had lost her sight. To get into the church, she had to have someone assist her.

He had taken this actual experience to illustrate a larger point. Paul wrote of the church as a body. When a person is acting in a role that is not what they are intended to perform, other members of the body have to compensate for this person not doing what they are intended to do. He remarked that it's amazing how one person being unable (or, I would add to extend this notion, unwilling) to do what they are supposed to requires two bodies. This type of scenario detracts from God's ability to demonstrate his love and power because people are using their gifts the wrong way and detracting from God's glory for their own pursuits.

With my running, I believe, and, after reflection, still see that I probably could achieve my goals of being a world class athlete. However, the amount of time, energy and effort required to accomplish this would be a horrible waste of time and a gross misplacement of focus. I would have to have inordinate resources, financial, social, mental and emotional, to pursue this. That's not something, as I now sense Paul was hinting at, I see making a lot of sense.

With God, all things indeed are permissible. But, I am now inclined to ask, "Is this beneficial?" "Does this help me love more?" "Does this choice promote me or others?" It is the age old question of putting yourself or others first. We were given free will. Using it for good, however, comes at a cost. I learned that making dreams come true makes for poor goodness.

While discussing giftedness with someone recently an argument I had never foreseen came up. The other person had detached themselves from a religious background and formed a very anti-religious sentiment throughout their life. In an effort to convince me of the virtue of this choice they said that not using their gifts, referring to mental abilities, would be not living up to God's potential. At the time I didn't see it, but, this is the exact kind of thing Paul was talking about in 1 Corinthians 13. He clearly says,

If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.

This particular person would have nothing. In fact, I look at their life and have deep pity, a certain sadness. The only focus for this person is their own giftedness. Sadly, they don't even realize the shallow "depth" of their point of view. Never do they ask, "What is the gift for?" Only, "how can I use it to the best of my abilities?" Wrong focus, wrong result.

In particular, "intellectuals" fall into the category of person who will resort to this argument that they have something and that something should be their focal point. In reality, love is the intended focus, and all gifts are meant to enhance our ability to love. Taking the focus off the gift, off the self, and looking at the results, at the love generated (or, as in this case, never developed), I think this type of false thinking can be uprooted.