Incase you haven't heard, the government is actually going to give you money to spend in hopes of boosting the economy.  Personally, I am kinda excited to get the check, but I cannot say I am sure about whether or not saving it is...well....ethical.  The government is giving me this check to spend, and while I do have things I don't mind spending money on, I could also just as easily save it and pad my retirement savings.  But I have to ask, is that really the best thing to do for the country?  The government is giving me money, and technically it is mine to do whatever I want with it, but wouldn't spending it be better than saving it for the sake of the country?  Did I really just say that?  Is the government really saying that we are giving you money because we want/expect you to spend it?  There is something really backwards about that philosophy.  If anything, shouldn't we all just save the money since we know times are getting tough for our country?  Shouldn't we pay a late bill or perhaps an extra mortgage payment?  I guess I just don't think the government really wants us to do that.  While those are good things in the long run, the stimulus package is for the short-term.  Spend money on goods and services so they economy can right itself and bring costs down and jobs up.  But can we actually sustain that given the current situation?  Isn't the market going to continually go south for a while?  Wouldn't we be better served letting it go down more so that we can implement the stimulus package with greater effect?  Suffice-to-say, I really believe our country is taking a fundamental turn in the way it views money.  

Consumerism makes all of these issues with money exacerbated to the point that there are no more right answers.  Our country relies so heavily on the business of making money on people borrowing money that we cannot imagine fixing the problem by questioning this assumption.  Capitalism, at least in America, relies so heavily on this method of economics that now we are seeing some of the long term effects.  What do we do when it is actually damaging the entire country to allow people to exact insane amounts of interest from borrowers?  Should we cancel their debt?  Well isn't the right of the lender to follow the contract to the letter?  Who can tell the lender "you must forgive some of this person's debt,"?  No one.  Why not?  Because anyone who had that authority, would have to ask themselves if they would be willing to do the same thing?  In America, we don't say that, but perhaps we know it so deeply that we cannot imagine questioning it.  Pray for our nation as we are navigating these waters of forgiveness and grace.  There will be no easy fix for our financial problems, and their will not be equality for all.  

If you really cannot wait to see what Bush is going to give you.  There is an Economic Stimulus Package Calculator online.

Cnn.com recently posted a great video that is a microcosm of what is happening in Northeast Ohio.  A Johnson Rubber Factory recently closed in Middlefield, OH leaving 500 people on the street.  In one worker's words, "Northeast Ohio is a tough place to work, its a tough place to get a job right now."  Certainly, blue-collar jobs are not as prevalent as they used to be all across the country.  But Northeast Ohio is a region that was founded on those jobs.  Nicknamed, "The Rust Belt" cities all along the great lakes are no where near recovering from the jobs lost to cheaper labor over seas.  Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton won the state of Ohio without winning Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati.  How can she win a state primary without winning its three largest cities!?  Simply because many people believe that she is the answer to the job crisis and will fight the hardest for poor working class families.  Throughout Ohio, many factory jobs are the main draw to live in their cities.  Cleveland has an industrial wasteland of factories that housed thousands of blue-collar jobs which have now vanished pushing many people further away from Cleveland and other major cities to look for factory jobs in smaller more rural areas.  Note to John McCain and Barack Obama, if you want to win Ohio, figure out a plan to bring blue-collar jobs back to Ohio.  Good luck.

When credit cards put you in jeopardy by cnn.com

I have become increasingly convinced that the church in the United States is captive to the greatest sin plaguing our country, consumerism.  While easy to spot, defining it will always be tough.  Lately, I feel consumerism is defined as the philosophy that sees the possessing of things as a right to be exercised rather than a gift to be enjoyed.  Certainly, this is up for debate in terms of clarity and accuracy, but this latest cnn.com article is yet another warning bell to be sounded for our nation.

And it's become a habit for them to spend more than they have. The overall credit card debt grew by 315 percent from 1989 to 2006, according to public policy research firm Demos.

To compound the problem, fewer people are paying their credit cards bills on time. The percentage of people delinquent on their credit cards is the highest it's been in three years, according to CardTrack.com.

Unbelievable.  In 17, the US grew its credit card debt by 315 percent.  Surely, this period of outrageous spending will be looked down upon in light of history.  But perhaps a greater question will be asked, "Where was the church when this was happening?"  Sure we preach sermons on money and offer classes on financial how-tos, but obviously its not enough.  The problem is not slowing down, but growing exponentially.  This stat has to be one of the largest contributers to the massive foreclosure crisis plaguing our nation (in particular Ohio).  When we lose all restraint on our spending habits and feel that we are owed things rather than earn the right to buy them, we will realize that there is no amount of "stuff" that will satisfy our craving.  Jesus warned that we could not serve two masters; God and money.  The church has perhaps the greatest message to counteract this type of rampant individualism in the life and death of Jesus Christ.  God chose to forsake all comforts and pleasures beyond what money could buy, to become a poor, blue-color carpenter and eventually be executed by the very people he was called to help.  Financially speaking, God made a poor investment in sending his only son to a people he knew would kill him.  But in doing so, he showed us that in giving us Christ he showed us that the greatest of sacrifices for God's purposes cannot be bought with silver and gold (in this case to bring people back into a loving relationship with their God).  

I pray we can all reflect on this and grasp the freedom offered in Jesus Christ to liberate us from the enslavement of stuff and allow us to experience the joy in giving.  "It is better to give than to receive."

The Church of Stop Shopping from Out of Ur This article highlights what should be an interesting film for the holidays. What Would Jesus Buy? is a documentary by Reverend Billy that pokes fun at the world of consumerism that has America, particularly at Christmas time. The controversy comes in the medium chosen to bash America. Reverend Billy and his "Church of Stop Shopping" are not an actual church in the Christian sense, but masquerade as an over the top televangelist and his congregation sent to preach a message of "stop shopping" to everyday people like you and me. The trailer is hilarious and shows that this film will certainly go for laughs over poignancy, but the jab at the Christian church is more of a stab in the back rather than a punch to the face. In choosing the tile of the movie and stereotype of mainstream Christianity, it seems obvious that Reverend Billy, someone who does not profess to be a Christian in real life, sees the church as having a role of some sort to play in the stop shopping message. But perhaps his point is that the church has no power to convince people to change when it is known itself as a money hungry and self satisfying religion itself? In an age where the church is even being challenged by the government on its money spending issues, with what serious can it be taken if it were to speak against consumerism and materialism? I think this would relate to having a log in our own eye while pointing out the speck in someone else's. I encourage you to check out the movie if you can. A recent Christianity Today review is a good read and states it is having trouble being seen since it cannot get corporate sponsors...surprise surprise.

Cleveland Foreclosure Factors This article highlights some of the factors that contribute to the state of the housing market in Cleveland. Foreclosures=Crime This article highlights how the rising foreclosure rate has created a heaven for crime in Slavic Village.

MTV in the Middle East from cnn.com You have to wonder what this channel looks like. A less scandalous MTV for conservative middle eastern countries? Are you serious? This is going to seem over simplistic, but this is a big reason why the US is not appreciated in the middle east. Its not just that we TRY bring our form of government and its values, but we always drag along our capitalism as well. MTV just can't imagine the prospect of someone not wanting their kids to be mindlessly entertained and over-sexualized. Especially when there is money that can be made by all? Unfortunately, the middle eastern bottom line is not always the American dollar. Consider that the American dollar is increasing losing its value among some countries, and you can see why MTV is up against a brick wall. To top is off, if sex and money isn't enough...we will bring over our "real" American artists that are born another nationality to show we aren't the only country that likes this stuff. Right. While they may be well known in other countries, it is ultimately the West that pays them to be the stars they are.

The station launched at midnight Saturday, airing a pre-taped show featuring Grammy award-winning rapper and actor Ludacris, Senegalese-born soul superstar Akon, Lebanese rapper Karl Wolf and the Emirates underground hip-hop band Desert Heat.

In case you cannot tell, this makes me sick. What little respect I pretended to have for MTV is now gone.

Wow. This quote is from a blog I mentioned previously that is written by an athiest who goes to various Christian events and gives his reaction. Regardless of the fact that he will obviously not be impressed with Benny Hinn, some of what he wrote is truly astounding. Particularly, the threat if the people do not give money.

They’re so good at evangelism, they even converted a building! This blog entry is part of an experiment by a Christian radio talk show host named Drew Marshall. He offered to pay some non-Christians to go to some churches in the Toronto area. This blog talks about their experience at a mega-church, and it is worth the read. Particularly, it should wake Christians up to see how an educated non-Christian sees a mega-church that is relying on being mostly attractional in its approach to reach people. (Attractional Church = majority of time money and man hours goes into the Sunday service). An excerpt:

This part of Bruxy’s series was about attitudes towards money - specifically, those of “The Secret” versus those of Christ. Great talk, very clearly pointing out the Bible’s really clear messages on money and wealth. I was impressed with Bruxy’s insistence on putting traditionally over-used quotes in context, which makes them clearer and points out how they’re usually mis-quoted. I also liked his style - yes, he was preaching the traditional message of “Seek His kingdom and the rest will follow”, and “We shouldn’t value money or possessions enough to seek them”, but he delivered it well. The line “God doesn’t need your money” really sat well with me - what omnipotent divinity needs the feeble human trappings of finance? Also really liked the way he pointed out that those who are wealthy shouldn’t be judged as impure or imperfect - that lesson often gets missed by those eager to be “the meek and poor”, and thus the inheritors of the earth. That said, I always get irritated by this topic as far as Christianity is concerned. Why is it that I should not seek out possessions and money, but the church is permitted to do just that? Does taking 10% of every congregant’s income not count as seeking out money? Why should the institution be rich, and the congregation not? If you really believe you should be living the aesthetic life led by Christ and his apostles, why aren’t you doing it? If money and possessions aren’t important, why aren’t you meeting to discuss the meaning of Christ’s ideas and life in the local park? Notwithstanding the need to broadcast to your rather large congregation, and obviously you’d have to come up with a solution during the winter months, but really: why the son et lumiere? I found the medium more than a bit out of whack with the message.

It has come to my attention that the church must take more seriously the medium it chooses to proclaim the Gospel. I have no doubt that the preacher gave the clearest, doctrinally sound presentation of what the text in the Bible intended. But that is not the chief concern of the non-Christian here and in most of North America. Instead, it is the method used to communicate that truth (flashy lights and sound) that is essentially, drowning out the message altogether. If this is the case, then for whom does the church do the elaborate Sunday service? Probably not those who are genuinely unchurched.

Dobbs: A legacy in search of a president Dobbs over at CNN.com had some staggering statistics on the public school system in major urban areas. This quote alone should break our hearts.

The Education Week report shows Detroit's public high schools will graduate only 25 percent of their students. Cleveland, Ohio, and Baltimore, Maryland, will graduate less than 35 percent; Dallas, Texas, New York and Los Angeles, California, about 45 percent. In fact, 10 of our nation's biggest cities will graduate fewer than half their students. This is nothing less than a national crisis.

I am not sure that focus of the article is that great. Trying to motivate President Bush to make a legacy by tackling Detroit Public Schools seems slightly sensationalized. Certainly, the war in Iraq is what he will be remembered for regardless of what else he does, good or bad. CNN and Fox have already made that call Lou :)

Study: Region must face divisions There was a study, commissioned by the Presidents' Council, a group of 17 chief executives at black-owned businesses, which made recommendations to Cuyahoga County (the city of Cleveland and its suburbs). These recommendations "must go beyond government reform and tackle divisive issues such as housing and education." recommendations include:

• opening high-achieving suburban schools to Cleveland children
• expanding affordable housing and mass transit so that workers in Cleveland and inner-ring suburbs can get to jobs in communities at the edge of the county
• The study's authors frown on consolidating Cuyahoga County under one government but do not reject the idea. Instead, they recommend ways to offset damage inflicted on Cleveland and inner-ring suburbs by urban sprawl and racial and economic segregation.
• affluent suburbs abandon rules that block developers from building houses for lower-income families.

I hope the study is published because it would certainly be an interesting read. Unfortunately, many of these recommendations are a tough sell to those in the outter ring affluent suburbs. Perhaps some recommendations that reward outter ring suburbs for participating in urban renewal? Regionalism will always be a hot topic in Cleveland, and this article seems to show the direction those leadership want to take it.

Supply, but where's demand? - cleveland.com In a fascinating article the Cleveland Plain Dealer pointed out the results of a study done by graduate students at Cleveland State showing that there is actually a 29% increase in retail space and 6% decline in population. The theory is that if you build more retail stores, people will move back into the city and inner ring suburbs. Really?? How does that make any sense when we have cars and gas stations? People can easily live outside the city and drive to these shopping areas. They always have and will continue to do so. Seriously, who thinks "Did you see they just built that new shopping center? Let's move there and keep it in business?" Unfortunately, this another example of consumerism and capitolism getting the best of Americans. If you want to "develop" some space and draw people, how about building a new community center or indoor gardens, something just for the local people to really appreciate that is within walking distance. Ultimately, this is where it is important to see the need for the church. While the government can help to build new structures and increase the "market value" of a given area. It can never change the hearts of the people who live there. God must change people to see that building new shopping centers actually enhances the ability of people to leave an area in decline. It allows an area to only be useful to come, consume, and retreat home. If God would change people to see their role as to bless the community and not just to consume from it, what would that city look like? Certainly more parks, community centers, art galleries and gathering spaces to allow for human interaction. "If you build it, they will come," but they will not stay.