Monday, December 7, 2015

American Citizen Vs. American Citizen: State of the USA


AMERICAN CITIZEN VS. AMERICAN CITIZEN: STATE OF THE USA

On the subject of citizen verse citizen relationships and Civil Liberties. Sunday an event occur in Los Angeles. It was the kind of event that happens everyday across the nation, but as I watched it unfold, I perceived it as the ripping of the nations-citizen against citizen. Early in the morning at a non-profit faith based breakfast gathering, an individual approached me and explained that his suitcase had been stolen. His suitcase is his livelihood seeming he is a independent sales person and had his inventory in his suitcase. He was in rage about the theft and began to curse God as being ineffective in assisting him. It was awkward for me, seeming as he approached I was praising God, with internal dialogues and thoughts from 2008 Youtube posting Sunrise by Yearsayer https://youtu.be/Wr9KUkiaJlc  and 2012 Youtube posting Pueblo De Jah by Tribo De Jah https://youtu.be/UMEhPqqp30A

So this individual approached me venting disdain for God and his personal anger, not even realizing that he was infringing upon my very blessed disposition at that very moment. Sunday was my birthday and I was just feeling really thankful to God and life in general. Until this individual approached. With his approach, my response seemed to not support him (and it never will) and I jokingly generalized his events (the theft of his suitcase) as personal and a physical reality issue: which should not be associated with a spiritual issue such as God. It's cool if you want to vent, but I can't relate at this moment and I didn't feel it necessary to explain. In our day to day life, we might be confused as if we must attend to all as to assist and be a shoulder to cry upon. But as I have presented thus far, at what point does one let someone else wooos, infringe upon their disposition. Should I jump off the edge with him and curse God also. Of course not and why should I feel guilt that he believes I should be...empathetic to his purpose, which is in direct contradiction than mine. People intentional try to bring a person down- the old statement, "MISERY LOVE COMPANY" is true.

This individual escalated the event, by getting a cup of coffee and throwing it outwardly upon the ground. As he did this the coffee seemed to have fallen upon another individuals car. The owner of the car, expressed his concerns about the coffee and it POSSIBLY hitting his car. At that point another by stander shouted out, "don't tell him not to vent, he has a right to vent!" This was alerting to me, seeming it is what I always express to all, but worded differently. I always express. "Never tell an AMERICAN to shut up because you are infringing upon their 1st Amendment right and also desensitizing the Bill of Rights!" 

When the individual who tossed the coffee as he was venting about God, probed me on the events, I told him I have an issue: for where he believes he has a first amendment right to vent and although I don't have to accept it, I should be empathetic. I informed him that I perceive that you do have a 1st Amendment right and I DO NOT have to attend to it. You can vent all you want  and express what ever you want and I DO NOT have to give any of my time, emotion, devotion or empathy to your expressed reasons. 

But what is more important is you are over looking the rights of the individual who owns the car. He used his 1st Amendment right to express to you, concern about you tossing coffee upon the ground, near his car and almost getting it on his car. Don't you see he was probing his 5th Amendment right of private property and you simply override his intent. Then you escalated it even further by getting a "quasi non-profit personal" from another agency to get involved as an authority - by which that quasi non-profit personal, suggested verbally to the car owner, that he APOLOGIZE to you to resolve the situation. And you expect me to have empathy for you. As I see it you are an ENERGY SUCKER! I walked away from the individual hoping he understand, stay away from me.

So a overview we have citizen against citizen, then a quasi non-profit personal acting on behave of an official, suggests verbally that one citizen apologize to another citizen: as if one citizen is correct and has a RIGHT! This is that state of America today! DESENSITIZED to their rights and entitlement of them. 

State vs. County Social Service: Prevention of Secure State Economy (DES) part 1 California

Cali Reflection in Cali = seeming I was considering/in route academically (MSW/JD) for a NASW career (halted, Phoenix ARIZONA --Margret Finn/SWBS Case Manager Neglect)! I am very concerned naturally about what use to be termed WELFARE (too much stigma) and then Social Service (current in many states and fading) and more correctly should be termed DES (the Department of the States Economy (all of these Services, work to insure a secure state economy!)
So Cali-Cali with it's county based inefficiency is slowly drowning themselves and all TAX PAYING state citizens into- confusion. Thus it immobilizes state citizens from county to county movement. That prevents economic growth for the state. And slows down processing. Well I'd be dead from hunger (if not for faith based churches and shelters, GOD BLESS YOU ALL). Still one county can't communicate to another county on the behalf of the TAX PAYING state citizen. DAMN California since I've returned home, this state just isn't radiating GOLDEN any more!
The majority of States have established a centralized administrative system and can be classified as State administered: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming.
Nine States can be described as county administered: California, Colorado, Minnesota,New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
Virginia (.https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/services.pdf)
So within the battle of the counties (Los Angeles County and San Diego County) I the state citizen am tossed back and forward. I on my own thoughts, think LET CONSIDER SECURITY ISSUES!!!
So San Diego County seems correct! I am no longer in the county, don't intend to return to the county, have applied for benefits in Los Angeles County 3 times (Oct 20, 2015-Nov 2, 2015), and have received different answers from each separate state department, bias to the county preferences. In San Diego, my prior EBT Card was stolen in Los Angeles (voided) yet November benefits are posted on that card and now December benefits.
Yet according to Los Angeles county, I must close out my San Diego accounts (Oct 20, 2015): According to San Diego county, I have 2 options 1) transfer my account and the account balances will transfer to Los Angeles within 30 days or 2) close out my account, but this option might take longer and depends on Los Angeles county and me being able to apply with a closed San Diego account (hint: TIMING 30-90 days).
This month San Diego has proven that they have closed the accounts as requested and the funds are in a transfer status. This will never occur, because Los Angeles county systems is not going to be able to open a CALFRESH account as long as there is funds on a prior EBT from another county. Los Angeles is correct with this and thus await San Diego to remove the account.
You'd think getting a EBT from San Diego County would be not so difficult. UHM when I was working as a contract worker at EDS and all the contract work I did across this nation, corporations that went out of business always seemed to have this type of customer and data bank confusion going on within their on network operations. Is this one state or not!!!
San Diego you are RIGHT for instructing me to tell the Los Angeles office to call you and you will release the code for a San Diego EBT card that can be printed from the Los Angeles office.
Los Angeles you are WRONG for following through and then giving me the code and telling me to call San Diego. THE CLIENT IS ALWAYS RIGHT, THIS IS PUBLIC SERVICE...
So as far as California and it's county based system goes. Does the ideal of inter-office, inter-state department communication mean anything any more! Well considering these days of network/mainframe security risk...WHY would a state employee provide the client with the data that is secure, when it could be done through an inter-department communication. One employee to another employee.
Thus let's raise concern and just post this information...This date should be consider inter state departmental data...so it's RED FLAGGING material to mean (data that is risky and not attended to appropriately by corporations or government agencies)...EBT CODE: 19014EMBOS01