Texas Gold is Coming Home

Texas Gold is Coming Home

Texas is building a gold repository and the ground breaking is planned for late this year. The law is in the books and the search is on for the contractor to build the high security facility. Mark your calendars for a December 1, 2016 kickoff.

In a world of unsettling economic madness, it is encouraging to see the state of Texas placing emphasis on self-sufficiency and stability. It is clear that the gold repository will be built and Texas’ physical assets will be moved there, it is promising that Texas legislators envision a future Texas economy driven by diverse commodity markets, and Texans will find comfort in individual investment possibilities in secure physical assets.

Some highlights of the Texas gold repository include:

  • Constitutionally Authorized
  • Develops Financial Infrastructure in Texas
  • Maintains Texas’ gold within the state as physical holdings
  • Generates new state revenue through holding fees
  • Eliminates $650k annual holding fees paid to other facilities
  • Enables individual Texans to securely invest and transact in gold
  • Develops other Texas commodity markets
  • Hedges against inflation and economic instability

Constitutional Sound Money

Setting up a gold repository is a endeavor in sound money. This strategy is based firmly on the U.S. Constitution as Article 1, Section 10, states:

“No State shall…coin Money: emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts…”

– U.S Constitution, Article 1, Section 10

Self-Sufficient Texas Infrastructure

The depository will provide a Texas-based infrastructure that will serve as a secure holding of precious metals for financial institutions, cities, school districts, businesses, individuals and countries.

The initial transfer will include $650 million owned by The University of Texas Investment Management Company, currently held in New York.

Further, the plan is to leverage the repository as a foundation for growing worldwide commodity markets in Texas. The envisioned market would offer the ability to trade and receive physical shipments of diverse Texas commodities such as cattle, oil, gas, and others.

In addition to the benefits to the State of Texas and business, individuals can leverage the repository for personal accounts.

Economic Stability for Texas and Texans

The depository will enable a hedge against inflation and economic disruptions and provides a can provide a layer of economic stability for Texas. It is no secret that the Federal Reserve has been printing money generously and increasing financial instability.

U.S. dollars are no longer back by gold as Nixon removed the last ties to the gold standard in 1971.  This raises concerns with regards to the long-term prospects for the dollar and the shorter term possibilities of inflation. Inflation strongly and negatively affects an individual’s ability to protect their property and savings. Prior to appointment as FED Chairman Alan Greenspan wrote:

“In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.

This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists’ tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists’ antagonism toward the gold standard.”

– Alan Greenspan, Gold and Economic Freedom, 1966

Notice that Greenspan points out that without a gold standard it is not possible for individuals to protect their savings. Since the Texas gold repository enables individuals to store their gold on-site and track this online it can provide a safe haven for private investment.

Greenspan did not often act on these convictions as FED Chairman. However, he has made recent comments that express a renewed emphasis on sound money based on gold. As recently as June 2016 in an interview with Bloomberg, Greenspan made this statement:

“If we went back on the gold standard and we adhered to the actual structure of the gold standard as it exited prior to 1913, we’d be fine.  Remember that the period 1870 to 1913 was one of the most aggressive periods economically that we’ve had in the United States, and that was a golden period of the gold standard.  I’m known as a gold bug and everyone laughs at me, but why do central banks own gold now?”

– Alan Greenspan, interview with Bloomberg, 2016

A Bigger Picture?

While Texas is making efforts to increase economic stability and independence, it will be interesting to see the next steps and opportunities that arise as a result of the foundation that the repository offers.

Some have called this the “Fort Knox of Texas” while others have claimed that this is the first step toward secession. Perhaps there are some considerations here with regards to Texas independence, perhaps not. Regardless, the gold repository is presented to Texans as “a bank that doesn’t do any lending” and that is a foundation that can be expanded upon as times change and new political needs arise.



United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 10 http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec10.html

First up: a gold depository in Texas. And then? http://www.star-telegram.com/news/politics-government/article104509111.html

Greenspan Warns A Crisis Is Imminent, Urges A Return To The Gold Standard http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-27/greenspan-warns-crisis-imminent-he-urges-return-gold-standard


The Worship of the Word “We”

The Worship of the Word “We”
The following are excerpts from Anthem, Ayn Rand. In this final chapter the main character awakens and escapes from the hell of a collective dystopian society to claim freedom as an individual. The dystopian society worshipped the word “we” and had banned the word “I”. 

These are the last things before me. And as I stand here at the door of glory, I look behind me for the last time. I look upon the history of men, which I have learned from the books, and I wonder. It was a long story, and the spirit which moved it was the spirit of man’s freedom. But what is freedom? Freedom from what? There is nothing to take a man’s freedom away from him, save other men. To be free, a man must be free of his brothers. That is freedom. That and nothing else.

At first, man was enslaved by the gods. But he broke their chains. Then he was enslaved by the kings. But he broke their chains. He was enslaved by his birth, by his kin, by his race. But he broke their chains. He declared to all his brothers that a man has rights which neither god nor king nor other men can take away from him, no matter what their number, for his is the right of man, and there is no right on earth above this right. And he stood on the threshold of freedom for which the blood of the centuries behind him had been spilled.

But then he gave up all he had won, and fell lower than his savage beginning.

What brought it to pass? What disaster took their reason away from men? What whip lashed them to their knees in shame and submission? The worship of the word “We.”

When men accepted that worship, the structure of centuries collapsed about them, the structure whose every beam had come from the thought of some one man, each in his day down the ages, from the depth of some one spirit, such as spirit existed but for its own sake. Those men who survived—those eager to obey, eager to live for one another, since they had nothing else to vindicate them—those men could neither carry on, nor preserve what they had received. Thus did all thought, all science, all wisdom perish on earth. Thus did men—men with nothing to offer save their great numbers—lose the steel towers, the flying ships, the power wires, all the things they had not created and could never keep. Perhaps, later, some men had been born with the mind and the courage to recover these things which were lost; perhaps these men came before the Councils of Scholars. They answered as I have been answered—and for the same reasons.

But I still wonder how it was possible, in those graceless years of transition, long ago, that men did not see whither they were going, and went on, in blindness and cowardice, to their fate. I wonder, for it is hard for me to conceive how men who knew the word “I,” could give it up and not know what they had lost. But such has been the story, for I have lived in the City of the damned, and I know what horror men permitted to be brought upon them.

Perhaps, in those days, there were a few among men, a few of clear sight and clean soul, who refused to surrender that word. What agony must have been theirs before that which they saw coming and could not stop! Perhaps they cried out in protest and in warning. But men paid no heed to their warning. And they, those few, fought a hopeless battle, and they perished with their banners smeared by their own blood. And they chose to perish, for they knew. To them, I send my salute across the centuries, and my pity.

Theirs is the banner in my hand. And I wish I had the power to tell them that the despair of their hearts was not to be final, and their night was not without hope. For the battle they lost can never be lost. For that which they died to save can never perish. Through all the darkness, through all the shame of which men are capable, the spirit of man will remain alive on this earth. It may sleep, but it will awaken. It may wear chains, but it will break through. And man will go on. Man, not men.

Anthem, Chapter 12, Ayn Rand

Popcorn Sales for the “Common Good”

Popcorn Sales for the “Common Good”

“We have rights, as individuals, to give as much of our own money as we please to charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of public money.”  – Davy Crockett

With broad strokes, individuals are getting stripped of opportunities to work hard work and use their talents for personal gain. This begins day 1 in public school. Kids are being taught to accept the idea that they might work hard but the results of this hard work are for an entire community to share. This theme is reinforced daily at our elementary school that is based on the Leader in Me’s 7 Habits of Happy Kids. This program is a mess of buzzwords that promote emotion-led decision making, “save the world” goal-setting, and group-think problem solving. They are presented as absolutes and preached endlessly. The habits are used to support an educational agenda where grades are subjective (Rubric Scoring), lessons are politicized (Common Core-ish) and social engineering of groups is prioritized over individual excellence (Engage! Learning Model).

Given our schools overall dedication to these habits and programs, it came as no surprise when the camp fundraiser was an experiment in redistribution. The money earned by the sacrifice and hard work of a few would be divided up and redistributed to the entire class. This is not a car wash or a  bake sale or some other effort where the group is participating as a whole to raise money for a joint purchase. The result here is a discount on a child’s camp fees. This is an effort where individual kids roam the streets in the heat selling overpriced popcorn. They call their friends and family to close deals, then they collect payment and deliver the popcorn. Often the parents help out too. It can be a lot of work but can be personally rewarding when successful.

Success in sales is based on offering a good product and incentivizing the sales efforts. With a student fundraiser there are some things that work in favor of sales that don’t exist in a regular sales process. Products can be priced high relative to the general market (in this case, $12 popcorn) and friends and family can be encouraged to purchase even if they don’t really want or need the product. The personal relationships with the student closes deals. Individual hard work and perseverance closes deals. This works great for the school’s chosen popcorn vendor but in all fairness it should work great for the individual making the sales too. Personal reward and individual goals serve as a natural incentive.

In this case, instead of empowering kids with natural incentives where they work hard, sell more and realize the benefits for themselves; the kids are asked to participate in a scheme where a few work hard and the the benefits are realized by others that did little or nothing. Unless I am missing something, every kid in our class is capable of hitting the pavement and working to sell popcorn. If they or their family want to lower their price of camp then they should be able to make the sales and keep the rewards of their own labor. Accordingly, the kids and families that sit-it-out should not benefit from the work of the ones who sweat-it-out.

Motivated by paying for camp, one student with his dad’s help sold enough units to cover the cost of camp completely. He believed that his work would fully cover his camp expenses. Here is how the numbers broke down. The student sold roughly $500 worth of popcorn. Thats more than 40 units at $12 each. Lots of work. He was expecting to earn 40%, or $200, as a discount off the camp fees. But, nowhere to be seen was the $200 camp discount. He was rewarded with a tour of the popcorn store, a $20 gift card and his “fair share” of the discount he earned. The profit was redistributed and each kid in the 5th grade will receive $2.50 off of their price for this individual’s hard work and family support. Only 1 kid earned this $200, yet roughly 79 others will divide up and plunder what was earned by him.

Often, this kind of sharing of proceeds is proposed to help those that need a helping hand. Unfortunately (and ironically), this communal approach to fundraising hurts those without resources the most. Consider a family that simply cannot afford to pay $200 to send their child to camp. Yes, they might get a small discount from pooled proceeds but they are dependent on others to achieve even marginal discounts. But with an individual-based fundraiser, the incentive is direct and they are presented with a way for the child to raise the money needed. The kid can sell enough popcorn to cover the cost. Every sale he makes contributes to his fund. 40 units will get it done. This works and it send a powerful message of self-reliance!

Of course, some might argue that the raised funds should be distributed only to those needing a helping hand. If that is the intention then a voluntary charity drive makes sense. In that case, the charitable motivation is clear. Please note, the important inclusion of the word “voluntary” here. Anyway, this isn’t a charity drive, so let’s move on…

The communal approach to fundraising is incentivized with low-budget prizes and school-hyped peer pressure. Instead of a natural incentive where you earn what you sell, kids are pushed to earn for the community and accept a dinky, low-budget prize. Instead of earning to pay their own way, kids are asked to serve for the sake of the group. The 7 habits refer to this dependence on classmates as interdependence and this is literally taught as a superior trait to independence. I cannot agree as personal success should be achievable through a kid’s own will and effort, regardless of peer participation. 

At our school where the 7 habits are up-front-and-center they might expect the kids to be motivated by this false narrative. I can already hear the grandstanding of the school pointing out to impressionable kids how taking money from those that worked to sell the popcorn and redistributing it among those that instead played Xbox is a “win-win” or a “together is better” situation as promoted by the ever-present 7 habits. In reality, the work and effort of some individuals and their families is plundered. No doubt, the kids that played Xbox will laugh at how clever they were to “earn” the same camp discount as the kids that burned up in the Texas heat.

Of course this is a minor and mostly insignificant example. Likely, the worst thing that will happen here is that the program will suffer from a lack of incentive. The parents will foot the bill and the kid’s won’t do much. A few will make some sales and will donate their time to other people’s pocketbooks. (Congratulations!) And while this might irritate a few that misunderstood the program, this is not much of a practical concern.

The problem is that the kids are learning that redistribution is ok. A fundraiser using a unjust economic model might not cause too many practical concerns (unlike redistribution in the real world). But, they see a plan where adults accept the idea that a few can be expected to do the work and everyone participates in the rewards. The school reinforces this with redundant buzzwords. The overall philosophy is the problem and this “common good” approach to individual sales adds momentum to the messages that they receive day-in and day-out at a school that preaches saving the world, group-think and basing your decisions on emotions. Bleh.

Of course this is just a fundraiser, but there is no reason to treat it as an exercise in the concepts of redistribution. Instead it was a great opportunity to teach kids about working hard and individual success. Perhaps they should even incorporate the concepts from the Davy Crockett quote above… that is, allow each kid to allocate some or all of his earnings for charity if the desire. Another opportunity for a lesson on charitable giving.

You know… keeping the fruits of your own labor, individual ruggedness and voluntary charity are embraced as core American values… let’s encourage those values instead.

“To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association — the guarantee to every one of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.” – Thomas Jefferson


Prospect of Hillary Presidency inspires Texas Secession

Prospect of Hillary Presidency inspires Texas Secession

A recent PPP poll indicates that 40% of Texans want Texas out of the union if Hillary wins the presidency. That is an impressive number of supporters for a topic that has not been considered serious and flown under the radar for decades. (Note, some articles are suggesting that 60% of Texans support secession based on the poll but this is only polling the Trump supporters… the overall number is 40%).

Texas secession is becoming an attractive solution to the overwhelming problem of corruption that is boiling over in Washington DC. Efforts to “vote the bums out” fail, “writing your congressman” falls on deaf ears, petitions are not part of the system and have no effect, and other “solutions” no longer solve any problems. The rule-of-law is mocked and personal freedoms are trampled. American freedom and liberty die more each year the federal march continues.

Unlike other politicians who manage to maintain some level of deniability with regards to corruption, Hillary’s corruption is out in the open for the world to see. This recent poll suggests that she might just be the slap in the face that Texans (and Americans) need to wash away the tempting, but false, veil that we can simply vote the free America back into existence. No one expects Hillary to abide by the Constitution or respect the rule-of-law. She doesn’t now, she won’t if elected president. With a Hillary presidency the rule-of-law is visibly dead and the 2nd Amendment is specifically in the crosshairs. The veil is removed.

This goes back to a systemic problem of centralized power. Americans know that power is centralized to a gluttonous, unhealthy degree. The polls simply suggests that people fear a match made in hell where vast corruption wields unlimited power. A reasonable fear indeed given Hillary’s disdain for American principles and her ability to skirt the laws that the rest of us must abide by.

Since the United States no longer operates as guaranteed by the Constitution, Hillary’s presidency (or anyone’s for that matter) would not be limited by checks and balances of any significance. There is little accountability at the federal level and we the people are left with no recourse, just blind hope that leaders are honest and fair and rule with good will. Yes, the system is broken, wide open to mischief, and this poll indicates that the idea of Hillary is helping Texans realize just how dangerous the blank check is.

The systemic problems run deep. The Constitution and it’s Bill of Rights no longer protect the people from overzealous politicians. Judges rubber stamp blatantly unconstitutional legislation. The system of Federalism which delegates a few powers to the federal government and leaves most powers in the hands of the states is all but forgotten. The 10th amendment was drafted by the states to strictly limit the federal government but it is ignored. In essence, the contract between the states and the federal government is no longer honored by the federal government. Naturally, states should question their participation in what has become a one-sided relationship.

Another problem is a problem of scale. Representation is nonexistent with such a large population and centralized power structure. Today, a group of 545 people in DC rule over 320 million. The federal government no longer allows states to run their own affairs. If allowed, regionally diverse people would govern themselves closer to home where they could better attend to their regional desires and needs. Unfortunately, any issues of significance are decided by the small subset of rulers in DC. Placing Hillary’s face of visible corruption at the top may be more than the top-heavy, teetering system can support.

Given the systemic problems faced and the prospect of a blatantly corrupt president wielding unchecked centralized power, it is natural to consider secession as a solution. Texas secession offers a possibility to sidestep Hillary’s corruption and emphasize limited more local government… both good advances for liberty and freedom. Based on the PPP poll, 40% of Texans have already come to that realization.

Source: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_TX_81616.pdf



10 Reasons to avoid The Leader in Me and the “7 Habits of Happy Kids”

10 Reasons to avoid The Leader in Me and the “7 Habits of Happy Kids”

Here are 10 reasons to avoid The Leader in Me program in your school. When a school adopts the program, it’s 7 habits are presented as absolutes and repeated endlessly. The habits are not universal truths.

 1. The habits are presented as absolutes.

The habits should not be treated as absolutes, yet they are. Each habit may have a time and a place as a guideline but they are not absolute wisdom. If fact, often they are exactly the wrong advice.

Be Proactive (Habit 1) can be sound advice when the student is taught to think for himself and act on his own without the need for assistance. However, as a habit and in the classroom, this message is generally communicated as “obey”. Of course, obeying rules is a good thing to maintain order in a classroom or at home. But it is not a life-lesson absolute and should not be presented as such. There are times in life to obey and times to disobey. As they proceed in life, it’s not healthy for kids to always feel that obeying is the best option or even the first option. Kids need to know when it is proper to obey, such as in a classroom setting, and when it is proper to stand up and say “no, I do not agree and will not do that”. Perhaps in this example it would be proper to discuss this as a class rule, but certainly not an attribute of a good leader or an absolute in life.

Together is better (Habit 6) is not an absolute. Often one dedicated person with a vision accomplishes more in less time. History is full of brilliant individuals that accomplished the unbelievable by themselves.

Thinking Win-Win (Habit 4) is not an absolute. Standing up for yourself when you are right and someone else is wrong is the right thing to do.  You don’t compromise with bullies or liars or thieves.

2. The habits are repeated, over, and over, and over.

The habits are everywhere at school, are pushed on parents  and are encouraged in life outside of school. You will not be able to avoid them and your kids will be exposed to them non-stop. At our school the habits are reiterated from dawn to dusk and beyond the classroom, every day, all day. They are found in and among: morning announcements, posters, emails from teachers and faculty, phone calls from teachers and faculty, automated phone calls, teacher podiums and classroom walls, the cover of the yearbook, in the lessons, themes for fairs and fundraisers, faculty presentations and opening statements, parent training events, parent-teacher conferences and even suggested as inspiration over holidays.

3. The habits overstep the role of the school. 

As a parent, I feel that values should be taught at home and any values taught at school should not depend on worldview. Values such as self-discipline, respect for others, hard work and integrity seem universal. And while the leader in me claims to promote such values the program also encourages peer dependence, group-think, emotion-based decisions and save-the-world goal setting. While some may find these latter values acceptable, many do not.

4. The habits are suitable for training workers, not entrepreneurs.

The habits do not promote innovation. They teach task execution. “Get it done”, “do it efficiently”, “meet the schedule”,  “don’t squabble”, etc are all good traits but they set the bar very low and hide important attributes that kids will need to position themselves for a greater impact in life. People need to know how to think, to solve problems and to arrive at solutions that might not be fit a specific process. In other words, they will have to lead and forge new paths to the solution. To do so they will have to remove themselves from the tiny “task-based” box that the Leader in Me traps them in.

To succeed at a higher level, they will have to improvise, to focus, to create, to have original ideas, to gain knowledge, to put in the hard time, to succeed, to fail, to learn from mistakes, to compete, to win, to lose, to solve problems on their own, to take risks, to seek individual rewards, to be a rugged individual, to work late into the night, to dedicate years to an endeavor, to stand by your argument, to know facts, to communicate as a person and many other values. Many of these values are counter to the habit’s absolute language.

5. Many real-world habits of true leaders are missing.  

The program is marketed as a “leadership” program, but it is not. Where in the habits do you see real-world leadership attributes like vision, or perseverance, or flexibility, or quick thinking, or rapid responses to changes, or creativity, or communication skills? They aren’t promoted with the habits and these are just a few examples of values that leaders need. Out-of-the-box thinking or critical thinking is not important to the program, instead they place all emphasis on compliance with rules, dependence on peers and adherence to a given process. That is not leadership at all. This sounds more like a follower to me. Remember, the program deals in absolutes and kids are taught that these habits define leadership.

6. The habits highlight the group over the individual. 

When the individual is discussed in the habits it is always in the context of serving the school, saving the world, serving the community, or simply obeying rules. This encourages responsibility, order and discipline but it is not about the person, or the individual at all. The individual is told that they are important in the context of how they sacrifice themselves to accomplish other people’s priorities or society’s noble cause-of-the-day. The habits do not encourage people to consider: who am i as a person, what do I want to achieve in life, what skills I possess that might be unique, what strengths do I have, what personal goals do I want to set for myself, what knowledge do I seek, what am I interested in, etc. The individual is discussed in terms of responsibility to others, not himself or herself.

7. The habits dehumanize communications.

The program encourages correspondence between students, teachers, administrators and even parents to be based on catch phrases like, “synergize”,  “sharpen the saw” and “everyone can win”. The program refers to this as a “common voice”. This limits the human element in communication and correspondence becomes robot-like as the buzzwords are integrated, often unnaturally into communications.

8. The program misdirects school emphasis.

Schools involved in leader in me promote the program over all else. Our school has replaced the honor roll with a “Go Getter” award based on a students ability to comply with and promote the 7 habits. Our school proudly points to wall art that states “Everyone can Win!” instead of “work hard” or “be your best”. The yearbook cover reminds the kids and parents that the habits are the most important part of education. The program encourages, and our school has adopted, subjective grading schemes (like Rubric’s) and group learning initiatives (like Engage! Learning Model). Fundraisers are executed to purchase more Leader in Me signs and posters to further force the kids attention on the habits. Compliance to the 7 habits is prioritized and awarded over academic excellence.

9. Your child may be used for marketing purposes.

Schools that adopt The Leader in Me may be required to provide video clips of children reciting the habits. The kids are coached to recite a habit and it’s influence on camera. If the child is not a fan of the habits, like mine, then words are provided for them. These video clips of your children are taken without your knowledge and can be used to promote the program without your explicit permission (you signed the release form for the yearbook, right?).

10. The habits will be used inappropriately and ineffectively for conflict resolution. 

The habits are so prevalent that wisdom is lost in how to deal with individual students that are not behaving properly. The school will seek to force-fit a habit as a means of conflict resolution. Unfortunately, the habits are focused on groups, so individuals that need guidance are not singled out. Instead a group is asked to come up with a “win-win” or “synergize” solution instead of directly dealing with the child causing the problem in the first place.

Bonus. The program is expensive.

Schools pay $50,000 or so annually for the program. This money could be better spent elsewhere or not collected in the first place.

Modern Education = Confusion

Today’s educational system creates more questions than answers. You may wonder, what happeded to textbooks? Or, why group learning is so prevalent? Or,  what is this crazy new scoring system?

The answer to these questions becomes apparent when you understand that the materials have changed and the goals of the education system are not as they once were.

Let’s start with the overall idea of education. In any educational system we must consider what materials, methods, results and validation components are implemented.

  • What is taught? (Materials)
  • How is it taught? (Methods)
  • Who is taught and what is retained? (Results)
  • How is success evaluated? (Validation)

Classic System

In the classic model of education, it is easy to see how facts are taught and individuals acquire knowledge. Grades are earned and help students and parents adjust.


In the classic system, confusion is removed. This leads to a clean transfer of knowledge to the student. We end up with prepared students with realistic goals! They are independent and ready for the real world.

Independent students are ready for a competitve market. Armed with facts, they are confident in their ideas, even when others may choose popular myths over unpopular truths.

Modern “Confusion” System

In the modern education system, facts are muddied with causes, focused lessons are replaced with multi-topic/multi-approach discussions,  groups are targeted over individuals and scores are arbitrary.


In the modern system, confusion hinders knowledge transfer. This results in unprepared students with unrealistic goals. The are trained to be dependent on one another.

Dependent students are not prepared to compete in the arena of ideas.  Instead, they seek approval of peers and authorities. They are confused by their lack of knowledge and utopian goals.

Confusion is Rampant

Unfortunately, confusion is everywhere.  Modern education is clearly dedicated to creating confusion. Common core and state alternatives set the stage for educational confusion while “whole school transformation” programs like The Leader in Me facilitate values confusion.