 Welcome to the First Unitarian Society of Madison. It's on. Hello. Ah. Okay, we'll try this again. Good morning. Welcome to the First Unitarian Society of Madison. This is a community where curious seekers gather to explore spiritual, ethical, and social issues in an accepting and nurturing environment. Unitarian Universalism supports the freedom of conscience of each individual as together we seek to be a force for good in the world. I would like to invite you now into a moment of centering silence. And if you would join me in our in-gathering hymn number 381. My name is Dorit Bergen, and on behalf of the congregation, I would like to extend a special welcome to visitors. We are a welcoming congregation, so whoever you are and wherever you happen to be on your life journey, we celebrate your presence among us. Newcomers are encouraged to stay for our fellowship hour after the service and to visit the library, which is directly across from the center doors of this auditorium. Bring your drinks and your questions. Members of our staff and lay ministry will be on hand to welcome you. You may also look for persons holding teal, stoneware, coffee mugs. These are FUS members knowledgeable about our faith community who would love to visit with you. Experience guides are usually available to give a building tour after each service, so if you would like to learn more about this sustainably designed addition or our national landmark meeting house, please meet near the large glass window on the left side of the auditorium immediately after the service. We welcome children to stay for the duration of the service. However, because it is difficult for some in attendance to hear in this lively, acoustical environment, our child haven and commons are excellent places to retire if a child needs to talk or move around. The service can still be seen and heard from those areas. And speaking of noise, this would be a good time to turn off all electronic devices that might cause a hindrance during the hour. I'd like now to acknowledge those individuals who help our services run smoothly. On sound, we have Pete Daly. Our greeter this morning was Patty Witte. Our ushers are John McEvna and Nancy Daly. And coffee is being made for you by Helen McEvna. Please note the announcements on the red floor's insert in your order of service would describe upcoming events at the society and provide more information about today's activities. Again, welcome. We hope that today's service will stimulate your mind, touch your heart, and stir your spirit. To seek elegance rather than to be worthy, not respectable, and wealthy. To study hard, think quietly, talk gently, act frankly. To listen to stars and birds, to babes and sages with an open heart. To bear all cheerfully, do all bravely, await occasions hurry never. To let the spiritual, unbidden, and unconscious grow up through the common. This is to be my symphony. And now please rise in body or spirit as Dorot lights our chalice. Please note these words from Ralph Waldo Emerson are written as a responsive reading. I will begin. Please read the bold type response. These roses under my window make no reference to former roses or to better ones. They are for what they are. They exist with God today. There is no time today. There is no time. Before a leaf bud has burst, its whole life acts. In the full-blown flower, there is no more. In the leafless root, there is no less. There is no less. But we postpone or remember. We do not live in the present. But with reverted eye lament the past or heedless of the riches that surround us, stand on tiptoe to foresee the future. And now please greet your neighbor in a friendly manner. Toys or pretend food or something stacked up in your room or a playroom? Do you all have? What sweetie? I can't hear you. Who wouldn't? That's an excellent question. We all agree with that. We all think we need some stuff right? Oh my goodness. Have you folks ever heard of Pandora's Box? That's when you ask something or do something and then everybody joins in and it gets bigger than it was. Here's a picture. Let's read the story now. This is a little girl named Tamina and her mother. Look at all that stuff there. The day before she went to see grandma, Tamina said, Dolls, dolls, I can take all my dolls on the airport. One said her mother, you can bring just one doll. Said Tamina. Have you ever said that? Yeah. Please. I will be very sad without all my dolls. One said her mom, you can take one doll. Okay, okay, said Tamina. Then Tamina said, toys, toys, toys, I can take all my toys. What do you think her mom said? One. You guys know this drill, don't you? You may bring just one toy. And of course then she said, I will be very sad without all my toys. What did mom say? One. You may bring one. Okay, okay, okay. Oh, you're right, I missed one, didn't I? I'm bad. Okay. There she is. They won't let you go away with anything. There she is. And look at all this stuff and all these toys. And she doesn't look very happy, does she? I think she's doing something that momies and daddies would rather we not do, which is called pounding. Yeah. Okay, so when Tamina came to the airport, she was carrying one doll and one toy. She was also carrying a huge backpack that her sister had helped her mush closed after she put a whole bunch of toys, $20 and 20 toys into the backpack. Well, the backpack was very heavy. And Tamina had trouble keeping up. Come on, come on, come on, said her mom. You are taking forever. Let me carry your backpack. What do you think she said? Oh no, I will carry my backpack. This is my private backpack. So you see how big it is? And she's lugging it through the airport, not very well. So they got into a long line and a security officer asked to see mom's backpack. Yes, she said. And yes, said her little sister. Then he said to Tamina, can I look in your backpack? What do you think she said? No, you may not look in my backpack. My backpack is top secret. Right, said the officer. How about we X-ray your backpack? Well, the officer put the backpack in the X-ray machine. Now here's the picture on this before about her refusing to allow the backpack. And guess what happened? The officer put the backpack into the X-ray machine. Then he looked at the screen and yelled, and fell over. Look what he saw in it. Look at all that junk in the X-ray. Look at that. Doesn't it look like it's about to explode? Well it was. On the plane, the flight attendant said, what's in the backpack? Watch, she said. And unzipped all the dolls and toys went flying all over the airport. Look at that. Do you really think she could have gotten that many in there? Look at that. Is that a writer of what? How many of you have ever been on an airplane? Do you think they'd let you get away with this? Yeah, look at that. Well, I don't think they'd let anybody get away with that. But now it says that she put ten dolls and toys on the seat in front of her, five on her seat, three on the back of the seat, and ten on the ceiling with tape. I bet they would let her do that. Wow, said the flight attendant. That's an awful lot of stuff. After they took off, the flight attendant came back and said, there are three kids from China and three kids from Kenya and three kids from Scotland who won't stop crying because their mothers wouldn't let them bring any toys or dolls on the airline. Well, of course, Temuna's mother hadn't let her anyway. She just sneaked and the flight attendant said, can I please borrow three of yours? Yes. So then they watched a movie, then they had dinner, then Temuna went to the bathroom 25 times, then everybody went to sleep. That 25 times may be a slight exaggeration, but it seemed like it, I'm sure, to her mother. Yeah. So, they had a wonderful trip. It turns out that Grandma made toys and dolls and made new ones and had already made some for Temuna's soul. She didn't miss the other ones and she forgot about it. Several months later, three packages came to her house. One from China, one from Scotland, and one from Kenya. Yes, you're right. She opened all the packages and there was a Chinese doll, a Kenyan doll, I'm going to turn it around, and a Scottish doll. See all those pretty dolls? So those children who'd had no toys and kept her American toys sent her dolls, wasn't that nice? Well, then she got another idea. Wow, I can't wait to go on another plane ride. It's a great way to get new stuff. Said her mother, next time you'll go with your dad. And look at his face when she said that. Uh-oh. He was not happy. And he had this flash fantasy of what it would be like to take her on the plane the next time. He has a little wheeled-down thing there and he's carrying all her toys. Yeah. Well, that's the end of the story. Do you think she had too much stuff? Yeah, I do too. Your mother did too. Okay. Well, now you may go to Summer Fun and we will hear some more beautiful, special music. Thanks for coming down. The name says where they're coming from. You can find these factoids and more along with the citations on their website. There are 300,000 items in the average American home. The average size of the American home has nearly tripled over the past 50 years. Despite this, one quarter of the people with two car garages don't have enough room to park any cars in them. Another 32% can get only one car in. Despite this, one out of every 10 Americans rents off-site storage. That's the fastest growing segment of commercial real estate. There are now more than 50,000 storage facilities in the United States, five times as many as the number of Starbucks. Our homes have more television sets than people and those sets are turned down more than eight hours a day. Shopping malls outnumber high schools and 93% of teenage girls rank shopping as their favorite pastime. 3% of the world's children live in America, but they own 40% of the world's toys. According to the Wall Street Journal, Americans spend $1.2 trillion annually on non-essential goods. In other words, things they don't need. Nearly half of all American households, on the other hand, do not save any money. Finally, from many different sources, it's difficult to pin down statistics on homelessness, but an estimated 2.5 to 3.5 million Americans are homeless. The next reading is from the Book of Luke. This may be familiar to some of you. This translation is from our hymnal. Can any of you, by worrying, add a single hour to the span of your life? You know how to interpret the appearance of earth and sky, but why do you not know how to interpret the present time? Why do you see the speck in your neighbor's eye but not notice the log in your own eye? And what does it profit them if they gain the whole world but lose themselves? And finally, from Ralph Waldo Emerson. A person will worship something. There's no doubt about that. We may think our tribute is paid in secret in the dark recesses of our hearts, but it will out. That which dominates our imaginations and our thoughts will determine our lives and character. Therefore, it behooves us to be careful what we worship. For what we are worshiping, we are becoming. This is Father's Day, even though I am a father and Jim used to be one. Father's Day has always been a very commercial holiday, so it segues nicely into our topic, which is income equality and how much is enough. Father's Day, of course, is the day to buy gifts for father, and this is not a Father's Day tie. Well, income inequality has just recently become a very hot issue, even though it's been getting worse for decades. Income inequality in the United States is worse than it's been at any time since the 1920s at least. It's much greater than in any other developed country and upward economic mobility is now greater in Europe than it is in the United States. There are lots of numbers to show this. In 1980, the average CEO pay package was about 30 times larger than the lowest salary in the company. Now it's almost 300 times. Since 1980, the gross domestic product and personal income in the United States have approximately doubled in inflation-adjusted dollars. All of the increase in personal income went to the top 1%. The median income in the U.S., the point at which half make more and half make less, has gone down by more than $4,000. Again, in inflation-adjusted dollars, that means the majority of the population has seen a decline in real income. Everyone is talking about the income gap. In January, at a forum sponsored by the Freedom Partners, one of the Koch Brothers' many institutions, three Republican presidential candidates all denounced income inequality, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio. Meanwhile, the Republican-controlled Congress, as you probably know, passed a bill to completely eliminate what remains of the inheritance tax. Republicans blame liberals for the inequality, though it's hard to believe that massive tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans over the last three decades don't have something to do with it. Well, what's wrong with income inequality? Haven't the rich earned their money? Well, in some cases, they actually haven't. Many of the billionaires who've been pushing American politics to the right inherited their wealth. The Koch Brothers, the Walton children, the DeVos children, the Rupert Murdoch, to name a few. Some of the self-made billionaires, including Warren Buffett, have opposed tax cuts for the rich. Buffett said, and I quote, the Secretary pays a larger portion of her income in taxes than I do, and that's wrong. And who in history has earned a billion dollars? I often ask myself this question. It kind of bothers me that Parade Magazine labels their annual survey of income, what people earn, when it's obvious to me that very often what people make has little to do with what they earn. What sort of service do you have to do for society in order to earn a billion dollars? Well, the main argument against inequality is that it's inconsistent with democracy. During the Gilded Age, more than 100 years ago, the rich simply bought the government with direct bribery. Today, it's unlimited campaign contributions and many other perks, and as former Senator Russ Feingold says, it's legalized bribery. Recent Supreme Court decisions have opened the floodgates to corporate money, as well as unlimited donations from individuals. An early Unitarian, Thomas Jefferson, wrote in 1916. He wrote this in 1816, I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country, unquote. By the way, Wisconsin has a law banning money in partisan elections, a law dating to the early 1900s, which of course is now inoperative. The Supreme Court decision that extended freedom of religion and political donations to corporations could not be more at odds with the history of the issue. Justice John Marshall, a political enemy of Thomas Jefferson, said a corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of law. Much more recently, Justice Byron White wrote, the state need not permit its own creation to consume it. And the U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2003 noted, the corrosive and distorting aggregations of wealth that are accumulated with the help of the corporate form, and that have little or no correlation to the public support for the corporation's political ideas. The court has since ignored this finding, of course. It's difficult to argue that wealth inequality doesn't affect government and society. The wealthiest 100th of 1% of the population contributes 40% of all campaign donations. The Koch brothers, David and Charles, have promised $900 million in the next election cycle to Republican candidates. And Sheldon Adelson has promised $100 million to the Republican candidate for president as long as that candidate promises unquestioning support of Israel. Adelson says that's the only issue he cares about. Most of the Republican candidates, including Scott Walker, have made the pilgrimage to Las Vegas to seek Adelman's favor. So, three men who are holding their own primary elections are going to spend a billion dollars between them to elect the candidates of their choice. To argue that this doesn't matter is to argue that advertising public relations and lobbying simply don't work. But if a majority of us are making less, how come we're still accumulating so much stuff? How much is enough? Well, for some, obviously, there's never enough wealth or power. These people may be what Buddhists call hungry ghosts who are always looking for more. Buddhism teaches that one of the sources of unhappiness is desire, because it can never be satisfied. At least not by the usual trappings of wealth and power. And therefore it leads to frustration and unhappiness. Critics have argued that our consumer and advertising-driven society is a factory for unhappiness by creating previously unrealized needs and wants, therefore increasing desire and unhappiness. Recently, I saw a television commercial which told me, you know you want a Colorado. I didn't know what a Colorado was besides the state. Turns out it's a Chevrolet pickup truck. It's true, I didn't know I wanted one. I still don't, but then I'm not the demographic that they're after. So how much is enough? The idea of replacing the gross domestic product with an index of happiness, the gross domestic happiness, if you wish, is gaining traction. One reason is that our growth rate of population is unsustainable, but that's another reflection. Of course, defining happiness is a problem. I've already said it's not the same as material wealth or comfort. Burma and some other majority Buddhist countries use a national happiness index and some South American countries have included in their constitutions the Native American concept of the good life, and some give details of what happiness means, including access to education, to clean air and water, and time for human relationships. Brazil recently added pursuit of happiness to its constitution, and the United Nations recently declared March 20th as International Happiness Day. Recent research indicates that the threshold of happiness is about $70,000 a year in the United States today. That's the point above which there is no correlation between wealth and happiness. Apparently it's not true that the more you have, the happier you are. Not always. Not surprisingly, the level of happiness among poor tends to increase with greater wealth, but even there it's not a direct correlation. Some of the poor report themselves as being happy. There's a lot of research based on self-reporting, but there's also some standardized tests for this sort of thing. Well, the question of how much is enough certainly spills over into the public area. It's the difference between individualism and collectivism. Whether government and society exist only to facilitate individual achievement and enrichment, or whether there's such a thing as the common good, which might interfere with the convenience of the individual or worse. The more extreme individualist sees a hostile world in which the individual can never achieve enough wealth and power, these two are almost synonymous, and power equates to security, a desire that seems to lead to unhappiness or even paranoia. The collectivist, however, sees the community as paramount and as the only security for the individual. Furthermore, Christianity and many other religions say the true happiness comes only from helping others. And Christianity has its roots deep in collectivism. The early Christian churches were communes. Well, while our denomination has a more individualistic slant, our forebears, as we've seen are not strict libertarians. You've no doubt heard the popular expression, he who dies with the most toys wins. I've always wondered wins what? The privilege of being the richest man in the cemetery? Andrew Carnegie said the opposite. The man who dies rich dies disgraced. Of course, Carnegie had no children. But happiness seems to be something that's inside each of us, not something dependent on external forces and situations. So that's what happiness seems to boil down to, attitude. Presumably, some billionaires are happy, some aren't. And as Abraham Lincoln said, people are about as happy as they make up their minds to be. Thank you, Jim. On the other hand, with all due respect, I'm not sure John's figure of $70,000 holds up today. An even more recent survey by Forbes magazine suggests that a dollar isn't what it used to be, and neither is $1 million apparently. That's according to 4,500 investors surveyed by Forbes who say wealth comes in at the $5 million mark. Anything under that, the chances are you won't feel wealthy. But perhaps more insightful is how they define wealth. It's not about a given amount of money. Wealth means having no financial constraints. It doesn't have a nice ring. No financial constraints. How you feel about your wealth depends on how long of you you take. As Gloria Steinem once observed, the poor make plans for Saturday night. The rich make plans for three generations. The economist James Sir Owecky once wrote an essay called Enough and ran through perceived needs as income increases. The bigger house, the two-car garage, the second car to go in it, at least for a while, the second home, the college fund, the private schooling, the top tier university, the national travel, complicated investment devices, the social demands of position, staffing problems, the clear and present need for a private jet, etc. Sir Owecky concluded convincingly that there is no such number as enough. So even Forbes respondents who say 5 million would do it may be kidding themselves. Why do we want so much? Because we are biologically programmed that way. We are animals. We need food, clothing, shelter. But what kind of food? What brand of clothing? What location of shelter? These are cultural questions, not biological ones. And we are not just animals. We are social animals. We need a sense of belonging of approval, of status. Have we learned that acquiring these may be expensive? Really expensive? Why do teachers and parents speak of the terrible twos in child development? Because by this age most kids have learned the power words. No. And mine. And a little later, but not much later, that's my property. As shopping moms quickly learn by preschool kids of a certain status are well educated in the fashion brands. What's in and what's out. Perhaps some of you have experienced this personally. So, our wanting is deeply rooted in basic primary processes. Primate processes, I meant to say. And our wantings are easily perceived as needs and even more easily rationalized. What we get, we feel entitled to. And maybe the more we get the more entitled we feel. I'm reminded of the myth of the self-made man and woman, of course. We want to believe that our hard work, our native intelligence, our unique gifts, and our competitive drive have lifted us to the place we have achieved. The myth conveniently ignores the advantages of birth, education, helping hands and lucky breaks have eased us on our way. Our social structure and our American culture valorizes competition. We reward success and bemoan the lack of success. We cheer the victors and pity the losers. We love tests, results, rankings. Our educational system seems more and more engaged in training to tests. But there are always more losers than winners. And maybe we don't look at the consequences for the larger population. As Paul the apostle, a big sports fan, put it, all who run in a race run truly, but one receives the prize. Or as Ring Lardner put it, the race is not always to the swift, but that's the way to bet. The central measure of success in America, perhaps in all first world cultures, is money. If you are paid more, you are worth more. Sports, medicine, business, dare I say politics, dare I say ministry? If you had a good year, you should be rewarded. Calvin Coolidge once complained that Ruth was paid more than he, the president. Ruth replied, I had a better year than you did. In Key Largo, a so-so bogey movie from the 40s, a Capone-like gangster played by Edward G. Robinson is asked what he wants. He's confused by the question, but Bogart knows. More. He wants more. Yeah, snarled Robinson. That's right, I want more. In a nutshell. A Dutch, excuse me, the emotion of the moment. A Dutch epigram says of happiness and despair we have no measure. Like most Dutch epigrams, it's succinct, but I'm not exactly sure what it means. I think happiness is a transitory state of euphoria where everything seems to have come round right as the hymn puts it. Steadyer, although still transitory states include contentment, satisfaction, a sense of well-being, security, but I'm suspecting that my underlined word and all that would be transitory. Maybe we should invoke some religious traditions here. In Isaiah the prophet says woe to those who add house to house and join field to field until everywhere belongs to them and they are the soul inhabitants of the land. But Jesus, frequently very harsh in speaking of the rich, eases off a little bit on a well-meaning young man who asks what he must do to gain the kingdom of heaven. Keep the commandments, said Jesus and names a few. All these I have done since I was a child the rich young man answers. Well, said Jesus, if you want to be perfect go sell what you have give to the poor and come follow me. The young man turns away sadly, says the gospel of Matthew because he was very rich. In fact, Muhammad states simply riches are not from the abundance of worldly goods but from a contented mind. But the best answer I have found on our reflections on money and moderation comes from the Buddha. The term middle way was used in the Dhamma Kaka Paravana Sutra. Yes, I practiced. The first teaching that the Buddha delivered after his awakening. In this sutra the Buddha describes the middle way as a path of moderation between the extremes of sensual indulgence and self-mortification. This according to him was the path of wisdom and he should know because he tried both the other paths. The middle way gives vision knowledge and leads to calm to insight to enlightenment. It is a noble eight fold path, namely right understanding, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. If calm, insight and enlightenment may not sound exactly like happiness, it may sound to me like a pretty good start. Right? And now, we have the collection. Do write by it. Impressive, thank you so much. I asked them earlier what you call a, what's the collective noun for a bunch of harps. There were a number of possibilities, but they settled on a circle of harps so we're going to stick with that one. Thank you so much. We turn out of the cares of the congregation. As you know, we bring to our gatherings all the cares that we carry from the outside. And although we have no specific cares this time, we certainly have had a week in which our hearts have been touched by the tragedies in our nation as our ban are outside proclaims. So let us take a moment of silence to reflect on the cares not only of ourselves, but of our nation. Thank you. May we be in peace. Now, we turn to our closing hymn. Whatever number it might be. Worthy not respectable. To listen to stars and birds, sages with open ears. To let the spiritual let this be our wish. Peace and please remain post.