President Obama's health care bill has shown up in the emergency room for extreme unction. Yet the reconciliation process--a kind of voodoo legislative zombification procedure to restore life to a captive, sedated health care bill, may yet walk the streets of the Federal District to receive winks from corporate lobbyists.
There are three economic classes of Americans; the rich, the middle class and the poor. The rich can afford any sort of health care and are fully insured. The poor generally have no health insurance and use emergency rooms a lot if they must; the middle class can afford health insurance generally, and sometimes has it through employers and other times at their own cost. They complain it is too expensive.
So the President has led an illogical effort to get more, better, cheaper, health coverage for the middle class. The middle class have a bad macro-economic rationale of consumerism. They have little savings, may have equity in a quarter million dollar home, own expensive cars that get low gas mileage and spend a lot as disposable income. Then they may get sick and want a half million dollars of medical treatment--with no savings.
People live longer than formerly and medical treatment technology has increased in skill level. It is possible to spend a lot more on medical treatment that before--yet the middle class can‘t really afford all of the treatment options then rich can. In some ways medical treatment is a commodity like that of other items, and reasonably the middle class cannot purchase the things the rich can.
So the President and the middle class believe that if they expand the ‘pool’ of health people buying insurance, but not using it, that will lower medical costs--and it might if insurance corporations did not just increase their profits as you know they would. Yet that is not the only problem. The people the President and the middle class want to recruit to add to those buying insurance are those that cannot afford medical insurance:the poor.
If there are 50 million poor, uninsured Americans that the Obama administration thinks are in America that could be paying for health coverage, or at least the middle class or rich could be paying for their health coverage--it defies reason to believe that increasing the taxpayer burden of buying medical coverage in the most expensive possible way for the nation’s poor will reduce the overall national health cost--its just plain dumb.
Four out of five of those fifty million people will annually not use the medical service at all, and the taxpayers will be paying for a free lunch windfall to health insurance corporations so that the middle class health costs might drop--there is no rational correlation that would necessitate middle class health costs decreasing by the increasing of purchase of medical insurance coverage for the poor.
Essentially, only way of providing health coverage for the 50 million poor, uninsured Americans effectively would be to create a national health service with federal physicians in a non-profit context that would treat only the poor. There is a Federal police force--the F.B.I., a federal army, a federal aviation administration--a federal health service for the poor would no more be socialist that they--it is a necessary, most cost efficient way of delivering medical treatment where needed.
When the poor no longer need to ad hoc medical coverage and can find affordable treatment just when its needed, the middle class should find lower costs when the medical industry does not need to absorb the costs of proving all that free or bad-debt treatment. At that point the middle class can deal forthrightly with their own insurance needs as a class without complications, smoke and mirrors, distractions and diversions such as the Obama Health Plan proffoists
Illegal aliens at would continue to use emergency rooms driving up middle class medical costs indirectly would continue to use emergency rooms if the poor are just insured--otherwise the middle class would need to buy medical insurance for illegal aliens too.
The middle class as a group of reasonably prosperous people should be able to buy affordable health insurance. If they are not a sickly class requiring liver transplants for debauchery pervasively, nor desirous of exotic rare treatments of elective natures generally--that is if they keep their health coverage to things that are rationally necessary and affordable, it should be no problem as some of the planets more prosperous people as a class. Many nations have better health care with less means over-all.
Like the social security system that cannot afford to pay out money to people in retirement earning more annually than average working people, a middle class cannot afford to spend more on medical treatments than it actually needs, nor perhaps can it afford to compel the nation’s poor to buy the same health coverage as the middle class with the middle class to pay for it. Understandably the poor need medical treatment--yet they do not generally need insurance before age 55. Walk-in clinics, screened referrals, advanced care for the majority of non-complicated problems can provide a public health system at lower cost than a private health system that would receive more complicated, uncommon referrals sick and injured poor screened from the public health system for the poor with Medicare kicking in..
The nation should have a medical safety net for those that are or become poor before retirement age. They should not accept the criticism and irrational excuses of the rich or their media mouthpieces such that it would be socialism. It is a necessary public service just like a police agency or food stamps, public utilities, sewer or highway departments. Only if public law enforcement is negated for being socialist might one reasonably argue that those being sick or injured should have no medical coverage of they can’t pay for it. When the chance for casualties to the rich and middle class from gunshot, laser beam or poison gas are as significant as they are for anyone else then its more fair to argue to leave the bodies where they lay groaning or rotting perhaps in the gutter.
Since Ronald Reagan left office the United States has seemingly progressed to more poiled Presidential leadership with a correlating increase of debt, moral decay, globalism, military adventurism incompetently administered. The saga of badly reasoned public health care leadership and maladroit political posturing--even demagoguery regarding socialism in health care has made the economic truth preventer have much success at avoiding the real reform needed to provide health care for the poor, keep the middle class from drowning in creating wage slavery for themselves and the poor , stop global warming, restart a renewably green economy, halt illegal alien immigration, encourage family and personal savings and so forth. Washington D.C. is more interested in gaying up the District of Columbia and the military than in balancing the federal budget. U.S. Congressmen and women that are homosexuals can know marry each other in Washington D.C.--they must be very gay about that. The Congress perhaps likes being courted by lobbyists so much that they desire proposals too.
Some talk of impeaching a President that planned for ten trillion of new public debt his first year in office as an high crime and more than a financial misdemeanor. At least the Obama-Orwellian Health Bill that would force all poor Americans to nup-date the U.S. government of their address and income continuously so the middle class can know, in theory, whose health insurance they are buying and where to send the proxy bill to return to themselves to lower their own insurance cost, can be defeated.
.
3/4/10
Globalism vs U.S. Investment in Federal Economic Policy--a comment
I think one must be cautious about arguing from the particular to the universal--it is a logical fallacy. In considering what a particular President or Congressional action has done that effects the economy--try to place it within a broader context historically to see how it fits in with the prior and subsequent economic positions of the United States; The same chess movement in different circumstances has different effects.
Here is a list of the worlds top 100 billionaires in 2009, a minority of which are Americans (34)-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_billionaires
Many of these people invest globally, are centered outside the United States, pursue policies that create a dysfunctional consumerism economy without a renewable ecological economic foundation for the United States. They have no need to be patriots of the United States striving to enrich their fellow Americans if they are Americans.
I have written a lot about this elsewhere. This is not the right place for that.
President Reagan inherited a bad post Vietnam War economy that President Carter mismanaged a little. His policies were designed to end the 'malaise', recession and so forth. The tax cuts and deficit spending were a Keynsianist approach to the max to stimulate the economy. Bush I called it 'voodoo' economics' rightly, if one considers a balanced budget as necessary.
I have written quite a bit about the media being owned by corporatists- and have supported a reallocation of the broadcast spectrum for Internet podcasts on radio frequency bursts. The technological exists already. Each citizen in a local area should be given a fair proportionate slice of dense broadcast data packing that radiowave Internet cheap am-fm digital receivers could select.
On Reagan's economic policy--For a one-term policy it did change the criterion. The trouble is that Americans became conditioned to accept it as a permanent rather than a temporary fix and became like patients addicted to pain killing narcotics piling up debt and so forth.
In the post cold war era there was no economic discipline in the Clinton administration nor Bush II; each outsourced jobs and reinforced a global approach the rich liked that was supposed to indirectly profit Americans. That was not fundamentally an intelligent belief.
The global trickle down trickled down globally--yet was not rational regarding ecological effects on local economies anywhere. The United States continued to borrow money to pay for imports and to purchase cheap consumer goods. 25% of U.S. rental properties were foreign owned. The Wall Street people became irresponsible globally in pursuit of cheap profits, and the basic infrastructure and direction of U.S. economic policy was no longer reinforced to preference of industry and opportunity for ecologically and nationally directly beneficial enterprise.
Corporatism is a political philosophy invented by the Italian Dictator Mussolini who was a socialist before inventing corporatism to synergize with fascism.
The American Eastern elite is heavily globalist via Wall Street and Government/Harvard. They own the media. It makes political, local self-determination rather complicated if not impossible. One's pockets stay empty not signed on board increasingly, and one's moral and political consciousness if subducted by the corporate totalitarian structures of power into working for them.
The administrative leadership of the U.S. Government from Bush I onward has outsourced jobs, invested overseas in China and elsewhere while letting the United States become a place to take profits from while reducing the middle class and poor to rent paying consumers with no savings.
Here is a list of the worlds top 100 billionaires in 2009, a minority of which are Americans (34)-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_billionaires
Many of these people invest globally, are centered outside the United States, pursue policies that create a dysfunctional consumerism economy without a renewable ecological economic foundation for the United States. They have no need to be patriots of the United States striving to enrich their fellow Americans if they are Americans.
I have written a lot about this elsewhere. This is not the right place for that.
President Reagan inherited a bad post Vietnam War economy that President Carter mismanaged a little. His policies were designed to end the 'malaise', recession and so forth. The tax cuts and deficit spending were a Keynsianist approach to the max to stimulate the economy. Bush I called it 'voodoo' economics' rightly, if one considers a balanced budget as necessary.
I have written quite a bit about the media being owned by corporatists- and have supported a reallocation of the broadcast spectrum for Internet podcasts on radio frequency bursts. The technological exists already. Each citizen in a local area should be given a fair proportionate slice of dense broadcast data packing that radiowave Internet cheap am-fm digital receivers could select.
On Reagan's economic policy--For a one-term policy it did change the criterion. The trouble is that Americans became conditioned to accept it as a permanent rather than a temporary fix and became like patients addicted to pain killing narcotics piling up debt and so forth.
In the post cold war era there was no economic discipline in the Clinton administration nor Bush II; each outsourced jobs and reinforced a global approach the rich liked that was supposed to indirectly profit Americans. That was not fundamentally an intelligent belief.
The global trickle down trickled down globally--yet was not rational regarding ecological effects on local economies anywhere. The United States continued to borrow money to pay for imports and to purchase cheap consumer goods. 25% of U.S. rental properties were foreign owned. The Wall Street people became irresponsible globally in pursuit of cheap profits, and the basic infrastructure and direction of U.S. economic policy was no longer reinforced to preference of industry and opportunity for ecologically and nationally directly beneficial enterprise.
Corporatism is a political philosophy invented by the Italian Dictator Mussolini who was a socialist before inventing corporatism to synergize with fascism.
The American Eastern elite is heavily globalist via Wall Street and Government/Harvard. They own the media. It makes political, local self-determination rather complicated if not impossible. One's pockets stay empty not signed on board increasingly, and one's moral and political consciousness if subducted by the corporate totalitarian structures of power into working for them.
The administrative leadership of the U.S. Government from Bush I onward has outsourced jobs, invested overseas in China and elsewhere while letting the United States become a place to take profits from while reducing the middle class and poor to rent paying consumers with no savings.
Health Reform Fiasco-End of Meaning of Marriage in Federal District of Columbia
I rather liked Soren Kierkeguaard's 'Concluding Unscientific Postscript'. If politics in the District of Columbia is run for elites, if they get in synch with Obama administration elites they can administratively force a lot of unpopular policy through. Yesterday the President said that everything that could be said about health care has been said. It must be nice to have that kind of closure decretal ability--I don't recall anyone in Congress seeking to create a public health service exclusively for the poor-a true safety net. If the poor are forced to tithe the Global Health ncorporations and provide their addresses and financial information forever than a certain notch is tightened eliminating liberty.
The middle class will have to pay for the health service for the poor anyway--at least through a reduction in services. The cheapest way to get good health services for a safety bet for the poor in absolute terms is a public health services--mint a few more doctors. They don't need to treat more than about 90% of the problems-rare things can be farmed out to medicare.
Health insurance for the poor would require continuing emergency room treatment for the uninsured illegal aliens anyway. Insurance for all the poor that aren't sick would also be unneccessary cost. Basically the middle class would be grafting the global insurance companies so they can profit by getting payments for a lot of people that are healthy--and the middle class thinks thats a way to cut health costs for themselves!
A public health service for the poor can treat the illegal aliens the government can't stop from crossing the border, and maybe can provide faster electric wheels for the Homeland Security so it can catch Speedy Gonzalez more of the time.
Corporatism is a pervasive, encroaching economic fact of life. Americans have decreasing political competence because of the layers of complexity, networking and corrupt influence over local polities. They can have luck at voting for something they thing they need to find that it is counter-productive. Globalism makes a mockery of political sovereignty and the value of enfranchisement. Concentrated wealth, media organs and a vast evil empire of corporate-communist network have evolved a very undemocratic structure over America today.
So here is some reasoning about the corruption of marriage in the District of Columbia that occurs today or tomorrow when homosexual marriage becomes law. Concluding unscientific postscripts about the decline and fall of morality are such as can be made though the McCarthyite 'tail-gunners' of defense for the homosexual vanguard fire bursts at any sort of commentators that are not in agreement with the advance of the demonic world spirit.
If reduction of the global population was the intent of the non-homosexual advocates of homosexual usurpation of marriage, homosexual assault upon marriage was a bad choice of means. It will advance social dissolution of coherent bonding such that the eventual destruction of society for clean restart is reinforced. These fair weather over-the-top corruptions create substantial dysfunctional evils is deep water storms when society discovers that its allegiances and loyalties are as dysfunctional as a broken rudder.
Defending laws as they are, that were well formed for valid, rational causes is worthwhile if one considers their veracity and service.
Homosexual assaults upon the meaning of marriage--upon it's rational meaning, forces an evil upon society pervasively.
Terms are not perfect that cover general facts-that is becoause of the synonomic/associative nature of language terms. Marriage as the procreative union is what is at the heart of the concept-to divorce the meaning entirely to mean non-procreative association generally will kill the true meaning of marriage.
Marriage need not be perfect as an institution-or it could only be awarded post hoc after children are born. To exclude procreation as the core meaning of marriage however is to eliminate the concept of marrying the egg and sperm into a blastocycst and zygote. It would be like changing the meaning of the moon program to include a cargo cult in Washington D.C.
I have found that homosexual militants preponderantly attack personally--ad hominems, in the effort to censor opposite opinions from being published. They tend to be essential factors in the decline of civilization, considering Toynbean historical cycles. from the Roman Cult of Bacchus to the homosexual leadership of Hitler's S.A. the decadent, wild, freaky instability of homosexual cadres undermining traditional social stability is notorious.
One is not 'picking' on homosexuals by defense of traditional marriage, the truth of marriage-an institution thousands of years old, from the perversion of Congress. Homosexuals are not required to expropriate marriage-to end its rational meaning, in order to secure benefits for themselves. Men are not in some way women that need to act like women in relationship with another man. If they choose to they can at least have the honesty to seek a unique label for that relationship besides marriage.
It reminds me of efforts of the rich to be called poor on tax day,for the fearless leader to say that he is just one of the guys before counting his millions, for the labeling of an interminable Iraq and Afghan nation building effort as 'war', to have a host of Orwellian use-truth falsehood labels upon every sort of honest social relationship such that honest politics are impossible for ordinary people.
The middle class will have to pay for the health service for the poor anyway--at least through a reduction in services. The cheapest way to get good health services for a safety bet for the poor in absolute terms is a public health services--mint a few more doctors. They don't need to treat more than about 90% of the problems-rare things can be farmed out to medicare.
Health insurance for the poor would require continuing emergency room treatment for the uninsured illegal aliens anyway. Insurance for all the poor that aren't sick would also be unneccessary cost. Basically the middle class would be grafting the global insurance companies so they can profit by getting payments for a lot of people that are healthy--and the middle class thinks thats a way to cut health costs for themselves!
A public health service for the poor can treat the illegal aliens the government can't stop from crossing the border, and maybe can provide faster electric wheels for the Homeland Security so it can catch Speedy Gonzalez more of the time.
Corporatism is a pervasive, encroaching economic fact of life. Americans have decreasing political competence because of the layers of complexity, networking and corrupt influence over local polities. They can have luck at voting for something they thing they need to find that it is counter-productive. Globalism makes a mockery of political sovereignty and the value of enfranchisement. Concentrated wealth, media organs and a vast evil empire of corporate-communist network have evolved a very undemocratic structure over America today.
So here is some reasoning about the corruption of marriage in the District of Columbia that occurs today or tomorrow when homosexual marriage becomes law. Concluding unscientific postscripts about the decline and fall of morality are such as can be made though the McCarthyite 'tail-gunners' of defense for the homosexual vanguard fire bursts at any sort of commentators that are not in agreement with the advance of the demonic world spirit.
If reduction of the global population was the intent of the non-homosexual advocates of homosexual usurpation of marriage, homosexual assault upon marriage was a bad choice of means. It will advance social dissolution of coherent bonding such that the eventual destruction of society for clean restart is reinforced. These fair weather over-the-top corruptions create substantial dysfunctional evils is deep water storms when society discovers that its allegiances and loyalties are as dysfunctional as a broken rudder.
Defending laws as they are, that were well formed for valid, rational causes is worthwhile if one considers their veracity and service.
Homosexual assaults upon the meaning of marriage--upon it's rational meaning, forces an evil upon society pervasively.
Terms are not perfect that cover general facts-that is becoause of the synonomic/associative nature of language terms. Marriage as the procreative union is what is at the heart of the concept-to divorce the meaning entirely to mean non-procreative association generally will kill the true meaning of marriage.
Marriage need not be perfect as an institution-or it could only be awarded post hoc after children are born. To exclude procreation as the core meaning of marriage however is to eliminate the concept of marrying the egg and sperm into a blastocycst and zygote. It would be like changing the meaning of the moon program to include a cargo cult in Washington D.C.
I have found that homosexual militants preponderantly attack personally--ad hominems, in the effort to censor opposite opinions from being published. They tend to be essential factors in the decline of civilization, considering Toynbean historical cycles. from the Roman Cult of Bacchus to the homosexual leadership of Hitler's S.A. the decadent, wild, freaky instability of homosexual cadres undermining traditional social stability is notorious.
One is not 'picking' on homosexuals by defense of traditional marriage, the truth of marriage-an institution thousands of years old, from the perversion of Congress. Homosexuals are not required to expropriate marriage-to end its rational meaning, in order to secure benefits for themselves. Men are not in some way women that need to act like women in relationship with another man. If they choose to they can at least have the honesty to seek a unique label for that relationship besides marriage.
It reminds me of efforts of the rich to be called poor on tax day,for the fearless leader to say that he is just one of the guys before counting his millions, for the labeling of an interminable Iraq and Afghan nation building effort as 'war', to have a host of Orwellian use-truth falsehood labels upon every sort of honest social relationship such that honest politics are impossible for ordinary people.
3/3/10
Nancy House of Congress Perverts Marriage in D.C., Bungles Health Reform
The U.S. House of Representatives has allowed homosexual marriage to become law in the Federal District of Columbia. Along with the effort in the Health Bill to force the nation's poor and uninsured to buy insurance from wealthy global corporations, the primary assault by the Democratic Party on traditional American common sense continues to spend its force like a tsunami with its elite and singular endowment of power.
A last minute reconciliation bill approach requiring just a simple majority to compel expensive, inefficient and neo-authoritarian conditions of tracking of the poor, the homeless, the oppressed about the nation instead of creating a practical walk-in national health service for the poor adds to the perfidious construction of global corporate control of the U.S. Government.
The high cost of health care is just one element in the post-cold war abandonment of responsibility and intellect by the U.S. Congress in the frenzied greed to profit from the end of the cold war and expansion of global corporate profit taking. With the demise of labor unions, the degradation of U.S. labor wages, concentration of wealth and stagnation and decline of real income for the majority of the middle class and poor the leverage on health costs was an inevitable step in the end of democratic pragmatism. The U.S. Congress-an institution by and for the rich these days, has yet a host of sympathizers of the poor who estimate what the poor should need, and what it might be like to be uninsured and injured. Pain was evolved such that sleeping mammals might awaken from sleep if a predator started nibbling on one's extremities.
The Congress has decided that the poor need the same sort of purchasing of insurance from the rich that the middle class has and can't afford--the middle class and rich can pay for the insurance. Lost in the reasoning is the fundamentally bad negotiating position the Congress continues to advance for the poor and middle class in economics and politics. A national health service for the poor would not lower health costs for the middle class directly--yet it would make a most cost effective delivery of medical services to the uninsured poor. The middle class must find their own path to lowering their health costs.
A last minute reconciliation bill approach requiring just a simple majority to compel expensive, inefficient and neo-authoritarian conditions of tracking of the poor, the homeless, the oppressed about the nation instead of creating a practical walk-in national health service for the poor adds to the perfidious construction of global corporate control of the U.S. Government.
The high cost of health care is just one element in the post-cold war abandonment of responsibility and intellect by the U.S. Congress in the frenzied greed to profit from the end of the cold war and expansion of global corporate profit taking. With the demise of labor unions, the degradation of U.S. labor wages, concentration of wealth and stagnation and decline of real income for the majority of the middle class and poor the leverage on health costs was an inevitable step in the end of democratic pragmatism. The U.S. Congress-an institution by and for the rich these days, has yet a host of sympathizers of the poor who estimate what the poor should need, and what it might be like to be uninsured and injured. Pain was evolved such that sleeping mammals might awaken from sleep if a predator started nibbling on one's extremities.
The Congress has decided that the poor need the same sort of purchasing of insurance from the rich that the middle class has and can't afford--the middle class and rich can pay for the insurance. Lost in the reasoning is the fundamentally bad negotiating position the Congress continues to advance for the poor and middle class in economics and politics. A national health service for the poor would not lower health costs for the middle class directly--yet it would make a most cost effective delivery of medical services to the uninsured poor. The middle class must find their own path to lowering their health costs.
3/1/10
Sin Amplified in Global Financial Networks
I thought I would write something about the new non-locality of financial sin. Since the increase of telecommunications globally and of planetary financial networking, traditional local financial sins have found new realms to romp through for plundering the people. Since the wicked may most desire wealth without social regard, a false interpretation of Adam Smith's quarter millenia old economic philosophy is used as a gospel for plundering the people and is presented as one false alternative-the only authorized alternative-- to the evil of communist totalitarianism. In such a political environment without much reason sin flourishes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diner's_dilemma
The Diner's dilemma and The Prisoner's dilemma are gaming strategies for exploiting best in a social environment. Each strategy applies to the evolutionary pressures to plunder the global financial and global production and eco-resource environments too. Sinners must out-profit other sinners without regard before the potential pot for plundering is depleted. I will not provide too much detail on the topic, being an unemployed house repainter myself--yet giving this topic some consideration before I move on to other issues by force of circumstance is worthwhile.
Sin has been with humanity since its emergence in the mists of time. It became formalized as deleterious human activity in the Bible. Humanity could recognize the patterns of conduct--actual ethical practices of evil, that lead to social anomie, injustice and strife. For most of human history sin was a local phenomena and was thus contained.
That is no longer the case. Sin has been liberated and spans the globe through telecommunications and transport. A disease forming from chimps with retroviruses up a vaguely named river in the challenged jungles of the Congo may be spread to Washington D.C. within days. Networks of financial crime may be established through originally well meaning establishments of business transaction to permit global culling of innocent investors. Sin has entered a new age where it is not contained by the plain geographic isolation and independence of business practices.
A kind of four-dimensional global financial chess game is played with the nations and corporations being the independently moving pieces seeking to win all capital for themselves. They are reluctantly moved by politicians and popular revolutionary pressures, yet the world people and environment are the losers for allowing the game to proceed--what is needed is restricted capital concentration by individuals and corporations such that competition and intelligence are required to win in a non-lethal business environmemmnt with just rules.
With new liberated opportunity for financial sin--with the transformation through Wall Street and other global investment venues of materially productive factories into units of billion and trillion dollar gambling and Rube Goldberg schemes of deception and perfidy limited only by the financial cunning and skills of economic innovators the world's firewalls of geographical security have been breached. The recent economic slump in much of the world's economic regions is a result of the rash, driving, plundering of all associated with the political-financial networks who have an implicit vulnerability to victimization by the financial manipulation and transaction classes.
Global networking and freeing up of mortgages and assets, real property and capital such that it is a liquid sea of cold mercury presents innumerable temptations and opportunities for financial sin. Traditionally only the good side of networking and mass marketing is advertised, yet the dark side of the financial network force is equally powerful and may bring the United States to financial ruin. Networking in sundry forms reduces the privacy and independent nature of business. Large corporations with tens of thousands of employees reduce competition. The global stock ownership class creates a de facto elitist corporate hegemony over democratic politics. Democracy and the environment are endangered. It is the amplification of sin from the local to the networked global level that has perhaps transformed the global business elite into being partners inn financial sin with the demonic spiritual realm that formerly was generally limited to imperial rulers, military generals and a rare few others.
In a 19th century kind of western civilization those business people that were financially unethical were restricted in there opportunities to plunder the people. Today global traders, investors and schemers must compete with each other to skim as much capital as possible from that liquid, mercurial abstract commodity below the surface of the everyday world. The financial war is perhaps more extreme than the military technology race I would think, as the fruits the management-owner class pursue are ownership of everything on Earth.
Many of us have experienced our own personal crystalnachts of small scale and diluted form when a corporation has decided its time to cash in and confiscate our personal profits and intellectual capital investments--these are trifling troubles in comparison to the vast evil empire of sin assaulting the global local property interests like a host of Genghis Khan's elites with M.B.A.'s from Harvard.
Human beings have off-line blood supply. If all human beings shared one blood circulatory system, one virus or illness might kill everyone. The world business and financial networks in many respects have that same vulnerability. It may be offended from innumerable unforeseen causes.
If corporations were limited to three thousand employees and if individuals could own stock of just three corporations it would help to place firewalls in the world economic and business order. There should also be firewalls in innumerable financial institutions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diner's_dilemma
The Diner's dilemma and The Prisoner's dilemma are gaming strategies for exploiting best in a social environment. Each strategy applies to the evolutionary pressures to plunder the global financial and global production and eco-resource environments too. Sinners must out-profit other sinners without regard before the potential pot for plundering is depleted. I will not provide too much detail on the topic, being an unemployed house repainter myself--yet giving this topic some consideration before I move on to other issues by force of circumstance is worthwhile.
Sin has been with humanity since its emergence in the mists of time. It became formalized as deleterious human activity in the Bible. Humanity could recognize the patterns of conduct--actual ethical practices of evil, that lead to social anomie, injustice and strife. For most of human history sin was a local phenomena and was thus contained.
That is no longer the case. Sin has been liberated and spans the globe through telecommunications and transport. A disease forming from chimps with retroviruses up a vaguely named river in the challenged jungles of the Congo may be spread to Washington D.C. within days. Networks of financial crime may be established through originally well meaning establishments of business transaction to permit global culling of innocent investors. Sin has entered a new age where it is not contained by the plain geographic isolation and independence of business practices.
A kind of four-dimensional global financial chess game is played with the nations and corporations being the independently moving pieces seeking to win all capital for themselves. They are reluctantly moved by politicians and popular revolutionary pressures, yet the world people and environment are the losers for allowing the game to proceed--what is needed is restricted capital concentration by individuals and corporations such that competition and intelligence are required to win in a non-lethal business environmemmnt with just rules.
With new liberated opportunity for financial sin--with the transformation through Wall Street and other global investment venues of materially productive factories into units of billion and trillion dollar gambling and Rube Goldberg schemes of deception and perfidy limited only by the financial cunning and skills of economic innovators the world's firewalls of geographical security have been breached. The recent economic slump in much of the world's economic regions is a result of the rash, driving, plundering of all associated with the political-financial networks who have an implicit vulnerability to victimization by the financial manipulation and transaction classes.
Global networking and freeing up of mortgages and assets, real property and capital such that it is a liquid sea of cold mercury presents innumerable temptations and opportunities for financial sin. Traditionally only the good side of networking and mass marketing is advertised, yet the dark side of the financial network force is equally powerful and may bring the United States to financial ruin. Networking in sundry forms reduces the privacy and independent nature of business. Large corporations with tens of thousands of employees reduce competition. The global stock ownership class creates a de facto elitist corporate hegemony over democratic politics. Democracy and the environment are endangered. It is the amplification of sin from the local to the networked global level that has perhaps transformed the global business elite into being partners inn financial sin with the demonic spiritual realm that formerly was generally limited to imperial rulers, military generals and a rare few others.
In a 19th century kind of western civilization those business people that were financially unethical were restricted in there opportunities to plunder the people. Today global traders, investors and schemers must compete with each other to skim as much capital as possible from that liquid, mercurial abstract commodity below the surface of the everyday world. The financial war is perhaps more extreme than the military technology race I would think, as the fruits the management-owner class pursue are ownership of everything on Earth.
Many of us have experienced our own personal crystalnachts of small scale and diluted form when a corporation has decided its time to cash in and confiscate our personal profits and intellectual capital investments--these are trifling troubles in comparison to the vast evil empire of sin assaulting the global local property interests like a host of Genghis Khan's elites with M.B.A.'s from Harvard.
Human beings have off-line blood supply. If all human beings shared one blood circulatory system, one virus or illness might kill everyone. The world business and financial networks in many respects have that same vulnerability. It may be offended from innumerable unforeseen causes.
If corporations were limited to three thousand employees and if individuals could own stock of just three corporations it would help to place firewalls in the world economic and business order. There should also be firewalls in innumerable financial institutions.
2/28/10
Networks of Sin and Wickedness
That's a snappy title-maybe someone will read it for or ignore it for that. The topics of sin and wickedness are highly subjective topics. We know about ethical definitions for sin and wickedness--some have their own, others share an ontology of meaning and others are agnostic on right and wrong--the U.S. Congress for example has a net ambivalence about the need to reform health care for the benefit of the poor right away--its all about the middle class and the rich instead.
In the brave new world the poor will need to pay the rich for health insurance and the middle class will have public debt added in their name--the rich will get tax cuts and corporations pay no taxes anyway--it is written in instant message script. There must be a network of sin and wickedness in there somewhere. Yet we must move on...
The poor and their free or cheap software may be controlled by hidden code in the word processors of politics--these are not open source documents that transfer transparently from notepad to msword to open office, Google docs and yahoo things--only joking! Everything gets cut up, blocked and disappeared in such integrations of writing modalities. Microsoft's software proprietary needs places walls in the Internet world difficult for some to overcome. I don't blame them, yet it is exemplary of the problems with the elitist side of politics and software for legislative combinations producing nothing except public opportunity cost for time lost.
The world's poor, if on-line with cheaper, better, faster waterproof Internet technology will likely find a universe of politi-techical obstructions and software conditioning walls from the Communist Party of China to the Italian elites distrustful of political free speech on the Internet--and I don't blame them because the Internet is a kind of natural redistributor of free speech access and dissolvant compound for exclusive control of public thought...Much sin will be used and infused to repress the masses and restrict access to political control of rights to exhaust finite natural resources irresponsibly (they will say they are responsible)
If Satan is a real power, then the increase of sin would be a Satanic goal I would imagine; the more sin flourishes the easier it is to accomplish egregious wickedness in society and politics. A good corrupt political swamp has minions of corruption at all levels who have learned that virtue and democratic rights for all equally are quaint concepts. Many regimes on Earth validate the presence of evil, and Satan may be gaining strength in that regard even though it is an ephemeral increase of power that perishes in the bright light and heat of God and the Day ahead.
Sin may be like a tide that rolls in making all the ships of sophisticated wickedness in the harbor rise. Sin in one places enables wickedness in others. It is not necessary to be judgmental regarding sin--simply abstain from it-resist wickedness yourself so far as possible and do not wire up new connections for evil such that the increase of newtworks of sin tie up the world.
To brake up the hogtied society subjugated by sophisticated powers of wickedness and sin requires a cutting of the Gordian knots of evil that bind the decent human impulses and inalienable rights of civil liberties each individual has. Philosophically wickedness may be all those things that drive mankind towards the brink of chaos and disasters of sundry sorts--sin-not just the obvious sins such as theft and homosexuality, adultery, murder and so forth, but the less obvious ones such as avarice (greed), gluttony etc. make mankind less trusting and less willing to solve mass social challenges successfully.
The world may be headed towards several disasters-even in Haiti steel pipe geodesic domes approved by the Fuller Institute are not being prioritized for construction--instead wood and plastic instant boxy slummier housing than donating countries are going up--there are innumerable economic and political sins that together strengthen the networks of sin and wickedness that could be associated with a planet-wide real-politik misery index. The reduction of the misery and sin index requires simultaneous advances and not with violence and persecutions either.
--post script
Someone usefully commented that entitlements may be considered to be a pervasive evil. I thought I would consider the topic of entitlements a little here in order to try to define what they are...
Entitlements must be perjoratively all those things that one has or uses yet does noot supply for-oneself. That would include not only those receiving government payments such as Medicare, social security, veterans benefits and so forth, but also things like airports, traffic signals, schools and any accumulated public infrastructure that one has not paid for oneself but feels entitled to. The list may be quite lengthy.
Some 'entitlements' are necessary; one is entitled to good police and fire protection most may think, or to a good military defense--one wants good chefs and hospitals and good highways rather than those with potholes. One is entitled to a good government that runs a balanced budget while supplying all the aforementioned and doesn't get it; so that I may reasonably ask; What is the social reasoning for having a good society-is that an entitlement?
A good society is not just a matter of switching word-terms about and blaming this or that imbalance--it is a matter of public intelligence and will equal to the challenging era eco-politically in which they live. A millionaire is one that owned a mill and had plenty--he or she had a lot of paper credits for being an owner of a productive fact (ory). A healthy society sets real goals (L.B.J. tried with The Great Society) to achieve within the actual means at its disposal--it is not simply a matter of possessing paper cash loaned by productive societies.
To achieve quality lifestyles and plentiful opportunities for all U.S. citizens within a stable population, with secure borders, with a recovering ecosystem and the proverbial liberty and justice for all requires intention and political will. A lassez fair attitude toward democratic responsibility in the present global demographic environment is a recipe for disaster.
Writing on a cosmology thread--someone used the term 1 to -1 to describe a relationship of the presence of quanta in the vacuum before the big bang. The problem of a terminology to describe real political space is absent in the United States today. Cash or capital power is the basic entitlement as an abstract moral right, it is held by some.
Yet cash and personal power to have property are civil determined by force. It may be the intellectual force of an enlightened democratic electorate or a guy with a totaliitarian control of nuclear weapons. In a limited, finite geo-political area orderly change and universal political liberty for the greatest number of people must be a fundamental entitlement for-itself.
Defining terms, and understanding them as well as the true social intentions of others, are essential for the effort to assure that corrupt social and political hegemony is cut back and contained.
Terms such as entitlement are perhaps referents to government pay-outs of tax money to people such as retirees, veterans, the disabled corporate contractors and so forth. Sin however is far more fundamental and subtle--why did the bad reconstruction for Iraq occur causing two trillion dollars of subsequent expense, why did the Wall Street Mortgage crisis occur?
A bad social environment steeped in sin and networks of wickedness stimulates the promulgation of legislation that is only less bad than others instead of being forthright and neccesary corrections beneficial for the public interest.
In the brave new world the poor will need to pay the rich for health insurance and the middle class will have public debt added in their name--the rich will get tax cuts and corporations pay no taxes anyway--it is written in instant message script. There must be a network of sin and wickedness in there somewhere. Yet we must move on...
The poor and their free or cheap software may be controlled by hidden code in the word processors of politics--these are not open source documents that transfer transparently from notepad to msword to open office, Google docs and yahoo things--only joking! Everything gets cut up, blocked and disappeared in such integrations of writing modalities. Microsoft's software proprietary needs places walls in the Internet world difficult for some to overcome. I don't blame them, yet it is exemplary of the problems with the elitist side of politics and software for legislative combinations producing nothing except public opportunity cost for time lost.
The world's poor, if on-line with cheaper, better, faster waterproof Internet technology will likely find a universe of politi-techical obstructions and software conditioning walls from the Communist Party of China to the Italian elites distrustful of political free speech on the Internet--and I don't blame them because the Internet is a kind of natural redistributor of free speech access and dissolvant compound for exclusive control of public thought...Much sin will be used and infused to repress the masses and restrict access to political control of rights to exhaust finite natural resources irresponsibly (they will say they are responsible)
If Satan is a real power, then the increase of sin would be a Satanic goal I would imagine; the more sin flourishes the easier it is to accomplish egregious wickedness in society and politics. A good corrupt political swamp has minions of corruption at all levels who have learned that virtue and democratic rights for all equally are quaint concepts. Many regimes on Earth validate the presence of evil, and Satan may be gaining strength in that regard even though it is an ephemeral increase of power that perishes in the bright light and heat of God and the Day ahead.
Sin may be like a tide that rolls in making all the ships of sophisticated wickedness in the harbor rise. Sin in one places enables wickedness in others. It is not necessary to be judgmental regarding sin--simply abstain from it-resist wickedness yourself so far as possible and do not wire up new connections for evil such that the increase of newtworks of sin tie up the world.
To brake up the hogtied society subjugated by sophisticated powers of wickedness and sin requires a cutting of the Gordian knots of evil that bind the decent human impulses and inalienable rights of civil liberties each individual has. Philosophically wickedness may be all those things that drive mankind towards the brink of chaos and disasters of sundry sorts--sin-not just the obvious sins such as theft and homosexuality, adultery, murder and so forth, but the less obvious ones such as avarice (greed), gluttony etc. make mankind less trusting and less willing to solve mass social challenges successfully.
The world may be headed towards several disasters-even in Haiti steel pipe geodesic domes approved by the Fuller Institute are not being prioritized for construction--instead wood and plastic instant boxy slummier housing than donating countries are going up--there are innumerable economic and political sins that together strengthen the networks of sin and wickedness that could be associated with a planet-wide real-politik misery index. The reduction of the misery and sin index requires simultaneous advances and not with violence and persecutions either.
--post script
Someone usefully commented that entitlements may be considered to be a pervasive evil. I thought I would consider the topic of entitlements a little here in order to try to define what they are...
Entitlements must be perjoratively all those things that one has or uses yet does noot supply for-oneself. That would include not only those receiving government payments such as Medicare, social security, veterans benefits and so forth, but also things like airports, traffic signals, schools and any accumulated public infrastructure that one has not paid for oneself but feels entitled to. The list may be quite lengthy.
Some 'entitlements' are necessary; one is entitled to good police and fire protection most may think, or to a good military defense--one wants good chefs and hospitals and good highways rather than those with potholes. One is entitled to a good government that runs a balanced budget while supplying all the aforementioned and doesn't get it; so that I may reasonably ask; What is the social reasoning for having a good society-is that an entitlement?
A good society is not just a matter of switching word-terms about and blaming this or that imbalance--it is a matter of public intelligence and will equal to the challenging era eco-politically in which they live. A millionaire is one that owned a mill and had plenty--he or she had a lot of paper credits for being an owner of a productive fact (ory). A healthy society sets real goals (L.B.J. tried with The Great Society) to achieve within the actual means at its disposal--it is not simply a matter of possessing paper cash loaned by productive societies.
To achieve quality lifestyles and plentiful opportunities for all U.S. citizens within a stable population, with secure borders, with a recovering ecosystem and the proverbial liberty and justice for all requires intention and political will. A lassez fair attitude toward democratic responsibility in the present global demographic environment is a recipe for disaster.
Writing on a cosmology thread--someone used the term 1 to -1 to describe a relationship of the presence of quanta in the vacuum before the big bang. The problem of a terminology to describe real political space is absent in the United States today. Cash or capital power is the basic entitlement as an abstract moral right, it is held by some.
Yet cash and personal power to have property are civil determined by force. It may be the intellectual force of an enlightened democratic electorate or a guy with a totaliitarian control of nuclear weapons. In a limited, finite geo-political area orderly change and universal political liberty for the greatest number of people must be a fundamental entitlement for-itself.
Defining terms, and understanding them as well as the true social intentions of others, are essential for the effort to assure that corrupt social and political hegemony is cut back and contained.
Terms such as entitlement are perhaps referents to government pay-outs of tax money to people such as retirees, veterans, the disabled corporate contractors and so forth. Sin however is far more fundamental and subtle--why did the bad reconstruction for Iraq occur causing two trillion dollars of subsequent expense, why did the Wall Street Mortgage crisis occur?
A bad social environment steeped in sin and networks of wickedness stimulates the promulgation of legislation that is only less bad than others instead of being forthright and neccesary corrections beneficial for the public interest.
2/26/10
Internet Writer's Security Seems Shaky and Subject to Corporate/Government Manipulation
The trouble with the internet for economics is that things just disappear when the wrong people will it so. If all of macro-economics were so flimsy material progress would be difficult. Security for writers, publishers of videos and so forth need to have a secure medium with no loss of material uploaded.
Farmers and others commonly experience vicissitudes of weather, yet the internet should have a goal fundamentally of zero loss of material other than what the authors remove themselves. WebPages such as Helium.com that permanently confiscate earnings without any sort of prior notice are exemplary of the unreliability, volatility and vulnerability of the Internet for writers and independent publishers. There should be more plain legal rights that are more standardized and arbitrated--a pay pal sort of legal medium without the money that writers can place their material in for security before signing aboard a publisher page--that is if the publisher page such as Helium has not got the blue ribbon of participation in the neutral writer assurance media, the writers would know they are undeserving of trust.
Writers should have all of their material backed up automatically through the facility of the neutral writer/publisher assurance media, the writer's earnings should never be confiscated, and termination for using Marxian secret words or politically incorrect language should be in a transparent, standardized, graduate way such that the writer can have assurance that the same word use policies regarding 'death-monkey' account status exist from one web-page to another.
Without such 'farming insurance’ policy for web writers and video publishers, corrupt corporate and hacker thugs will make a mockery of independence--and that's just the way it is.
Farmers and others commonly experience vicissitudes of weather, yet the internet should have a goal fundamentally of zero loss of material other than what the authors remove themselves. WebPages such as Helium.com that permanently confiscate earnings without any sort of prior notice are exemplary of the unreliability, volatility and vulnerability of the Internet for writers and independent publishers. There should be more plain legal rights that are more standardized and arbitrated--a pay pal sort of legal medium without the money that writers can place their material in for security before signing aboard a publisher page--that is if the publisher page such as Helium has not got the blue ribbon of participation in the neutral writer assurance media, the writers would know they are undeserving of trust.
Writers should have all of their material backed up automatically through the facility of the neutral writer/publisher assurance media, the writer's earnings should never be confiscated, and termination for using Marxian secret words or politically incorrect language should be in a transparent, standardized, graduate way such that the writer can have assurance that the same word use policies regarding 'death-monkey' account status exist from one web-page to another.
Without such 'farming insurance’ policy for web writers and video publishers, corrupt corporate and hacker thugs will make a mockery of independence--and that's just the way it is.
2/25/10
Health Care Summit-Charybdis and Scylla Fight over National Health Care, Seek to Create Orwellian State
In my humble opinion, the efforts of the Democrat and Republican parties to reform health care are like ravens and seagulls fighting over a crust of bread. Each party is hungry to profit yet neither is thinking about the interests of the Eagles that aren’t so good at ground fighting or sparrows that don’t want much more than a very small portion when the larger birds are gone. Both parties are representatives for the rich and upper classes owning the corporate health care systems-the poor of the United States are mostly left out except as excuses for more totalitarianism and profit for the social phenomena of developmental corporatism.
Adam Smith believed that left to their own supervision, individuals investing their own capital could do no harm and that regulation was inevitably bad. That was generally true in the 18th century when corporations did not yet exist and the environment and finite resources weren’t issue. Today Smith’s paradigm obviously is wrong in part, considering that the magical potion of capital investment does not inevitably produce good nor is incapable of producing evil. From stuck gas vehicle accelerators to Minimata chemical dumping, from Three Mile Island, to flammable kids pajamas it is possible to produce bad things with capital. When capital is controlled by an extreme minority universally through intercorporate stock ownership a creeping neo-authoritarian state is produced. Adam Smith was not a science fiction writer in the genre of sci-fi-economic theories of the 21st century--he had no idea what the future would do to morph up his practical theories of the era when monarchy and aristocracy sought to control all business and trade.
Corporate health care can produce good and bad results; while the medical technology produced by humanity generally accretes regardless of the system (one can read Solzhenitsyn’s ‘The Cancer Ward’ and learn of the evolution of experimental radiological dosage for cancer in Soviet institutions in the 1050’s and 60’s), economic evolution of social and political forms contemporaneously occurs too. Constructing a large corporate state that tracks each U.S. citizen requiring of all that they pay a global corporation for health insurance is an ineffective evolution as far as democracy and individualism goes--for it establishes a de facto corporatist state.
The Democratic party lost its ability to stand up for fundamental principles after the loss of Tip O’Neil as Speaker of the House. It became eventually a moll--a mildly protesting accomplice of Bush II era deficit spending on the Iraq reconstruction quagmire. During the Clinton years it allowed home to be turned into ATM machines and Wall Street to run amuck while outsourcing industry to China. Neither did it forthrightly defend the U.S. Mexican border after 9-11 will a total environmental control zone of berms and saltwater canals to create a recreational atmosphere with no passage of illegals through the challenging course.
Such a control of illegal aliens was necessary for health care reform if the flow of illegals to emergency rooms were to dry up; that create huge costs for the health care system that will not end through an insurance program for all American citizens once they have the government tracking dog-radio frequency collar of mandatory insurance attached. Myself-I haven’t afforded rental of a mailbox in more than a decade, and the government would guarantee paying insurance payments for me I suppose under the Democratic plan. I can say that the Orwellian health plan that would make transfer payment to the rich is another bad idea.
Most of the poor that are less than 40 are healthy and don’t need insurance--they need health care when they are sick or injured. The best way to do that is to create a national medical system for the poor in families or as individuals earning below the poverty level annually. For the least amount of public cost coverage of the poor would be created, and it could also treat illegal aliens until the flow is halted.
A few words more about the health care system for the nation’s poor and the reasoning for it being the most cost-effective way to go…The actual doctors reacquired quantitatively to treat the health issues of the poor will be the same regardless of who pays for it or where they are treated in the U.S.A. Hiring federal staff doctors to treat physical problems for the poor in general areas, referring specialty issues out to the Medicare structure and private physicians, will eliminate the need to pay for all those poor that are not sick or injured each month with insurance payments. The poor will yet have quality medical care available should they need it, and the public will not have to have their insurance rates increase because of the large numbers of poor people using or abusing the system with unnecessary visits through an expensive process of personal medical coverage. The federal health system should have a competent functioning structure to treat the most common problems, would be able to outsource patients without the common problems, and would have a good demographic idea of what the annual uses of the system will be.
In Alaska some of the legislators in sessions are presently trying to raise the ceiling on reporting of gift dinners from lobbyists from $15 dollars per day to perhaps $50. Legislators in the U.S. want to live high off the hog and haven’t the drive to survive as lean, mean, fighting machines so far as creating a democratic society goes. The nation runs vast deficits, gets involved in protracted for reconstruction efforts of things they have destroyed, and special interests profit thus killing the stimulus to think of effective ways to get things done with a profit or at least without debt. Tip O’Neil would not have been ashamed of creating a national health care system for the poor, nor considered it socialism to do so.
Democracy can allow some large structures to exist. The outsized for Smith capitalism scale of global corporations should be reduced to a size of just 3000 employees per corporation to create a better challenge-response change and adaptation to environmental conditions criterion also more manageable for democracy. It should create a national health care structure for the poor while trying to eliminate poverty.
Adam Smith believed that left to their own supervision, individuals investing their own capital could do no harm and that regulation was inevitably bad. That was generally true in the 18th century when corporations did not yet exist and the environment and finite resources weren’t issue. Today Smith’s paradigm obviously is wrong in part, considering that the magical potion of capital investment does not inevitably produce good nor is incapable of producing evil. From stuck gas vehicle accelerators to Minimata chemical dumping, from Three Mile Island, to flammable kids pajamas it is possible to produce bad things with capital. When capital is controlled by an extreme minority universally through intercorporate stock ownership a creeping neo-authoritarian state is produced. Adam Smith was not a science fiction writer in the genre of sci-fi-economic theories of the 21st century--he had no idea what the future would do to morph up his practical theories of the era when monarchy and aristocracy sought to control all business and trade.
Corporate health care can produce good and bad results; while the medical technology produced by humanity generally accretes regardless of the system (one can read Solzhenitsyn’s ‘The Cancer Ward’ and learn of the evolution of experimental radiological dosage for cancer in Soviet institutions in the 1050’s and 60’s), economic evolution of social and political forms contemporaneously occurs too. Constructing a large corporate state that tracks each U.S. citizen requiring of all that they pay a global corporation for health insurance is an ineffective evolution as far as democracy and individualism goes--for it establishes a de facto corporatist state.
The Democratic party lost its ability to stand up for fundamental principles after the loss of Tip O’Neil as Speaker of the House. It became eventually a moll--a mildly protesting accomplice of Bush II era deficit spending on the Iraq reconstruction quagmire. During the Clinton years it allowed home to be turned into ATM machines and Wall Street to run amuck while outsourcing industry to China. Neither did it forthrightly defend the U.S. Mexican border after 9-11 will a total environmental control zone of berms and saltwater canals to create a recreational atmosphere with no passage of illegals through the challenging course.
Such a control of illegal aliens was necessary for health care reform if the flow of illegals to emergency rooms were to dry up; that create huge costs for the health care system that will not end through an insurance program for all American citizens once they have the government tracking dog-radio frequency collar of mandatory insurance attached. Myself-I haven’t afforded rental of a mailbox in more than a decade, and the government would guarantee paying insurance payments for me I suppose under the Democratic plan. I can say that the Orwellian health plan that would make transfer payment to the rich is another bad idea.
Most of the poor that are less than 40 are healthy and don’t need insurance--they need health care when they are sick or injured. The best way to do that is to create a national medical system for the poor in families or as individuals earning below the poverty level annually. For the least amount of public cost coverage of the poor would be created, and it could also treat illegal aliens until the flow is halted.
A few words more about the health care system for the nation’s poor and the reasoning for it being the most cost-effective way to go…The actual doctors reacquired quantitatively to treat the health issues of the poor will be the same regardless of who pays for it or where they are treated in the U.S.A. Hiring federal staff doctors to treat physical problems for the poor in general areas, referring specialty issues out to the Medicare structure and private physicians, will eliminate the need to pay for all those poor that are not sick or injured each month with insurance payments. The poor will yet have quality medical care available should they need it, and the public will not have to have their insurance rates increase because of the large numbers of poor people using or abusing the system with unnecessary visits through an expensive process of personal medical coverage. The federal health system should have a competent functioning structure to treat the most common problems, would be able to outsource patients without the common problems, and would have a good demographic idea of what the annual uses of the system will be.
In Alaska some of the legislators in sessions are presently trying to raise the ceiling on reporting of gift dinners from lobbyists from $15 dollars per day to perhaps $50. Legislators in the U.S. want to live high off the hog and haven’t the drive to survive as lean, mean, fighting machines so far as creating a democratic society goes. The nation runs vast deficits, gets involved in protracted for reconstruction efforts of things they have destroyed, and special interests profit thus killing the stimulus to think of effective ways to get things done with a profit or at least without debt. Tip O’Neil would not have been ashamed of creating a national health care system for the poor, nor considered it socialism to do so.
Democracy can allow some large structures to exist. The outsized for Smith capitalism scale of global corporations should be reduced to a size of just 3000 employees per corporation to create a better challenge-response change and adaptation to environmental conditions criterion also more manageable for democracy. It should create a national health care structure for the poor while trying to eliminate poverty.
2/24/10
Steel Pipe Geodesic Dome Project for Haiti Before Hurricane Season?
With more than a half a million homeless Haitians the need for a standardized quality steel-pipe geodesic home construction project is apparent. The fundamental frame can be made quite easily crushing pipe ends and through-bolting them according to some models, and the geodesic home frames can survive Hurricanes and Earthquakes with the virtue of being transparent, standard forms suitable for a coordinated international relief effort right away. Rust-proof painting of the steel pipe is useful.
It should be possible to ship a few loads of steel pipe to Haiti for local fabrication under supervision of dome construction specialists, local Haitian authorities and the U.N. Perhaps the Toyota corporation can spare a boatload of steel pipe, and perhaps China. The top steel pipe producers today may have some slack inventory with the global recession. The United States still has bolt manufacturers--this is an opportunity for upgrading the second and third world's inventory of modern American housing--Buckminster Fuller was a college professor in North Carolina.
The next disaster may be just a few months away in Port-Au-Prince when Hurricane season arrives. A quality geodesic dome may be assembled in just a day and later covered with plastic, fiberglass coated plywood with pipe fasteners, built up with epoxy layers or a variety of other solid sheeting from aluminum to composites. The dome frames may be set on tires and anchored into the ground, and a concrete floor might be poured later.
http://www.geodomehome.com/
http://www.dragishak.com/dome/dome.html
http://www.fiea.ucf.edu/~mgourlay/dome/
http://www.geo-dome.co.uk/
http://www.eham.net/articles/11300
http://www.scribd.com/doc/22633447/Geodesic-Dome-Plans
An international geodesic home construction project for Haiti could produce pipe sections of the right lengths locally from imported steel. Perhaps a regular job program manufacturing pre-fabricated domes could be an ongoing local industry. I think it would be the best quality at the lowest cost for ordinary homeless Haitians new home program that might be started.
Air ventilators may be built into the homes for cooling along with solar powered electric fans in ventilators. Steel pipe domes may be coated with ceramics, camouflaged, given sky blue painting over the epoxy coated plywood or other, surface planking. They may be used as greenhouses and hospitals, libraries and schools. They may also be joined together in more complex structures.
It should be possible to ship a few loads of steel pipe to Haiti for local fabrication under supervision of dome construction specialists, local Haitian authorities and the U.N. Perhaps the Toyota corporation can spare a boatload of steel pipe, and perhaps China. The top steel pipe producers today may have some slack inventory with the global recession. The United States still has bolt manufacturers--this is an opportunity for upgrading the second and third world's inventory of modern American housing--Buckminster Fuller was a college professor in North Carolina.
The next disaster may be just a few months away in Port-Au-Prince when Hurricane season arrives. A quality geodesic dome may be assembled in just a day and later covered with plastic, fiberglass coated plywood with pipe fasteners, built up with epoxy layers or a variety of other solid sheeting from aluminum to composites. The dome frames may be set on tires and anchored into the ground, and a concrete floor might be poured later.
http://www.geodomehome.com/
http://www.dragishak.com/dome/dome.html
http://www.fiea.ucf.edu/~mgourlay/dome/
http://www.geo-dome.co.uk/
http://www.eham.net/articles/11300
http://www.scribd.com/doc/22633447/Geodesic-Dome-Plans
An international geodesic home construction project for Haiti could produce pipe sections of the right lengths locally from imported steel. Perhaps a regular job program manufacturing pre-fabricated domes could be an ongoing local industry. I think it would be the best quality at the lowest cost for ordinary homeless Haitians new home program that might be started.
Air ventilators may be built into the homes for cooling along with solar powered electric fans in ventilators. Steel pipe domes may be coated with ceramics, camouflaged, given sky blue painting over the epoxy coated plywood or other, surface planking. They may be used as greenhouses and hospitals, libraries and schools. They may also be joined together in more complex structures.
2/23/10
U.S. Government's Inadequate Design Templates for New Foreign Governments of Iraq and Afghanistan
I wanted to write on the topic of the U.S. Federal policy of destroying foreign governments in two instances in order to build new governments, and how that policy may have select illogical elements within it. I will not provide arguments for or against the validity or legal right to destroy the former governments of Iraq and Afghanistan--I tend to feel the actions were proximally justifiable, instead I wish to concentrate upon the inadequate paradigms or templates for post destruction reconstruction of new governments that were notoriously costly in dollars and casualties multi-nationally.
My feeling is that the global corporate ownership class behind the phenomenal of corporatism expropriating the democratic pragmatism and functional health of the economy of the United States exists analogously on the upper floors of political-economic skyscrapers crossing from one building term to another over sky-bridges, thus never touching the ground floors of mass political interest. The media supported wealthy elites are the goal class that many politicians seek to join, and to pass on that class to their heirs. Unfortunately with the inter-owning class of concentrated wealth investing in all global corporations it is a self-perpetuating and ecologically detached class. That being said, I will return to the issue of the badly constructed Iraq and Afghan reconstruction plans.
The Bushes and oil interests may have sought to gain oil contracts in Iraq--and they now have. Yet the pan-Arabic imperial goals of Saddam Hussein were a long range problem for the entire middle east though Hussein was appositely named to bring Shi’a and Sunni together from Iran to Saudi Arabia, the antipathy of Iran and other people of the region was a flaming hate understandably. When the Bushes opted to depose the Ba’thist regime of Iraq they were following the only politically practical and acceptable course (ending sanctions and letting the chips fall where they may being the other). What the Bushes conveniently failed at was in saying that instead of a $40 billion dollar reconstruction cost for Iraq the bill would be about 2 trillion dollars. For Afghanistan the bill is still growing.
The differences between Iraq and Afghanistan in terms of history and civilization are vast. Iraq has had a civilization along the rivers in from the deserts for more than 5000 years while Afghanistan is an ancient land of travelers and rural tribesmen. It was the ancient homeland of the Aryans (Iran) and a place that has been difficult for many in the high plains and mountains to find prosperity in. Perhaps the prosperity of Afghanistan is simply in being there to discover the sky and the beauty of a land austere and inspirational of thoughts of God.
The Bush II administration may have felt that war reconstruction costs would not matter because military contracting expenses would benefit all the right military industrial Bush friends in the corporate world. If the people of Iraq had been given ownership in private stock shares themselves of Iraq oil fields right after the war instead of never, peace would have been supported with far more vigor by the people of Iraq both Sunni and Shi’a, Kurd and Christian. The conflict of interest on oil field contract for the Bush administration is obvious--they could not support a democratic reconstruction for Iraq except nominally at the higher political levels, while the people would be groveled about as usual finding larger-ups associated with the payouts from the U.S.A.
In Afghanistan the reasons for war were to remove a Taliban that had sheltered AL Qa’eda, and of course to remove or capture Al Qa’eda in order to prevent future attack organization upon the United States. Obviously no military venture abroad was necessary to defend the avenues of ingress the 9-11 box cutting hi-jack and crash team had used--the only thing required for that was better airport screening, security in aircraft cockpit access and effective intelligence agency work in government regarding how to actually, physically defend the United States.
The United States of course choose to attack Afghanistan when the Taliban Government would not give up the Al Qa’eda members they allowed to live and organize in Iraq. A BBC report on the Taliban in Afghanistan said that the more than 100 year old loosely organized political tradition has a history of providing refuge to political exiles or political fugitives such as the United States has for Cuban ex-patriots or perhaps Soviet or Iranian dissidents. The United States chose to war upon Afghanistan to remove the Taliban without a good idea of how to reconstruct a government or what the cost would be.
Such is the current exploration of method in Afghanistan that is scheduled to send another 30,000 soldiers at the cost of 30 billion dollars. The Marja offensive to displace the Taliban from a stronghold near the Pakistan border is a showpiece to support the U.S. administration decision to accelerate troop deployments and investments in the Afghan war effort. It is expected to show positive results in time for the 2012 re-election season. Democrats are thought to be ready to re-elect the President if the war in Afghanistan is going well--meaning the pacification of the nation with few suicide bombers or I.E.D.’s going off killing American soldiers. In some way a reduction in U.S. bombing of Afghan civilians used as shields for traveling Taliban would also be considered a positive development.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marja'_(islamic_law)-MEANS 'SOURCE TO IMITATE-RELIGIOUS REFERENCE
The decision to impose a central government upon Afghanistan seems destined to fail…the timing is the question--how long will it take?
Afghanistan is a large, poor rural nation, a sort of Wyoming without the oil fit best for wild tribesmen and women surviving modestly in ancient dwellings. These are not people that normally would support a large central government or large standing army with modern weapons. It will be interesting if Afghan pilots are trained in the United States to fly a five jet squadron of F-16’s. I think really they should just for old time’s sake; The Hmong of the Vietnam war era produced some great U.S. trained pilots that won medals for valorous flying. If there are few valid targets in Afghanistan or Air Force to oppose so what--they would make any down hillers think twice about sending anything up their way agin them.
Afghanistan would normally have a more rural nation with a modest government. They have the problem of corruption from drug producers and traffickers and of course payments from political and terrorist fugitives from abroad they choose to shelter for both Muslim brotherhood and financial reasons. We might have properly bribed the Taliban to give up Al Qaeda and shelter U.S. special forces to hunt Al Qaeda and saved the U.S. taxpayers a lot of billions of dollars even if the special forces needed to be trained Muslims to be acceptable to the Taliban. Since we went to war to depose a tradition, it is necessary to think about the chances for long range stability in the area.
Not living on the upper floors of the skyscrapers of the wealthy, rather drifting in the dank alleys and swamps of society, my regard for the choices the elite political class chose to invest in for Afghanistan is not high. I would prefer an American prosperity and federal spending on ecological economic full employment with zero growth goals for non-renewable material through-put as a way to achieve national prosperity. I think the concept of creating a sustainable ,western-friendly Afghan central government is not going to be successful in practice; once the money supply/fuel is cut off the central government/standing army/police machine will grind to a halt and the members disperse to the traditional and economically rational way of rural life with a modest government. I doubt that Afghans will like the idea of paying taxes to support a central government any more than Alaskans (who have no state income tax) or Republicans in the U.S. Congress support tax increases on the wealthy, on corporations, or inheritance taxes.
If the U.S.A. continues to fund the Afghan Government after out troops are withdrawn, the rural Afghans will consider them foreign lackeys and attack them as evil minions of Satan foisting perversity and photos of naked breasts upon the faithful, along of course with the plying of liquor. It is only while the free money flows and fuels the cooperation of those seeking employment that our Afghan allies are loyal. They are not supporters of the Democratic policies of the administration or Congress for ideological reasons I would think.
Governments form for sociological reasons anchored in history and geography. Iraq logically has civilization while Afghanistan reasonably has a discrete, variegated and disperse constellation of villages with some larger town and cities. Within that political economy various political alliances and formations evolve in dynamic balance to conserve various economic and social interests as well as for security.
The United States Government has no reason for a lugubrious outlook on the prospects for structuring a stable and discrete, decentralized Afghan government that could function reasonably well in the absence of U.S. expenses, it is possible. Following the prior Afghan war of defense against the Soviet Union the United States failed to provide any sort of support that would enable the United States to offset the influence of Al Qaeda. Further U.S. overly-large ambitions of a bi-polar sort in Afghanistan such that it must become a kind of High Asian versions of a Beltway Republic seems to be in progress. It is even reported that the Obama administrations plans for a withdrawal in ah hurry after ‘Vietnamizing’ the ‘war’. For a war of understanding it seems to be, allow I have a too remote perspective on the event from the alleys outside the cities with the skyscrapers on the hills of Boston and in the lofty pyramids of power on dollar bills of D.C. passing through congressional control.
A more intelligent and discrete policy designed to recognize Afghan sovereignty and need for its own internal readjustments following the departure of both American military forces and spending would have been a better approach-and it still would, to achieving an Afghanistan that neither requires vast U.S. spending or is a concern about a training area for Para-military terrorist organizations with N.A.T.O. countries as their target locations. That is still a better, more pragmatic political goal than the present undisclosed policy of the Obama administration.
Perhaps we need to fortify a few towns were our friends in Afghanistan live, or plant some crops outside towns like Marja. Maybe a better selection of investments that can exist in a periods of radical realignment following U.S. and N.A.T.O. departure is required. What is very probable is that once the monetary fuel supply for the central government ends it will fade away as quickly as would that of the U.S. Government in Washington D.C. Americans cannot afford to pay for the existence of foreign governments in order to illogically provide security at U.S. airports. At the least a real; Mexican ecological border control barrier zone should be constructed in the United States before Olympic also-ran terrorist conditioned athletes run in high explosives and terrorist supplies at night along g.p.s. courses with night vision goggles to cache in the wastelands of New Mexico and southern Texas.
addition One...
--even hate changes (fades) fast in time such that it waits for no one. I believe Afghanistan will continue to change with the 21st century techno-invasion of communications and data-bases at low cost. How that will affect rural people in central Asia I cannot say.
A religious reason for antipathy towards prosperity is fine and good in some cases and not so in others. India is Hinduia for some, and a billion soul techno-basket of change to others. Conflict is costly and leads in many contexts simply to suffering. I think that the pursuit of prosperity and virtue simultaneously will perhaps be a new direction such as the religious toleration that prevailed in Europe somewhat after the end of the 100 years of religious wars.
Afghanistan absent of the vast expenses of the United States will seek a more normal social level as would the waters behind a dam after a flood. Yet everything from nano-technology to organic solar voltaics will still be increasing in the world. The effort to improve the existence of ordinary people will require a Democratic readjustment of social control of investments from elites and hierarchical powers to the people. Instead of ideologies of conflict led by leaders, more practical, discrete and disperse ecological economic localists synergistically conserving and simultaneously investing in the future will need to be reinforced.
People will try to turn away from mass movements of war and terror if they can, yet that won’t be simple. If those that forget the past are doomed to repeat it, those that cannot forgive or forget the past are doomed to remain in it. Right responses to human evil and conflict is to move away from it and to try to accentuate the positive--it is a challenging yet necessary task. Afghans will want to attempt to modernize and find rapprochement with India and other nations while yet keeping their faith, if they cannot become Christian. Tolerance and respect for individualism should allow people with different background to work together for mutual advantage--if that means dampening the excesses of social, marketplace practices offensive to others then such accommodations need to be made.
My feeling is that the global corporate ownership class behind the phenomenal of corporatism expropriating the democratic pragmatism and functional health of the economy of the United States exists analogously on the upper floors of political-economic skyscrapers crossing from one building term to another over sky-bridges, thus never touching the ground floors of mass political interest. The media supported wealthy elites are the goal class that many politicians seek to join, and to pass on that class to their heirs. Unfortunately with the inter-owning class of concentrated wealth investing in all global corporations it is a self-perpetuating and ecologically detached class. That being said, I will return to the issue of the badly constructed Iraq and Afghan reconstruction plans.
The Bushes and oil interests may have sought to gain oil contracts in Iraq--and they now have. Yet the pan-Arabic imperial goals of Saddam Hussein were a long range problem for the entire middle east though Hussein was appositely named to bring Shi’a and Sunni together from Iran to Saudi Arabia, the antipathy of Iran and other people of the region was a flaming hate understandably. When the Bushes opted to depose the Ba’thist regime of Iraq they were following the only politically practical and acceptable course (ending sanctions and letting the chips fall where they may being the other). What the Bushes conveniently failed at was in saying that instead of a $40 billion dollar reconstruction cost for Iraq the bill would be about 2 trillion dollars. For Afghanistan the bill is still growing.
The differences between Iraq and Afghanistan in terms of history and civilization are vast. Iraq has had a civilization along the rivers in from the deserts for more than 5000 years while Afghanistan is an ancient land of travelers and rural tribesmen. It was the ancient homeland of the Aryans (Iran) and a place that has been difficult for many in the high plains and mountains to find prosperity in. Perhaps the prosperity of Afghanistan is simply in being there to discover the sky and the beauty of a land austere and inspirational of thoughts of God.
The Bush II administration may have felt that war reconstruction costs would not matter because military contracting expenses would benefit all the right military industrial Bush friends in the corporate world. If the people of Iraq had been given ownership in private stock shares themselves of Iraq oil fields right after the war instead of never, peace would have been supported with far more vigor by the people of Iraq both Sunni and Shi’a, Kurd and Christian. The conflict of interest on oil field contract for the Bush administration is obvious--they could not support a democratic reconstruction for Iraq except nominally at the higher political levels, while the people would be groveled about as usual finding larger-ups associated with the payouts from the U.S.A.
In Afghanistan the reasons for war were to remove a Taliban that had sheltered AL Qa’eda, and of course to remove or capture Al Qa’eda in order to prevent future attack organization upon the United States. Obviously no military venture abroad was necessary to defend the avenues of ingress the 9-11 box cutting hi-jack and crash team had used--the only thing required for that was better airport screening, security in aircraft cockpit access and effective intelligence agency work in government regarding how to actually, physically defend the United States.
The United States of course choose to attack Afghanistan when the Taliban Government would not give up the Al Qa’eda members they allowed to live and organize in Iraq. A BBC report on the Taliban in Afghanistan said that the more than 100 year old loosely organized political tradition has a history of providing refuge to political exiles or political fugitives such as the United States has for Cuban ex-patriots or perhaps Soviet or Iranian dissidents. The United States chose to war upon Afghanistan to remove the Taliban without a good idea of how to reconstruct a government or what the cost would be.
Such is the current exploration of method in Afghanistan that is scheduled to send another 30,000 soldiers at the cost of 30 billion dollars. The Marja offensive to displace the Taliban from a stronghold near the Pakistan border is a showpiece to support the U.S. administration decision to accelerate troop deployments and investments in the Afghan war effort. It is expected to show positive results in time for the 2012 re-election season. Democrats are thought to be ready to re-elect the President if the war in Afghanistan is going well--meaning the pacification of the nation with few suicide bombers or I.E.D.’s going off killing American soldiers. In some way a reduction in U.S. bombing of Afghan civilians used as shields for traveling Taliban would also be considered a positive development.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marja'_(islamic_law)-MEANS 'SOURCE TO IMITATE-RELIGIOUS REFERENCE
The decision to impose a central government upon Afghanistan seems destined to fail…the timing is the question--how long will it take?
Afghanistan is a large, poor rural nation, a sort of Wyoming without the oil fit best for wild tribesmen and women surviving modestly in ancient dwellings. These are not people that normally would support a large central government or large standing army with modern weapons. It will be interesting if Afghan pilots are trained in the United States to fly a five jet squadron of F-16’s. I think really they should just for old time’s sake; The Hmong of the Vietnam war era produced some great U.S. trained pilots that won medals for valorous flying. If there are few valid targets in Afghanistan or Air Force to oppose so what--they would make any down hillers think twice about sending anything up their way agin them.
Afghanistan would normally have a more rural nation with a modest government. They have the problem of corruption from drug producers and traffickers and of course payments from political and terrorist fugitives from abroad they choose to shelter for both Muslim brotherhood and financial reasons. We might have properly bribed the Taliban to give up Al Qaeda and shelter U.S. special forces to hunt Al Qaeda and saved the U.S. taxpayers a lot of billions of dollars even if the special forces needed to be trained Muslims to be acceptable to the Taliban. Since we went to war to depose a tradition, it is necessary to think about the chances for long range stability in the area.
Not living on the upper floors of the skyscrapers of the wealthy, rather drifting in the dank alleys and swamps of society, my regard for the choices the elite political class chose to invest in for Afghanistan is not high. I would prefer an American prosperity and federal spending on ecological economic full employment with zero growth goals for non-renewable material through-put as a way to achieve national prosperity. I think the concept of creating a sustainable ,western-friendly Afghan central government is not going to be successful in practice; once the money supply/fuel is cut off the central government/standing army/police machine will grind to a halt and the members disperse to the traditional and economically rational way of rural life with a modest government. I doubt that Afghans will like the idea of paying taxes to support a central government any more than Alaskans (who have no state income tax) or Republicans in the U.S. Congress support tax increases on the wealthy, on corporations, or inheritance taxes.
If the U.S.A. continues to fund the Afghan Government after out troops are withdrawn, the rural Afghans will consider them foreign lackeys and attack them as evil minions of Satan foisting perversity and photos of naked breasts upon the faithful, along of course with the plying of liquor. It is only while the free money flows and fuels the cooperation of those seeking employment that our Afghan allies are loyal. They are not supporters of the Democratic policies of the administration or Congress for ideological reasons I would think.
Governments form for sociological reasons anchored in history and geography. Iraq logically has civilization while Afghanistan reasonably has a discrete, variegated and disperse constellation of villages with some larger town and cities. Within that political economy various political alliances and formations evolve in dynamic balance to conserve various economic and social interests as well as for security.
The United States Government has no reason for a lugubrious outlook on the prospects for structuring a stable and discrete, decentralized Afghan government that could function reasonably well in the absence of U.S. expenses, it is possible. Following the prior Afghan war of defense against the Soviet Union the United States failed to provide any sort of support that would enable the United States to offset the influence of Al Qaeda. Further U.S. overly-large ambitions of a bi-polar sort in Afghanistan such that it must become a kind of High Asian versions of a Beltway Republic seems to be in progress. It is even reported that the Obama administrations plans for a withdrawal in ah hurry after ‘Vietnamizing’ the ‘war’. For a war of understanding it seems to be, allow I have a too remote perspective on the event from the alleys outside the cities with the skyscrapers on the hills of Boston and in the lofty pyramids of power on dollar bills of D.C. passing through congressional control.
A more intelligent and discrete policy designed to recognize Afghan sovereignty and need for its own internal readjustments following the departure of both American military forces and spending would have been a better approach-and it still would, to achieving an Afghanistan that neither requires vast U.S. spending or is a concern about a training area for Para-military terrorist organizations with N.A.T.O. countries as their target locations. That is still a better, more pragmatic political goal than the present undisclosed policy of the Obama administration.
Perhaps we need to fortify a few towns were our friends in Afghanistan live, or plant some crops outside towns like Marja. Maybe a better selection of investments that can exist in a periods of radical realignment following U.S. and N.A.T.O. departure is required. What is very probable is that once the monetary fuel supply for the central government ends it will fade away as quickly as would that of the U.S. Government in Washington D.C. Americans cannot afford to pay for the existence of foreign governments in order to illogically provide security at U.S. airports. At the least a real; Mexican ecological border control barrier zone should be constructed in the United States before Olympic also-ran terrorist conditioned athletes run in high explosives and terrorist supplies at night along g.p.s. courses with night vision goggles to cache in the wastelands of New Mexico and southern Texas.
addition One...
--even hate changes (fades) fast in time such that it waits for no one. I believe Afghanistan will continue to change with the 21st century techno-invasion of communications and data-bases at low cost. How that will affect rural people in central Asia I cannot say.
A religious reason for antipathy towards prosperity is fine and good in some cases and not so in others. India is Hinduia for some, and a billion soul techno-basket of change to others. Conflict is costly and leads in many contexts simply to suffering. I think that the pursuit of prosperity and virtue simultaneously will perhaps be a new direction such as the religious toleration that prevailed in Europe somewhat after the end of the 100 years of religious wars.
Afghanistan absent of the vast expenses of the United States will seek a more normal social level as would the waters behind a dam after a flood. Yet everything from nano-technology to organic solar voltaics will still be increasing in the world. The effort to improve the existence of ordinary people will require a Democratic readjustment of social control of investments from elites and hierarchical powers to the people. Instead of ideologies of conflict led by leaders, more practical, discrete and disperse ecological economic localists synergistically conserving and simultaneously investing in the future will need to be reinforced.
People will try to turn away from mass movements of war and terror if they can, yet that won’t be simple. If those that forget the past are doomed to repeat it, those that cannot forgive or forget the past are doomed to remain in it. Right responses to human evil and conflict is to move away from it and to try to accentuate the positive--it is a challenging yet necessary task. Afghans will want to attempt to modernize and find rapprochement with India and other nations while yet keeping their faith, if they cannot become Christian. Tolerance and respect for individualism should allow people with different background to work together for mutual advantage--if that means dampening the excesses of social, marketplace practices offensive to others then such accommodations need to be made.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Here and there pointillist continua build rowing the skiff clambering over the road staying in shadows until spring insouciant compact snow ...
-
Alaskan officials have cut down or banned King Salmon fishing in much of Alaska because so few of the large fish are returning. The Ancho...
-
Why do F-22 pilots lose consciousness and let their planes crash and burn? The air superiority fighters are designed to survive oppositio...
