U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller running against two other solidly financed rivals-Sitka Alaska fisherman Scott McAdams on the Democratic Party plank and second-try Lisa Murkowski for-herself after losing the Republican primary is encountering political turbulence in the last two weeks of the campaign with two controversial phenomena. For one-he is charged with using a computer at lunch while employed by the Fairbanks Alaska North Star Borough government, the second weird event that brought demands by Lisa Murkowski that Miller apologize is more complex.
A blogger with a camera who has written critically of Joe Miller was held by security guards until police arrived at a Miller campaign event. Miller had rented a school and hired a security firm for the event.
Bloggers should be given special consideration over the broadcast media journalists at all political events obviously, yet they should not interfere with candidates by heckling them with importunate questions. Bloggers should be respectful of the candidate’s ‘store front’ and stay within a candidate’s guidelines for marketing. Later, the blogger may chastise the candidate for supporting the existence of the broadcast media and other exclusive, elite tools for propaganda by concentrated wealth if he wants.
Courtesy is requisite in public affairs if individuals are to have a chance to actualize and express political ideas and then for the public to consider those concepts. Cyber bullying and broadcast media abuse can be held as bad examples and public corruption of common sense. It is possible that some bloggers try to emulate the broadcast media practice of invasive trampling of private interests and individualism in public affairs.
On the issue of lunchtime use of a government computer for personal interests it is easy to understand. Americans are somewhat addicted to the Internet especially with all of the brilliant bloggers out there writing of things philosophical and practical in addition to YouTube videos and so forth. Computer and Internet access for all public employees at lunch would save a lot of time spent on trying to get something to eat and find a wireless Internet connection at lunch hour. In Fairbanks even a government lawyer might need to go outside in 40 below zero temperatures, start a cold car, drive a couple miles and park by a snow drift to get a wireless connection maybe with the interior of the car as warm as minus 20. The one must still walk over the icy parking lot, buy a jelly donut and coffee, watch it freeze and get into the slightly warmer car with the engine left running and type a few words with freezing fingers and gloves off. To avoid frostbite the twitting must be brief. Then it time to drive back to work and hope the plastic notebook doesn’t fracture from all of the extreme temperature changes (minus 40 to positive 70 degrees at work).
The political critic of Joe Miller for using a computer in Fairbanks at lunch plainly are not concerned about employee safety. If they were they would agitate for wireless Internet access for all Alaskans at all city, borough, state and federal public office buildings. With ordinary Internet wireless access public employees could use their web-book computer at lunchtime and brown bag it saving money and fuel consumption that causes global warming.
10/17/10
A Basic Theory of Middle Class Housing as a Function of the Concentration of Wealth
A basic theory of the troubles with the U.S. housing market of a non-technical nature might include the large phenomena of networking and the concentration of wealth with the few. Housing sizes became larger and more expensive challenging even the middle class to afford the huge, inefficient vessels.
I thought about this today walking along a nice neighborhood where new homes are going in for just a little more than 220,000 dollars. With interest maybe they would cost 300,000 dollars, I cannot say. They were of a two story boxy appearance without much yard.
As a college graduate and veteran with an honorable discharge, even though the service ended with the end of the cold war and peace instead of a shooting war with high pay, glory and benefits who earns just a little over 4000 dollars a year when I can find houses to paint, I realized that these homes would cost me a couple hundred years to buy if I could pay half of my annual wages on one. If I were to live 1000 years maybe working two hundred years to buy a home would be worthwhile.
These average big box homes are costly even for a middle class family with a 50,000-dollar annual household income. The housing developments are financed by bankers and a global business network able to buy and sell U.S. mortgages. The M.B.A. generation of arranging national business to their liking is paying off and wealth is being conce3ntrated while the middle class struggle, as did the lower working class in former decades before the latter half of the 1970s.
Ideally, advantaged Harvard M.B.A.s and their corporate employers, CEOs and shareholders should be able to exploit the middle class as readily as the working class and poor, and to accomplished that very larger homes, low mileage SUVs and vehicles costing 50,000 dollars should be the norm. The middle class then struggle to pay the price of housing they will lose with even brief periods of unemployment rather easily. Three decades of solid employment required to afford an expensive homes is becoming improbable even for the middle class.
Before the end of the 1960s the average CEO of a corporation earned 300 times more than the lowest paid worker. Today that CEO earns some like 3000 times more and the disparity is increasing. In the 1960s a man could be broke and unemployed, yet if he got an industrial job as were common he might buy a home within a year or two of starting work. Homes were a lot smaller then. With a nail gun I suppose I could make good winter housing with a couple of days work and three hours shopping at the lumber yard--yet one has zoning instead that add 30 years time required to finance a winter home. At least tenting is a way to keep the freezing rain away awhile as an alternative to being a quarter-millionaire and beloved corporate minion of dubious morality.
One must buy most of one's home construction products from the networked corporations. They would not like significant rivals to ordinary housing structures such as well designed stress membraned housing good for 30 years that when removed leave just a simple clearing in a verdant ecosystem that quickly recovers from displacement.
My grandfather bought a home in Eastern Washington in the 60s for just 4000 dollars, and raised quite a wonderful lot of vegetables in his garden. Today if unemployed and broke in middle age one has very dismal prospects for owning a home because they are just too large, and gardens may be zoned for illegality especially on front lawns. In Houston's suburbs even planting a pear tree might be considered radical although some have banana plants or plantains by their pools that live until the rare solid freeze.
The high costs of American homes may be a logical desire by the wealthy to maximize profits and make the middle class drudges to their borrowed 'castles'. Those M.B.A.s need to be put to work concentrating and organizing all that potential wealth out there after all, yet the collateral damages to the U.S. economy of forcing too large of homes and inefficient cars on America are substantial.
The middle class fails to build up substantial capital savings in the too large of home and car environment. They send hundreds of billions of dollars abroad annually to import fuel. The middle class in upgrading the Death of as Salesman lifestyle that has become totalized from polluted sea to polluted sea may be co9ntent to just save some money for retirement. The concept of capital for business investment falls commonly by the wayside.
If necessity is the mother of invention, the middle class paradoxically has no necessity and invents little. It may be comfortable in its wage slavery living within a deterministic economic environment. The middle class may be happy to live in a half million dollar home, have three cars, large screen high resolution televisions, watch the Seahawks be trounced by the Giants on television, and die without any savings. If the middle class invented anything the ubiquitous global corporations would soak it up anyway and the concentrated wealth flummery would reap new profit or sequester the invention if it was a rival to existing products.
How to create a new envi9rnment of inventiveness in the United States is not simply a matter of creating a better education system for the actual economic structure outflanks and repress intellectual virility. Inventions today increasingly are an evolution of existing corporate, pharmaceutical, chemical and biological product interests. The intense interest in biology for human health and life extension drives a desire to patent every kind of real and synthetic genome. Human interest in conserving living species and biodiversity pales in comparison as a global human-caused mass extinction is in progress that may undermine the ecosystem supporting all human life on earth. Neither do humans have an interest in developing moon facilities to build real space ships in lunar orbit from materials fabricated on the moon.
I should write something more about that; true space ships would use the entire ship’s hull for an engine interacting with various fields and particle-waves and potentials existing in space rather than with an Earth boating concept of an engine like an outboard fit on the back of a boat that propels it forward through the water…even the U.S.S. Enterprise had a dilithium crystal outboard/inboard motor kind of concept. A hull spaceship with field-drive would be too large and expensive to launch through the Earth atmosphere obviously. Until the moon is developed as a space-ship base and all extra-terrestrial bodies than can be inhabited have a population of 1000 people for research and self-sustaining terra-forming micro-environments sustaining life humanity will not be really serious about survival in this somewhat benevolent yet simultaneously dangerous portion of the galaxy. Disaster can occur very swiftly.
The U.S. middle class in its increasing position of luxury wage slavery exists simultaneously with a global economy that the Wall Street and Harvard M.B.A. network as used to maximize profits as well. The middle class and poor have a decreasing capacity to control their own economic destiny or to develop businesses that compete with existing capitalized networked corporate infrastructure. The notion that the interests of the wealthiest drive the most efficient form of capitalism or economic a democracy might create is absurd. The economic interests of all the people are a part of a complete economic tree in the modern world in which none may simple exist apart and alone as an island unto himself along with his family.
The modern economy of the United States could be compared to a plant or hedge with those at the top drawing their profit from those producing at the roots from the environment. The Harvard M.B.A. concentration of wealth at the top has increased the extraction of resources from nature that the roots process and moved it up bypassing the economic nourishment of the roots and middle class of the hedge. The logical outcome of killing the roots and middle of the plant in order to expedite concentration of wealth at the top is the death of the planet.
The economy is not so simple as that however. Inventions that are increasingly fractional advances of technological systems such as in biomedicine do not produce complete products. Complete product inventions like a light bulb or a telephone historically tend to be created by individuals creating something that works for-itself. With a closer relationship to nature and necessity inventors such as a Henry Ford might invent an entire assembly line process while today the middle class in their wage slavery without capital to invest in there own inventions much less defend a patent if interested in inventing something rather than investing their capital in the advantaged corporate networks that reinforces the doom of the middle class and poor produce fractional appendages to the corporate beast of controls servo-unit mechanism.
If smaller homes were ordinarily built in the United States people would have an option of economy. Perhaps high quality stressed membrane buildings with special insulating foam in anchorage Alaska suitable for low temperatures, earthquake survival and even quick spare library construction the middleclass would have the option of just spending 50,000 on a home instead of 300,000 dollars and save the rest for investment in inventions and business concepts of their own. Without capital to risk it is very difficult to get anything built. Guaranteed investment would attract too many investors and the cost of investing would rise offsetting profits. The difference between gambling and risky investments fundamentally lies within the intellectual skill set of the individual—his or her intellectual capital, instead of in an extrinsic material, social investment opportunity with assured return such as U.S. Government Bonds before an era of quantitative easing (Fed ex-lax of debt dumping upon others).
Many Americans have expressed an interest in buying lower cost, more efficient homes—and why not? A good ecofriendly yard and simple modular domes can create an efficient living space with –privacy and utility. Where is the profit in that for the bankers and developers seeking to extract maximum profits from the roots and middle class though?
The concept that the concentration of wealth will create the most efficient society politically, socially or ecologically is absurd. Unfortunately the paradoxes of the prisoners and diner’s dilemma wherein those that defect to procure their own self-interest rather than being gentlemanly and seeking on a team basis to bring about increased public good tends to drives the political and economic ad hoc collectives that make the economic decisions of national importance in Washington D.C. and Boston. The future of the United States does not seem especially excellent today as the Democratic Party is little more than lip service token opposition to the concentration of wealth—even Michelle Obama had a quarter million dollar a year health industry administrator job in Chicago before becoming the first lady. What were the chances that the President would have supported a plain free public health service for the poor that was staffed by public doctors and joined with the V.A. instead of requiring that all Americans buy health insurance from the wealthy global corporations fo0r home his wife worked? Probably none. The democrats in office has basically been the gay team cheerleaders of the corporate work environment seeking to make the military become soldiers of sin in order to better serve the bent upper classes of society.
I thought about this today walking along a nice neighborhood where new homes are going in for just a little more than 220,000 dollars. With interest maybe they would cost 300,000 dollars, I cannot say. They were of a two story boxy appearance without much yard.
As a college graduate and veteran with an honorable discharge, even though the service ended with the end of the cold war and peace instead of a shooting war with high pay, glory and benefits who earns just a little over 4000 dollars a year when I can find houses to paint, I realized that these homes would cost me a couple hundred years to buy if I could pay half of my annual wages on one. If I were to live 1000 years maybe working two hundred years to buy a home would be worthwhile.
These average big box homes are costly even for a middle class family with a 50,000-dollar annual household income. The housing developments are financed by bankers and a global business network able to buy and sell U.S. mortgages. The M.B.A. generation of arranging national business to their liking is paying off and wealth is being conce3ntrated while the middle class struggle, as did the lower working class in former decades before the latter half of the 1970s.
Ideally, advantaged Harvard M.B.A.s and their corporate employers, CEOs and shareholders should be able to exploit the middle class as readily as the working class and poor, and to accomplished that very larger homes, low mileage SUVs and vehicles costing 50,000 dollars should be the norm. The middle class then struggle to pay the price of housing they will lose with even brief periods of unemployment rather easily. Three decades of solid employment required to afford an expensive homes is becoming improbable even for the middle class.
Before the end of the 1960s the average CEO of a corporation earned 300 times more than the lowest paid worker. Today that CEO earns some like 3000 times more and the disparity is increasing. In the 1960s a man could be broke and unemployed, yet if he got an industrial job as were common he might buy a home within a year or two of starting work. Homes were a lot smaller then. With a nail gun I suppose I could make good winter housing with a couple of days work and three hours shopping at the lumber yard--yet one has zoning instead that add 30 years time required to finance a winter home. At least tenting is a way to keep the freezing rain away awhile as an alternative to being a quarter-millionaire and beloved corporate minion of dubious morality.
One must buy most of one's home construction products from the networked corporations. They would not like significant rivals to ordinary housing structures such as well designed stress membraned housing good for 30 years that when removed leave just a simple clearing in a verdant ecosystem that quickly recovers from displacement.
My grandfather bought a home in Eastern Washington in the 60s for just 4000 dollars, and raised quite a wonderful lot of vegetables in his garden. Today if unemployed and broke in middle age one has very dismal prospects for owning a home because they are just too large, and gardens may be zoned for illegality especially on front lawns. In Houston's suburbs even planting a pear tree might be considered radical although some have banana plants or plantains by their pools that live until the rare solid freeze.
The high costs of American homes may be a logical desire by the wealthy to maximize profits and make the middle class drudges to their borrowed 'castles'. Those M.B.A.s need to be put to work concentrating and organizing all that potential wealth out there after all, yet the collateral damages to the U.S. economy of forcing too large of homes and inefficient cars on America are substantial.
The middle class fails to build up substantial capital savings in the too large of home and car environment. They send hundreds of billions of dollars abroad annually to import fuel. The middle class in upgrading the Death of as Salesman lifestyle that has become totalized from polluted sea to polluted sea may be co9ntent to just save some money for retirement. The concept of capital for business investment falls commonly by the wayside.
If necessity is the mother of invention, the middle class paradoxically has no necessity and invents little. It may be comfortable in its wage slavery living within a deterministic economic environment. The middle class may be happy to live in a half million dollar home, have three cars, large screen high resolution televisions, watch the Seahawks be trounced by the Giants on television, and die without any savings. If the middle class invented anything the ubiquitous global corporations would soak it up anyway and the concentrated wealth flummery would reap new profit or sequester the invention if it was a rival to existing products.
How to create a new envi9rnment of inventiveness in the United States is not simply a matter of creating a better education system for the actual economic structure outflanks and repress intellectual virility. Inventions today increasingly are an evolution of existing corporate, pharmaceutical, chemical and biological product interests. The intense interest in biology for human health and life extension drives a desire to patent every kind of real and synthetic genome. Human interest in conserving living species and biodiversity pales in comparison as a global human-caused mass extinction is in progress that may undermine the ecosystem supporting all human life on earth. Neither do humans have an interest in developing moon facilities to build real space ships in lunar orbit from materials fabricated on the moon.
I should write something more about that; true space ships would use the entire ship’s hull for an engine interacting with various fields and particle-waves and potentials existing in space rather than with an Earth boating concept of an engine like an outboard fit on the back of a boat that propels it forward through the water…even the U.S.S. Enterprise had a dilithium crystal outboard/inboard motor kind of concept. A hull spaceship with field-drive would be too large and expensive to launch through the Earth atmosphere obviously. Until the moon is developed as a space-ship base and all extra-terrestrial bodies than can be inhabited have a population of 1000 people for research and self-sustaining terra-forming micro-environments sustaining life humanity will not be really serious about survival in this somewhat benevolent yet simultaneously dangerous portion of the galaxy. Disaster can occur very swiftly.
The U.S. middle class in its increasing position of luxury wage slavery exists simultaneously with a global economy that the Wall Street and Harvard M.B.A. network as used to maximize profits as well. The middle class and poor have a decreasing capacity to control their own economic destiny or to develop businesses that compete with existing capitalized networked corporate infrastructure. The notion that the interests of the wealthiest drive the most efficient form of capitalism or economic a democracy might create is absurd. The economic interests of all the people are a part of a complete economic tree in the modern world in which none may simple exist apart and alone as an island unto himself along with his family.
The modern economy of the United States could be compared to a plant or hedge with those at the top drawing their profit from those producing at the roots from the environment. The Harvard M.B.A. concentration of wealth at the top has increased the extraction of resources from nature that the roots process and moved it up bypassing the economic nourishment of the roots and middle class of the hedge. The logical outcome of killing the roots and middle of the plant in order to expedite concentration of wealth at the top is the death of the planet.
The economy is not so simple as that however. Inventions that are increasingly fractional advances of technological systems such as in biomedicine do not produce complete products. Complete product inventions like a light bulb or a telephone historically tend to be created by individuals creating something that works for-itself. With a closer relationship to nature and necessity inventors such as a Henry Ford might invent an entire assembly line process while today the middle class in their wage slavery without capital to invest in there own inventions much less defend a patent if interested in inventing something rather than investing their capital in the advantaged corporate networks that reinforces the doom of the middle class and poor produce fractional appendages to the corporate beast of controls servo-unit mechanism.
If smaller homes were ordinarily built in the United States people would have an option of economy. Perhaps high quality stressed membrane buildings with special insulating foam in anchorage Alaska suitable for low temperatures, earthquake survival and even quick spare library construction the middleclass would have the option of just spending 50,000 on a home instead of 300,000 dollars and save the rest for investment in inventions and business concepts of their own. Without capital to risk it is very difficult to get anything built. Guaranteed investment would attract too many investors and the cost of investing would rise offsetting profits. The difference between gambling and risky investments fundamentally lies within the intellectual skill set of the individual—his or her intellectual capital, instead of in an extrinsic material, social investment opportunity with assured return such as U.S. Government Bonds before an era of quantitative easing (Fed ex-lax of debt dumping upon others).
Many Americans have expressed an interest in buying lower cost, more efficient homes—and why not? A good ecofriendly yard and simple modular domes can create an efficient living space with –privacy and utility. Where is the profit in that for the bankers and developers seeking to extract maximum profits from the roots and middle class though?
The concept that the concentration of wealth will create the most efficient society politically, socially or ecologically is absurd. Unfortunately the paradoxes of the prisoners and diner’s dilemma wherein those that defect to procure their own self-interest rather than being gentlemanly and seeking on a team basis to bring about increased public good tends to drives the political and economic ad hoc collectives that make the economic decisions of national importance in Washington D.C. and Boston. The future of the United States does not seem especially excellent today as the Democratic Party is little more than lip service token opposition to the concentration of wealth—even Michelle Obama had a quarter million dollar a year health industry administrator job in Chicago before becoming the first lady. What were the chances that the President would have supported a plain free public health service for the poor that was staffed by public doctors and joined with the V.A. instead of requiring that all Americans buy health insurance from the wealthy global corporations fo0r home his wife worked? Probably none. The democrats in office has basically been the gay team cheerleaders of the corporate work environment seeking to make the military become soldiers of sin in order to better serve the bent upper classes of society.
10/15/10
President Obama's Preference for 'Who They Are' O.K. Gay Military Cadre
President Obama speaking on the federal military policy to not inflame heterosexual rights and protections/defense interests by keeping a neutral "'don't ask don't tell policy said that "people shouldn't need to lie about who they are". That statement seems to provide some insights into the President's way of thinking. That statement seems to provide some insights into the President's way of thinking. It seems to entail the premise that lying is o.k. but people should not need to do that... Sound fundamentalist Muslim thinking for infiltration purposes even Lenin would have agreed with. Democrats may believe in 2010 that America needs more lying politicians in order to force through the post-modernist agenda.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/14/AR2010101407018.html?hpid=sec-nation
Sect. Gates will comply with Judge’s ruling to allow openly gay military. The Justice Depart. President Obama’s Justice Department has appealed the ruling asking for a stay. Obviously the President is confused as are the Democratic putchers of gay social decay.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gbhCI7HA7kv5yS3DDFzAMaleTW2A?docId=dc63b749ed6c4557a28f13f3d41e008c
Perhaps the President is a post-modernist naturally, or it may be a Hawaiian natural concept that falls a little short of acute legal reasoning. The difference between what people do and what people like to do is different from 'who they are'.
Behavioral psychologists such as B.F. Skinner might have believed that who and what people are have the same meaning. People are organisms that consume food and respond to stimuli. One might define a particular individual as 'one who picks grass and wildflowers by the ocean and sells them in the public market in the afternoon', yet of course that description could change from day top day. In western civilization the legally community tends to use specific and invariant definition of who in the form of names/pronouns, date and place of birth.
Besides being fuzzy legal reasoning, the Presidential concept of who individuals are serving in the military as packets of behavior sets attempts to predicate an equality of all behavior sets in public service and in the public area that will naturally cohere together amicably because they are abstract sets of who-behavior descriptions.
If cannibals immigrated to the United States some in the military might find it offensive if they declared themselves as such. If unrepentant Nazis or even Klu Klux Klansmen and women enlisted in the military and put notices on their lockers that they are haters of blacks, some would find that offensive. Would the President defend the right of Nazi’s, pedophiles, racists of all sorts and communists equally as he defends the rights of homosexuals to openly declare their same sex preference in the military? If who they are is an adequate rational for tolerance of conduct, it would be a bias to discriminate amidst anyone or anything that is a behavioral preference--and that is a ludicrous concept.
I wondered if down on the beach on Oahu someplace there are these people that use crack cocaine or crystal meth because 'that's who they are'. Is there some kind of Hawaiian easy living tolerance of who people are commonly defined by 'they hang out at the beach and use cocaine and are homosexuals and they have nice condos' etc? Well, the civilian sector easy living definitions of who people are may be right enough for a non-military environment. Civilians have a right to go about their own interests privately as 'who they are'. In the public sector that sort of tolerance stops and a more hardened boundary line is drawn such that all people may repress their special 'who they areness' quirks, behaviors, preferences and attributes in order that all may keep them.
In the military environment the behavior is necessarily more repressed. It cannot be a hang ten dudeness 'what it is, who they are man' social environment. In the civilian world one may hate people of a particular race, sex preference, religion, physical appearance, behavior conduct, political party affiliation and so forth and accordingly keep one's distance from those that are members of such groups. One may hate SUV drivers burning gas, or middle class people cold blooded as sin in disregarding the need for national free health care for the poor through a public health system of government payroll physicians (only for the poor and V.A.), one can hate spoilt broadcast network common taters with their idiots view of social reality from easy money winter comfort and summer fun and tune them out. In the military one must co-exist with all the aforementioned lunatics and repress outward expression or preference for those perversions so far as possible or practical and serve in the mean green machine, the wavy navy, the mirthful marines or acrobatic air force as a simple service member without concerns to distract from the mission. It is not an environment of 'who they are' as anything other than soldiers, sailors marines and airmen.
Of course the military is an agency of socialization, perhaps even the largest agency of socialization in the United States besides the pharmaceutical product development community. When the military integrated blacks into the predominantly white military social segregation ended as well. Homosexuality is a behavior preference rather than a natural human condition though. Few can discriminate homosexuals by sight or sound in most instance perhaps. The post-modernists of the Obama administration and Democratic Party seem to want to exploit the U.S. military as an agency of socialization to introduce homosexuality as a social norm in all aspects of American life including primary and secondary education.
Post-modernism developed as a moral or anti-moral conceit following upon the scientific insights of evolution. A perspective of meaninglessness in all things including language and speech followed evolutionary science. Traditional moral values were largely associated with obsolete scientific knowledge. Post-modernism is a religion of atheism. As Nietzsche wrote in his book 'Beyond Good and Evil' on the philosophical basis of an eternal recurrence of the existence of the Universe (and the big bounce recursion cosmologists would go along with that), post modernists find their own foundation for going beyond good and evil in evolution. Life is a simple evolution of inorganic molecules into organic complexity. That is reductionism reduced to its essential concept.
With the global population moved beyond 6.2 billion and on its way to 9 billion this century and with traditional economics royally missing the chance to transition to a new, more intellectually led kind of no-net-natural resource increase economic growth with full employment coincident with a no-net-loss of biota ecosystem globally, the post-modernists seem to believe that a population reduction or arrest through the promotion of non-reproductive homosexuality and the massification of humanity as commodities for management by perverted yet special elites without concern for concepts of good and evil is the better way to reign in the out of control traits of humanity. They are wrong and President Obama is wrong as well as appearing to have developed a casual preference for non-acute legal reasoning and bad economic conceptualizing.
The moral path for the nation is the only reasonable way to go. Education and intellectual explanations of the world’s limits to growth must gain voluntary compliance from the people of the United States. The military should remain a 'don't ask, don't tell environment, and homosexuals in the social civilian sector should get out of the public political spotlight and leave heterosexuals alone. The rights of all citizens to have an uncorrupted public sector with equal opportunity should not be a license to trample the rights of others. There are innumerable other, better methods of an honest nature whereby the homosexual perversion preferring U.S. citizens can secure their fundamental social rights. Homosexuality should be irrelevant regarding other citizens. Homosexuals have no economic rights that all other Americans shouldn't have as well, nor should they.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/14/AR2010101407018.html?hpid=sec-nation
Sect. Gates will comply with Judge’s ruling to allow openly gay military. The Justice Depart. President Obama’s Justice Department has appealed the ruling asking for a stay. Obviously the President is confused as are the Democratic putchers of gay social decay.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gbhCI7HA7kv5yS3DDFzAMaleTW2A?docId=dc63b749ed6c4557a28f13f3d41e008c
Perhaps the President is a post-modernist naturally, or it may be a Hawaiian natural concept that falls a little short of acute legal reasoning. The difference between what people do and what people like to do is different from 'who they are'.
Behavioral psychologists such as B.F. Skinner might have believed that who and what people are have the same meaning. People are organisms that consume food and respond to stimuli. One might define a particular individual as 'one who picks grass and wildflowers by the ocean and sells them in the public market in the afternoon', yet of course that description could change from day top day. In western civilization the legally community tends to use specific and invariant definition of who in the form of names/pronouns, date and place of birth.
Besides being fuzzy legal reasoning, the Presidential concept of who individuals are serving in the military as packets of behavior sets attempts to predicate an equality of all behavior sets in public service and in the public area that will naturally cohere together amicably because they are abstract sets of who-behavior descriptions.
If cannibals immigrated to the United States some in the military might find it offensive if they declared themselves as such. If unrepentant Nazis or even Klu Klux Klansmen and women enlisted in the military and put notices on their lockers that they are haters of blacks, some would find that offensive. Would the President defend the right of Nazi’s, pedophiles, racists of all sorts and communists equally as he defends the rights of homosexuals to openly declare their same sex preference in the military? If who they are is an adequate rational for tolerance of conduct, it would be a bias to discriminate amidst anyone or anything that is a behavioral preference--and that is a ludicrous concept.
I wondered if down on the beach on Oahu someplace there are these people that use crack cocaine or crystal meth because 'that's who they are'. Is there some kind of Hawaiian easy living tolerance of who people are commonly defined by 'they hang out at the beach and use cocaine and are homosexuals and they have nice condos' etc? Well, the civilian sector easy living definitions of who people are may be right enough for a non-military environment. Civilians have a right to go about their own interests privately as 'who they are'. In the public sector that sort of tolerance stops and a more hardened boundary line is drawn such that all people may repress their special 'who they areness' quirks, behaviors, preferences and attributes in order that all may keep them.
In the military environment the behavior is necessarily more repressed. It cannot be a hang ten dudeness 'what it is, who they are man' social environment. In the civilian world one may hate people of a particular race, sex preference, religion, physical appearance, behavior conduct, political party affiliation and so forth and accordingly keep one's distance from those that are members of such groups. One may hate SUV drivers burning gas, or middle class people cold blooded as sin in disregarding the need for national free health care for the poor through a public health system of government payroll physicians (only for the poor and V.A.), one can hate spoilt broadcast network common taters with their idiots view of social reality from easy money winter comfort and summer fun and tune them out. In the military one must co-exist with all the aforementioned lunatics and repress outward expression or preference for those perversions so far as possible or practical and serve in the mean green machine, the wavy navy, the mirthful marines or acrobatic air force as a simple service member without concerns to distract from the mission. It is not an environment of 'who they are' as anything other than soldiers, sailors marines and airmen.
Of course the military is an agency of socialization, perhaps even the largest agency of socialization in the United States besides the pharmaceutical product development community. When the military integrated blacks into the predominantly white military social segregation ended as well. Homosexuality is a behavior preference rather than a natural human condition though. Few can discriminate homosexuals by sight or sound in most instance perhaps. The post-modernists of the Obama administration and Democratic Party seem to want to exploit the U.S. military as an agency of socialization to introduce homosexuality as a social norm in all aspects of American life including primary and secondary education.
Post-modernism developed as a moral or anti-moral conceit following upon the scientific insights of evolution. A perspective of meaninglessness in all things including language and speech followed evolutionary science. Traditional moral values were largely associated with obsolete scientific knowledge. Post-modernism is a religion of atheism. As Nietzsche wrote in his book 'Beyond Good and Evil' on the philosophical basis of an eternal recurrence of the existence of the Universe (and the big bounce recursion cosmologists would go along with that), post modernists find their own foundation for going beyond good and evil in evolution. Life is a simple evolution of inorganic molecules into organic complexity. That is reductionism reduced to its essential concept.
With the global population moved beyond 6.2 billion and on its way to 9 billion this century and with traditional economics royally missing the chance to transition to a new, more intellectually led kind of no-net-natural resource increase economic growth with full employment coincident with a no-net-loss of biota ecosystem globally, the post-modernists seem to believe that a population reduction or arrest through the promotion of non-reproductive homosexuality and the massification of humanity as commodities for management by perverted yet special elites without concern for concepts of good and evil is the better way to reign in the out of control traits of humanity. They are wrong and President Obama is wrong as well as appearing to have developed a casual preference for non-acute legal reasoning and bad economic conceptualizing.
The moral path for the nation is the only reasonable way to go. Education and intellectual explanations of the world’s limits to growth must gain voluntary compliance from the people of the United States. The military should remain a 'don't ask, don't tell environment, and homosexuals in the social civilian sector should get out of the public political spotlight and leave heterosexuals alone. The rights of all citizens to have an uncorrupted public sector with equal opportunity should not be a license to trample the rights of others. There are innumerable other, better methods of an honest nature whereby the homosexual perversion preferring U.S. citizens can secure their fundamental social rights. Homosexuality should be irrelevant regarding other citizens. Homosexuals have no economic rights that all other Americans shouldn't have as well, nor should they.
10/13/10
New Federal Efforts to Become 'The Evil Empire'
Successor systems in ecosystems follow the demise or destruction of a given existing ecosytem. This occurs in politics too. In Afghanistan today we see an American led foreign social ecosystem management structure attempting to transform the kinds of human life liviong there. They are trying to harden the native Afghans to have a kind of Taliban or fundamentalist Muslim resistance. Yet while the Afghan ecosystem may have fewer fundamentalist Muslim warriors today, there are hordes of them over the border in Pakistan nurtured in natural fundamentalist Muslim seedling facilities waiting to return and recover the governing ecosystem.
The United States for a few decades has involved there economics in foreign government cultivation generally without success. The last Shah of Iran was one such project that was overtaken by native plants choking out the royal garden.
In America today a federal judge acting on behalf of the Log Cabin Homosexuals of Illinois has order a butch receptive military to become law worldwide. Our American unholy war on traditional morality is a reason why some perceive the U.S. Feminist-Homosexual Jihad on fundamentalist Mohammadanism in Afghanistan as a holy war. There can be no mistaking the fact that the post-modern atheist politicalo action is an unholy war led by mufsidoon warriors possibly associated with Satan.
Oh well, that makes it a hard sell in the Central Asian Muslim countries with their Islamic Law vs American Unholy Law of Satanic Perversions. We will learn how the gardening project goes, hoping that the budget for the unholy war is reduced a little. We hope to buy propane for-ourselves in Alaskan homeless camps this winter. Knocking the ice off the coffee cup and drinking ice coffee to get a cold chill reminds me of Solzhenitsyn's Kolyma transit camp facility dilema of the herring and ice water of hunger option too much.
I have been reading the Ptarmigan’s Dilemma by John and Mary Therberge this October in Alaska and made it through an interesting section on ornithological facts. I should mention that the major premise of the book is on the subject of the organization of life and of ecosystems too. As a soul with an avocation in philosophy perhaps I have a different perspective on life and its development from non-living materials and of the cosmological relationships of all things. Yet I like the Therberg’s book for several reasons especially with its attention to detail of the natural world.
When I learned today on the broadcast news of the order of a federal judge in California that the U.S. military should immediately end its practice of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ in order to allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military, I was reading about the number of notes per second some select songbird species can sing—as many as forty. Human beings comparatively have the capability of singing four notes per second.
The competition amongst birds to sing in order to communicate territorial claims and find a mate in more populous areas compels certain features and variation patterns of song coding that will enable them to recognize their own species. Perhaps modern humans in urban environments are better than bird brained creatures, yet we see the same intensity in language development in rave speech today that might be compared with birdsong. At any rate, the genotypes and phenotypes of birds tend to be exclusively devoted to evolutionary self—interest, as perhaps was the federal judge’s decision to force a heterosexual military social environment to openly allow potential predator and minimally anti-communication reinforcing homosexuals openly in their midst.
The evolution of social environments and of governments is a complex affair comparable in several ways to the evolution of ecosystems. Human ecosystem development often comprises simple exploitation of its resources. Americans in particular tend to live in a veritable technological existential automobile commune of variegated structure that reinforces fossil fuel consumption and patterns of social behavior that reinforce those particular social values with a mythos of free enterprise capitalism overlying the continental phenomena of highway expansion and larger vehicles. Environments over-stressed by a given species and generally the human species often collapse.
It is the collapse of environmental systems that is of interest. In reading The Ptarmigan’s Dilemma I was again reminded of the complex interaction of various species in supporting the entire structure. Birds may bury seeds or transport them for sprouting; bovine hooves may create indentations in the sod for seeds to sprout and so on. The natural relationships in any given ecosystem are complex as are those of human social institutions such as government.
In the United States the people have a tradition of government with the consent of the governed. Perhaps today with so many urban Americans, so few farmers and people living directly off the environment as primary producers in a renewable way ( I believe the Therberges called it living off the interest of nature rather than on the principle) the concept of the consent of the governed might be changed such that it morphs into a metrosexual-existential paradigm of bread, circuses (pro sports) and good corporate or government jobs rather than of individuals and families well able to earn a living without being within a tightly supervised social establishment.
Compiling national debt may be one simple way that the people of the United States will create a successor system to a government by the butch. Returning the United States to just fifty individual states as nations would eliminate the debt and permit at least a few states to work toward ecological renewal and full employment without growth in consumption of natural resources.
Some people theorize that the elites may have designed a two tier plan to reduce global population through intense biotechnological structuring. A world populated by non-reproducing athletes and butch supervisors of an androgynous nature could simple discontinue the entertainment-athlete class in a generation crashing the human population. With most people working at entertainment or non-materially productive work primarily in a non-ecological economic based economy, discontinuing the pleasured drone athletes could even seem humane. It is a brave new world.
The United States for a few decades has involved there economics in foreign government cultivation generally without success. The last Shah of Iran was one such project that was overtaken by native plants choking out the royal garden.
In America today a federal judge acting on behalf of the Log Cabin Homosexuals of Illinois has order a butch receptive military to become law worldwide. Our American unholy war on traditional morality is a reason why some perceive the U.S. Feminist-Homosexual Jihad on fundamentalist Mohammadanism in Afghanistan as a holy war. There can be no mistaking the fact that the post-modern atheist politicalo action is an unholy war led by mufsidoon warriors possibly associated with Satan.
Oh well, that makes it a hard sell in the Central Asian Muslim countries with their Islamic Law vs American Unholy Law of Satanic Perversions. We will learn how the gardening project goes, hoping that the budget for the unholy war is reduced a little. We hope to buy propane for-ourselves in Alaskan homeless camps this winter. Knocking the ice off the coffee cup and drinking ice coffee to get a cold chill reminds me of Solzhenitsyn's Kolyma transit camp facility dilema of the herring and ice water of hunger option too much.
I have been reading the Ptarmigan’s Dilemma by John and Mary Therberge this October in Alaska and made it through an interesting section on ornithological facts. I should mention that the major premise of the book is on the subject of the organization of life and of ecosystems too. As a soul with an avocation in philosophy perhaps I have a different perspective on life and its development from non-living materials and of the cosmological relationships of all things. Yet I like the Therberg’s book for several reasons especially with its attention to detail of the natural world.
When I learned today on the broadcast news of the order of a federal judge in California that the U.S. military should immediately end its practice of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ in order to allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military, I was reading about the number of notes per second some select songbird species can sing—as many as forty. Human beings comparatively have the capability of singing four notes per second.
The competition amongst birds to sing in order to communicate territorial claims and find a mate in more populous areas compels certain features and variation patterns of song coding that will enable them to recognize their own species. Perhaps modern humans in urban environments are better than bird brained creatures, yet we see the same intensity in language development in rave speech today that might be compared with birdsong. At any rate, the genotypes and phenotypes of birds tend to be exclusively devoted to evolutionary self—interest, as perhaps was the federal judge’s decision to force a heterosexual military social environment to openly allow potential predator and minimally anti-communication reinforcing homosexuals openly in their midst.
The evolution of social environments and of governments is a complex affair comparable in several ways to the evolution of ecosystems. Human ecosystem development often comprises simple exploitation of its resources. Americans in particular tend to live in a veritable technological existential automobile commune of variegated structure that reinforces fossil fuel consumption and patterns of social behavior that reinforce those particular social values with a mythos of free enterprise capitalism overlying the continental phenomena of highway expansion and larger vehicles. Environments over-stressed by a given species and generally the human species often collapse.
It is the collapse of environmental systems that is of interest. In reading The Ptarmigan’s Dilemma I was again reminded of the complex interaction of various species in supporting the entire structure. Birds may bury seeds or transport them for sprouting; bovine hooves may create indentations in the sod for seeds to sprout and so on. The natural relationships in any given ecosystem are complex as are those of human social institutions such as government.
In the United States the people have a tradition of government with the consent of the governed. Perhaps today with so many urban Americans, so few farmers and people living directly off the environment as primary producers in a renewable way ( I believe the Therberges called it living off the interest of nature rather than on the principle) the concept of the consent of the governed might be changed such that it morphs into a metrosexual-existential paradigm of bread, circuses (pro sports) and good corporate or government jobs rather than of individuals and families well able to earn a living without being within a tightly supervised social establishment.
Compiling national debt may be one simple way that the people of the United States will create a successor system to a government by the butch. Returning the United States to just fifty individual states as nations would eliminate the debt and permit at least a few states to work toward ecological renewal and full employment without growth in consumption of natural resources.
Some people theorize that the elites may have designed a two tier plan to reduce global population through intense biotechnological structuring. A world populated by non-reproducing athletes and butch supervisors of an androgynous nature could simple discontinue the entertainment-athlete class in a generation crashing the human population. With most people working at entertainment or non-materially productive work primarily in a non-ecological economic based economy, discontinuing the pleasured drone athletes could even seem humane. It is a brave new world.
10/12/10
Joe Miller and Ecosystem Stabilization- Federal Genotype/Phenotype Wave Communications Clashes
Genotypes and phenotypes contrast genetic versus environmental and behavioral elements of the construction of an individual and species. Bird species differentiation from environmental separation as well as from competition with other birds may change their song patterns.
I have been reading the Ptarmigan’s Dilemma by John and Mary Therberge this October in Alaska and made it through an interesting section on ornithological facts. I should mention that the major premise of the book is on the subject of the organization of life and of ecosystems too. As a soul with an avocation in philosophy perhaps I have a different perspective on life and its development from non-living materials and of the cosmological relationships of all things. Yet I like the Therberg’s book for several reasons especially with its attention to detail of the natural world.
When I learned today on the broadcast news of the order of a federal judge in California that the U.S. military should immediately end its practice of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ in order to allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military, I was reading about the number of notes per second some select songbird species can sing—as many as forty. Human beings comparatively have the capability of singing four notes per second.
The competition amongst birds to sing in order to communicate territorial claims and find a mate in more populous areas compels certain features and variation patterns of song coding that will enable them to recognize their own species. Perhaps modern humans in urban environments are better than bird brained creatures, yet we see the same intensity in language development in rave speech today that might be compared with birdsong. At any rate, the genotypes and phenotypes of birds tend to be exclusively devoted to evolutionary self—interest, as perhaps was the federal judge’s decision to force a heterosexual military social environment to openly allow potential predator and minimally anti-communication reinforcing homosexuals openly in their midst.
The evolution of social environments and of governments is a complex affair comparable in several ways to the evolution of ecosystems. Human ecosystem development often comprises simple exploitation of its resources. Americans in particular tend to live in a veritable technological existential automobile commune of variegated structure that reinforces fossil fuel consumption and patterns of social behavior that reinforce those particular social values with a mythos of free enterprise capitalism overlying the continental phenomena of highway expansion and larger vehicles. Environments over-stressed by a given species and generally the human species often collapse.
It is the collapse of environmental systems that is of interest. In reading The Ptarmigan’s Dilemma I was again reminded of the complex interaction of various species in supporting the entire structure. Birds may bury seeds or transport them for sprouting; bovine hooves may create indentations in the sod for seeds to sprout and so on. The natural relationships in any given ecosystem are complex as are those of human social institutions such as government.
In the United States the people have a tradition of government with the consent of the governed. Perhaps today with so many urban Americans, so few farmers and people living directly off the environment as primary producers in a renewable way ( I believe the Therberges called it living off the interest of nature rather than on the principle) the concept of the consent of the governed might be changed such that it morphs into a metrosexual-existential paradigm of bread, circuses (pro sports) and good corporate or government jobs rather than of individuals and families well able to earn a living without being within a tightly supervised social establishment.
In Alaska long ago a miner named Frank Miller and his brother arrived to look for gold. Frank’s brother brought the first cow into the Yukon over the Chilkoot trail from Dyea near Skagway. ‘Cow’ Miller sold milk to Yukon miners by the glass for an exorbitant, enterprising cost, and eventually the Miller family established a roadhouse and prospected along the eponymous Miller Creek on the Steese Highway. The Therberge’s described their friendship with Frank Miller who lived to the age of 94 as well as the ecosystem changes to the Miller Creek area after Frank Miller’s death by.
If Joe Miller becomes the next U.S. Senator, we hope that he will continue the Alaska pioneering tradition of that family name not only on his farm that still has a mortgage on it, but in the entire state as well regarding the ecosystem as a vital and sensitive living thing requiring care and careful though to manage in a healthy way.
Ecosystem succession has a couple of basic theories that I won’t describe here, yet I think that principles of ecosystem succession may apply as well at the human social level of government as well. If the people are governed without their consent such as when onerous practices and polices are forced upon them they can effectively revolt in a variety of ways. Ghandi’s principles of non-violence might be applied through federal deficit spending in order to create such a large public debt that the people of the individual state general agree that a succession to fifty independent nations without public debt might be a better idea.
That is a reason why the federal government’s efforts to force a homosexualized social environment upon the nation in a variety of ways may not be an effective way to create a better society. Maybe creating a better society isn’t the obligation or duty of the U.S. Government yet we may prefer to believe that it is.
Fundamentally laws made by a government can be compared to driving an automobile and rules of the road. Each individual’ freedom to move is regarded as the ultimate good. Gridlock defeats all social interests collectively and may require extreme action temporarily suspending individual rights (such as detours). In theory I do not care if a driver wants to park his car sideways on a busy freeway—he can take his car wherever he likes except on my private property (if I had any). Yet in practice laws regulating auto driving are required in order to allow the traffic to flow freely.
Today it is difficult to advance the Unit6ed States beyond the automobile-highway paradigm of life. Expanding the number of roads and destroying the health of ecosystems are facts of life. Species are being exterminated and the federal government consistently tries to force a homosexual paradigm upon the laws of the United States. A butch government is not a liked government, and dissent may include dissolving the government of the United States through a non-violent succession one day, and perhaps it would be best to avoid that, and perhaps not.
In order to conserve and restore an intelligent ecosystem health relationship of most Americans to the environment returning the sovereignty of the individual states to themselves may be a better way to allow ecosystem conservatives to live in and restore the health of at least a portion of the United States of America.
Well, who can say what the future will allow to develop? Intelligent governance makes the people satisfied rather than unhappy. It brings a balanced budget and a healthy environment. Economic growth occurs when full employment happens through sharing of existing resources and efficiency increases in use of ecological resources and technological knowledge. Economic growth that occurs through the increase of consumption and despoliation of the environment may bring a concentration of wealth and reallocation of natural resource conversion and manufacture production to improve the standard of living of the rich instead of a reduction of the number of unemployed.
A good government educates and reinforces the valid principle of eliminating poverty and unemployment nationally without increasing gross natural resource consumption. Millions of jobs could be created in transitioning toward a renewable, full employment ecosystem revitalization economy with Herman Dailey’s ecological economics criteria. A sustainable national economy with 300 to 500 million people in the United States that is in environmental recovery is not so difficult to achieve simultaneously with full employment and health care for the poor and improving quality of life for all citizens, yet it requires and effort and intention by politicians to accomplish—it will not simply ‘evolve’.
I have been reading the Ptarmigan’s Dilemma by John and Mary Therberge this October in Alaska and made it through an interesting section on ornithological facts. I should mention that the major premise of the book is on the subject of the organization of life and of ecosystems too. As a soul with an avocation in philosophy perhaps I have a different perspective on life and its development from non-living materials and of the cosmological relationships of all things. Yet I like the Therberg’s book for several reasons especially with its attention to detail of the natural world.
When I learned today on the broadcast news of the order of a federal judge in California that the U.S. military should immediately end its practice of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ in order to allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military, I was reading about the number of notes per second some select songbird species can sing—as many as forty. Human beings comparatively have the capability of singing four notes per second.
The competition amongst birds to sing in order to communicate territorial claims and find a mate in more populous areas compels certain features and variation patterns of song coding that will enable them to recognize their own species. Perhaps modern humans in urban environments are better than bird brained creatures, yet we see the same intensity in language development in rave speech today that might be compared with birdsong. At any rate, the genotypes and phenotypes of birds tend to be exclusively devoted to evolutionary self—interest, as perhaps was the federal judge’s decision to force a heterosexual military social environment to openly allow potential predator and minimally anti-communication reinforcing homosexuals openly in their midst.
The evolution of social environments and of governments is a complex affair comparable in several ways to the evolution of ecosystems. Human ecosystem development often comprises simple exploitation of its resources. Americans in particular tend to live in a veritable technological existential automobile commune of variegated structure that reinforces fossil fuel consumption and patterns of social behavior that reinforce those particular social values with a mythos of free enterprise capitalism overlying the continental phenomena of highway expansion and larger vehicles. Environments over-stressed by a given species and generally the human species often collapse.
It is the collapse of environmental systems that is of interest. In reading The Ptarmigan’s Dilemma I was again reminded of the complex interaction of various species in supporting the entire structure. Birds may bury seeds or transport them for sprouting; bovine hooves may create indentations in the sod for seeds to sprout and so on. The natural relationships in any given ecosystem are complex as are those of human social institutions such as government.
In the United States the people have a tradition of government with the consent of the governed. Perhaps today with so many urban Americans, so few farmers and people living directly off the environment as primary producers in a renewable way ( I believe the Therberges called it living off the interest of nature rather than on the principle) the concept of the consent of the governed might be changed such that it morphs into a metrosexual-existential paradigm of bread, circuses (pro sports) and good corporate or government jobs rather than of individuals and families well able to earn a living without being within a tightly supervised social establishment.
In Alaska long ago a miner named Frank Miller and his brother arrived to look for gold. Frank’s brother brought the first cow into the Yukon over the Chilkoot trail from Dyea near Skagway. ‘Cow’ Miller sold milk to Yukon miners by the glass for an exorbitant, enterprising cost, and eventually the Miller family established a roadhouse and prospected along the eponymous Miller Creek on the Steese Highway. The Therberge’s described their friendship with Frank Miller who lived to the age of 94 as well as the ecosystem changes to the Miller Creek area after Frank Miller’s death by.
If Joe Miller becomes the next U.S. Senator, we hope that he will continue the Alaska pioneering tradition of that family name not only on his farm that still has a mortgage on it, but in the entire state as well regarding the ecosystem as a vital and sensitive living thing requiring care and careful though to manage in a healthy way.
Ecosystem succession has a couple of basic theories that I won’t describe here, yet I think that principles of ecosystem succession may apply as well at the human social level of government as well. If the people are governed without their consent such as when onerous practices and polices are forced upon them they can effectively revolt in a variety of ways. Ghandi’s principles of non-violence might be applied through federal deficit spending in order to create such a large public debt that the people of the individual state general agree that a succession to fifty independent nations without public debt might be a better idea.
That is a reason why the federal government’s efforts to force a homosexualized social environment upon the nation in a variety of ways may not be an effective way to create a better society. Maybe creating a better society isn’t the obligation or duty of the U.S. Government yet we may prefer to believe that it is.
Fundamentally laws made by a government can be compared to driving an automobile and rules of the road. Each individual’ freedom to move is regarded as the ultimate good. Gridlock defeats all social interests collectively and may require extreme action temporarily suspending individual rights (such as detours). In theory I do not care if a driver wants to park his car sideways on a busy freeway—he can take his car wherever he likes except on my private property (if I had any). Yet in practice laws regulating auto driving are required in order to allow the traffic to flow freely.
Today it is difficult to advance the Unit6ed States beyond the automobile-highway paradigm of life. Expanding the number of roads and destroying the health of ecosystems are facts of life. Species are being exterminated and the federal government consistently tries to force a homosexual paradigm upon the laws of the United States. A butch government is not a liked government, and dissent may include dissolving the government of the United States through a non-violent succession one day, and perhaps it would be best to avoid that, and perhaps not.
In order to conserve and restore an intelligent ecosystem health relationship of most Americans to the environment returning the sovereignty of the individual states to themselves may be a better way to allow ecosystem conservatives to live in and restore the health of at least a portion of the United States of America.
Well, who can say what the future will allow to develop? Intelligent governance makes the people satisfied rather than unhappy. It brings a balanced budget and a healthy environment. Economic growth occurs when full employment happens through sharing of existing resources and efficiency increases in use of ecological resources and technological knowledge. Economic growth that occurs through the increase of consumption and despoliation of the environment may bring a concentration of wealth and reallocation of natural resource conversion and manufacture production to improve the standard of living of the rich instead of a reduction of the number of unemployed.
A good government educates and reinforces the valid principle of eliminating poverty and unemployment nationally without increasing gross natural resource consumption. Millions of jobs could be created in transitioning toward a renewable, full employment ecosystem revitalization economy with Herman Dailey’s ecological economics criteria. A sustainable national economy with 300 to 500 million people in the United States that is in environmental recovery is not so difficult to achieve simultaneously with full employment and health care for the poor and improving quality of life for all citizens, yet it requires and effort and intention by politicians to accomplish—it will not simply ‘evolve’.
10/9/10
Latin King Goonies Fail Federal Workplace Hate Free Crime Environment-G.W.H. Bush-Gates-Rumsfeld Contractor Era
Finally the federal judicial effort to provide special protection to special elements of society have paid off. The vicious gang beating by gangsters of a gang recruit applicant and his acquiantances has brought charges that hate was an additional element of the Latin King Goonies Gang decision to victimize homosexuals.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101009/ap_on_re_us/us_gang_hate_crime_4
Normally, gang beatings, robbings, stabbings, extortions and murders of straight people and straight gang rivals occur without the bias of hate. Usually gangsters are kinder and gentle-like Don Corlione perhaps. Gang workplace rules for criminal activities have now come under federal scrutiny and are likely to improve.
If only Elliot Ness would have had such powerful federal weapons to fight hate perhaps the Lavender Hill mob of Chicago could have expanded its rum running turf and prevented the St. Valentines Day massacre from occurring-perhaps, maybe.
The Federal hate crimes laws to prosecute gang members in Juarez Mexico and Tijuana reaching over the border into the United State may not slow down killing much, yet at least Americans can rest assured that it won’t be done hatefully.
The hate of gangs may actually increase in era of high unemployment as the broadcast media seem to have easy money, morals and corrupt power. Yet what are gangs that the federal government is mindful of them?
Brown and Root was a large Defense contractor in the Vietnam era that built most of the largest U.S. bases in Vietnam. Former Defence Secretary Rumsfeld visited Cam Ran bay in 1965 as a congressman Of course he served along with George H.W. Bush in the Nixon administration-one as the youngest defense Sect. ever and the other as Chief of the Central Intelligence Agency.
The G.H.W. Bush effect on U.S. politics and defense contracting through the era of the Father, the Son and the Rumsfeld-Gates axis has continued for a few decades with some member of that group virtually continuously in service of the U.S. Government. While not exactly a gang it does present an evident appearancee of a conflict of interest with defense contractors, foreigh military engagements and U.S. foreign policy. The drift of thte United States toward making hate crimes a kind of marlin waiting capture by federal authorities also increased in this era, with present Defense Secretary and former Clinton C.I.A. Chief Bill Gates advocating for an open homosexual presence in the U.S. Military.
Since Defense Secretary Gates was so well informed about the Pakistani-Kashmiri-Afghanistan terrorist networks, it is a wonder that since taking office as Defense Secretary the United States has not developed a better policy to conclude the Kashmir-Pakistan-India line of control problems and ran the border legally halfway between K-2 and the nearest glacier to the east. With such a development Pakistan might agree that the presence of any terrorist training bases in Pakistan should put Pakistan non the watch list of nations supporting terrorism.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101009/ap_on_re_us/us_gang_hate_crime_4
Normally, gang beatings, robbings, stabbings, extortions and murders of straight people and straight gang rivals occur without the bias of hate. Usually gangsters are kinder and gentle-like Don Corlione perhaps. Gang workplace rules for criminal activities have now come under federal scrutiny and are likely to improve.
If only Elliot Ness would have had such powerful federal weapons to fight hate perhaps the Lavender Hill mob of Chicago could have expanded its rum running turf and prevented the St. Valentines Day massacre from occurring-perhaps, maybe.
The Federal hate crimes laws to prosecute gang members in Juarez Mexico and Tijuana reaching over the border into the United State may not slow down killing much, yet at least Americans can rest assured that it won’t be done hatefully.
The hate of gangs may actually increase in era of high unemployment as the broadcast media seem to have easy money, morals and corrupt power. Yet what are gangs that the federal government is mindful of them?
Brown and Root was a large Defense contractor in the Vietnam era that built most of the largest U.S. bases in Vietnam. Former Defence Secretary Rumsfeld visited Cam Ran bay in 1965 as a congressman Of course he served along with George H.W. Bush in the Nixon administration-one as the youngest defense Sect. ever and the other as Chief of the Central Intelligence Agency.
The G.H.W. Bush effect on U.S. politics and defense contracting through the era of the Father, the Son and the Rumsfeld-Gates axis has continued for a few decades with some member of that group virtually continuously in service of the U.S. Government. While not exactly a gang it does present an evident appearancee of a conflict of interest with defense contractors, foreigh military engagements and U.S. foreign policy. The drift of thte United States toward making hate crimes a kind of marlin waiting capture by federal authorities also increased in this era, with present Defense Secretary and former Clinton C.I.A. Chief Bill Gates advocating for an open homosexual presence in the U.S. Military.
Since Defense Secretary Gates was so well informed about the Pakistani-Kashmiri-Afghanistan terrorist networks, it is a wonder that since taking office as Defense Secretary the United States has not developed a better policy to conclude the Kashmir-Pakistan-India line of control problems and ran the border legally halfway between K-2 and the nearest glacier to the east. With such a development Pakistan might agree that the presence of any terrorist training bases in Pakistan should put Pakistan non the watch list of nations supporting terrorism.
10/8/10
After Osama Bin Ladin's Abu Jindal Declaration of War on America-Evolution of Economic Attacks?
Since Osama Bin Ladin speaking at his Abu Jindal terrorist training camp in Afghanistan declared in 1998 that he would send attacks upon American targets, U.S. intelligence and military services had had a difficult time keeping up with the latest Al Qa’eda T.O.E. (table of evolution). http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/afghanistan/militia-fac.htm
When the United States allowed al Qa’eda to escape from Tora Bora and Khandahar with the Taliban of Afghanistan the terrorist organizations were able to return to former friendly locales in Pakistan and more recently Kashmir. Al Qa’eda today may have more terrorist training infrastructure than it did in 1998-the year that Pakistan detonated five nuclear bombs at once to demonstrate to India their nuclear capability.
http://www.currentintelligence.net/agenda/2010/7/5/al-qaeda-in-kashmir.html
http://kashmirihindu.wordpress.com/2009/04/26/taliban-al-qaeda-linked-to-kashmir/
Pakistan has had a history since 1947 of support for radical Muslim terrorist organization fundamentally to war against Indian political and military forces in Kashmir. Pakistani intelligence and military services have largely controlled these organizations. Terrorist networks of large jihadist groups such as Hizbul Mujahideen are quite bloody and ruthless even purging rival jihadist organizations by the thousands. These organizations with Kashmiri insurrectionist goals have long trained and even fought in Afghanistan.
Al Qa’eda has declared a new branch for Kashmir named al Qaeda in Kasmir. Without a good regional approach to terrorist management abroad, and a new ecological economic pro-nationalist spin on full employment for U.S. citizens and no immigration of cheap, destabilizing foreign labor the prospects for American defrapping of the fundamentalist Muslim assault upon western civilization funded largely by oil sales profit sharing diminish.
It would be a fine thing if some Nobel Peace Prize winning political liberator like China's Liu Xiaobo emerge to lead the Central Asian Muslim world away from the road to global terrorist jihad, yet that seems unlikely.
Because the U.S. economic structure has moved away from a monetary base with money function generally as an intermediate abstract trade device to one in which the manipulation of money and finance debases the value of real material production the United States has moved into an economic milieu with more regard for the possession of the intrinsically worthless paper than of the well being of citizens.
Financial networking has become the main producer of more money (besides the dubiously honorable U.S. Federal Reserve that may just print up money to buy federal bonds thus further debasing the value of material production). Even home mortgages have become commodified and tradable en masse by foreign concerns. The development of global financial networks that have undermined U.S. material security and production values of material goods in a practical sense have made the United States vulnerable to foreign economic terrorism. In reliance upon foreign oil and a corrupting and implicitly environmentally obsolete economic structure the United States places itself on the auction block of financial terrorism and Muslim intrigue. Plainly if al Qa’eda were to take out the Saudi Ras Tannura oil facility or otherwise close down mid-east oil sales right away the U.S. economy would plunge into depression.
Al Qa’eda is unlikely to destroy the primary source of Saudi, Sunni, Wahhabist wealth. The Arab terrorists training in Pakistan and possibly Kashmir share the same religious and national credentials even if from an antipathetic economic position in some instances.
Not much can be said for American prospects for not merging through much terrorism and financial defeat to eventual Muslim control and even Sharia if the nation’s leadership is simply stupid, lazy and greedy. There is no guarantee of anything politically in the wild kingdom.
When the United States allowed al Qa’eda to escape from Tora Bora and Khandahar with the Taliban of Afghanistan the terrorist organizations were able to return to former friendly locales in Pakistan and more recently Kashmir. Al Qa’eda today may have more terrorist training infrastructure than it did in 1998-the year that Pakistan detonated five nuclear bombs at once to demonstrate to India their nuclear capability.
http://www.currentintelligence.net/agenda/2010/7/5/al-qaeda-in-kashmir.html
http://kashmirihindu.wordpress.com/2009/04/26/taliban-al-qaeda-linked-to-kashmir/
Pakistan has had a history since 1947 of support for radical Muslim terrorist organization fundamentally to war against Indian political and military forces in Kashmir. Pakistani intelligence and military services have largely controlled these organizations. Terrorist networks of large jihadist groups such as Hizbul Mujahideen are quite bloody and ruthless even purging rival jihadist organizations by the thousands. These organizations with Kashmiri insurrectionist goals have long trained and even fought in Afghanistan.
Al Qa’eda has declared a new branch for Kashmir named al Qaeda in Kasmir. Without a good regional approach to terrorist management abroad, and a new ecological economic pro-nationalist spin on full employment for U.S. citizens and no immigration of cheap, destabilizing foreign labor the prospects for American defrapping of the fundamentalist Muslim assault upon western civilization funded largely by oil sales profit sharing diminish.
It would be a fine thing if some Nobel Peace Prize winning political liberator like China's Liu Xiaobo emerge to lead the Central Asian Muslim world away from the road to global terrorist jihad, yet that seems unlikely.
Because the U.S. economic structure has moved away from a monetary base with money function generally as an intermediate abstract trade device to one in which the manipulation of money and finance debases the value of real material production the United States has moved into an economic milieu with more regard for the possession of the intrinsically worthless paper than of the well being of citizens.
Financial networking has become the main producer of more money (besides the dubiously honorable U.S. Federal Reserve that may just print up money to buy federal bonds thus further debasing the value of material production). Even home mortgages have become commodified and tradable en masse by foreign concerns. The development of global financial networks that have undermined U.S. material security and production values of material goods in a practical sense have made the United States vulnerable to foreign economic terrorism. In reliance upon foreign oil and a corrupting and implicitly environmentally obsolete economic structure the United States places itself on the auction block of financial terrorism and Muslim intrigue. Plainly if al Qa’eda were to take out the Saudi Ras Tannura oil facility or otherwise close down mid-east oil sales right away the U.S. economy would plunge into depression.
Al Qa’eda is unlikely to destroy the primary source of Saudi, Sunni, Wahhabist wealth. The Arab terrorists training in Pakistan and possibly Kashmir share the same religious and national credentials even if from an antipathetic economic position in some instances.
Not much can be said for American prospects for not merging through much terrorism and financial defeat to eventual Muslim control and even Sharia if the nation’s leadership is simply stupid, lazy and greedy. There is no guarantee of anything politically in the wild kingdom.
10/7/10
Mini-Submarines as Nuclear Bomb Package Delivery Vectors (The Gomar Khan Factor)
Since 1996 a variety of home-built semi submersible submarines have been fabricated to deliver cocaine to the United States from Columbia. Many of these large smuggling vehicles are apprehended by legal authorities, perhaps some are not. The potential for manufacturing very small, completely submersible drone craft to deliver a nuclear bomb to a harbor city such as San Francisco, Los Angeles or Anchorage Alaska, Boston or Washington D.C. via the Chesapeake Bay is manifest. Launched from an approaching ship, fishing boat or seafood processor offshore, made to carry at bomb at a set depth such as 400 feet at a slow speed, the minimal drone submersible travelling along may methodically make its way to the harbor to explode.
http://www.niuginidiving.com/japsub.html
http://www.heiszwolf.com/subs/plans/plans.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narco_submarine
http://www.psubs.org/store
We believe the engineering and fabrication capacity for production of minimallly detectable mini-submarines is well within the ability of numerous fundamentalist Muslim terrorist organizations. If launched over the side perhaps 100 miles from the U.S. coast, or from international fishing boats in the Gulf of Alaska, successfully delivery of a drone, automatically guided mini-submarine nuclear bomb package is evident. Besides the Mexican border infiltration route, the undersea route is also quite real.
The Bush administration in 2008 produced a Homeland Security measure to defend against small boat ingression of weapons deliver packages by terrorists, yet we remain unconvinced that a foreign fishing vessel in international waters beyond Kodiak could not introduce a mini-submersible drone to crawl up Cook Inlet to Anchorage, or alternatively from the Grand Banks into Boston Harbor.
http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2008/04/28/homeland-security-unveils-plans-to-thwart-small-boat-terror-attacks/
Pakistan has about 100 nuclear warheads and has miniaturized some for use on missiles. It is increasing its plutonium producing capacity, nad manufactures a significant about of plutonium. The Nagasaki bomb used in World War Two had only 6 kilograms of Pu-239. A good plutonium bomb needs only 8 to 11 kilograms, and the Pakistanis spike their bombs with tritium, and a few ounce of that makes a nuclear bomb 300% more explosive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
Making a mini-submarine drone able to deliver a 30 to 40 pound bomb of U-239 doesn't seems that difficult. With the I.S.I., the Taleban, al Qa'eda and a plethora of additional terrorist groups good buddies, perhaps new border security control measures should be taken to screen out the big bang the first time it's launched.
http://www.niuginidiving.com/japsub.html
http://www.heiszwolf.com/subs/plans/plans.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narco_submarine
http://www.psubs.org/store
We believe the engineering and fabrication capacity for production of minimallly detectable mini-submarines is well within the ability of numerous fundamentalist Muslim terrorist organizations. If launched over the side perhaps 100 miles from the U.S. coast, or from international fishing boats in the Gulf of Alaska, successfully delivery of a drone, automatically guided mini-submarine nuclear bomb package is evident. Besides the Mexican border infiltration route, the undersea route is also quite real.
The Bush administration in 2008 produced a Homeland Security measure to defend against small boat ingression of weapons deliver packages by terrorists, yet we remain unconvinced that a foreign fishing vessel in international waters beyond Kodiak could not introduce a mini-submersible drone to crawl up Cook Inlet to Anchorage, or alternatively from the Grand Banks into Boston Harbor.
http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2008/04/28/homeland-security-unveils-plans-to-thwart-small-boat-terror-attacks/
Pakistan has about 100 nuclear warheads and has miniaturized some for use on missiles. It is increasing its plutonium producing capacity, nad manufactures a significant about of plutonium. The Nagasaki bomb used in World War Two had only 6 kilograms of Pu-239. A good plutonium bomb needs only 8 to 11 kilograms, and the Pakistanis spike their bombs with tritium, and a few ounce of that makes a nuclear bomb 300% more explosive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
Making a mini-submarine drone able to deliver a 30 to 40 pound bomb of U-239 doesn't seems that difficult. With the I.S.I., the Taleban, al Qa'eda and a plethora of additional terrorist groups good buddies, perhaps new border security control measures should be taken to screen out the big bang the first time it's launched.
10/6/10
Kashmir, Pakistan, India, Afghanistan & U.S. Foreign Policy
This is a brief article to describe some elements of the equilibrium of terrorist organization location, activity and relationship in the central Asian region, as I understand it. For an American citizen with interests besides those of foreign policy objectives and analysis there is quite a lot of time consuming reading required to get a meaningful idea of the relationships in this area.
The U.S. Defense budget is just about the largest expense annual in the U.S. federal budget. We as citizens are told by the military from year t year that the 'war' must go on for several years for national defense. We also wonder if the cost is worth the return. Since it is our federal budget, we have no necessity of signing carte blanche these checks too fund military, defense contractors and C.I.A. ventures abroad. National interest might be in making our own nation prosper rather than those of central Asia.
So we wonder; is the premise that installing a friendly government in Afghanistan will halt most al Qaeda terrorist attacks on the United States valid. Another point possible, desirable and so forth. We wonder how many years that will take, and what the opportunity for the United States will be?
The origin of terrorist training camps and organizations in Pakistan goes back to the early 19th century. Jihadist organizations sought to repel the noon-Muslim British occupiers. Yet we will skip over that to the more recent 1940's, 1970s and 1980's when two more recent political conflicts stimulated the formation of jihadist terrorist training organizations in Pakistan.
The first and most significant cause was the sectarian separation of India and Pakistan and their fight to control Kashmir. On one side is the Hindu Indian Government with the legal title to Kashmir and on the other is the majority population of Muslims with decades long support continuing to the present of training of jihadist Muslim guerilla fighters. The 1972 line of control roughly divided Kashmir and Jammu in half and is a good enough permanent boundary, yet neither nation (Pakistan or India) would be happy with that, and the additional problem of Kashmiri Muslim guerrillas fighting for Kashmiri national independence form both Pakistan and India also exists.
The Pakistan Intelligence Service and military have worked for decades in providing training and support for Kashmiri Muslim jhadist guerrilla fighters. Pakistani leaders have supported the constellation of terrorist training camps and have provided arms and munitions including some from the United States.
The Afghanistan war against the Soviets and the Afghan civil war following led to the Taliban taking control of most of the nation. The Taliban were formed in Pakistan and simply move south when American forces are present. It is possible that a natural selection of fundamentalist Muslim leaders are elevated to lead the Taliban and that to negotiate with the United States would be suicidal in effect, for the Taliban would be at the top of one jihadist pyramid and unlikely to receive broad popular support in the jihadist community if they fraternized with the infidels much. U.S. concepts of negotiating with theTaliban seem destine to just create a Hamas effect of shifting the violence to another terrorist organization and infrastructure supported at sometime by the Pakistani I.S.I. (intelligence service).
The United States to reduce the terrorist training in Pakistan would need to settle the Kashmir issue satisfactorily to all concerned parties first. That would reduce tensions between India and Pakistan. Pakistan does not want Indian involvement in Afghanistan and were probably happy when the Indian embassy in Kabul was blown up in 2008.
From my point of view it seems improbable that the Indian-Pakistani boundary, water rights and Kashmir control issues will be solved in the next year or two, and that means more pressure for Pakistan to support Muslim jihadist guerrillas to train in Northern Pakistan to establish terror structures and cells in Kashmir. Whenever Pakistan regulars go to fight in Kashmir as they have in the past against Indian forces it escalates the conflict--and that could lead to a nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India potentially.
A comprehensive solution to the problems of Pakistan and Kashmir seems an essential element of a plan to have peace in Afghanistan. It is dubious that peace and stability in Afghanistan would itself eliminate the terrorist dangers to U.S. interests, for al Qa'eda and the Taliban merely moved south and east when the U.S. invaded Afghanistan and are flourishing there today.
Perhaps Bin Ladin is in an alp near Nanga Parbat in Kashmir with a few wives enjoying the good, rural life-who can say? At six foot five Oz bin Ladin is a striking king of figure in some regards, and one unlikely to be followed by the paparazzi for some years. Because the U.S. Government does not say what its comprehensive India-Pakistan-Kashmir-Afghanistan policy is, we have no basis to determine if it is competent or not, or if there is not a need to formulate a better and more effective policy to reduce the development of terrorism in the region.
The U.S. Defense budget is just about the largest expense annual in the U.S. federal budget. We as citizens are told by the military from year t year that the 'war' must go on for several years for national defense. We also wonder if the cost is worth the return. Since it is our federal budget, we have no necessity of signing carte blanche these checks too fund military, defense contractors and C.I.A. ventures abroad. National interest might be in making our own nation prosper rather than those of central Asia.
So we wonder; is the premise that installing a friendly government in Afghanistan will halt most al Qaeda terrorist attacks on the United States valid. Another point possible, desirable and so forth. We wonder how many years that will take, and what the opportunity for the United States will be?
The origin of terrorist training camps and organizations in Pakistan goes back to the early 19th century. Jihadist organizations sought to repel the noon-Muslim British occupiers. Yet we will skip over that to the more recent 1940's, 1970s and 1980's when two more recent political conflicts stimulated the formation of jihadist terrorist training organizations in Pakistan.
The first and most significant cause was the sectarian separation of India and Pakistan and their fight to control Kashmir. On one side is the Hindu Indian Government with the legal title to Kashmir and on the other is the majority population of Muslims with decades long support continuing to the present of training of jihadist Muslim guerilla fighters. The 1972 line of control roughly divided Kashmir and Jammu in half and is a good enough permanent boundary, yet neither nation (Pakistan or India) would be happy with that, and the additional problem of Kashmiri Muslim guerrillas fighting for Kashmiri national independence form both Pakistan and India also exists.
The Pakistan Intelligence Service and military have worked for decades in providing training and support for Kashmiri Muslim jhadist guerrilla fighters. Pakistani leaders have supported the constellation of terrorist training camps and have provided arms and munitions including some from the United States.
The Afghanistan war against the Soviets and the Afghan civil war following led to the Taliban taking control of most of the nation. The Taliban were formed in Pakistan and simply move south when American forces are present. It is possible that a natural selection of fundamentalist Muslim leaders are elevated to lead the Taliban and that to negotiate with the United States would be suicidal in effect, for the Taliban would be at the top of one jihadist pyramid and unlikely to receive broad popular support in the jihadist community if they fraternized with the infidels much. U.S. concepts of negotiating with theTaliban seem destine to just create a Hamas effect of shifting the violence to another terrorist organization and infrastructure supported at sometime by the Pakistani I.S.I. (intelligence service).
The United States to reduce the terrorist training in Pakistan would need to settle the Kashmir issue satisfactorily to all concerned parties first. That would reduce tensions between India and Pakistan. Pakistan does not want Indian involvement in Afghanistan and were probably happy when the Indian embassy in Kabul was blown up in 2008.
From my point of view it seems improbable that the Indian-Pakistani boundary, water rights and Kashmir control issues will be solved in the next year or two, and that means more pressure for Pakistan to support Muslim jihadist guerrillas to train in Northern Pakistan to establish terror structures and cells in Kashmir. Whenever Pakistan regulars go to fight in Kashmir as they have in the past against Indian forces it escalates the conflict--and that could lead to a nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India potentially.
A comprehensive solution to the problems of Pakistan and Kashmir seems an essential element of a plan to have peace in Afghanistan. It is dubious that peace and stability in Afghanistan would itself eliminate the terrorist dangers to U.S. interests, for al Qa'eda and the Taliban merely moved south and east when the U.S. invaded Afghanistan and are flourishing there today.
Perhaps Bin Ladin is in an alp near Nanga Parbat in Kashmir with a few wives enjoying the good, rural life-who can say? At six foot five Oz bin Ladin is a striking king of figure in some regards, and one unlikely to be followed by the paparazzi for some years. Because the U.S. Government does not say what its comprehensive India-Pakistan-Kashmir-Afghanistan policy is, we have no basis to determine if it is competent or not, or if there is not a need to formulate a better and more effective policy to reduce the development of terrorism in the region.
Collectivist Capitalism vs. Compassionate Capitalism
This is actually a fairly simple distinction. Capitalism that grows from an individual or family’s personal work building assets without exploiting other people is compassionate capitalism, while the impersonal stock investment, M.B.A. networking trans-national globalism business approach is collectivist. The collectivists are cold-blooded while the small time capitalist is compassionate and cares about his own work and building up of resources.
Adam Smith, the modern spiritual founder of capitalism, wrote largely in support of compassionate capitalism inclusive of trade. There weren't the sort of large-scale networked corporations in existence in his day that built up huge global capital advantages and leveraging monetary sophistication. It is quite a stretch to transmogrify The Wealth of Nations into a support for absolute abstract modern business practices and monetary policy. One must be disingenuous to extend Smith's Wealth of Nations so far as that.
Adam Smith was a pragmatic economist and held the welfare of the people of England of his day-of the ordinary people, as being of first concern. He sought for methods to understand, improve and describe more ideal forms of economic methods. One of the fundamental challenges of his day was to liberalize trade and business from the corrupting control of concentrated wealth in the form of royal power or taxation that was not spent to advance the interests of the people of England.
Thus in the United States today compassionate capitalists may rightly oppose foreign military spending in badly thought out ventures in Afghanistan and Iraq. We know that jihad by the U.S. Government in Afghanistan is opposed by jihadists from Kashmir, Pakistan and elsewhere in the Muslim world. Our jihad is an economic one, for the military industrial complex makes a vast fortune on the enterprises, while the goal of preventing terrorist attacks through the installation of a toady regime in Kabul is unlikely to stop the sources of jihad in Pakistan, Kashmir and elsewhere. Better policy is required. What does the expense do to increase the standard of living of the poor and middle class in the U.S.A.?
Compassionate capitalist support a general increase of wealth in the United States for all citizens and of a healthy ecosystem. They have their eyes open and look at the real world and not just abstract profit and loss statements or throughput concepts and expanding networked, corporate power and market control.
Compassionate capitalist support practical limits on the opportunity for individual citizens to control other through the acquisition of monetary wealth and leveraged investments. Social capital may be perceived as differing from compassionate capital and should be limited. A democracy has the freedom to choose to limit the power that collective business enterprises may gain because of their capacity to oppress the citizenry and harm the security of the nation's ecological environment. It is reasonable that a maximum percent of the gross national product held by any legally individual entity such as a corporation or individual might be set in order to prevent tyranny.
Compassionate capitalists would be concerned that the poor would all have free health care and that the environment is getting better and recovering toward a more natural condition of health viable for centuries ahead rather than in decline perennially. Compassionate capitalists would be aware that all citizens require life-long secure housing and would reverse the legislation that eliminated Glass-Steagle protections on home mortgages. A home should not be a financial chip for of interest to global collective capitalist acquisition.
Instead of the duplicitous policy of building quarter million dollar homes for entry level workers to buy with dubious prospect for three decades of job security ahead the Government rightly should encourage a generation of low cost affordable ecologically no net loss of biota energy generating homes. Compassionate capitalists could readily support low-cost affordable housing that is beneficial to the environment comparatively and realistically is a base for self-sufficiency, home gardening and so forth.
While the collectivist capitalist trait is product disposability, through-put for profit and impersonal conformity if citizen reasoning the compassionate capitalist endeavors to assure that all citizens are secure in their home and possessions and that a conservation principle of ecological husbandry overtakes and corrects the wastage of collectivist capitalism.
Adam Smith, the modern spiritual founder of capitalism, wrote largely in support of compassionate capitalism inclusive of trade. There weren't the sort of large-scale networked corporations in existence in his day that built up huge global capital advantages and leveraging monetary sophistication. It is quite a stretch to transmogrify The Wealth of Nations into a support for absolute abstract modern business practices and monetary policy. One must be disingenuous to extend Smith's Wealth of Nations so far as that.
Adam Smith was a pragmatic economist and held the welfare of the people of England of his day-of the ordinary people, as being of first concern. He sought for methods to understand, improve and describe more ideal forms of economic methods. One of the fundamental challenges of his day was to liberalize trade and business from the corrupting control of concentrated wealth in the form of royal power or taxation that was not spent to advance the interests of the people of England.
Thus in the United States today compassionate capitalists may rightly oppose foreign military spending in badly thought out ventures in Afghanistan and Iraq. We know that jihad by the U.S. Government in Afghanistan is opposed by jihadists from Kashmir, Pakistan and elsewhere in the Muslim world. Our jihad is an economic one, for the military industrial complex makes a vast fortune on the enterprises, while the goal of preventing terrorist attacks through the installation of a toady regime in Kabul is unlikely to stop the sources of jihad in Pakistan, Kashmir and elsewhere. Better policy is required. What does the expense do to increase the standard of living of the poor and middle class in the U.S.A.?
Compassionate capitalist support a general increase of wealth in the United States for all citizens and of a healthy ecosystem. They have their eyes open and look at the real world and not just abstract profit and loss statements or throughput concepts and expanding networked, corporate power and market control.
Compassionate capitalist support practical limits on the opportunity for individual citizens to control other through the acquisition of monetary wealth and leveraged investments. Social capital may be perceived as differing from compassionate capital and should be limited. A democracy has the freedom to choose to limit the power that collective business enterprises may gain because of their capacity to oppress the citizenry and harm the security of the nation's ecological environment. It is reasonable that a maximum percent of the gross national product held by any legally individual entity such as a corporation or individual might be set in order to prevent tyranny.
Compassionate capitalists would be concerned that the poor would all have free health care and that the environment is getting better and recovering toward a more natural condition of health viable for centuries ahead rather than in decline perennially. Compassionate capitalists would be aware that all citizens require life-long secure housing and would reverse the legislation that eliminated Glass-Steagle protections on home mortgages. A home should not be a financial chip for of interest to global collective capitalist acquisition.
Instead of the duplicitous policy of building quarter million dollar homes for entry level workers to buy with dubious prospect for three decades of job security ahead the Government rightly should encourage a generation of low cost affordable ecologically no net loss of biota energy generating homes. Compassionate capitalists could readily support low-cost affordable housing that is beneficial to the environment comparatively and realistically is a base for self-sufficiency, home gardening and so forth.
While the collectivist capitalist trait is product disposability, through-put for profit and impersonal conformity if citizen reasoning the compassionate capitalist endeavors to assure that all citizens are secure in their home and possessions and that a conservation principle of ecological husbandry overtakes and corrects the wastage of collectivist capitalism.
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...
