What Can Be Changed in the Political Economy of the U.S.A.

A political economy interfaces politics and economics. For the U.S.A., when government regulation quality and understanding is lacking the private sector and government investment goes to seed; the ecosystem declines, economics serve capital concentration entirely for its own sake rather than national citizenry well-being, national financial balances run tens of trillions of dollars of deficits, and wealth is concentrated to the point of creating a virtual aristocracy or plutonomy.

Remedies exist that are obvious, yet the corporatism phenomena of the private sector merging with the government that becomes a servo-unit for it following it about has negated the selection of quality political candidates and oversight.

Patents can be reformed such that exclusivity exists for just three years with 10% royalties to patent holders from anyone in the common domain era after three years, Regulations can be made to reward quality production that reduces mal-effects on the ecosystem. Capital acquisition by individuals can be capped at a percent of the national income that is low enough to prevent political power from being concentrated as well as economic, and ecological economics can become a guiding principle for the political economy, instead of being a vague outline in the shadows.

A Question for Grasshopper

I made one of those posters for grasshopper as applied to global warming questions. It seems like the left use Buddhism in their tool kit for environmentalism- yet is that accurate?

I like John Stuart Mill's work on utilitarianism. It seems to me the debate was always about act and rule based versions. The greatest good for the greatest number as the golden rule for utilitarians for example would, a priori, proscribe mass killings from drunk drivers IMO, or nuking innocent cities to kick off urban renewal.A consequentialist might wait until after the fact to decide if the consequences of the nuking were good or bad. 

 I am not sure if it is a Zen Koan. If i interpreted the meaning correctly, for Buddhists reality is illusory. If nothing is more than a temporal illusion, and return to nothingness (nirvana) is best, then killing the puppy is nothing meaningful either. Because so many of the post-industrial left tend to like Buddhism quite a bit, and are environmentalists too (at least nominally), I though I would try to point out the inconsistency in values; if everything is illusory then why concern about global warming and ecosphere decline? I don't share the viewpoint, yet it is interesting to note that by the turn of the century most people on Earth (if present trends continue) won't have access to brain growing omega 3s because of over-fishing, ocean warming, habitat loss etc.

 https://www.inverse.com/article/59208-omega-3-shortage

Today some academic insiders of the east look toward consequentialism as the justification for leftist ethics for grasshoppers of the cognoscenti. In my opinion though, some of the deontological systems that are Bible based work better, yet if one's idea is to change social moral norms to something that anti-Christians would be comfortable in, then Bible deontological ethics would be problematic. Few people actually study ethics then  personally apply them I think.

Ethics aren't difficult to find-especially in Muslim cultures. All human cultures have social behavior patterns that have set acceptable parameters; even lawful parameters. Sociologists and others study human behavior, and mass human behavior, and the rules of social behavior are fairly well known. Moral behavior is the way people interact in society-what they actually do, and what manner they follow those rules, historical rules, ere applied ethics. Morality are the rules of what is acceptable social behavior, and ethics are the way those rules are used by people. It is a very old custom.

 The ten commandments and other deontological systems were moral paradigmata. Thou shalt not kill, steal, perp adultery, etc are as old as human society. One might argue that social rules against bad behavior originated with society as an innate logic for social behavior, and their may be some truth in that. Plainly people are not amoeba or zombies free to consume their neighbor for-themselves without legal, moral or ethical concern.

Collapse of Roman Empire Not a Good Fit for USA

Direct comparative criteria for national collapse of the old world empires and modern societies are not exactly on the mark without some enumeration of points. They have fundamentally different elements and paradigms for nations. Roman civilization in its day was far ahead of most of the rest of pagan, ignorant Europeans. Celts had only relinquished their cannibalistic warrior ways in Switzerland with the appearance of Germanic enemies who marginalized them. Germans had stick villages. England had Stonehenge, yet it was probably short, darker people from Malta that migrated north to bring their technology to the cold isle. I wonder if the structure around St. Peter's square could be said to imitate Stonehenge structure a little?

Italians are a Germanic people too, and the Roman Empire following the Etruscan inherited the knowledge of the very ancient civilizations to the south. Roman expansion through France and Britain was nearly like an advanced extra-terrestrial civilization arriving on Earth where live the conceited hillbillies believe they know it all. Ancient Roman Civilization took the best of the near East and Greek knowledge too, and brought everything to the far west and north.

Roman civilization was due to collapse when it had served its purpose of bringing civilization and Christianity to all of Europe. Christianity was the common tie that drew formerly pagan and violent peoples into a proto-modern-European Civilization. It became a violent Europe with rapidly developing technology tempered with Christianity in a largely illiterate social environment. Imperial Rome could only go so far and last so long. Tamarlane would surge into invading unto Iraq. There was too much going on up North and West, while Constantine moved the main focus of his ruling era toward the East in Constantinople where the Eastern version of the Roman Empire survived another thousand years beyond the west.

The United States compared to Rome has not yet fulfilled its destiny as a leading technological and cultural accelerator of human prospects within a democratic political economy. It is possible that branches of the United States may survive off-world longer than the terrestrial version- maybe ten or twenty thousand years. I would think if that occurred it would not be recognizably American except in name only should some uncreative group of people full of nostalgia for this millennium wish to call themselves the USA or America.

The United States hasn't a history of owning foreign colonies- it is a trading empire with much direct investment in foreign entities. It hasn't foreign possessions to lose. True it was stuck with the Philippines for a few decades, yet it rectified that when practical to do so.

It is possible that the rapid decline in Christianity in the United States could precipitate national economic and social collapse. Rich corporations tend to be over-promoting their existing values and methods to the detriment of democracy’s marketplace of ideas. Good ideas may have few readers as the authors are marginalized in the commercial ecosystem.

Perhaps Mexican illegal aliens and other Latinos will bump out the existing cultural composition in the United States and transform the nation into something else- a Nova Mexico, through evolution and leadership weakness in the U.S.A. Alternatively China may absorb America like the Borg absorbs civilizations as Americans hand them the political economy on a silver platter because of cheap labor and sales opportunities in China. No one ever said the Chinese are stupid- they won’t look a gift horse in the mouth, as the saying goes.

The United States could fade away as environmental crisis overtakes the vanities of mass consumerism political economics. Certainly there is no political leadership aware of the science of ecological economics in the United States.

Alaska's northern towns have warmed up a lot since 1976. The Alaska Climate Research Center publishes a chart comparing temperatures from 1976 to 2018, and the results are consistent with global warming observations and theories. The temperature change for Barrow in autumn, for example, is 18.0 degrees Fahrenheit.

Chart from Alaska Climate Research Center-affiliated with U.A.F. Geophysical Institute.

North Slope and Alaska Interior are Much Warmer than 24 Years Ago

Alaska's northern towns have warmed up a lot since 1976. The Alaska Climate Research Center publishes a chart comparing temperatures from 1976 to 2018, and the results are consistent with global warming observations and theories. The temperature change for Barrow in autumn, for example, is 18.0 degrees Fahrenheit.

http://climate.gi.alaska.edu/ClimTrends/Change/TempChange.html

The Alaska Climate Research Center is funded by government grant and is affiliated with the University of Alaska-Fairbanks geophysical institute.

Weather record from 1949 to 2018 also show increased average temperatures.

How the Fed Would Work A Green New Deal

The Fed would create a lot of electronic dollars to loan to itself (new public debt)- however many trillions the Democrat Party leaders deemed useful, and allocate that pot of money to various contractors known to be sympathetic to Democrat Party politicians.

Because a green new deal would require some copious latitude for condemnations, expropriations and relocations of sundry establishment content found to obstruct government eco-redesign plans, some Supreme Court quibbling would ensue for some time, so a leftist court would be de rigueur for implementation of the Von Green Deal plan.

Giving the U.S.A. a great tax increase again would be necessary to fund the deal and make it seem like it would pay for itself. Maybe a 50% tax on the income of the top 5% earners. $12,000 of free income  for all would end unemployment and employment for some.

It would all go very smoothly and the dawning of the Age of Aquarius would arrive at last.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjxSCAalsBE

Unchanging Laws of Physics

Physicists generally believe the laws of the Universe haven't changed. There was an idea about a possible variable speed of light, yet that was not developed too far. One might want to throw out the word 'eternal' from the cosmology criterion. The Universe is believed to have had a beginning at T=0 and now is about 13.3 billion years old (unless it is an unobservable Multiverse- the boundaries could never be observed with the present physics knowledge and tech). So if it has any sort of eternal character about it that would be in one direction-outward as time and matter runs down, unless of course it is an eternally recurrent Universe that expands and contracts like a yo yo (an improbable idea and it would require constant never changing laws ad infinitum).

The reason for the assumption that the laws of physics haven’t changed since the start of the Universe is based on observations of the Universe together with the body of physics knowledge theory development and how that correlates with observations. One need distinguish between the laws of physics that exist in nature and human ideas about what those laws are. Physicists and their theories are fallible. Their ideas evolve over time and usually improve.

https://www.livescience.com/solution-to-worst-prediction-in-physics.html

The Universe has a thermodynamic nature- it started highly organized and compact and unwinds to expand in a disorganized form. Initially there was just one force and field, highly compact, and it expanded and cooled down in to four primary forces that exist today. At very high temperature such as occurred at the start of the Universe the forces unify.

There is a Multiverse theory wherein each unique Universe has its own laws. Yet once the Universe starts it irreversibly flows ‘downslope’ as it were unwinding along within its particular balances of physical structure.

Physical laws are discovered rather than invented, so it is quite right that the understanding and description of physical laws may change. What does not change is the operating mechanics of any given universe. It is the operating laws of a universe that make it that particular universe.

An analogy might be that of a square box with three dimensions and six sides including the top and bottom. A box in that Universe could not have ten sides, or two sides, and be a square box. It would be possible to redefine what a side is and say for example that all of the sides of the box excluding the top and bottom are just one sides (ignoring the corners), yet the box that must exist in the Universe would be the same box regardless of how it is described (assume that there is one perfect example box that really exists to describe). In that same Universe a box described as having six sides could not be a box described as having three sides without either a logic or categorical error/inconsistency in the definition of sides.

Descartes' Meditations about first principles of thought and certainty (epistemology) of what is known or knowable began with self-reflection on thought. Zhuangzi had a famous saying about a man dreaming he is a butterfly and vice versa- the east had several thinkers who considered the possibility that reality as illusory before Descartes. Descartes' main differentiation from his predecessors is in his development of reason as the tool for epistemology and certainty. He wrote the Meditations of a Method while employed as a mercenary in Switzerland where he spent a lot of time inside an oven that was used as a sauna. 

https://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/meditations/

President Trump's Steady Foreign Policy

U.S. Foreign policy has remained fairly constant the past two years. What has changed is the emergence of characteristics of the policy initiatives in Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan that show a certain variegated approach toward bellicose rhetoric and military disengagement.

President Trump has directed negotiations with the Taliban that excluded the lawful government of Afghanistan and the media reports they are close to reaching a deal for the United States to withdraw half of its troops right away and possibly more later in exchange for three promises or wishes the Trump team asked. President Trump seems to have short-term profit strategy in his foreign policy, yet with Afghanistan long-term commitment is required to create a Taliban-free culture that isn’t a coordinating center for Eastern hemispheric terrorism. 

What would have happened if the United States had allowed the Nazi party to return to Germany in 1963? The answer probably is that today it would be run by the 4th Reich of Nazis. Germany required a half century before it really changed, and Afghanistan will require a century more or less of U.S. garrisons working with the Afghan people before it has a culture that can co-exist with the west (although the west need be tolerant of Muslim moral norms generally and should not expect to coerce those to change).

The President’s North Korean diplomacy with North Korea is good, yet bad because that nation continues to develop nuclear weapons and systems to deliver them. Since China was saturated with W-54 small nuke technology by the Clinton administration’s allies, and as Pakistan has that too, there may be a deep feeling that portable man and drone carried nuclear weapons are a thing of the second world’s future so they can play around with the western leaders until the time is better for changing balances. I wonder if President Trump has any awareness of that, if it is so.

President Trump has expanded U.S. ground forces in Poland at their request to defend against the Russian menace, that is more of a result of Democrat party insistence than anything else, that bad relations with Russia rise, that the Ukraine was usually not part of Russia and Russians should have no interest or claim on it or the Crimea. If Germany does not require U.S. forces to make sure that young Adolph II does not seek to be the Chancellor, some of those could be shifted to Afghanistan to garrison it for a century to make sure the Taliban does not let a profusion of terror training and bomb making underground clinics arise amidst the mass stoning of women that were westernized and lynchings of anyone that worked with the United States.

Iran has been given sanctions (as has Russia) and stern warnings, yet nothing will follow that. President Reagan walked softly and carried a big stick while President Trump has a boastful mouth and threats that are like one huge, dark cloud passing in the summer desert sky. He is fundamentally a man of profit and peace with recalcitrance to spend on fighting- wars are costly. Still, some defense allocations are necessary to keep the peace, rather than rash withdrawals or commencement of hostilities.

With illegal immigration from Latin America and elsewhere over the southern U.S. border the President has shown a consistent approach of defending U.S. national interests. As the Chief enforcement officer of the U.S.A. he has worked to stop illegal entry into the nation. 

China policy has also been a consistent program to require Chinese compliance with equal rights and normal responsibilities of trading partners; primarily the United States. The President has used tariffs to enforce the policy as well as other measures. Prior President were loose with China trade policy and a lot of U.S. business relocated to China. That trend developed so far that much U.S. manufacturing capacity was being lost.

Analysts have said that the policy of Wall Street was to have tech employment on the American coasts, flood the nation with illegal aliens in the center to keep wages down and manufacture things in China. The President has resisted that apparently, though he too is a billionaire. His foreign policy is consistent enough.

Would It Be Possible to Grow Brainless Beef Without Stomachs in Warehouses?

Growing the meat of beef cattle without a whole cow; a meat growing mechanism without stomachs, flatulence, without a brain or legs, sitting on a warehouse shelf somewhere and fed with artificial nutrients might be a project that bio-scientists might investigate to develop and replace the present global warming gas, cattle raised for slaughter technosystem that badly affects the planetary ecosphere because of the vast numbers of cattle.

 The growing product would have no head, no nervous system or anything not required for direct support of growing the meat. It would be meat minimalism shaped perhaps as a large New York steak five foot in diameter and two feet thick. It would have no genetic engineering or pesticide contact. It would be an all-natural food. 

Manufacturing beef in a way that would be comparable to growing watermelons would free up the acreage exploited for cattle grazing and stop the CO2 from those multiple stomachs and a-holes. New businesses such as The Mindless Meat Company could sprout.

Meeting the meat challenge should be within the capacity of science and technology.

Make Northern Ireland a Free Trade Zone

It should be hard to believe that British leaders and Eurocrats given months or years to figure out how to make Northern Ireland a free trade zone able to govern its own trade and set its own rules, yet remain a British client state. It isn't unbelievable as it should be. Politicians these years don't have full wattage in their brains ordinarily.Britain and Northern Ireland would have a joint foreign origin trade control criteria that wouldn't let foreign interests exploit North Ire as a back door to England for easy dump in England.

The Yellowstone Security and Power Project

A Yellowstone super-volcano eruption is the largest clear and present threat to life on Earth. Billions might perish from famine in a global cooling period that would follow. It is not too soon to innovate ways of controlling the development of an eruption; perhaps with heat relief from exploiting the geo-thermal power resource of Yellowstone.

https://www.idahostatejournal.com/news/local/yellowstone-volcanic-threat-level-elevated-to-high/article_5f6c1675-0fca-5ed6-a30a-f8786a217ea7.html

The Yellowstone magma reserve underground has the energy to create enough electricity to enable a national electric vehicle in-line power grid. Removing all of the nation's fossil fuel cars and replacing them with electric would be a good way to reduce greenhouse gases.

https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/observatories/yvo/

The down side of exploiting Yellowstone's geothermal power is that it might induct more heat from down below and precipitate a super-eruption.

A number of other factors could make the super-volcano erupt sooner than expected...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/science/2018/08/21/yellowstone-supervolcano-eruption-stop-worrying-its-blow/973633002/

That includes unforeseen plate tectonic activity and meteors from space striking some area of the surface sending shockwaves along.

At the least the US Government should form a scientific committee to investigate all of the variables and constants about the super-volcano to discover how it might be safely harnessed to produce electric power. There is so much heat that salt-water could be siphoned from the Pacific in pipelines and evaporated to make freshwater for agriculture elsewhere in the nation, after passing through turbines to make electricity for the nation auto grid. It might be possible to refill Lake Bonneville and other water storage areas and develop agriculture with irrigation across much of the S.W. It might be quicker to siphon saltwater to Deming New Mexico and create a border canal with double covers to spill it in and evaporate-condense on the lid to desalinate it as it flows in locks east and west. There is no harm in getting more bang for the buck with a better than a fence boundary security barrier with millions of gallons of fresh water for agriculture, drinking and recreation in Arizona, New Mexico, California and the Sonora desert. Perhaps both methods should be invested in with research at the least.

Image credit- National Park Service