Republicans Stall on Ratifying Reduction of Nuclear Warheads/Launchers

The Republican Party is stalling on ratification of the New Start treaty, seemingly in order to gain political credit themselves for a future treaty, and perhaps as a tactic looking ahead to the 2012 Presidential election. I hate to think that the Republicans in Congress would jeopardize the future of the nation (well maybe not) in order to gain a few political brownie points

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/weekinreview/21baker.html?src=twrhp

Russia and the United States will each be able to keep 1550 warheads and 1700 launchers. Thats enought to destroy most life on earth a few times over not including the cascading extra effects of such mass catastrophe. Besides running huge public debt up, the Republicans of Congress seems hell bent for keeping the use of large numbers of nuclear weapons alive.

Gambling with the future to keep domestic economic power to oppress the poor, destroy quality sports fishing in Alaska, and create a global evil corporate empire is the Republican party. The Democrats are simply the party of moral decay (with Republican help).

Nuclear weapons, global warming, pollution of the environment-the Republican Party should step up with the times a take a step back from nuclear brinksmanship as best as it can manage. The Obama administration does not need help in using bad political judgment in economics, morality or other impolitical factors the voters don't like.

Presidient Obama does need help with getting the reasonable nuclear reduction treaty signed. N.A.T.O. and Russia have agreed to build a new Star Wars Missile Defense together-so let us all move ahead a little. All that required is that the Republican Party stop viewing the Russians as a Boris Badanoff gang of radical unionists. Today the corporatist global evil empire is a danger equal to that of famous evil empires the world over.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11803931

N.A.T.O. and Russia Agree To Build Star Wars Anti-Missile System

Russian President Dmitri Medvedev has agreed with N.A.T.O. to invest in the construction of a missile defense shield. A strategic goal of the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance is to defend the United States, Europe and evidently Russia against nuclear attack. Since the Nixon administration the reduction of nuclear weapons dangers in arms limitations talks has been a political goal that is proceeding to better cooperation between former cold war protagonists. N.A.T.O. has stated that Russia is not a threat.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11803931

A ten-year N.A.T.O. strategic defense plan statement provides a new N.A.T.O. approach to defense challenges of the 21st century. http://www.nato.int/lisbon2010/strategic-concept-2010-eng.pdf

The U.S. Senate has an opportunity to ratify further arms reduction with Russia, such that our nuclear stockpile would drop from approximately 1750 to 1500 weapons. With a Russian reduction in the agreement, the United States can move on to work on a new and improved Star War laser anti-missile system.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/weekinreview/21baker.html?src=twrhp

The prospect of constructing an effective anti-ballistic missile system with Russia and N.A.T.O. aboard is an achievement for the Obama administration. It is a will o’the’wisp defense target moving into the realm of reality. Unfortunately cruise missiles with nuclear weapons are a more direct, cheaper and less pompous method of delivery nuclear weapons to targets. Nuclear non-proliferation experts will have that remaining, significant challenge before them.

The United States of America is a member of N.A.T.O.

2012 Presidential Campaign Needs an Independent Candidate

The 2012 Presidential campaign would be a good time for the entry of a new and improved Ross Perot style independent Presidential candidate. The Democrat Party is effectively the party of depravity, and the Republicans the party of concentrating wealth for the rich. Physically, the geography of the United States has been a strength; today it is a determining economic factor as well although to the detriment of the poor and middle class.

Writing critically is sometimes challenging politically for accurate political descriptions are not inevitably welcome. Interstate 35 from Laredo and Mexico north into the heartland admits 10,000 trucks per day to the U.S.A. The border patrol stops perhaps one of three illegal aliens, wealthy urbanites with global commercial empires such as Mayor Bloomberg of New York City really don’t care about the demographic changes to the American southwest as cheap labor and good migrate north. The interests of the 30 million poor Americans cast aside by the surplus labor just lose in the political balances of the interests of the rich, globalist and middle class.

The American middle class has become a toady for global corporatism. Saying nothing and keeping their heads down, making criticism of corporate power equivalent to communism is a good way to kill democracy. Men afraid to put their own name on Internet posts did not build America; the founders did not hide behind pseudonymous symbols. Corporatism will concentrate wealth for the rich and gut public outlays on anything not supporting their infrastructure.

Democracy is a horse of a different color though. The people have a right to set national parameters of development. They have a right to build an impassable yet beautiful border ecological control zone. Intelligence and creative economic conservativism are rational, necessary developments if the United States is to grow within a democratic rather than a depleting corporate paradigm.

I am not optimistic that democracy will return to the United States. The present trends are against it. Easy money and cheap labor disempowering the millions of poor and working class Americans that would like a stable population and full employment with scarce surplus labor appeal to corporations concentrating wealth and requiring political silence from white male execs. The female anti-white male vote in the United States has become a spread and receive fullness certainty that corporations will promote their class existential interests to leadership. Feminine sexuality is wonderful, yet that nature should not convert into political indolence with reliance on global economic promiscuity. There is nothing wrong with democratic proprietary national interest that moves beyond merely personal narrow self-interest.

The homosexual militancy also seeks to graft itself in malevolent political partnerships with a corporatist agenda intolerant of national economic and political security.

There is little reason to be optimistic that a solid independent Presidential candidate will emerge to run in 2012. The nation needs one; the environment and economy require a rectification to high quality, low quantity resource use. The world population wants a stable, ecologically rational if not brilliant good example. Mexico as a corrupt parasite annexing the United States permits a drug distributor border corps to corrupt its domestic politics with so much human illicit traffic economically moving the center politically and economically of Mexico outside the boundaries of its voters.

The present world chess rankings do not list one American in the top ten-that seems reflected in the political-economy of the U.S.A. as well.

http://www.expert-chess-strategies.com/world-chess-rankings.html

The decadent globalist trends of the United States will continue for twenty or thirty years perhaps before some sort of larger global catastrophe brings the imbalanced era of present U.S. leadership to an end. Americans cannot expect much from feudal tithe collecting priesthoods that could have no idea of what a priesthood of believers would be like. Really.

Republicans Stall on Ratifying Reduction of Nuclear Warheads/Launchers

The Republican Party is stalling on ratification of the New Start treaty, seemingly in order to gain political credit themselves for a future treaty, and perhaps as a tactic looking ahead to the 2012 Presidential election. I hate to think that the Republicans in Congress would jeopardize the future of the nation (well maybe not) in order to gain a few political brownie points

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/weekinreview/21baker.html?src=twrhp

Russia and the United States will each be able to keep 1550 warheads and 1700 launchers. Thats enought to destroy most life on earth a few times over not including the cascading extra effects of such mass catastrophe. Besides running huge public debt up, the Republicans of Congress seems hell bent for keeping the use of large numbers of nuclear weapons alive.

Gambling with the future to keep domestic economic power to oppress the poor, destroy quality sports fishing in Alaska, and create a global evil corporate empire is the Republican party. The Democrats are simply the party of moral decay (with Republican help).

Nuclear weapons, global warming, pollution of the environment-the Republican Party should step up with the times a take a step back from nuclear brinksmanship as best as it can manage. The Obama administration does not need help in using bad political judgment in economics, morality or other impolitical factors the voters don't like.

Presidient Obama does need help with getting the reasonable nuclear reduction treaty signed. N.A.T.O. and Russia have agreed to build a new Star Wars Missile Defense together-so let us all move ahead a little. All that required is that the Republican Party stop viewing the Russians as a Boris Badanoff gang of radical unionists. Today the corporatist global evil empire is a danger equal to that of famous evil empires the world over.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11803931

Why Mediums of Exchange are Invariably Physical Elements

Everything is physical. One could trade in quantum bits and they would still be physical. The problem is accounting and the desire people have for particular things. Then its a matter of fairness and access. Electronic money replacing cash would create new ways of corrupting currency exchanges, and make accounting increasingly challenging, while advantages would implict flow to those operating the electronic exchange media.

Every bit of data, each piece of information, is associated with a real object. Vedral's 'Decoding the Universe' might help explain that. One can disagree about the Universe being simply information, or D.N.A. as a quantum computer in biological form, in fact there are numerous or an infinite number of ways to construct accounting and representational structures yet they are all associated with a temporal physical structure. Christians believe God donates a spiriutual element-perhaps of conduct-yet that is not an economic element.

Philosophically one may argue about what real objects are, and equally one may differ about the meaning of words and of course history too. I enjoy reading linguistic-analytic philosophy occassionally. I have Quine's Philosophy of Logic and Kripke's Naming and Neccessity as ongoing projects.

Concepts of causality and cash, or causality and war, and a classification system of human social conflicts in wars and non-wars such can be duplicitous. Sophism in conflict definitions such as a Vietnam Conflict, a War on Poverty, A War on Cancer, A War on Drugs, The Korean Conflict, The War in Iraq and so forth are linguistic things different than the things for-themselves. Philosophers of language and logic try to keep that awareness that language is one thing, and things in themselves quite another.

One might read Quine's Ontological Relativity' and discover a synopsis of how language has differnet sets or lexcions in various circumstances. Much language is about translating terms and meanings from one lexicon to another often without success, for many social lexical sets have inherent presumptions and constants that render the data value and words rather inflexably.

Some Christians may find it difficult to understand why everything in the Universal is physical. There are not two natures of substance, yet there may be a class of emergent characteristic that can be considered a qualitatively different genre of substance.

People commonly use water and ice as an example of qualitatively different materials made from same element. Of course because H2o is also partly made of the temperature of the Universe and the local temperature, it is rather disinegenuous to say that water or ice are made simply from water or ice.

Life is an emergent characteristic of inanimate matter. The complexity of the arrangement of the materials of life allow it to support the complex phenomenology of mind.Mind is fundamentally different than matter although each has the same fundamental base elements.

To declare that everything is physical, is just to offer an opinion of monism. Monism is a philosophical opinion that all things are of one basic substance in different configurations. Logic demands that sort of statement from living beings. Yet it is like saying that all things are A. It is saying that all things are of set A, and nothing that exists is not a member of set A.

So a Chriistian might say-whoah! what about the spiritual? God we stipulate is pure spirit and transcends the physical and all existing things. No scientific investigation or theory will ever comprehend God. People are physical, God is spiritual, yet people are created in the likeness of God-how so?

The emergent characteristic of mind in sentient life is how. Mind is a physically-based version of spirit, yet not spirit. If Christians of faith receive the Holy Spirit and God in dwells them, that is as close as humans get to the spiritual. God can transcend and inhabit any should willing to accept the atoning grace of Jesus Christ and His sacrifice on the cross as payment for his own original sin nature (of being physical and temporal).

What Would Abe Lincoln Do?

Abe Lincoln would get down in the pit and wrestle the crocodiles. He was a leader that like Reagan sought to enrich all ordinary Americans.

When General Meade defeated Robert E. Lee's Army of Virginia the tide had been turned in the civil war. The effort to make men free-in the United States, and to prevent southern state's officers from riding into Northern states to extradite escaped slaves had been reinforced and when Lincoln appointed Grant to lead the Army starting with the Wilderness campaign and to Cold Harbor a year of intensive war setting precidents for later wars was cast.

Lincoln as the first Republican President was not for lawlesness-he did after all order the largest mass hanging in U.S. history. I would imagine that wealthy drug using musicians would not have been people he admired.

Nevertheless Lincoln supported the pioneer ethic of hard work and self-help. Unfortunately in a spoilt society where networks and non-work are given disproportionate compensation, social position counts for far more than work. Sure there are still surgeons, soldiers and painters working honestly, yet unlike European Jews of yore scrimping to become petite burgeois and own their own small business and save capital, todays middle class have huge SUVs, houses and debt. They disregard the poor and kow tow to the rich and doom the poor and middle class in the process. They are trained to spend and consume and have no savings.

Lincoln was a nationalist rather than a globalist like all good U.S. President working for the people, and would not have approved tax cuts for the rich or the middle class in order to pay down the national debt directly. He would have secured our borders against illegal immigration so the U.S. poor could be more financially free to get jobs and better wages through negotiation and scarcity of labor.

Today some politicians even talk about ending the T.S.A. to let private security firms perhaps based in Dubai or Mecca guard the nation's security-you betcha, corporatism seeking to subvert Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson and Pat Buchanan again.

Money; Whence it Came From and Where it Went (J.K. Galbraith)

Its been a while since I read Galbraith's book. I will probably only make a brief mention of it's content. I believe it was published about 1975 or so. It will lack the history of the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama era of Wall Street financial perfidy.

http://www.amazon.com/Money-Whence-Came-Where-Went/dp/0395198437

The history of money is quite interesting. Did you know there was a real John Law who worked for Louis the 16th (I believe it was the 16th)? He made all these land deals to prop up the monarchy that eventually collapsed and he was figuratively tarred and feathered.

Galbraith, who was in charge of U.S. economics for Roosevelt during the second world war, was a student of John Maynard Keynes, yet of course Galbraith wasn't an idiotic supply-sider.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Kenneth_Galbraith#Money_:_Whence_It_Came.2C_Where_It_Went_.281975.29

Galbraith explains Gresham's law-bad money follows good. Early in U.S. history when anyone could mint their own currency, and there were hundreds, some obviously weren't good. Yet Gresham's law is about imitation of successful economic strategies that are debased.

Galbraith explained that all the gold ever found would fit in one large supertanker ship. Much of it has been melted down and recast numerous times, and not too much lost.

Money was originally just a trade good, and when civilization developed a standard trade good of value became obvious; if the king of Mycenae had a gold coin of a particular weight then it would be worth the same as that of the King of Troy. Egoism of the day had the rulers image put on a coin, and greedy rulers would debase their currency putting dross weight inside a gold wrapped shell (does America have any real copper in pennies any more?).

Currency of money as an abstract items became a reflection of the complexity of an economy and of trade more than the thing itself. Nixon took America off the Gold Standard, and so today we see phenomena like quantitative easing or 'minting' of 600 billions of dollars by the Fed up ahead.

Monetary theory as contemplated by Von Mises and Freedman, seeks to determine what real capital value is. Money in some way is supposed to be associated with real capital value, so it obviously becomes more difficult to determine what value is when it is not plain and simple like wheat in a silo and no complications other that immediate supply and demand.

When a variety of global networks own various items, and fuel from OPEC nations is essential for transport as well as production of commodities and manufactured items, the effort to set a given value is difficult to isolate.

I believe it is important for citizens to have a material currency to trade for themselves freely, without being controlled by financial networks directly. It is also something of a reality check objectively upon the honesty of the advantaged currency traders and manipulators.

Value theory is a social element, perhaps a democratically elected element that is achieved via social momentum and limited citizen input determining social values. It is a philosophical activity with many points of view, and ecological economics of low entropy, low pollution, stable population are minority opinions today in the globalist expansive sprawl of power, avarice and control thoughtlessly reducing the health of the planet and its potential carrying capacity for human life.

--------------------------------------------------

post-script

Money hasn't much intrinsic value any longer. It is more about power and the desire to control properties that is the problem. A medium of social exchange is just one tool of economic activity.

Formerly and still, wars of conquest are fought to expropriate resources and social power.

Value theory may deem anything valuable. My books for instance, could become socially valued this Christmas, and I could sell millions. Then if a depression occurred, and no more could be printed existing copies could become more valuable than gold (invest now in several copies from www.lulu.com/garycgibson).

Seriously though, a theory of social conflict is not reasonably reducible to money. That may be a proximal cause of crime such as in 'Crime and Punishment', yet there are larger social structures and causes for crime besides money-even in Dostoyevsky's book.

An intermediate tool of social exchange reflecting value of what money is about. To ossify or institutionalize money in the hands of an elite would not eliminate the tool of social exchange,it would just eliminate economic activity in which individuals set their own values for which they would exchange money.

Electronic money already exists for the convenience of the advantaged. The poor haven't access to such things, and electronics aren't worth a damn in many circumstances of the outdoor life. Even rechargable batteries freeze at low temperature for instance.

Increasing rather than decreasing the mediums of social value would be a good way to go. Currency banks for Christians in a priesthood of believers for work, church attendance and participation in liturgy and readings from the Bible-that is a way to go.

There could be other social networks created to provide real social value for people-a sort oof turbo craigs list and exchange bank combine, that would allow a storing of work and exchange credits without money. Yet money is just a concept of an objective social exchange unit.

One wants and honest and impartial social exchange unit for work effort of course, yet people are disputacious and disagree about what is of value, and who should receive value units for various activities. A communitarian approach might create several alternative social value compilation structures so individuals would have more resources to draw upon in lean time.