President to Ban Foreigners and Non-Citizens from D.C. Hotel to Comply With Law?

Before taking office with the acclaim of Americans that want a wall covered in solar panels built on the Mexican border, President Trump owned a hotel and possibly additional properties in the nation’s capital city. The President has been sued by two state’s attorney’s generals for letting foreigners that have public business presumably, stay in that hotel. There is some sort of ban on receiving bribes or emoluments from foreigners while in office.

In the founder’s day corporate collective business didn’t exist. Individuals just owned land and private buildings. It was easier to recognize illicit contributions then now. A new herd of capital at Arlington pastures before Washington choose to cast a veto would have been noticed. Capitalism and government could use reform.

Traditionally U.S. Presidents have not been showered with foreign gifts or financial support and were thus weak on the trade balance issue, giving more than receiving-a Christian yet not a Democrat Party way of being-for-oneself. However there may be no law against foreign born Americans actual taking the office of President through stealth and subterfuge votes if one goes on the precedent offered by 2016 candidate Senator Ted Cruz who is a foreign born citizen of Canada and Cuba. Canadians and other foreigners including Ted Cruz may not be allowed to stay in the President’s Washington D.C. hotel even if U.S. Senators if they have not forfeited their foreign citizenship with denunciation and stamping on the Maple Leaf flag and all of the foreign syrup that stands for within a foreign embassy witnessed by their co-conspirators. The President may need to ban Brits and all 30 million illegal aliens and Mexicans from staying at any of his hotels to be sure they aren’t slipping him emoluments including ketchup and Gray Poupon, under the table.

If Hillary Clinton had been elected in 2016 the Clinton foundation might have had to give up tours of the state department or contributions from Russian oligarchs (life can be hard).  In order to comply with American law the President may need to boot foreigners out of all his hotels and possibly the Martian El Largo too.

  When President George Washington posed at the front of a boat while crossing the Delaware River amid ice floes to stay at the four-star Mayflower Hotel he possibly day-dreamed of revenues from his own future hotels when potentates of the Middle East and Canada would pay top dollar for the privilege of staying at his King Suites chain to watch Dusty Lanyard on special-view TV at a thousand dollars a night. Maybe he knew that domestic Americans agitating for abortion and homosexual marriage would never stay there to try to bribe him, yet if he could he probably would have sent a tweet or two on the topic so future historians could reflect upon in order to comment knowledgeably on such matters.

  President Trump could just ban any foreigners with government employment at least, and maybe even their proxies and foreign media too and just give discounts to the National Rifle Association members that are the only really trustworthy national organization in a time where illegal aliens are better regarded in the state of California (state officials regard a mustache as chauvinistic and are considering litigating about National Security Advisor John Bolton over it when he gets on the job).

Enslaving the Public with Defense Spending & British Evolving Gooniess

Wars have been quite costly for nations to prosecute since the 18^th century.  Britain and France took on great public debt to wage their wars of conquest and colonization during the 18^th and 19^th century. The British fight to keep America enslaved brought them to take on debt equivalent to 800% of their national annual income. If Britain had won that war the British would have had vastly more wealth and income, so the rich were gambling on a good policy for positive payback. Russia may have a similar appearance to contemporary Brits and Wall Street.

Britain lost the American revolutionary war lost so their debt persisted until about World War One when they drew the United States into the battle to help them win an armistice costly to Germany.

  The ratio of private capital and debt to public capitol and debt as they relate to national income is quite an interesting historical study about which I have been reading recently in Thomas Pickety’s ‘Capital in the 21^st Century’. There are various relationships that occur to nations over history between public and private capital that recur. I am just adding a few of my own remarks here that pertain to the U.S.A.

 In Britain today 99% of capital is private yet of course the U.S. public often tend to regard Britain as a neo-socialist nation with its public health system. British public capital is rather puny because it is a small nation without much public land or parks. In the 21^st century land does not comprise a great percent of capital in first world nations. The United States probably has a greater level of public capital because it still has substantial public lands and obviously those will be targets of long-range hostile takeover by the private sector though that would cause egregious ecospheric harm.

  Private capital is definitely in the rise in the United States. It crashed during the second wo0rld war and has since recovered such that it comprises many times the national income. Public capital is comparatively deflated though the ecological value is quite undervalued. As private capital is concentrated because of the nature of networking and collective ownership in stocks it has a self-reinforcing nature that lets it accumulate more wealth and power reducing the masses to dependent and relatively powerless status. Mass political parties evolve to condition the masses to pursue unrealistic and irrelevant, non-economic political objectives.

   Interestingly enough it is war that tends to reduce the ratio of private capital to public capital though not always in a way that one expects. Britain and France financed their wars in different ways. France took on vast public debt on which it eventually defaulted while Britain fought America without raising taxes. Instead the Brits borrowed money from the rich and repaid them over a century. A huge percent of British government spending for a century went to just paying off the loans to the rich with interest. The rich got much richer as a result and public infrastructure was neglected. The United States seems to face similar challenges today.

  With tax cutting programs since the Reagan administration wars and defense spending have generally been accomplished without raising taxes to pay for them. I believe that President Roosevelt probably didn’t get his ideal 90% tax rate on the rich made law until the outbreak of the Second World War though the depression before had perhaps supported a legislative increase in taxes to benefit the public sector. Wars that are fought without raising taxes in the U.S.A. along with great defense spending even during peace rely in loans/bonds sold to the rich. The nation pays for that for decades or centuries. While inflation remains low and wealth is concentrated through a number of mechanical networking means of technical power the public debt is a great lever on the public sector reinforcing the corporate ad hoc governing state of an elite 1% of the people over ever one else to have their way. They own the broadcast media and increasingly the Internet and suppress or marginalize any sort of dissent or suggestion within Democratic means for changing ratios of taxation and public capital (that does not require socialism incidentally for effective reform).

  I believe the United States following the black pimpernel administration and the most recent tax cuts have passed over the event horizon into the realm of corporatism as the de facto political structure of the United States and that little can be done about it. Few understand it and fewer have the will or capacity to return to a reformed constitutional democracy since even the interpretation of the constitution by the High Court has become one of creative fiction.

  Capital makes for good reading, tough John Saul’s book from 1999, I believe, named ‘The Unconscious Civilization’ describing corporatism, and perhaps ‘Ecological Economics’, and some political philosophy about the nature of capitalism in addition to Adam Smith’s ‘The Wealth of Nations’ probably are required readings if one is to understand Smith’s idea about breaking up concentrated wealth and power latent in the Aristocracy of England in his day sufficient well empirically to think about creating a reformed constitutional democracy in the United States with a sustainable ecospheric relationship that provides and supports the means for enabling citizens to achieve their maximum inventive and productive potential that would keep them happy.

In contemporary popular economic philosophy there is generally confusion about the relation between private capital and public such that it is believed that to reform and to have a more equitable distribution of wealth private capital must be shifted to public capital and that of course is the road towards socialism. That mistaken belief readily overlooks the possibility of reforming private capital and reforming tax and business laws to assure that wealth is not concentrated and that everyone has an equal opportunity to produce and conserve capital without the problem of running into the obstruction of inherited concentrated wealth that dominates capital.

 With the British invention of evolution theory a major change has occurred in support of the British method of concentrating wealth for the benefit of elites. Adam smith of course opposed and reformed that policy that is recurring now. Evolution theory made a political device appeals to every godless goon and immoral thug in the west seeking an amoral environment to exist in as a kind of amoeba without civic or moral concerns under the aristocratic supervision of behavioral evolutionary biologists. The trend isn’t good for the American paradigm.

President Trump Lags Behind Obama War Creation Pace

President Trump's first year in office was luck-luster regarding the creation of wars. President Obama's first year saw glorious speeches made across the middle east followed by several wars during the Arab spring. In fact the President never lacked for wars he had stimulated being fought during his entire administration in addition to watching over the rise of the Islamic state. It is difficult to defend the President's lack of wars and some must face up to the fact that he could be more interested in business and building than destruction.

  Fortunately the President is hiring the known tough guy John Bolton for his new National Security Adviser. Maybe he can get things on track possibly through North Korea, though it must be recognized by war mongers that the meeting scheduled with the Warrior-Dictator Kim Jong Un may nip in the bud the prospects for a quick and effective small nuclear conflict to end the North Korean build up of weapons of mass destruction while being bellicose and threatening toward the 1%.

  President Trump has given 700 billion more to the Pentagon for national defense in his new spending bill yet about nothing for a defense wall with Mexico. Without solid wars its hard to justify the budget for a DOD that can't even defend the southern border.

  One can have difficulty understanding the reasoning for war for the worlds instead of ecospheric restoration of course. I believe it goes like this... When the aliens return and hover over Mt. Everest they shall drop an anchor line to the summit, descend a few who will walk down to the 22,000 level where their press spokesman Elvis, will explain it all.

  

Making Nuclear Reactors Great Again

  Nuclear reactors release energy when U-235 undergoes fission. Apparently that's a reasonably simple process. Usually water is used to dampen that so the heat and energy is moderated. one would think that something besides water could be used and it probably has; maybe sodium or something.

  Nuclear reactors have sometimes had their energy runaway and causing meltdown of the unit and of course contamination as radioactive fallout and such things are as harmful for human prospects for life on Earth as basic environmental damage that significantly harms the ecosphere and people too. Thus its a good idea that continuing research on safe reactor design and alternative mediums for capturing the fissile energy release safely.

  Russia and China have some very small nuclear reactors used commercially as well as the very large, yet they are still rather substantial in weight and possibly not valuable in the forseeable future for providing energy to electrify barren outer solar system moons cleanly. One might like to find dampening moderators that occurs simply as superconducting materials or batteries; solids that don't require liquid water; so rare in some places beyond the other.

  Not all solid moderators are without implications for bomb making of course. Graphite is used as a moderator at Oak Ridge to compile plutonium for weapons and of course to power satellites like Voyageur. The value of creating safe solid moderators for in-line superconducting and of a very light weight structure that could be placed by drones and robots on distant lifeless moons without enough sunlight for solar power to speak of, would advance manned space exploration and research colonization.

The Earth economy probably doesn't need much more than solar power and super-conductors of course, yet that can't be said of distant worlds that people  may want to vacation and live on in the next century.

The Brits made a gas cooled and graphite moderating reactor among others, based on the Magnox reactor design.

Arctic Sea Ice; Can it Be Great Again?

 Arctic sea ice has been in decline over the time that wages for white American males have stagnated since 1973. What can be done to make wages and sea ice great again?

  The entire Earth is in free fall in the nothingness of space. It is hard to realize that the planet is falling in an absolutely (nearly) empty spaces sprinkled here and there with mass and dark mass suffering the same fate of nothing to hang onto for a solid grip. Life on Earth just barely clings to the gravity of the world as a kind of elegant dirt on the outer layer that would be in a tough spot just free falling in nothingness without any gravity for a lifetime. Perhaps then each human would need to rely on his or her own gravity; being in quest of more. Yes, enough of that. On to the N.A.S.A. video with witty female scientists talking about the albedo of the earth decreasing and making the Arctic Ocean warmer as a result.

Reading from 'Pieces of Eight'

Pres. Trump Caved In on Wall Funding in $1.3 Trillion Dollar Budget

 The budget the President signed hasn't any funding for the border Wall with Mexico; merely 1.6 billion for fence repair. Giving up on securing funding for the Wall, an important campaign promise, was tactically not a very good political move for President Trump. His best hope for being re-elected is that Hillary chooses to run another time.

  It is true that a border canal with salt-water piped uphill with solar power would be a better way to provide security and fresh water as a dollar value. In helping establish a corporatist state working with the Communist Chinese dictator-for-life while being divided from political and economic unification in friendly policy with Russia (a strategic British goal of keeping the two large nation at loggerheads) the President just needs U.S. peons for Wall Street and Democrats that want to appear compassionate in hiring cheap illegal workers.

  If a law was passed that everyone in America had to be paid a fair minimum wage including illegal aliens the funding of a Wall would proceed directly. Democrats only want illegals here while they are exploited illegally as workers. The Democrat Party is the party of slavery and they continue that tradition now.

  The Congress should require that everyone in America be paid at least minimum wage even of they are illegally here. The penalty for paying sub-minimum wage should be hard time in jail for employers of at least 1 year per felony count, while the penalty for hiring an illegal worker should be 30 days in jail.