Pres Biden hints Democrats may have weather control in the future

 POTUS replied to a press question in Kentucky that the government can do something to recover from weather damage even if it can’t control the weather now. The inference is that Democrats may be able to control the weather in the foreseeable future. After that maybe controlling the tides is next on the party agenda. I believe the irrational exuberance of the Democrat party over passage of the biggest bill in decades or something to that effect said Senator Schumer, is evident.

 In the 2020 Democrat Presidential primaries global warming response was a big topic that elicited plans from all the on-stage candidates. The most expensive ran north of 50 trillion dollars and the cheapest was Joe Biden’s 3.5 trillion dollar plan. The great ‘Inflation Reduction Doublespeak Bill” allocates about 350 billion to slow global warming a little. That is 1/10^th of the cost of the most minimal plan; not exactly a success.

 My belief is that intelligent regulations and laws could eliminate greenhouse gassing, habitat degradation and mass species extinctions faster and better than any spending bill the Congress might pass. Those bills are invariably loaded with pork and are poorly planned to the extent of being ineffective at improving the ecosphere. Jacque Cousteau and James Lovelock each expressed the opinion that mankind has about 200 years of a livable planet remaining. I believe the ballpark figure now is about 170 years. Humans are just over-consuming and overusing natural resources with inefficient and ecospherically mal-adapted technology.

 Democrats have managed to restore the Cold War version 1.0 to a full 2.0 status. Sending ten billion to the Ukraine government for weapons to kill Russians might have some unintended negative consequences for the U.S.A., yet like the global warming problem, government leadership tends to ignore the challenges and even increase the potential scale of disaster. Maybe it’s premature in regard to the Democrat’s new world order schedule to think about how normal relations could be restored with Russia and China, yet I will indulge that point a little.

 Democrats have piled on every sanction and penalty they could imagine upon Russia. That will make it difficult to end conflict with Russia or to end sanctions short of some kind of complete surrender by Russia even though the U.S.A. and N.A.T.O. aren’t technically at war with them (though Democrats might wish they could be).  If the U.S. weapons can kill so many Russian soldiers that the Russian military withdraws to areas the United States government considers their legitimate reservation it could not end the sanctions without that Russian surrender; if it did that would be like ending sanctions on Saddam Hussein after General Schwarzkopf and the military coalition drove the Iraqi military out of Kuwait and back to Iraq. So long as Russia is regard as belligerent and on the wrong side of the Queer Curtain (like the Iron Curtain except lavender on the U.S.-N.A.T.O. side and red on the Russian peace couldn’t be assured. Maybe it would evolve like the DMZ dividing the two states of Korea and the western forces would stand ready to war against the Eastern forces for a half century or more.

 I believe intelligent people tend to see more and deeper than people less intellectually gifted. It may also be that people believe their own intellect is fine and they understand things as they are. Even the most intelligent may be wrong- Einstein for example believed his cosmological constant was a blunder. Maybe it’s a variable; if it was less a few billion years ago than it is now it might have accelerated some-space on the way to terminal velocity. Democrats seem content that their attitude toward Russia and Ukraine is intelligent and the best outlook. They also minimize or ignore dire possible consequences to global security as a result of the war. Too often they declare they are defending another democracy when factually the U.S.A. has evolved into plutocracy with nominal democracy. Wealth has concentrated, the broadcast media became special interest social fascists fanning racial politics and Democrats legislate special interest bills with one-party votes and a majority of one in the Senate. Neither party seems interested in building a better world that eliminates poverty in the U.S.A. first and then that of the world while returning the environment to health.

  With free enterprise and limits to capitalism good legislation can move in the direction of a healthy world. God told Jeremiah that everyone knows Him and they simply forget who he is. Democrats not only lose reverence for God or even awareness of Him, they also forget about campaign promises to pass substantial legislation to slow or reverse global warming instead dumping ecospheric tokenism into their synthetic fascist information media to prop up November re-election trimes. Alaska’s next election later in August has weighted candidates where one is supposed to rank choices, as if any substitute product was acceptable to one a voter believes best. If federal elections had ranked choices indicating that just insiders are ranked and eligible  they would need negative ranking choices (less than zero) to realistically capture voter sentiment.

Earth Heating/Cooling for Desert Homes

 The Earth is constant regarding temperature. Not far below the surface the temperature remains the same regardless of extremes caused by climate change. Desert homes built in the exuberance era of Hoover Dam's online status that rely entirely on electricity for comfortable heating cooling highlight human designing flaws in adapting to the Terran ecosphere. Rational politics would adapt to the change and reduce desert heating costs by at least half.

 There may always be more demand for power than can be produced or that is necessary for heating and cooling of well designed structures. Costs rise with demand always shuffling out the poor from new deals. Las Vegas could adapt to increased global heating by requiring some ordinance that new homes be at least 50% cooled from passive Earth technology that bring down high temperatures and bring up cold with little electrical use. Retrofitting structures should also be considered, and public spaces that don't need electricity to stay within a survivable range should be considered for emergency preparedness.

California Governor's Attack on U.S. Constitution

 California’s Governor Newsom signed in to law a bill allowing citizens to sue other citizens for exercising their constitutional right to keep and bare arms. He modeled the bill on a Texas law allowing citizens to sue abortion providers. Apparently he doesn’t know the founders did not put a constitutional right to abortion in the original document or amendments thereafter. Letting citizens sue citizens for exercising constitutionally protected rights is a direct attack on the constitution of the United States. The Newsom anti-build a gun kit law sets a precedent for liberal lawsuits on every constitutionally protected right. The Newsome model would let a globe of lawsuits contradicting constitutional rights like the right of women to vote and freedom from slavery.

For some reason Democrats don’t seem to comprehend the ramifications of their approach to gerrymandering constitutional liberties. For instant gratification Democrats make very dangerous attacks on the pillars U.S. government legislative rules, and constitutional rights in addition to unstatesmanlike foreign policy. At least the nation can be confident that Democrat Party leadership will continue to seem to be disingenuous or indolent and never get an advanced new energy infrastructure built that creates hydrogen gas from electrolysis to make a liquid hydrogen cooled super-conducting electrical grid that synergizes greenhouse gas reduction and clean energy independence.

Bad politics and daft politicians are an empirical threat rather than an existential one. The difference is this; existential viewpoints are individual rather than common or empirical. What is an existential threat to one person may be beneficence to another. An empirical threat is a pervasive threat to all within a realm. That kind of threat usually arrives from space, from deep in the Earth, or from Washington D.C.

 

 

Irrational Exuberance, Environment and Inductive Puzzles

 Experiencing the climate this year in S.E. Alaska where July so far was cool and inclement it occurred to me that indoor, thermostat regulated lifestyles like those of average Americans detach humans from environmental sensitivity. I’ve spent decades in unheated shelters including Alaska, sometimes sleeping on the ground where I used ground temperature and insulating blankets to keep a gallon of water from freezing solid when the air temperature was zero Fahrenheit, so I am fairly sensitive to climate.

The effects of indoor, thermostat regulated lifestyles are fairly new in the course of human history. A couple of centuries ago people in the north were lucky to have a wood stove for cold winters and built their homes around the wood stove. Air conditioning didn’t exist much before electricity when the Gulf coast was populated by mosquitoes and outlaws. People worked hard to separate themselves from nature to a certain extent; they liked bright things, glitz and shiny and that desire to be relieved from the common dark, dour, sometimes dank conditions of homes lit by candles and perhaps kerosene lamps increased along with the advance of technology. People were attracted to neon lights like bugs are to bug lights. Indoor living with climate controlled environments became common as did machines for transport and to relieve work. Humans to some extent tried to forget the external and very real world of nature and were unconcerned with managing its health. In places like the Willamette Valley of Oregon and Puget Sound of the state of Washington urban and suburban sprawl overtook exceedingly fertile farmlands that had arisen when the great northwestern forests were converted into lumber. An irrational exuberance had overtaken humanity of the first world and it was based on segregating nature and placing mankind into an artificial, bug free, trouble free world.

It is my belief that the irrational exuberance of living a lifetime in artificial environments has affected human psychology deeply. The bright lights and bling of the artificial has become the new normal and nature has become regarded as disreputable. Some associate nature with vermin and value its remaining ecospheric health only so far as to consider its monetary value if processed for market sale. The psychology of natural consumption inside the new nature of the artificial normalizes irrational exuberance. The addiction to a world of pastel colors, shiny objects, bright lights and machines has been joined with drugs, alcohol, tobacco and intoxicants of polluting and non-polluting kind so far as to make common human nature maladapted to experience subtle change of seasons effects directly on the senses, the varieties of darkness and light of winter months, and psychologically incapable of making serious remedies for gross natural habitat loss, mass species extinction and global warming.

In my opinion being aware of the problem is required for fixing those serious ecospheric, environmental challenges. It is probably impossible to get humanity to step back from the ecospheric ledge if it requires reducing consumption, so increasing efficiency through innovating new technological and environmental methods may be the most realistic way to proceed.

Politicians tend to be immersed in the general unnatural psychology of irrational exuberance and excess consumption. Americans buy some things just because they can and feel like it. They have disposable income that exceeds their basic needs for living. President Reagan was known as the great communicator. He was an optimist with a cheery disposition. Not only was he liked, he was trusted. President Reagan said that America’s best times were yet ahead. His optimism helped greatly to bring about the end of the Cold War 1.0. President Reagan had faith in God and that was honest. He too however personified the American greatness of consumption rather than environmentalism. The nation needs faith in God, environmental reformation and technological progress to move very far ahead in the way of progress. Blind allegiance to the politics of consumerism and a wrong understanding of Smith’s Wealth of Nations/Capitalism may deliver the U.S.A. to knock itself out crashing into an environmental limits wall.

I have written elsewhere on select approaches to take to make up with the nation and world’s ecosphere. The field of environmental economics is highly recommended. I would add here the observation that what is lacking in U.S. politics at the Federal level (actually quite a number of character items are lacking and in need of repair yet I will not digress) is creative thinking. Fixing the environment is a matter of solving inductive puzzles rather than deductive ones like crossword puzzles. Inductive puzzles bring one to see ways to put different technologies or tools together to make something to solve problems and challenges. From pieces in the world comprising everything that exists, one selects pieces to invent a puzzle  picture that solves the problem.

Audio News Media vs Text

 There is a stark contrast these days between news media with human audio and news reports in written text; the former is marinated in political spin and text, far less so. Television, radio and Internet video are saturated with human and speech synthesizer read news stories that usually have rave demotic spin slathered onto skeletal structures of news facts.  Hearing via the ears, Julius Caesar commented, is the most vulnerable sense. He would be aware if alive today that enemies with mass communication technology can do a lot of social harm. People can injure via the ears from across the globe. Brainwashing and political control may be engendered through audio with deceit and guile. Text is shorn of emotional and disinformative spin packed into audio inflections and warps of paradigmatic and syntagmatic axes. Audio readily serves as a communicable social disease of lies.

Text of course may be used to put out propaganda. The ability to consider text reports without emotional manipulation is much easier than for audio reports. One may for instance, compare audio to walking through a store checkout line with human checkers vs. one with a self-scanner-check out, do it yourself system. The human may use audio to spin even the weather while the do-it-yourself scanner should generally be silent and compliant.

Text has a syntagmatic and paradigmatic axis. Audio has those too, and one more; a phonological axis. The phonological axis can be used to corrupt syntagmatic and paradigmatic axes infusing each with duplicity and/or emotives.

It isn’t that automated systems with speech synthesizers cannot be used for audio spin; they can. The National Weather Service’s marine weather forecast radio usually applies some kind of controlling spin pronunciation onto regular words. One could pack emotion laden language into any speech synthesizer or insults from grocery auto check outs to automatic car driving systems. Electric powered self-driving car owners may want their vehicles to have a road rage program function built in to compensate for a wussy environmentalist reputation; who can say.

It is possible to compare text for objective content more easily than audio reports. If one watches the spin of Fox News vs. NBC or CNN via the Multi-news windows of cable TV the contrast can be notable sometimes. With text one can line up three reports on the same news item and sometimes see spin from the left, right and with luck, and objective, just the facts sort of item.

The Democrat Party seems to be permanently on vacation from objectivity and intellectually optimizing mass infrastructure designs for progress in a preference of anti-Trump and anti-Russia narratives forever. The hate Trump narrative is comparable to the Mary Jo Kopekne remarks that flowed through the conservative media about Sen. Ted Kennedy decades after the drowning; it is simply much more hateful, loud and of a scale Sen. Joe McCarthy would have appreciated.

I believe it is possible that the phenomenology of modern capitalism inducts socially destructive political dynamics to facilitate the concentration of wealth as a best-possible-wordline in-itself. The rich own the media and the political environment too. With the end of Cold War 1.0 political reorganizations were made to enable concentration of wealth. The rise of an American left was a concern. It is possible that the left were diverted to socially divisive issues as a way to take their focus off economics and the politics of economic equalization within a reasonable range income distribution. The same principle may apply to environmental reformation too; the rich may prefer gradual for-profit market responses to environmental challenges over comprehensive government led approaches in order to conserve increasing concentration of wealth. I believe the media, owned by the rich, reinforces the narrative of social issue divisions.

Democrat Party vs. Russia & China; basically the wrong direction

Trying to interpret contemporary history and U.S, Presidential leadership isn’t too easy. Especially that of Barrack Obama, possibly of Indonesian birth, though more likely Hawaiian, who was given a Nobel Prize and then stimulated civil conflicts across the Middle East. Understanding his role in fomenting nearly a decade of race protests and riots and contributing to the hate Russia narrative and Ukrainian war with Russia is challenging for outsiders to elite American establishment institutions. The media made it unpatriotic and racist to criticize President Obama’s conduct as one might any usual President with dubiously useful policy. That was convenient for Wall Street an 1% insiders who had their way with tax cuts for the rich without resistance except from Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Most American voters probably will never visit the Ukraine or care much about it. Neither do most Americans care much about Muslim world except when Islamic terrorists are blowing up buildings in the United States. Even so it is useful to understand the relations of Democrat politics and Presidential leadership to foreign affairs as they do impact the U.S. economy and moral sensibilities.

President Bill Clinton got Cold War 2.0 established in 1994 when Ukraine was removed entirely from Russia. Russia was weak and rebuilding after going through the very risky step of ending the Soviet Union. In theory President Reagan would have welcomed Russia as equals in a post-Soviet world order. In fact there were elements that sought to exploit Russian weakness and minimize Russian land area. A long period of rebuilding Russia from a dead communist model to a free enterprise society followed.

Russia choose to rebuild its military on the American model of volunteers well trained with modern equipment, smaller in numbers yet more effective than a conscript military. It began to build institutions and eventually was able to put a small income tax on big business mostly held by oligarchs. A Russian movie industry developed. When the Muslim attack on the World Trade Towers occurred Russia partnered with western agencies cooperatively to contain Muslim terrorism internationally. During the Bush II years Russia was still basically on good relations with the United States. The Barrack Obama was elected President of the United States.

The Nobel Prize Committee awarded Barrack Obama the peace prize for being the first black President of the United States. The President made a speech in accepting the prize that seemed to support just war. He traveled to the Middle East and at Cairo made a speech in support of the Arab Spring revolts that was followed by several years of conflict in Egypt, Libya, Syria and Yemen. The Republican Bush II administration had made a peace treaty with Qaddafi of Libya that was destroyed by President Obama who supported the war on his regime. When anarchy followed the end of the Qaddafi government and Islamic fundamentalist cadre moved in, the increase of Sub-Saharan Muslim terrorism grew too. America has probably lost Russian support in fighting against Muslim terrorism.

President Obama was an accelerant and organizer for the Syrian civil war. He sent military and financial support to Syrian rebels. Syria was a long-time ally of Russia, and that choice to support the Sunni revolt against Shia/Alawite minority rule placed the United States in conflict with Russia policy. That may have been inevitable, as the earlier Democrat president Bill Clinton had laid the foundation for Democrat Party belligerence toward Russia.

President Obama’s domestic policies allowed the Black Lives Matter movement to grow without resistance or redirection to more positive and civil means for achieving racial goals.* His decision to support homosexual marriage and the orientation of blacks as queer allies placed the U.S.A. into another belligerent, antagonistic posture in regard to Russia. Russia was far more conservative of traditional morality. When the European Union and the U.S.A. became queer marriage entities placing sanctions on Russia for supporting Syria, and expanded N.A.T.O. into Eastern Europe, Russian leadership probably viewed the west and corrupt, duplicitous, untrustworthy and dedicated to flanking and subjugating Russia so far as they could. In 2014 Russia choose to invade and retake the Crimean Peninsula- claimed by Ukraine that had been part of Russia- rather like Florida is to Americans for winter vacation and southern commerce, for centuries before President Clinton. More western sanctions followed, and the ground was set for protracted Cold War.

The election of President Trump changed the inertia of U.S. foreign policy for a while to one that was not too antagonistic to Russia. At least, the administration was amenable to improved Russian-American relations though the Democrat Party hatred of President Trump and Russia grew white-hot. An inquisition was made by the Democrat controlled Congress into the 2016 election that tried to prove Russians colluded to elect the President, and that President Trump might have hidden relations with Russia. President Trump’s support may have in part been a reaction not only to onerous, wicked Democrat Party policy that was so belligerent in approach; it may have received white support to counteract the perceived racist agenda of Barrack Obama and the Democrat Party.

One might wonder why Democrats hate Russia. It could be speculated that Democrat Party politics in support of homosexuality and feminine leadership and quick women’s liberation around the world- unsupported by economic facts to a certain extent, coupled with the desire for political and economic hegemony on Eurasia, required a continuum of pressure to hold and expand their goals. One wonder if President Obama was a racist who viewed Russia as the main obstruction to creating a non-white world and new age for Africans, Asians, Latinos etc over old Europe and the United States- each already flooded with illegal migrants Democrats tended to support.

Donald Trump is a famous loud blonde, or orange haired guy. He is a self-promoter with a rough style that offends many opponents. His international relations policies were pretty good however; he should have won a Nobel Prize for merit rather than race. He was skunked instead. After his years of being a target of Democrats ended with his administration- or might end after the end of the Biden administration, President Putin probably realized that he faced more years of very tight sanctions and Democrat Party hostility from the new Democrat administration led by President Obama’s Vice-President, Joe Biden. In 2022 Russia invaded Ukraine and the fighting continues with Democrats pouring all of the accelerant they can find onto the fire of war. That affect the U.S. and world economy, yet as part of the Democrat New World Order agenda of making a morally corrupt world beyond good and evil led by feminist-queer shop forepersons of planetary plutocrats, it may be considered a small price to pay. Democrat, godless corporatism doesn’t come cheap in terms of the cost of human lives.

*Most of the Black Lives Matter protests and riots were about police shootings of black men. With hundreds of thousands of arrests made each year in the U.S.A. fewer than twenty or so killings of suspects by police are plainly wrong. All of those policemen are union members and it isn’t likely union performance will be able to improve much and reduce the killings to zero.  An alternative approach might be to de-unionize police departments and replace them with contract workers financially incentivized for quality performance. Perhaps unions could negotiate contracts with monetary penalties for shooting people without necessity or for using excess bullets. Maybe any bullets used that hit a human should cost $1000 per in order to discourage use of bullets except in cases where perpetrators are firing bullets at police in which case police officers would be entitled to send three bullets for each bullet fired at them by a perp at no cost. Performance criteria for pay could be low or no numbers of shootings, most arrests leading to conviction etc; money matters. If police job performance matters for pay purposes financial motivation to use minimal force might be able to reduce fatalities without simply transferring fatalities from suspects to police. Should every policeman receive an automatic semi-annual $1000 non-shooting bonus that is forfeit if he fires a gun? I think it unlikely a policeman would ever not shoot if his life were actually in danger from an armed suspect as he weighed the question of his life worth losing a thousand dollars or not. Jack Benny told a story that he was accosted by an armed robber who said “Your money or your life”, and Benny said; “I’m thinking about it”. It is possible though that police fatalities could increase if they are compelled by new union rules to give themselves greater exposure to risk of death from armed suspects while they have their hands tied regarding use of force, such that they have no choice to use force. The problem seems to be one of using excessive or unnecessary force when it is required for personal or public safety.

Making sense of the Democrat Party’s long range influence on international affairs is challenging. Democrats started the Vietnam War in 1960 and the appropriately labeled General Westmorland oversaw the U.S. military at its height. Russia and the communists of the Soviet Union supported Asians versus the U.S. Army of the new world. After the failure to secure more land in the old world Republicans worked on rapprochement with the Soviet Union and Communist China eventually producing fruit with the Reagan administration’s mutual draw down of military and political hostility. The Communism of the Soviet Union ended and Russia was converted to free enterprise and modern gangster elitist concentrated wealth capitalism. It did not end there.

The Democrat Bill Clinton took office and stole Ukraine from the nascent Russian federation to found the West’s Democrat Party eastward expansion that resulted eventually in the Ukraine conflict after succeeding Democrat Presidents elevated enmity with Russia. If N.A.T.O. leader Stoletenberg is replaced someone named Eastmorland should be replace him to provide neat historical bookends on U.S. foreign policy the past 62 and next three years when, with luck, the policy will be retired and a new era of peaceful free enterprise with a safely taxed capitalism will build.

The tendency for wealth concentration edging toward enabling a small aristocratic elite effectively ending Democracy except in name only requires defense with taxation. Overly concentrated wealth subverts free enterprise of the masses, prevents competition to existing structures owned by elites and requires a substantial underclass with perennial economic insecurity.

Democrat presidents unconcerned with business in comparison to Republicans too readily get involved in wars even if for reasons of political ideology. One must wonder if the Second World War and Korean Conflict (and Serbian) could have been avoided and finessed to a better non-combative direction. President Eisenhower was no slouch at war yet managed to make it through eight years without creating a large international conflict or even sponsoring one. I wonder if anyone might be able to discern a Democrat Party pattern of political conduct, policy or method regarding Eurasia.

Democrats were the party of the Confederacy leading to the Civil War. After Andrew Johnson no Democrat could get elected President for more than a half century. Republicans were the northern anti-slavery party and held the office of President for quite a while. Republican leadership was OK. until Woodrow Wilson got America into the First World War, then Americans voted for the Bull Moose Neo-Republican Theodore Roosevelt. Calvin Coolidge had a good Presidency in the roaring twenties getting out after one term ducking the immanent crash that occurred during the Hoover administration. The national depression enabled the election of the first Democrat to the White House Lincoln’s assassination promoted Andrew Johnson to be the 17th U.S. President. Maybe Andrew Johnson wasn’t really a Democrat. No internet access here in rural S.E. Alaska to confirm that presently. It is easier to consider long range, general historical trends in an unelectrified paradigm than to remember select historical details of centuries past.

Theodore Roosevelt’s cousin Franklin was a Democrat lawyer from New York able to get elected after the Hoover crash of 1929-30. Franklin D. Roosevelt got the United States into the Second World War. I am not of the opinion that Democrat President always get the United States into foreign wars or that they were all honorably avoidable. My opinion is that if sound alternatives to war could have been developed Democrats would not find them. Their leadership in regard to war seems to be like that of crash test dummies on foot running blindly into unsound policies that meet war like an old friend. Since Vietnam Democrats prefer proxy wars.

The Democrat party of the United States appears to use social-political insanity to construct a fascist society under plutocratic, authoritarian rule enforcing Democrat Party agenda. That tradition may have begun with the desire to enforce the return of escaped slaves from anyplace in the U.S. to southern slave owners and continues today with the use of force so far as possible to control the federal legislature along with executive power to corrupt racially impartial civil rights.

Labor participation in Covid Year 2021 down; recession 2022?

 The fact that about 370 thousand people were hired in July doesn’t preclude the possibility or even likelihood of recession developing. The labor participation rate- the percent of adult Americans working, was fairly low before Covid. Mass layoffs during 2020 because of Covid threw millions of boomers out of work and onto early retirement. The number of people that won’t return to work from skilled positions that may be more difficult to fill than unskilled may create millions of job openings besides those of people being hired to fill jobs that were canceled temporarily.

Usually it seems that at least 150,000 people are hired as a monthly average during a normal economy. Doubling that number as a post-Covid 19 return to near normal economics draft seems about right, in a horseshoe toss sort of way. I think no one believes that 350 thousand monthly job hires is the result of a booming economy and clever administrative management.

If the labor participation rate is still low compared to normal times with the ongoing exodus of boomers from jobs it is possible that recession or producing less is a natural level of economic activity. Maybe increased use of robotics will expand economic productivity as flow-charting product through-put designs are reconfigured to use fewer human employees. The Biden administration may search for more ways to flood the nation with increased illegal alien workforce cadre to keep their salads green on restaurant tables. They did get the Congress to spend 20 billion dollars on a domestic chip development stimulus- a fraction of what they spent on donating weapons, cash and future considerations to Ukraine’s comedian president and military.

It can be very difficult for boomers seeking to return to the workforce facing age discrimination. It is also a fact that once people start drawing social security retirement they can no longer change the amount with further work disincentivizing them to work. I do not know if they must pay into social security if they do return to work since the payments would do nothing for themselves. Maybe Congress should act to reform social security a little to address the reality of boomer retirements in 2021 and 2022 and let them return to work if they prefer for a few more years with their retirement payments suspended and a future fresh approach to retirement made to renormalize matters. A few extra years of work paying into social security can result in a better retirement check when one does retire, while early retirement and no work is deleterious.

Democrats are attempting to pass an environmental bill worth 70 billion a year for ten years as a reaction to global warming. Most objective people would say that is far too small of an investment that will not slow global warming sufficiently to terminate more deleterious effects ahead economically. Cynics might note the main reason that sum was proffered was the attempt to get Democrats re-elected in November.

The administration also seeks to let retirees on Medicare who can afford Plan B – a requirement for buying into Plan D that is the Medicare drug coverage- have the opportunity to negotiate drug prices as a collective bargaining unit in order to lower costs of drugs. Like Obamacare that left many of the poor out of its plan for many reasons, the Biden drug plan excludes poor retirees who can’t afford Plan B from getting reduced prescription drug prices in Plan D. If those making laws and implementing them were not so prosperous they would be able to comprehend that those Americans excluded from workforce participation much of their lives are also excluded from the collective benefits those better off share.

If President Obama had not been a former cocaine using tobacco smoking Harvard front man he would have included the poor in his medical plan so no citizens are excluded from Plan B and D when too old to fashionably be employed in the lunatic American society of the Democrat Party. If there are not too many Americans that poor, so few that rich Democrat politicians don’t notice them, it shouldn’t be too costly to their 33 trillion dollar economy to provide Plan B and D coverage for that fractional minority.