Third Party & Independents Archives

Jeez David I have been so busy discussing the national non-issue of Mosque locations that this much more substantial issue has gone by the wayside. How sad is that.

I agree with your excellent explanation of the difference between wealthy donors and the public in general.

It seems I may have a chance to vote for more than the 2 major party candidates for my representatives in November. There may be an additional 2 candidates on the ballot, so I may be able to vote for a third party this time out.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 16, 2010 02:59 PM

Bravo, j2t2. I am siding with the New American Independent Party these days on the majority of their platform positions, but, alas, they have no candidates running in my voting districts. So, voting for challengers regardless of party is my best voting option this November.

Thanks for your comments.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 16, 2010 03:18 PM

Don’t know what choices I will have in November but I will vote against the incumbents even if it means voting for a Dem or Rep. Ooops! My fanger puicked on the keyboard.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 16, 2010 04:11 PM

j2t2, David has been sitting at his keyboard, waiting for someone to repond and you had to be the one…

What I read in this post is that people are fed up with politicians and when these incumbents get voted out, David will give VOID the credit. Even though 99.99999999% of people have never heard of VOID…

Posted by: Beretta9 at August 16, 2010 04:12 PM

Baretta9, Rome was not built in a day. VOID has only been around 4 years, that is two elections. Give us some time. The 10’s of thousands who have heard of VOID will become millions as our donations continue to grow. More than $10,000 last month alone. Your wishful thinking for obscurity of VOID, I and our individual contributors, assure you, will never be fulfilled.

I will give credit where credit is due. I gave credit to the Tea Party and Coffee Party in this article. Which your illiterate ass missed entirely, apparently. Pretty much sums up the credibility of your comment. Thank you.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 16, 2010 05:14 PM

Thanks for the chuckle, Roy. Good one. Even my arthritic fingers got a chuckle out of that one.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 16, 2010 05:17 PM

DRR:

“Which your illiterate ass missed entirely, apparently. Pretty much sums up the credibility of your comment.”

This pretty much borders the violation of the rules of this site. Pretty bad when the manager losses his temper and has to result to personal attacks. I love it when the left has to result to personal attacks instead of dialog.

Posted by: Beretta9 at August 16, 2010 10:10 PM

David,
I agree with you that VOID is obe of the answers to Americas’ Problems; however, knowing a much stronger stance may be needed in order to get Our Elders, Parents, and Children to discuss the Role of Corporation Parenthood. Tell me if you care to debate this Unlearned Unbrifled Anti-Authoritarian Child of the 70’s by Freewill and Self-Nature over the following statement.

Given a Finite World

As a Child of the 70’s I am proud to see many of My Brothers and Sisters of the 70’s begin to question the Authority of Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders; however, as an Unlearned Unbridled Anti-Authoritarian Child of the 70’s by Freewill and Self-Nature I have been raised listening to your parents and grandparents tell you money does not grow on trees. Yet, I still look forward to the day the President of the United States of America and Members of Congress can explain how Apple, Orange, and Walnut trees cannot only supply their owner with a sustainable source of energy and food, but why Americas’ Government and Society provides to opportunity for a source of income separate from the Labor and Management of the Corporation. For if the 2010 Elections are going to be a referendum between the Establishment of the 21st Century and the Status Quo of the 20th Century than can the Know-Nothing party and the No-Nothing Party of Wall Street and Washington show My Community Elders and Peers of the 70’s a plan to increase the Natural and Sustainable Resources of Mankind given the limits of a Finite World.

Because why I am sure My Elders are happy no Special Interest Group has called for the Conservatorship of all the fossil fuel saved by Renewable Energy Farms and Money Tree Foresting. I do find it puzzling how one can allow the Oil Companies fear of losing sales to Americas’ Electricity Companies prevent the other corporations who use fossil fuel resources to remain limited when My Cajun and Gulf Kinfolk can tell you that a Political Viable Solution rests somewhere between 300 million plus individual REFs and a 2 Giga Watt Public REF capable of protecting the Mississippi Delta.

Yes, IMHO the 2010 and 2012 Elections can be the time when Americas’ Elected Officials are allowed to address the Issues of the 20th Century and begin to prepare for the Events of the 21st Century. And though it may (most likely) take a few generations before every Human learns the importance of Renewable Farming and Money Tree Foresting I know the Children of the 21st Century can use Commerce and Industry to prove to the Community Elders and Peers that every Citizen has the opportunity to become economically viable and financially independent.

So why Grandma and Grandpa can rest easy knowing the Money Trees which have the 5, 10, and 20 dollar bills hanging from their branches remain hidden from view and the Children of the 21st Century can relax knowing the Children of the 70’s are going to allow them to build a Better World. Nevertheless, knowing the Youth of the 60’s and Silver Spoons of the 70’s are not the smartest ones of the bunch, I do believe the Barons of Wall Street and Washington will be shocked to see what the Youth of Today can do given the same opportunities.

Close Enough?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 17, 2010 05:15 AM

“j2t2, David has been sitting at his keyboard, waiting for someone to repond and you had to be the one…”

Well it seemed to work as it got your attention Beretta. I was encouraged to find out just a few days ago that I may actually have a choice when it comes to my representative in Congress. Usually I get choices for president only.

“What I read in this post is that people are fed up with politicians and when these incumbents get voted out, David will give VOID the credit. Even though 99.99999999% of people have never heard of VOID…:

Well VOID has been around longer than the Tea party yet I suppose you will give all the credit to them Beretta. You seem to forget that groups like VOID bring solutions to the forefront while the Tea Party gets sponsored media attention and all hat no head spokespeople like Palin and Bachmann. Tea baggers are the movement followers that well….you know.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 17, 2010 07:37 AM

So, is repeatedly rewarding Congress with 90% re-election rates working?

What is the term to describe someone that repeatedly does the same thing, while expecting a different result?

What about dismally low 11% approval ratings for Congress?

And don’t forget, the majority of unhappy voters did vote out incumbent politicians by the hundreds in years 1929, 1931, and 1933.

• Start __ End __ Congress _ Re-Election ___ Party Seat-Retention
• Year ___ Year ___ # ______ Rate ________ Rate
• 1927 ___ 1929 ___ 070st ___ 83.6% ________ 96.4% (087 incumbents ousted: 22(D), 64(R), 1(FL) )
• 1929 ___ 1931 ___ 071st ___ 79.7% ________ 92.5% (108 incumbents ousted: 51(D), 44(R), 2(FL), 1(S) )
• 1931 ___ 1933 ___ 072nd ___ 76.8% ________ 88.5% (123 incumbents ousted: 36(D), 87(R) )
• 1933 ___ 1935 ___ 073rd ___ 61.2% ________ 78.7% (206 of 531 incumbents ousted: 59(D), 147(R) )
• … … … … … … … …
• 1989 ___ 1991 ___ 101 _____ 90.1% ________ 99.6%
• 1991 ___ 1993 ___ 102 _____ 87.7% ________ 98.3%
• 1993 ___ 1995 ___ 103 _____ 73.5% ________ 98.1% (142 of 535 incumbents ousted)
• … … … … … … … …
• 1999 ___ 2001 ___ 106 _____ 89.2% ________ 99.3%
• 2001 ___ 2003 ___ 107 _____ 89.2% ________ 98.7%
• 2003 ___ 2005 ___ 108 _____ 87.9% ________ 98.1%
• 2005 ___ 2007 ___ 109 _____ 88.6% ________ 98.7%
• 2007 ___ 2009 ___ 110 _____ 84.9% ________ 93.1% (81 of 535 incumbents ousted)
• 2009 ___ 2011 ___ 111 _____ 86.7% ________ 93.3% (about 71 of 535 incumbents ousted)

Source: One-Simple-Idea.com/CongressMakeUp_1855_2011.htm

Who (if anyone) can list 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, or even 268 (half of 535) incumbent politicians within Congress that are not FOR-SALE, incompetent, greedy, arrogant, and corrupt?

The idea of VOID upsets partisan loyalists mostly.
Why?
The reason is not logical.
But the reason is not complicated, which is a failure to strive for long-term, enlightened, self-interest, instead of short-term selfishness, which manifests itself as:

• laziness, false pride, lying (e.g. blind partisan loyalties; blindly pulling the party-lever; self-delusion; lazily and foolishly believing that THEIR politicians are better; lazily fueling and wallowing in the blind partisan-warfare);
  
• greed, lust for power, irrational hatred and anger (foolishly being bribed with your own tax dollars; abuse of wealth to influence government as evidenced by 99.7% of all 200 million voters being vastly out-spent by a very tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters who make a whopping 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more; looking for revenge against the OTHER party; hatefully and angrily fueling and wallowing in the blind partisan-warfare);
  
• envy and jealousy (trying to disguise eny and jealousy as demands for equality; fueling the myth that we can all live at the expense of everyone else; fueling envy and jealousy by fueling class-warfare, racism, and discrimination of other despicable forms)
  
• fear (trying to influence voters by fear mongering and lies);
  
• ignorance (failing to learn the truth; and allowing master cheaters and master parasites to tap-into their fear, bigotry, anger, laziness, greed, envy, and hatred for their own cheaters’ and parasites’ own nefarious purposes);

However, there is one fortunate thing; a potential self-correction mechanism; which provides some reason for hope:

• Pain and Misery

Responsibility = Power + Virtue + Education + Transparency + Accountability

Corruption, Pain, and Misery = Power - Virtue - Education - Transparency - Accountability

When will rampant corruption, pain, and misery dimimish?
Quite simply, most likely, eventually, when too much Corruption finally beccomes too painful.
Quite simply, most likely, when enough voters have finally received their inevitable Education (whether the hard way; or sooner than later by the smarter way).
Quite simply, most likely, when enough voters finally understand that they are ultimately culpable too.

So, perhaps, when enough of the voters are jobless, bankrupt, homeless, and hungry, enough of them may finally understand that they are culpable too, and repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, greedy, arrogant, corrupt incumbent politicians with 90% re-election rates not only makes no sense, but is increasing their own pain and misery.

It took many decades to get where we are today, and the majority of voters and politicians are ALL culpable.
Fueling and wallowing in the blind partisan warfare is for master cheaters, master parasites, and the fools that allow the cheaters and parasites to tap-into their fear, bigotry, anger, laziness, greed, envy, and hatred for their own cheaters’ and parasites’ own nefarious purposes.

To be honest, it is increasingly difficult to have much sympathy for the majority of voters who repeatedly reward failure and repeatedly reward FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with 90% re-election rates, despite dismally low 11% approval ratings, and constant whining about corruption, when the voters have a very simple mechanism right under their very own noses. Quite simply::

• Stop Repeat Offenders.
  
• Don’t Re-Elect the Master Cheaters and Master Parasites.

Or don’t! BBBAAAAAAAAAAAAHHhhhhhh … BBBAAAAAAAAAAAAHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh …

The truth can hurt, but not nearly as bad as repeatedly ignoring the truth.
The truth can hurt, but not nearly as bad as getting your Education the hard way, instead of sooner than later by the smarter way.

At any rate, until then, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, repeatedly rewarding the duopoly, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 17, 2010 02:31 PM

Dan, Why call them the ‘Master’ Cheaters and ‘Master’ Parasites ?

Could it be because they are Masters at Manipulating the voters? Isn’t it becoming increasingly difficult to have sympathy for the majority of voters because they willingly accept being manipulated by their Masters, the Master Manipulators?

Awareness is a terrible thing to waste.

In voting out incumbents, we should want to:

1) Return control and responsibility for the government to the voters.

2) Begin the process of eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse from the governmental process.

3) Provide a forum to present the issues, to the people, in an honest and forthright manner, for true debate and consensus.

Posted by: jlw at August 17, 2010 04:54 PM

Henry, the expertise to resolve the challenges facing America exist and are readily accessible to our representatives. There is no dearth of such expertise. The fundamental problem is our political system which has elevated power and the struggle for it, above all other priorities, including solving the challenges to our nation’s future.

That’s the crux of the problem, in a nutshell. The solution is simple in concept. Voters voting for or against government results, instead of for, or against, political parties and personalities they proffer. When roughly 1/3 of voters vote against incumbents who oversaw government results that disappoint the voter, then our representatives will be forced by that 1/3 of voters who decide election outcomes, to address the common demands of these voters, which currently (according to polls), include jobs and job security, deficits and debt, and the viability of our economic future for our children.

Why 1/3? Because Democrats and Republicans each make up approx. 1/3 of voters, resulting in the other third becoming the independent tie breakers and election deciders. VOID is about unifying a majority of this independent minded 1/3 around a voting strategy which will get their common demands of government met.

VOID’s challenge is to raise enough ongoing funding to reach that 1/3 of voters with the strategy that will get them what they demand - responsible government on the nation’s major challenges. VOID has experienced significant growth, but, has much further to go.

Speech is free, mass media communication is very expensive. Every dollar helps VOID move toward expanding its mass media reach while ever growing the grass roots anti-incumbent voting block.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 17, 2010 06:05 PM

j2t2, another important difference is that VOID is truly non-partisan. The Tea Party wants to see their own brand of Republicans control the nation’s agenda. The Coffee Party wants to see their own brand of Democratic progressives control the nation’s agenda. VOID wants neither. VOID wants voters to use their vote to approve of, or disapprove of, the government they live under at the hands of their OWN representatives.

It would tickle some folks pink if they could vote for or against everyone else’s representatives, but, that is a fantasy world. In the real world, the only representatives in charge of government that voters can vote for or against, are the one’s in their legal residence districts. If voters want to see more responsible government, they have NO EFFECTIVE CHOICE but to register their discontent with their own representatives by voting against them. To vote for them, pools their approval with all the other voters who vote for their incumbents, and these incumbents are collectively responsible for the government we have. It is illogical, therefore, to vote for one’s own representative while disapproving of the government they preside over. Of course, many voters are incapable of logic so that argument will fail to resonate with partisan loyalists.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 17, 2010 06:24 PM

Agree with your post, jlw. And, I am immediately pulled back to the same position. IMO, no sense working to achieve your goals so long as the Corpocracy is calling the shots. Watching 30 years of reform effort go nowhere has convinced me that it won’t happen under Corpocracy rule. Fringe change at best. No reform.

David says ‘it would tickle some folks pink if they could vote against someone elses representatives.’

Then it’s clear the solution is to support a unique 3rd party designed to abolish corporate personhood, removing the tentales of the Corpocracy from gov’t, allowing for REAL campaign finance reform

and,

allowing the membership to provide an oversight function for party members who are elected as U.S. Congressperson’s or official political appointee’s/ambassador’s at the federal level. So, to the extent that if that person fails to support the party agenda or has ethics problems, you can vote on someone elses representatives.

and, let’s be clear. You can’t expect reform through the run of the mill 3rd parties. Watch how quickly the TEA Party movement becomes co-opted as Republican Lights and the Coffee Party will surely go the same way. It will take a 3rd party with a different political attitude - - - rules - - - and all that - - - - Republican Sentry Party, fer shure.

Otherwise, we have the Corpocracy we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 17, 2010 07:59 PM

I use op-ed’s to get the word out about Article V and Void. Easy to write something up as it’s not a partisan thing. It is a pain to have to adjust the length of the article to whatever the news paper allows. But, it’s free and gets the word out. I try to end with a request to ‘send this oped to others and pass the word along, etc’

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 17, 2010 08:03 PM

David,
Why I understand the crux of the problem put forth by the Youth of the 60’s and Silver Spoons of the 70’s, I do worry Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders are about to lose their 150 plus years of Government and Societal Rule. For why the Media Pundits are still promoting the Status Quo of the 20th Century, knowing it will only take one book or invention to radically challenge thode preconcived ideas I’m not sure if Americas’ Lawyers can protect the Powers-that-Be from what is about to be brought to the Market.

For example;
With doctors now making office visits online cheaper than the waiting rooms of the past and more and more patients taking charge of their Health-Care, how soon before the Health Insurance Companies, Hospitals, and other Medical Facilities fall due to the lack of affordability?

Or what happens to the oil companies when the last drop of crude is refined? Do we just stop and claim them as the winners or will the other corporations using the same resource purchase all the future production and force the electric and transportation sectors out of business today?

Yes, 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 may make up the political playground in an Ideal World; however, looking back to the 1800’s and what can be done over the next 100 years to preserve the American Dream of giving every American the opportunity of becoming economically viable and financially independent I wonder if a Grass Root Org. can put together a list of Proper Questions so Americans can ask their Candidates and Incumbents where they stand on the Issue.

Because why I cannot say if, when, or where I will ask North Carolina Senator Candidate and Incumbent if they would support Individual North Carolinains building offshore Renewable Energy Farms to supplement their income from the fear of losing their job from the States’ Corporations. Since I do believe with a $30,000.00: $30,000.00: $15,000.00: and $100,000.00 split from a long term electricity source would make it hard for Labor and Management to match.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 17, 2010 08:45 PM

In the latest Rasmussen Generic Congressional Ballot Poll, Republicans have jumped to a 12-point lead. This is up from a -6 points in Jan. 2009. Now this may not seem to mean much, but what the poll shows is that 48% of voters would re-elect their Republican congressmen and only 36% of voters would re-elect their Democrat congressmen. So I believe VOID is having more effect on Democrats than it is Republicans.

The AP has come out with the latest approval/disapproval of Obama’s economic policies. 56% of voters disapprove of his economic policies. Remember the old saying, “it’s the economy stupid”. Well, does this saying apply now?

Rush Limbaugh had a great program yesterday. His comments can be found on his web site today. The stimulus did nothing more than bail out the unions, with more talk about bailing out the teachers unions. These unions take in millions of dollars in dues and spend millions to re-elect the same old democrats and now they are broke and the taxpayers have to bail them out, I don’t think so.

He also had a section of the union takeover of Chrysler and now wanting to lock out union employees because the employees are not willing to take a pay cut. I missed some of this, but it is worth my while to study up on it. It is interesting that a union controlled company would lock their own union members out because the members would not take pay cuts. I guess the union leaders have learned a lesson in a company making money….

Posted by: Beretta9 at August 18, 2010 10:10 AM

VOID does not have anymore effect on Democratic voters than it does on Republican voters. VOID’s message resonates with Independent voters, not party loyal voters.

There are a host of variables affecting the poll you cite, not the least of which is the historical record showing that the majority party has more to lose, and is the primary target of unhappy voters, and the polls will reflect that. Whether that means VOID is responsible for that polling data, is dubious, in the absence of any correlative data to support it.

A much more likely reason which has been reported a lot in the media is the disappointment factor amongst progressives with the failure of their Party to push for the Public Option in the HC reform. Percentages match up with your cited poll fairly well, too!

You can believe whatever you want about VOID. It’s a free country. But, that poll does NOT support your belief. Your belief is pure conjecture without evidence of any kind. That said, I would be tickled to learn that VOID is responsible for at least part of that drop in the polls for Democrats. Because that means VOID has the same potential effect on the GOP. Reducing the incumbent reelection rate for BOTH parties is one of VOID’s objectives in accomplishing its mission.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 18, 2010 11:38 AM

Henry, it’s not for the lack of ideas. Few have the wealth to invest in innovation. And, whatever gets developed will have a hard time getting to market through the conglomerates and monopolies who decide what gets produced and what gets to market. Here is some verbage from Pat Choate’s ‘Saving Capitalism’.

In 90 China had a $10B trade surplus with the US, in 08 a $268B surplus = 2680% increase.
Companies that buy in to China get a minor position and a toehold in China while China makes the major decisions, gets their capital and expertise in becoming world-class competitors.

Intel is supposed to have a $2.5B chip factory up and running in China in 2010 while receiving a package of subsidies worth $1B. The trend for advanced technology (AT) goods. In 08 the US exported $275B of AT goods but imported more than $329B. Of those imports, about $91B, 27% came from China. Overall, the US had a $72B AT trade deficit with China in 08, up from $11B in 2000. The US depends on these technologies yet we are outsourcing their production.

The US has a policy of using commercial products for military goods which means compromising much of American weapon system s. China used investment clout to persuade Costa Rica to break diplomatic relations with Taiwan systems. To fast track to global status China may purchase all or major stock positions in a company like they did with IBM to make Lenovo a major worldwide enterprise.

Japan will never permit Chinese control of their corporations. Germany put investment controls in place in 2009. But good old USA, those free market absolutists have been willing to allow the sale of anything in America.

Clinton and Bush admins worked to weaken US patent laws to facilitate globalization. One way this was done was to slow down the time to process a patent applicant. The average time to process went from 18 months in the 90’s to 33 months today. If a patents validity is challenged another 5 to 7 years of the twenty-year patent life can be consumed. A 5 year delay for electronics technology to gain patent may mean the product is obsolete before a patent is obtained.

In 1999 Congress begain require the patent office to publish all patent applications 18 months after filing. While it takes the PO an about 33 months to process an application, it reveals the inventor’s secrets to the world at 18 months. During the 15 months between publication and the average patent decision, an inventor has no protection. Rivals who have access to the patent information can use that knowledge to work around the proposed patent and create similar, but different, innovations and begin using them with or without patents in their race to dominate global markets. In China and elsewhere, infringers take US applications, modify them slightly, and file them as new patens at China’s patent office.

Japanese patent office officials did some research to determine how often people were accessing their patent office computer system to look at patent applications. They found that 17000 inquiries a day were coming from China and 55000 a day from South Korea.

In a nutshell, no private corporation can compete for long against the state-owned and state-operated enterprises of nations such as China or the state-back corporations of Japan, Korea, Taiwan, or Germany. The US imported $6T more in goods from abroad than they exported from 81 to 08. The country paid for those goods by exhausting its savings, and selling assets.

Chairman Waxman: You found a flaw?
Greenspan: I found a flaw in the model that I perceived is the critical functioning structure that defines how the world works, so to speak.
Waxman: In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right, it was not working.
Greenspan: Precisely. That’s precisely the reason I was shocked, because I had been going for forty years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well. End gist/excerpts from ‘saving capitalism’.

BS. Greenspan and Paulson was able to make a little money by selling out to the Corpocracy. Plain and simple.

Posted by: Henry at August 18, 2010 11:55 AM

jlw wrote: d.a.n, Why call them the ‘Master’ Cheaters and ‘Master’ Parasites ?

Because calling them #~@%!^& Master Cheaters and #~@%!^& Master Parasites would be using profanity that is potentially offensive.

But seriously, because that is what too many of them are.
They come in two varieties:

• The puppeteers,
  
• and their puppets.

jlw wrote: Could it be because they are Masters at Manipulating the voters?

Absolutely.

The Master Cheaters and Master Parasites (i.e. the puppeteers) are experts at tapping-into many of the voters’ (i.e. mostly puppets’) own selfishness, which manifests itself as laziness, greed, envy, jealousy, irrational fear, bigotry, hatred, self-delusion, dishonesty, and ignorance.

So, the majority of voters are culpable too; especially since the majority of voters repeatedly reward FOR-SALE, incompetent, and corrupt incumbent politicians with 90% re-election rates, despite dismally low approval ratings (as low as 11%) for Congress. Does that make sense?

jlw wrote: Isn’t it becoming increasingly difficult to have sympathy for the majority of voters because they willingly accept being manipulated by their Masters, the Master Manipulators?

Absolutely. That’s what I meant by:

To be honest, it is increasingly difficult to have much sympathy for the majority of voters who repeatedly reward failure and repeatedly reward FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with 90% re-election rates, despite dismally low 11% approval ratings, and despite the constant whining about corruption, when the voters have a very simple no-brainer mechanism right under their very own noses. Quite simply::
• Stop Repeat Offenders.
• Don’t Re-Elect the Master Cheaters and Master Parasites.

jlw wrote: Awareness is a terrible thing to waste.

Yes.

Ignorance makes some people puppets to be abused by Master Cheaters and Master Parasites (i.e. puppeteers).
Some voters would rather keep right on fueling and wallowing in the blind partisan warfare, and self-delusion, despite the painful consequences, rather than ever abandon their pride and admit that there is no longer any important difference between the FOR-SALE, incompetent, greedy, arrogant, corrupt incumbent politicians in the IN-PARTY or the OUT-PARTY.

But eventually, for most voters, the painful consequences of their own selfishness will become too painful.
And that is when real reforms may become possible.

But more Corruption, Pain, and Misery will most likely (eventually) provide the much needed motivation for acquiring sufficient Education to learn how to stop allowing the Master Cheaters and Master Parasites to use and abuse others.

One simple, no-brainer thing to do is to stop repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, and corrupt incumbent politicians with 90% re-election rates.
That is not the entire solution, but it is a very good start, since repeatedly rewarding failure and corruption will only lead to more corruption, pain, and misery.
Here’s a simple voting guideline that partisan loyalists loathe.

jlw wrote: In voting out incumbents, we should want to:

• 1) Return control and Responsibility for the government to the voters.

Exactly. Because:

Responsibility = Power + Virtue + Education + Transparency + Accountability

And the voters have the Power to get control of their own government, via their vote.

It’s the voters’ choice and the voters are culpable too.
And the voters will most likely make a better choice when they have sufficient Virtue, and/or sufficient Education to learn to stop repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, greedy, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians with 90% re-election rates (perhaps when enough of the voters are jobless, bankrupt, homeless, and hungry?).

jlw wrote:

• 2) Begin the process of eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse from the governmental process.

Exactly. Because:

Corruption, Pain, and Misery = Power - Virtue - Education - Transparency - Accountability

That requires the voters to first get their Virtue and/or Education first (possibly via motivation from the painful consequences of failing to get their Education sooner than later), and then subsequently decide the next logical step is to simply stop repeatedly rewarding corrupt incumbent politicians with re-election, and then pressure their elected officials (via always voting out corrupt incumbent politicians) to increase Transparency and Accountability.

jlw wrote:

• 3) Provide a forum to present the issues, to the people, in an honest and forthright manner, for true debate and consensus.

HMMMMmmmmmmmm … didn’t someone promise something like that (i.e. more Transparency and Accountability)?

Did we get it?
It appears very much as though the status quo still exists.
It appears that the lack of Transparency and Accountability continues to breed excessive corruption, and increasing moral and fiscal bankruptcy.
But voters are culpable too, since they repeatedly reward FOR-SALE, incompetent, and corrupt incumbent politicians with 90% re-election rates.

More precisely, what is required is simply:

• (1) First, Education is a key part of the solution; and we’re going to get our Education one way or another; it doesn’t help that the U.S. is fallen to 12th (or lower) in Education (world-wide), but the type of Education needed is not strictly only academic;


• (2) Second, enough voters, finally having received sufficient Education; need to finally understand that they need to stop repeatedly rewarding failure and corruption and stop repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, greedy, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians with 90% re-election rates.


• (3) And Third, enough voters need to constantly pressure (via threat of being voted out of office) their politicians for more:
  
  Responsibility = Power + Virtue + Education + Transparency + Accountability

… to reduce:


Corruption, Pain, and Misery = Power - Virtue - Education - Transparency - Accountability


• (4) And Fourth, Return to Step (1).

It’s not really that complicated, but there is no shortage of fools (puppets) and cheaters and parasites (puppeteers) who use over-complication, obfuscation, and circular gobbledygook to tap into some other peoples’ own selfishness.

That forumala can help to remember that a vast majority of our problems are not that complicated and that our problems rooted in too many peoples’ own dismal failure to strive for long-term, enlightened self-interest, instead of short-term selfishness which manifests itself as excessive laziness; dishonesty; self-delusion; greed; abuse of power; irrational fear, hatred, racism, and bigotry; envy and jealousy disguised as demands for equality; and ignorance (all things that Master Parasites and Master Cheaters try to tap-into for their own nefarious purposes).

We have met the enemy, and it is ourselves.
The majority of voters are culpable too.
The fueling and wallowing in the blind, circular partisan is an extremely powerful tool used by cheaters, parasites, and their puppets; tapping-into the puppets’ own selfishness to distracts from the cheaters and parasites numerous methods of abusing others for their own self gain and other nefarious purposes.

The majority of voters have what they deserve and will suffer the painful consequences as long as:

• too many voters lazily and blindly pull the party-lever, without even knowing all of the candidates on the ballot, much less the politicians’ voting records.
  
• too many voters (about 45% of all 200 million eligible voters) don’t care enough to bother to vote at all.
  
• too many voters do not know who their senators and representatives are, much less those incumbent politicians’ voting records.
  
• too many voters are unaware that 99.7% of all 200 million eligible voters are vastly out-spent by a tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters who make a whopping 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more.
  
• too many voters elect 90% of the politicians who spend the most money (which are usually the incumbent politicians, who have many unfair incumbent advantages).
  
• too many voters prefer to lazily engage in the blame game, and wallow in the blind, circular, divisive, distracting partisan-warfare, rather than admit that there is no important differences between the IN-Party and the OUT-Party, who sabotage each other merely for political gains, instead of what is best for the nation.
  
• too many voters are delusional, and lazily believe that THEIR incumbent politician and THEIR political party is better than the OTHER party, when the only differences are unimportant.
  
• too many voters think the problem is only with the OTHER party and fail to see the disturbing problems within THEIR own party.
  
• too many voters find it easier to blame the OTHER party, rather than see the lack of any important differences between the OTHER party and THEIR own party.
  
• too many voters whine and complain, and give Congress dismally low approval ratings (as low as 11%), but repeatedly re-elect and reward THEIR incumbent politicians in THEIR party with 85%-to-90% re-election rates (87% in the 2008 election);
  
• too many voters are unaware of countless lies by the government and that many economic statistics have most likely, for a long time, been worse than what is being reported (source: www.ShadowStats.com/alternate_data ; One-Simple-Idea.com/USD_Falling.htm ; One-Simple-Idea.com/DebtUntenable1.htm ; One-Simple-Idea.com/Abuses.htm);
  
• too many voters fail to understand that the incumbent politicians have cleverly rigged the system to increase incumbency rates by eliminating other choices in THEIR own party, and since many voters are unwilling to vote for anyone in the OTHER party, they repeatedly reward the incumbents with 85%-to-90% re-election rates.
  
• too few voters (if any) can name 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, or even 268 (half of 535) in Congress that are responsible and accountable, but the majority of voters continue to reward incumbent politicians in Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates.
  
• too many voters fail to see the insanity of doing the same thing over and over and over and over, while expecting a different result. Too many voters fail to understand that rewarding failure and corruption merely creates more failure and corruption, which creates more pain and misery for the majority of voters.
  
• too many voters are too easily bribed with their own tax dollars. Too many voters have fallen for the myth that we can somehow all live at the expense of everyone else. Too many voters want a free ride, or want to be coddled and cared for from cradle-to-grave, or want to wallow in every manifestation of unchecked greed.
  
• too many voters fail to see how they are puppets of clever puppeteers who cleverly tap-into the voters own selfishness; ironically, many people become cheer-leaders for the very cheaters and parasites that use and abuse others for their own self-gain and other nefarious purposes.
  
• too many voters simply don’t care … at least, until (possibly) some day, the consequences of the majority of voters’ own negligence and short-term selfishness finally becomes too painful.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, repeatedly rewarding the duopoly, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 18, 2010 12:33 PM

Beretta9, could it be that Republicans are just more tolerant of bad government.

Rather than face the challenges of the 21st century, conservatives want to return to the 19th century.

The politicians of both parties will do what they are paid to do, rather than what they are voted into office to do. Compared to the corporate election funds, sweetheart loans, and insider trader deals, Congressional salaries are a pittance.

Send a list of what you want to hear from your favorite politicians and they will tell you what you want to hear. But, they will do what they are paid to do.

Limbaugh, Beck, Olbermann, etc., even Nancy Grace make their money by serving the status quo. Distract and divide.

Posted by: jlw at August 18, 2010 04:34 PM

jlw wrote: The politicians of both parties will do what they are paid to do … But, they [politicians] will do what they are paid to do.

That’s mostly correct, because:

• most of their campaign donations comes from a tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters who make a whopping 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more. Therefore, the remaining 99.7% of all 200 million eligible voters are vastly out-spent.
• 90% of elections are won by the candidate that spends the most money on their campaign, which are usually the incumbent politicians.
• and therefore, voters repeatedly reward incumbent politicians with 90% re-election rates.

Those are some interesting correlations, eh?

If the majority of voters were aware that 99.7% of the 200 million eligible voters were vastly out-spent by a very tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters who make 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more, would they bother to contribute any of their money to their choice of politician(s)?

Why bother?
Because if their choice is different than that of politicians’ with very wealthy backers (who is usually an incumbent politician), then they are vastly out-spent by the wealth donors.

And to add insult to injury, Congress receives an automatic raise, unless the majority of Congress votes against a raise. Cha Ching!
Until the 27th Amendment was ratified in year 1997, Congress voted on their raises.
Of course, that looked bad, but not as bad as “The Salary Grab Act” passed by Congress on 3-March-1873, which allowed the doubling of the salary of the President and the salaries of Supreme Court Justices, a 50% increase for members of Congress, and it was also all retroactive to the beginning of their just-ending term!
Public outcry led Congress to rescind the congressional salary increase.

So now, Congress set it up such that Congress has to vote against their automatic raises.
How greedy and arrogant is that?
But that salary is really just as you say, “a pittance”, and miniscule to the other avenues of self-gain.

And Congress is above the law too.
Many Congress persons appear to think they are exempt from paying taxes, reporting income, and the laws they make for the rest of us?
Even if convicted of crimes, they may get a pardon, and they still get their pensions.
For example, since year 1980, the following have been convicted of felonies, and some received pardons and all were still eligible to receive their pensions:

Democrats:
• (D) Rep. Dan Rostenkowski, D-Ill., the former chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, was sent to prison on charges of keeping “ghost” employees on his payroll and embezzling public funds to buy gifts for friends and family. He was pardoned by Bill Clinton, and was still able to keep his $126,000 annual federal pension. Cha Ching!
  
• (D) Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., convicted on federal charges of racketeering, soliciting bribes and money laundering in a long-running bribery investigation into business deals he tried to broker in Africa.
  
• (D) John M. Murphy
  
• (D) Austin J. Murphy
  
• (D) Carroll Hubbard Jr.
  
• (D) Mario Biaggi
  
• (D) Walter E. Fauntroy
  
• (D) Mary Rose Oakar
  
• (D) Nicholas Mavroules
  
• (D) Joseph P. Kolter
  
• (D) Lawrence J. Smith
  
• (D) Frederick W. Richmond
  
• (D) Albert G. Bustamante
  
• (D) Michael J. Myers
  
• (D) Carl C. Perkins
  
• (D) Rep. James A. Traficant Jr., D-Ohio, was ousted from Congress after being convicted in 2002 for taking bribes, filing false tax returns, racketeering and forcing aides to perform chores on his farm. He is serving an eight-year prison term and continues to receive his $40,000-a-year taxpayer-funded federal pension.
  
• (D) Possibly, Charlie Rangel ?
  
• (D) Possibly, Maxine Waters ?

Republicans:
• (R) Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham, R-Calif., resigned in November 2005 after pleading guilty to accepting $2.4 million in bribes from defense contractors and underreporting his income for 2004. He reportedly used his ill-gotten gains to buy a yacht, a Rolls Royce and a mansion in a Washington suburb. Mr. Cunningham started serving an eight-year prison sentence in March 2006 and still collects a combined $64,000-a-year congressional and military pension.
  
• (R) David Durenberger
  
• (R) John G. Rowland
  
• (R) Donald E. Lukens
  
• (R) Rep. Robert Ney, R-Ohio, was convicted last year of doing illegal favors for a lobbyist in return for gifts, expensive meals, skybox sports tickets and luxury travel that included a golf vacation to Scotland. When he turns 62, he is eligible to receive a $33,000 annual federal pension.

jlw wrote: Rather than face the challenges of the 21st century, conservatives want to return to the 19th century.

HHMMMmmmmmmmmmmm … it appears more likely that neither Democrat or Republican politicans are serious about facing challenges or doing what’s best for the nation, but that is also mainly because the voters repeatedly reward with re-election.

After all, if conservatives were mostly to blame, then why were Democrats in Congress not able to do something about it, since Democrats have had the vast majority in Congress all but 12 of the last 78 years since year 1933 ?

While each (i.e. Republicans and Democrats) often go to different extremes, is there really any important differences left beyond those equally destructive extremes?

• Extreme # 1:
  One extreme wants regressive taxation, unfettered capitalism and freedom to explore and wallow in every manifestation of unchecked greed (which we have seen plenty of lately).
  
  
• Extreme #2:
  The other extreme wants a nanny-state with citizens increasingly dependent on the government; with massive cradle-to-grave government programs (which are usually severely mismanaged, abused, and pilfered) that nurture a sense of entitlement and dependency on government; wants to grow government ever larger (despite the already current nightmare proportions); rewards failure and laziness; and perpetuates the myth that we can somehow all live at the expense of everyone else.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, repeatedly rewarding the duopoly, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 18, 2010 07:21 PM

If the anti-incumbency sentiment is strong as expected then the effect on the Corpocracy should come about relatively quickly. With the 2012 elections the voters will have had two shots at their Representatives and 2/3rds of the Senators will have stood the test.

With about 80 days remaining we are close to seeing the effort of our works. I believe that removing 20% of the incumbents would be considered a success this first time out. That would be a good shot over the bow and would portend the same for 2012 elections.

Don’t know if my fangers will hold out that long. Maybe I can teach my dog to poke for me.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 18, 2010 11:14 PM

Henry,
Why teaching Old Dogs new tricks may not be easy; nevertheless, showing Americas’ Barons and Elders the Consumer, Small Business Owner, and Taxpayer can increase their purchasing power through today’s technology while reducing the National Debt happens to done by and through Generational Thinking.

For example; President Obama and Congress passed the Cash for Clunkers program last year in order to spark the sale of the 2009 inventory. Yet, instead of the Loyal Opposition on Wall Street praising the Democratic Party for providing Anerican Consumer, Small Business Owner, and Taxpayer the opportunity to increase their purchasing power, they sought to degrade the idea as a grimmick. Even though simple math would have shown trading in a vrhicle getting 9 mpg for a vehile getting 27 mpg would be the equilivant to returning the price of fuel back to 1990’s prices.

And why the Republicans and Tea Party still may cry over the money invested in Americas’ Automotive Industry, one has to wonder how much the Local, State, and Federal Budgets can be reduced simply by replacing the current fleets with electric vehicles.

No, innovation or invention aimed at giving the Consumer, Small Business Owner, and Taxpayer the ability to increase their purchasing power while reducing operating costs are taught in the Books of Government and Society of the 20th Century; nevertheless, 30 years of training in reducing the cost of manufacturing and services does make one wonder just how low in the next 30 years the Cost of Living can be reduced as Americans learn how to build a Green Sustainable Government and Society in a Race to the Top.

For short of paying $15,000.00 for a shirt in the next 10 years. How would Labor and Management claim to build a Better World than the Youth of the 60’s and Silver Spons of the 70’s?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 19, 2010 07:13 AM

Henry, take a look at the world through my glasses. I’m not interested in creating a ‘green’ world as much as I am interested in controlling world population growth.

Currently, there is no shortage of anything, water, food, oil, gas, etc. Instead of tinkering around with mother nature re genetically modified food/drink I believe we should be working on controlling the population through education and financial incentitives. Maybe change the tax code to be regressive in respect to family size. The more children you have the more taxes you would pay.

Can you tell me one good thing gained through increasing the world population? When man intervenes in nature the cost of things go up, IMO. There must be a lobby working out there to get a law through allowing businesses to charge for their bathroom facilities, etc.

Common sense suggest that, at some point in time, real shortages will accrue driving the price of a resource up which will likely have a ripple effect on other resources.

A parallel effort, green and population reduction, would be fine but green by itself seems self defeating, IMO.

A reduction or stablization of population growth would mean we would have to give up or modify our ponzi agencies, the Fed Rsv and Social Security, which would be a good thing, IMO.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 19, 2010 10:12 AM

Roy,
Why a few good bombs could limit the population of Man, who decides which Human lives and which Human dies? And why I do belive that does not mean every Man should have a hundred children, I do believe History show families shrink in size in the more Civilized Socities naturally.

Now, as far as a Green World goes, how much food, clothing, water, shelter, etc… does a citizen require from cridle to grave? And should Mankinds’ Government and Society control those resources in such a manor which reserve them for future generations?

Besides, if only out of Pure Greed one should look at the fact Nature has been using compost and dung to generate warm moist air and nutrients for more years than Mankind has existed. Especially since in years to come an Individual can grow every thing needed to produce their wahts and desires through the advancement of goods and products produced by Commerce and Industry.

And why that may take a few 100 years to achieve, imagine the day when you can plant a cotton seed and have a three piece suit come out the other end of a machine? Because why I realize it might take a few generations to get the Urbanites to learn how to grow their own food supply and other bio-mass material required, not knowing of a Single Farmer who has built the Renewable Farms and planted the necesary Money Trees I do believe the Founding Fathers of America and the Ancient Ones of Songs still hold the Authority on the subject. I.E. A Complete Self-Sustainable Universe.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 19, 2010 09:12 PM

Henry, the shortest route to that ideal future is world economic collapse, and the massive death and war for territory that would ensue, with peace-niks winning those wars. Somehow, I just don’t see that outcome as anything but fantasy. The military and militias will become the primary survivors, and martial law will become the rule.

Maintaining viable global economic trade relations amongst nations and their civilian governments is the only hope mankind has for avoiding the scenario above. Which is why it is imperative that voters of democratic nations mature, and assume the mantle of responsibility for holding to account their representatives in free and fair elections.

It is a monumentally difficult challenge set before voters of the world, and one which must be accomplished and relearned with each generation. But, it truly is the best hope for our species on this planet. Leaving our future to political parties is the shortest route to a Mad Max future.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 20, 2010 07:09 AM

David,
I’m not sure about the dhortest route, but I do know an Anti-Authoritarian Mind set against All Corporations wanting to put their profits above their customers and investors will surely lead to Government and Societal Change. For why Management can and will fight Labor and other special interest groups in order to hold onto power. Knowing history shows that Commerce and Industry cannot force the Consumer to purchase their product or the Investor to buy their stock, care to debate how a military or militias can win a war without bullets?

Now, I realize the Children of the 70’s and 21st Century cannot change the world overnight unless they want to become the Monsters their parents have fought for the last 30 years. Nevertheless, proud to see My Brothers and Sisters of the 70’s have moved passed the “F-You Debate” of their Parents. I wonder if My Community Elders and Peers are ready to go toe to toe with the Children of the 21st Century “Just Because?”

For why it is possible to show the Powers-that-Be making every Human on Earth economically viable and financially independent in a generation. Not even Pure Greed could survive beyond the Political Thunder Dome. Thus, where does the line of “Just Because” get drawn between the Parents of the 70’s and the Children of the 21st Century so Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders may maintain the Limited Universe of Mankind well into the 22nd Century?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 20, 2010 08:30 AM

Henry said: “care to debate how a military or militias can win a war without bullets?”

Somalians and Afghanis don’t seem to have a problem making and obtaining bullets, and they are amongst the poorest of nations.

Henry said: “For wh[ile] it is possible to show the Powers-that-Be making every Human on Earth economically viable and financially independent in a generation.”

I do not believe that is possible. Simple distribution of goods and services has intrinsic limitations regardless of whether there is ample supply. We see this in Haiti, with tons of supplies unable to reach Haitians in need. Likewise in Somalia. Where economic resources are concerned in free marketplace economies, the cost of reaching the last needy persons becomes prohibitive very rapidly.

This is why charity cannot work as the sole means of reaching all in need. Charitable organizations are bound to put their resources where they will do the most good for the greatest number, which means those in need which are more costly to reach, will not be reached by an outstretched charitable hand. This was called the Elymosenary System at the turn of the last century, and it got its greatest test during the Great Depression, and failed horribly to reach millions of Americans in need, for the exact principles I have just outlined.

Economics is the discipline of allocating finite resources amidst infinite demand for those resources. Resources will always be finite, and demand will always be infinite. The system which most beneficially allocates those resources in support of the greatest number demanding them, is the best economic system. Failed economic systems are marked by civil or international war, revolution, or political instability followed by authoritarian rule.

This is why democratic societies and well regulated free enterprise markets offer the best potential for the best economic system. Living up to that potential however, requires an informed, vested, and responsible voting public. No democracy on earth has yet to come close to maximizing that potential. And the reason is the rise of political parties as offering a crutch for voters to lean on, instead of voters assuming their more arduous and industrious role as informed, vested, and responsible voters.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 20, 2010 11:12 AM

David,
Why most Somalians and Afghanis may have access to bullets, I wonder how many of them pay full price. Because why it would IMHO be nice to see all ammunition plants bombed, I do believe increasing the material cost needed to make bullets to a price above the means of the War Lords to pay would have the same affect. For how many bullets could one fire if the cost was of the shot equaled a million dollars?

Now as far as making every Human on Earth economically viable and financially independent, you do by Generational Ignorance have the Unalienable Right to believe it is impossible; however, considering 30 years ago it was possible to put $20.00/week into an FDIC Savings Account paying 7% apr in your local bank maybe someone would care to explain who and why the business practice was changed in the 1980’s.

And as far as goods and services being a finite resource, tell me how many Radios and TV’s can one person own before even the greediest stop buying them? However, to say that Commerce and Industry could supply a generation with all their wants and needs in a timely fashion well you are probably right that Demand could outstrip Supply just do to the fact of cost and limited finance. Nevertheless, with one of the most important items known to Man being food I wonder what Al Qaeda would say if they knew through controlled environmental chambers even an Eskimo could grow their own bananas and oranges.

True, I did not follow the same path Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders have nor do I expect My Brothers and Sisters of the 70’s will allow the Children of the 21st Century to walk over the Status Quo of Mankinds’ Government and Society. Yet, just like space travel was once considered a fantasy I hope 20th Century Americans realize future generations have the ability and potential Political Freewill to recognize the difference between being Wealthy through Oppression and Wealthy through Self-Sustainability.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 20, 2010 07:54 PM

Henry, one only needs access to cast iron molds and lead and firewood to make bullets. One only needs brass to and a hydraulic press to make bullet casings. I have made my own bullets for years. Dramatically cheaper than buying them. I gather the brass others leave behind and collect their spent bullets to recast, since the majority already have the right amount of tin and antimony in them, prevent lead fouling of the weapon’s barrel. The point being, anyone with desire and a couple hundred bucks can begin making bullets and ammo.

Gunpowder is the black market item that constitutes the interdiction point for distribution and accountability, if the politicos wanted to clamp down on the distribution of bullets. But, that would go the way of marijuana. Billions spent to control a substance that can’t be controlled as long as there is a demand. Entrepreneurs will fulfill that demand.

Henry, sorry to be so blunt, but, equating finite resources with TV’s and radios demonstrates a complete failure to grasp this most elemental concept of economics. Clean air, potable water, arable land, rare metals for manufacturing processes, and skilled labor and expertise and a near infinite list of other items are all finite resources. All people wanting to be wealthy constitutes infinite demand. What wealthy person have you heard of recently who made headlines declaring they do not want to be even more wealthy? It contradicts human nature.

There are many theories of economics, but, that all attempt subscribe to resolution of the basic concept of economics which is: “Economics is the discipline of allocating finite resources amidst infinite demand for those resources.”

Often this is phrased in Econ text books as a system, instead of using the word, discipline. I find the word discipline more appropriate since, economics can’t be divorced from politics and political systems, and politics and political systems virtually guarantee that any economic, so called, “system” will lack the integrity which the word, system, requires by definition.

For example, a healthy body is a system, with each part doing its share in appropriate measure to contribute to the end state of a healthy body. Corruption of the system by introducing toxins that don’t belong, and the system breaks down. Its integrity fails.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 20, 2010 09:05 PM

Beck has been barking about how corruption takes off when Religion, Commerce, Gov’t and one other entity collude or tag team on some common initiative. Example: Regan set the corporations free on the world to conglomerize and monopolize to get ‘their fair share’ of the worlds goods. i.e. government collusion with big biz. At that time the players knew they had from one year to infinity to pull off their grand globalization scheme. So, let’s say we return to sanity in 10 years with regulation and anti-trust law. Big biz will have had a good 35 year run to gobble up the little guys and set themselves up as global heavies. Left unattended for another 35 years I can see where big biz’s would establish their own militias and war it out with each other for that last consumer nickle. In a trickle down economy maybe I could get hired as a sergeant in Wally Worlds milita organization. Just thinking.

But, its clear some strong regulation is called for.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 20, 2010 09:53 PM

David,
Lead, brass shells, gun power, caps, and the forging of bullets even by individuals at war has been proven unsustainable. In fact, the use of bombs and bullets today has failed to get a group of people to agree to the terms established by the Status Quo. So why eliminating bullets may IMHO be the right thing to do, check out History to see what happens to the Leaders who try to force the Consumer and Investor to accept the Status Quo.

And why you may think radios and TVs may not make a good example for the finite resources, look at the list of material needed to make a modern product. Circuit broads, wires, plastic, metal, etc… are all resources, correct? So why they may not fit the 20th Century Status Quo list, to the Common Person not learned in economics the goods produced by raw resources are easier to understand.

Now as far as “What wealthy person have you heard of recently who made headlines declaring they do not want to be even more wealthy?” Well, does the names Bill Gates and Warren Buffet sound familiar. Or how about the Elders of the 70’s who stepped aside in order that the Youth of the 60’s and Silver Spoons of the 70’s could invest in their idea of a Better World. And though many things can be said about the Race to the Bottom the Democrats and Republicans of the 20th Century have followed for the last 30 years. I do believe in winning the Race to the Top, it is the corporations with the most Consumers and Investors who will be set to win the game.

Roy,
President Regan gave us the Game where the one with the most toys at the end wins. Now, can the Children of the 70’s give their Children a Game where the corporation with the most Consumers and Investors win.

Posted by: Henry Schlayman at August 21, 2010 02:07 AM

Seems, in your terms Henry, the game is won and over. GM/Cherry would seem to be where the consumers and invstors win. Goldman Sacs would be another. Consumers and investors, worldwide are enjoying the ‘everyday low prices’ of the Walmarts.

Bill Gates/Microsoft has taken the admin to task a number of times trying to squeeze more temporary work visas out for skilled (read cheap) foreign workers.

IMO, the children of the 70’s need to get behind a 3rd party with a different political attitude, and help work toward the abolishment of corporate personhood, help to implement REAL campaign finance reform. In so doing we will have removed the money influence and Corpocracy from gov’t. At that point we could begin to promise a ‘pig in every poke’, transparency in gov’t, etc.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 21, 2010 11:00 AM

Henry, Money is the toxin that causes the body politic system to break down, losing its integrity, becoming ill, and eventually expiring. There is only one vaccination against this toxin, and that is Voting Out Incumbents in greater numbers until the money in politics is reduced to non-toxic levels.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 21, 2010 11:23 AM

Henry said: “Lead, brass shells, gun power, caps, and the forging of bullets even by individuals at war has been proven unsustainable.”

Sorry, Henry, but the evidence from Somalia and Afghanistan disprove your comment, outright! These are the poorest countries in the world, and there is no lack of bullets flowing into, and being created in, these countries.

The marijuana market and the ubiquitous prostitution trade throughout the history of human culture, proves the rule, where there is a demand, there will be supply. Even in Afghanistan where the law requires prostitute adulterers to be stoned to death, prostitution continues. The greater the poverty, the greater the risk taking to supply demand. It is a fundamental law of economics.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 21, 2010 11:49 AM

David,
Why Somaila and Afghamistan currently has a free flow of bullets, who is paying for them? And more important, what price has to be made before no one but Governments can afford to own them. Especially since nukes can be built using the same argument of just retaining the resources.

Now as far as “The greater the poverty, the greater the risk taking to supply demand. It is a fundamental law of economics.” Is this to say Americans should only vote for candidates and incumbents who believe this fundamental law of economics? Since if the argument is to hold Logic and Reason than only the King and Queen should have access to the supplies and all corporations be kept in great poverty so that higher returns on investment can be enjoyed by only the select few of Man. No, suppling the poor in the 21st century doesn’t carry any greater risk than suppling the ultra rich; yet, it bewilders me why the Leaders today allow the same priates and theifs to exists. For if Americans truely are seeking change than one would hope that the candidate and/or incumbent they vote for have a few good ideas on how to stop the plundering.

Because why the “Old Folks” of the 20th Century may think marijuana and prostitution are a Moral Sin, do you know of any part of the Founding Documents of America and Humanity that forbids Civilized Man from regulating them like any other resource thoght to be bad for Human Cunsumption?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 22, 2010 08:10 AM

David Remer wrote: Henry, Money is the toxin that causes the body politic system to break down, losing its integrity, becoming ill, and eventually expiring. There is only one vaccination against this toxin, and that is Voting Out Incumbents in greater numbers until the money in politics is reduced to non-toxic levels.

Exactly.

That is one of the worst of the numerous abuses chipping away at the base of our increasingly unstable house of cards.

The government is quite simply, and unambiguously FOR-SALE.
Foreign countries are contributing to some campaign war chests.
Some wealthy Americans who abuse their vast wealth to control and influence government, are funneling millions of dollars to political parties.

The numbers and severity of the rampant absues continue to grow ever worse, and so do the painful consequences.
Now, we’re hearing that record numbers of Americans are raiding their 401Ks.
And there are NO surpluses in the Social Security system; only I.O.U.s which represent more borrowing and/or printing money out of thin air.

But the majority of voters are culpable too, since:

• (1) In a voting nation, too often, the government is FOR-SALE, and controlled and influenced by only a few with vast wealth. This is the case in the U.S., in which a tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters make 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more;
  
• (2) the majority of voters repeatedly reward failure and repeatedly reward FOR-SALE, incompetent, greedy, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians with 85%-to-90% re-election rates;
  
• (3) too many voters have misplaced loyalties, and love THEIR party more than their country;
  
• (4) too many voters prefer to fuel and wallow in the blind, circular partisan-warfare, while trying to blame everything on the OTHER party;
  
• (5) the majority of voters are unaware of the above, and/or refuse to admit the truth of it.

• Problem: Too much short-sighted selfishness, and not enough long-sighted, educated, and enlightened self-interest;
• Solution: less short-sighted selfishness, and more long-sighted, educated, and enlightened self-interest;
• Conclusion: government is too corrupt, and it will only get worse as long as voters reward corrupt incumbent politicians with 90% re-election rates; In a voting nation, Education, Transparency, Accountability, and Virtue are paramount, and the nation will get their Education one way or another.
  Responsibility = Power + Virtue + Education + Transparency + Accountability
  Corruption, Pain, and Misery = Power - Virtue - Education - Transparency - Accountability

Henry Schlatmann wrote: Roy, Why a few good bombs could limit the population of Man, who decides which Human lives and which Human dies?

The risk of that may be more real than you realize, when you consider that all new births minus all deaths, per day, equals 211,000 persons per day!!!

There is a common-thread all throughout human history:

People struggling for freedom from oppression, and struggling to survive.

However, humans will most likely start killing each other by the millions (or billions), when resources become too scarce due to extreme over-population, because there will be aggression by many simply trying to survive. How many people already die every day from malnutrition, starvation, and easily treatable diseases?

Consider the following.
The Earth’s Diameter is 7926.41 miles.
The surface area of Earth is (pi x Diamater²) = 197.38 million square miles (where pi = 3.14159265358979).
However, the Earth only has 57 million square miles of land (that’s 36.48 billion acres; there are 640 acres per square mile).
However, there are only 12 million square miles (7.68 billion acres) of arable land.

The world population in year 1 A.D. was 250 million people.
The world population in year 1492 was 500 million people.
The world population in 1804 was 1.0 billion people.
The world population in 1922 was 2.0 billion people (doubled in 118 years; increasing on average by about 23,000 per day).
The world population in 1959 was 3.0 billion people (increased by 1.0 billion in only 37 years; increasing on average by about 74,000 per day).
The world population in 2006 was 6.68 billion people (more than doubled in 47 years; increasing now by 211,000 persons per day!).
The world population by 2039 could be 8.0 to 13 billion.

In 1959, there were 12.16 acres per person, world-wide (i.e. 36.48 billion acres / 3 billion people).
In 2006, there were 5.46 acres per person, world-wide (i.e. 36.48 billion acres / 6.68 billion people).
By 2039, there may be only 2.81 acres per person, world-wide (i.e. 36.48 billion acres / 13 billion people).

The U.S. has 3.794 million square miles, of which 3.54 million square miles is land area (for a fast growing U.S. population of 300 million people as of the end of year 2006).
That is only 8.09 acres per person in the U.S.
However, only about a quarter of that is arable land.
That means there are only about 2.02 acres per person of arable land in the U.S.

However, consider that there is only 12 million square miles (7.68 billion acres) of arable land on the planet.
And, ignore for a moment that arable land is being lost at a rate of 38,610 square miles per year.
That is, lets assume no arable land is being lost for the next 33 years. Then …

In 2006, there was 1.15 acres of arable land per person, world-wide (i.e. 7.68 billion acres / 6.68 billion people).
By 2039, there may be only 0.59 acres of arable land per person, world-wide (i.e. 7.68 billion acres / 13 billion people).

However, arable land is being lost at the alarming rate of over 38,610 square miles (24.7 million acres) per year.
Therefore, by 2039, there may be only 0.53 acres of arable land per person, world-wide (i.e. 6.865 billion acres / 13 billion people).
At the current rate of loss of 38,610 square miles per year of arable land, and even if the population didn’t grow any larger, ALL arable land could be lost in only 310 years (12 million square miles / 38,610 square miles per year)!

Now consider the following: the sea-level is rising due to rising temperatures and melting ice.
The island nation of Tuvalu is slowly being submerged. The people of Tavalu have requested permission to move to immigrate to New Zealand.
The islands in the Chesapeake Bay are being submerged.
Bangladesh’s lowlands farmlands are being submerged and saltwater is seeping into fresh water systems.
NOTE: For about every foot rise in the sea-level, the inland flooding is about 100 feet. Many people live along coastlines all around the world.

Starting to get the picture (source: One-Simple-Idea.com/Environment1.htm)?
And global warming might make it worse.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 22, 2010 10:38 AM

My wife was telling me of a couple who have 19 kids and looking for another one. I assume the tax deduction holds for any number of dependents. That would be $3500 x 20 or $70K in tax deductions, and needed, fer shure, raising that many children.

I would like to see this deduction removed from the tax code as it encourages population growth when, IMO, we should be concentrating on population reduction or at least a no=growth population policy.

But, since Social Security is ‘ponzi’ based few politicians will ever stand for a no=growth policy.

A flat tax with no deductions would put us on the road to sanity re population.

And, what are we doing by educating foreign students who then compete with US workers for jobs? Consider Mexico. If the bright ones immigrate to the US where does that leave Mexico? How does that play into globalization? Many of the US educated Chinese are returning to the US for better pay and work environment.

So, how’s globalization doing? Ian Fletcher relates in ‘Free Trade Doesn’t Work’ that China deliberately blocks imports, mainly with non-tariff barriers, in order to decrease consumption, increase savings and boost investments. As a result, even the limited purchasing power of China’s mostly poor population rarely gets spent on US goods.

India has a per capita income of about $1k/yr. For $5k, US corporations off-shoring work there can hire a computer-science grad. A former Fed Rsv official has estimated that that globalization will eventually cost 40M US jobs. The UN reported that 54 nations were poorer in 2003 than in 1990. The BLS reports that the US lost over 54k engineering and architectual jobs between 2000 and 2008. During GW’s tour the US lost over 3M manufacturing jobs. The CIA reports nothing but bad news coming from globalization -
‘the integration of global financial markets will quickly transmit turmoil in one economy regionally and internationally.’. Ian relates that a former World Bank employee reported that between 81 and 93 Latin Am. GDP went up by 25% while the portion of the population living on under $2.15 a day increased from 26.0 percent to 29.5 percent.

In 1910 Argentina had a per capita income equal to 77% of the ours and now their per capita is 31 percent. End gist from Ian’s book.

So, it seems that around the ‘globalized’ world the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, perhaps as intended.

Otherwise, we have the Corpocracy we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 22, 2010 01:44 PM

d.a.n, the only way forward for our species, while not losing our sense of humanity, is through the employment of the best management practices our species can produce. Which means, human societies must adjust their politics in a manner that insures that 1) such managers are put in charge of the decision making, and 2) that those managers best decisions to address the challenges you pose, are supported and sustained by those with the power to remove them.

Put more succinctly, the fate of our species depends directly upon our political systems and their capacity to manage these challenges effectively. Which makes education the bedrock of the politics that can salvage mankind’s humanity. If our educational systems are built upon bogs and sand, our future shall surely sink and topple with them.

Democracy absolutely demands the best education possible for the voters if democratic institutions are to address the challenges you raise. Absent such education, benevolent authoritarian regimes become the best hope for meeting those challenges. China and the U.S. represent the political future political structures to address those challenges. As of this moment, neither appears poised to adequately address those challenges, though China has a slight advantage in ability to effect large, short term changes, to address their challenges.

The Chinese “Sword of Damocles” above their political necks is their population size and environmental catastrophes threatening the efficacy of their decision making process, and revolution should they fail.

The education deficit amongst voters is the Sword above America’s and all democratically elected nation’s political necks. Democracy cannot function well without an informed and educated consensus amongst voters. Dramatic and repeated reversals of solutions to address long term challenges is the result of an education deficit which political parties exploit for short term power struggles.

All of the challenges you raise require long term strategies, adhered to throughout, to solve. The American political system is incapable of adhering to such strategies.

There is now, and will be much more, massive inhuman suffering in our world. We as a people can choose to minimize it, or maximize it. So far, we are ‘electing’ to maximize it with our complete absence of bi-partisan agreement to adhere to solutions.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 22, 2010 02:46 PM

Trans-national and multi-national corporations simply chose to hire cheaper labor.
For a while, Americans benefited from some low-priced products.
However, Americans’ wages started to stagnate, and then started falling.
The wealthiest 1% who owned 20% of all wealth jumped to 40% of all wealth (since year 1976).

David R. Remer wrote: There is now, and will be much more, massive inhuman suffering in our world. We as a people can choose to minimize it, or maximize it. So far, we are ‘electing’ to maximize it with our complete absence of bi-partisan agreement to adhere to solutions.

Then, sadly, a rapid decline in U.S. education began, and slipped from 3rd in the 1960s, to 5th in the 1970s, to 14th in the 2000s, and now down to 18th in 2009.

Roy Ellis wrote: And, what are we doing by educating foreign students who then compete with US workers for jobs?

Roy,

Exactly. What’s up with that?
All of the data you presented above proves what the disastrous effects of globalization are on Americans.

I was talking to an H1B Visa worker at work the other day.
Though his English was barely comprehensible, I asked him:

• “How did you came to be here in the U.S.?”.
  
• He said “I got scholarship to university [Name of a well known university in Texas]”.
  
• I asked, “You mean your government paid for your scholarship ?”
  
• He said “No. University pay all of it.”
  
• I asked, “How did you get it. What steps did you take?”
  
• He said “I wrote letter. I ask for a scholarship, and I got it.”

Then I was thinking to myself that my son went to that same university, and he had good grades, but he couldn’t qualify for a scholarship (though he applied).
Then I started thinking about his wife, who graduated from that same university with tens of thousands of dollars of debt, which they are still repaying.

What’s up with that?

But if that seems un-American, take a look at this, in which law firms in the U.S. teach corporations how to avoid hiring Americans.
This law firm by the name of Cohen & Gribsy gives seminars on how to avoid hiring Americans.

And if that doesn’t upset you, take a look at the testimony to Congress by Bill Gates, asking to remove limits on total H1B Visa workers.

And if that doesn’t bother you, then consider the tens of millions being imported for profits from cheap labor, and votes.

Pretty despicable, eh?

So, some people (far too few, unfortunately) also look at Congress, and wonder why they ignore so many despicable acts? ! ?

Well, the answer to that question is very simple:

They don’t want to, and they don’t have to, because they don’t want to do anything that would reduce their own opportunities for self-gain, or reduce the profits of their greedy puppeteers who fill their political campaign war-chsests, and because no matter what they do, and no matter how low their dismal approval ratings are, the majority of voters will still repeatedly rewarding the with 85%-to-90% re-election rates.

So, why should Congress and their puppeteers stop doing any of these despicable things, when the majority of voters repeatedly reward FOR-SALE, incompetent, greedy, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates?

Apparently, the majority of voters in the United States must like the prone position?
At least, until it finally becomes too painful?

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 22, 2010 07:12 PM

There is a lot of talk about the necessity for an ‘educated electorate.’ I agree with that, in the sense that most should have a high school level of education and enough intuition to read a newspaper or follow the news on TV/radio. Politics is more common sense than (political) science, IMO.

I believe the problem lies more in what is not being said, information that is confined to the Corpocracy for ‘their’ political and monetary gain. For example: Ian Fletcher writes in ‘Free Trade Doesn’t Work’ that of the four Presidential and Vice-Presidential debates of 2008 imports were never mentioned, the trade deficit was never mentioned, and exports were mentioned only once. China, by contrast, was mentioned 15 times,

I recall that I never heard immigration mentioned during the primary campaign debates. It was only after Obama and McCain were selected from the D’s and R’s that immigration got a mention.

As I can remember there was zero debate on globalization, the new world order, and, as we discussed in a recent thread the only NAFTA debate was between Al Gore and Ross Perot in 1993 on Larry King. I just wrote an article for a thread relating that if there is no debate on globalization in the mid term elections then that implies that globalization is a great conspiracy happening right before our eyes. Any high schooled person understands that. Doesn’t take a PHD.

In that sense we are a nation of political illiterates, by plan. Can you tell me why the D and R websites aren’t running mini cspans for dialogue between the officials and their constituents to discuss their ideas on immigration, globalization, Free Trade, NAFTA and the AFTA’s, etc? You can’t have a meaningful debate with a fence post.

And, the politicos pushed this political correctness BS for years and we still can’t ask people where they came from unless they first commit a crime of some sort. No matter how much education one has they can’t read minds, or listen to political innuendo and derive policy from it. I believe I get more of my information before the public than does Jim Webb or Eric Cantor. I’ve little idea what they stand for or what they are pushing. Really don’t care, just want them VOIDED ASAP. It’s nothing short of a conspiracy taking place before our eyes, IMO.

Otherwise, we have the Corpocracy we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 22, 2010 07:24 PM

By the way, I was telling a friend about this (above), who is a highschool teacher, and she said:

Might as well give the scholarships to foreigners, since most Americans are too ignorant to know what to do with a scholarship.

Man, has this country turned into a bunch of back-stabbing, anything-for-a-buck, uneducated, ignorant, whining, party-lever-pulling, delusional, greedy, selfish, lazy people?

Seriously. Inquiring minds want to know?

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 22, 2010 07:33 PM

David. What do you really want to say?

Posted by: d.a.n at August 22, 2010 07:38 PM

d.a.n, vote for positive results and vote against negative results. Roy is right, this one piece of what should be, common sense, is all that is required to improve our government and politician’s actions. Where I differ with Roy is that, this is not yet, common sense, in America. Nor in most democracies today, due to the lying, deceptive, and money controlled political parties and their candidate puppets.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 22, 2010 11:15 PM

David,
Is it Educating or Enlightening the Voter on the Principles and Standards Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders are governed by?

For why I was told some 30 years ago to leave the subject of Political Correctness alone, the fact some Americans are asking today why such things matter leads me to believe the Elders of Mankinds’ Government and Society IMHO needs to step forward.

For example; Dan and Roy talk about world population growth, but the American Family over the last 40 years have fallen from the 2 parents and 7 children of the 30’s and 40’s to the 2 parents and 3 chukdren of the 50’s and 60’s to the present fanily of 1 or 2 parents and 1 point something child without a Government or Societal Mandate.

Than there are resources and the fact those over 30 lack the Self-Awareness and Self-Knowledge to realize the amount of resources used by Commerce and Industry has and is undergoing massive changes. For just as plastic replaced most sheet metal on automobiles over the last 30 years. So will plastic be replaced over the next 30 years by bio-mass material as Mankinds’ Institutions discover new uses for plants.

Yes, the Generational Societal Contract of the 60’s and 70’s left most of Humanity Issues on the Table only allowing the Democratic and Republican Leadership to agree to disagree on the subjects. Limited to my personal point of view, I do believe the American Voter needs to be made aware that through this time of Generational Change they have the Civil and Constitutional Rights to hold their candidates and incumbents to the debate of “Just Because” correct?

Because shouldn’t Our Elected Officials be able to be shown a Better Way to build a Better World within the Guidelines of Goood Parenting and Grandmas’ Rage.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 22, 2010 11:47 PM

David Remer wrote: d.a.n, vote for positive results and vote against negative results. Roy is right, this one piece of what should be, common sense, is all that is required to improve our government and politician’s actions.

Yes. That basic component appears to be what is missing. So, how do we acquire enough of it (i.e. common sense)?

David Remer wrote: Where I differ with Roy is that, this is not yet, common sense, in America.

Yes, I thought that is actually (reluctantly) what “you really want to say”.

Sadly, I agree, because the overwhelming evidence of a lack of ordinary “common sense” is all too obvious when today, the majority of voters:

• repeatedly reward failure, corruption, and repeatedly reward FOR-SALE, incompetent, greedy, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates;
• repeatedly reward candidates with election 90% of the time, who spend the most money on their election;
  
• cheerlead for THEIR political party and THEIR politicians;
  
• and repeatedly do so many things that make no sense, and clearly only lead to more pain and misery of the voters very own making;
  
  • despite dismal 11% approval ratings,
    
  • despite the nation’s serious problems growing in number and severity;
    
  • despite record level foreclosures (846,0000 in year 2005; 1.2 million in year 2006; 2.0 million in year 2007; 3.2 million in year 2008; about 4.0 million in year 2009; far over 4.0 million foreclosures in year 2010);
    
  • despite high unemployment; reported to currently be 9.5%, but is possibly really 22% unemployement by some calculations (source; ShadowStats.com/alternate_data);
    
  • despite 20% of all wealth for the wealthiest 1% growing to over 40%, while median income for the majority decreases;
    
  • despite total per-capita Federal debt ($13.4 Trillion) that is now 80% larger today than it was in after World War II (in 2008 inflation adjusted U.S. Dollars).
    
  • despite total per-capita nation-wide debt ($57 Trillion) that is now 400% larger today than it was in year 1956 (in 2008 inflation adjusted U.S. Dollars).
    
  • despite total per-capita Federal debt that is now 705% larger today than it was in the Great Depression (in 2008 inflation adjusted U.S. Dollars).
    
  • despite GDP that can’t support a population growing by 5 million per year; currently reported to be +3.0% but is possibly really -1.5% by some calculations;
    
  • despite the falling U.S. Dollar for about a decade;
    
  • despite rising cost and declining quality of education;
    
  • despite incessant inflation; reported to currently be 2.0%, but is possibly really 8.0% ;
    
  • despite rampant waste, and corruption;

The only hope that may remain is: pain and misery
Possibly, pain and misery can provide sufficient motivation for enough voters to get sufficient Education sooner than later?
Already, numerous negative economic trends have now existed for many decades.
How many more years, and how much more pain and misery is needed before enough voters understand that rewarding failure, corruption, and repeatedly rewarding Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election is the path to more pain and misery?
Since when did rewarding failure and corruption ever produce less pain and misery?

David Remer wrote: d.a.n, vote for positive results and vote against negative results. Roy is right, this one piece of what should be, common sense, is all that is required to improve our government and politician’s actions. Where I differ with Roy is that, this is not yet, common sense, in America. Nor in most democracies today, due to the lying, deceptive, and money controlled political parties and their candidate puppets.

True. That is why Education is so important.

Yet, sadly, there is a rapid decline in U.S. education:

• U.S. was 3rd in the 1960s
  
• U.S. fell to 5th place in the 1970s
  
• U.S. fell to 14th in the 2000s,
  
• U.S. fell to 18th or 19th in year 2009.
  
• source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_Index

Thomas Jefferson said that liberty and ignorance cannot coexist:

• “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” — Thomas Jefferson, 1816.

However, one horrible aspect of our national educational crisis stems from the fact that tens of millions of illegal aliens are dividing the country, and creating a violent and uneducated underclass, a loss of a cohesive language, and a “dumbing down” of our own children in public schools.

We have a frightening harvest of illiterate, uneducated, antagonistic and non-invested young people exploding into our society with no academic skills. This is the very reason why so many Third World nations suffer what they suffer, which is: a lack of an educated, invested, and moral citizenry.

This situation fosters a growing separation of:

• the number of people who can speak English and pursue educational goals
  
• versus tens of millions who have babies out of wedlock, no working skills, none or poor English speaking skills, and an uncanny ability to ride welfare rolls with unprecedented talent (70% of all women giving birth at Parkland Hospital in Dallas, Texas are illegal aliens; source: www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/parkland.asp).

The United States is (or was) a Democratic Republic, which is a very delicate form of governance, and one glimpse around the world will show you why.
It requires 3 qualities to remain viable and functioning:

• [1] First, it needs a sufficiently educated population;
  
• [2] Second, it needs a nation that can speak the same language so that it can discuss, debate and vote intelligently, and hopefully pull in the same direction.
  
• [3] Third, and finally, it needs a sufficiently moral population, that enforces the laws, demands an ethical citizenry and government, an efficient and honest voting system, and an engaged and educated electorate that understands these two simple equations:
  
  
  • Responsibility = Power + Virtue + Education + Transparency + Accountability
    |
    
  • Corruption, Pain and Misery = Power - Virtue - Education - Transparency - Accountability

We are losing all 3 qualities faster than you can count to three.
Short-sighted selfishness is winning over longsighted and educated self-interest.
Education is a critical operand in the equation above.
Part of that Education is knowing who the cheaters and parasites are, and voting them out of office, and/or upholding the law to hold them Accountable.
Laws were created for a reason, but rampant disregard for the law is what you find in many third world nations.
Today, Congress blatantly ignores Article V of the U.S. Constitution (among other Constitutional violations).
Right is becoming wrong, and wrong is becoming right.
Legal plunder is evidenced by 6 new cases per day of eminent domain abuse.
More and more Corruption, Pain and Misery can be seen everywhere.

David Remer wrote: Nor in most democracies today, due to the lying, deceptive, and money controlled political parties and their candidate puppets.

• A tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters make 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more, so government is quite simply FOR-SALE.
• 90% of elections are won by the candidate that spends the most money; source: One-Simple-Idea.com/OpenSecrets_DonorDemographics.htm
• Too many voters (the largest group; also low-level puppets) not only allow it, but reward failure, corruption, and repeatedly re-elect government officials with perpetual re-election?

It’s really not that complicated.
It’s really a matter of choice.
We can choose wisely and enjoy the benefits, or we can choose foolishly and selfishly, and suffer the painful consequences.

Here’s a poem, which I modified (replacing “Gods of the Copybook Headings” with “Master Cheaters and Parasites”) in Rudyard Kipling’s 1919: “The Gods of the Copybook Headings”:

As I pass through my incarnations in every age and race,
I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Master Cheaters and Parasites, I notice, outlast them all.
:
We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.
:
We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place,
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.
:
With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.
:
When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Master Cheaters and Parasites said: “Stick to the Devil you know.”
:
On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Master Cheaters and Parasites said: “The Wages of Sin is Death.”
:
In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Master Cheaters and Parasites said: “If you don’t work you die.”
:
Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Master Cheaters and Parasites limped up to explain it once more.
:
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
:
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Master Cheaters and Parasites with terror and slaughter return!

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 23, 2010 06:16 AM

d.a.n, In the movie, Instinct, the protagonist calls them, “Takers”. So apropos’ in contrast to religion’s exalting “Givers”.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 23, 2010 09:00 AM

Interesting. I’ve heard them called other things too.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 23, 2010 09:03 AM

Henry said: “For example; Dan and Roy talk about world population growth, but the American Family over the last 40 years have fallen from the 2 parents and 7 children of the 30’s and 40’s to the 2 parents and 3 chukdren of the 50’s and 60’s to the present fanily of 1 or 2 parents and 1 point something child without a Government or Societal Mandate.”

But, as the new census will show, our population continues to grow.

Henry asked: “Is it Educating or Enlightening the Voter on the Principles and Standards Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders are governed by?”

Neither. The primary role of political parties is to misinform in their own favor, counting on the lack of civics education to make such tactics and strategy work. The NY Mosque backlash is a primary example. The protesters are ignorant, cowardly, and hateful. Ignorant of the facts. Afraid of the boogeymen they can’t see. And hateful toward any and all in any way different from them, for causing their cowardice to show.

The only way our elected officials can be transformed into problem solvers and agents for the greater good of the people and nation, is if their reelection depends upon it. VOIDing incumbents is the way. VOIDing incumbents has always been the way. It lies at the heart of the very definition of democracy and democratic elections. The majority of the general population of American voters has yet to learn this, despite universal suffrage being 90 years old in the U.S. But, more and more are learning as the threats increasingly block out the sun on our future’s horizon.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 23, 2010 09:06 AM

The Tea Party:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer

Posted by: Marysdude at August 23, 2010 09:12 AM

Marysdude, that’s what happens to the principles of political parties. They sell them down the river to the highest contributors.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 23, 2010 12:38 PM

That’s why we need a new 3rd party with a different political attitude - - -

Otherwise, we will continue to have the Corpocracy we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 23, 2010 01:13 PM

Roy Ellis…read DRR’s posting above yours. DRR…read Roy’s posting below yours. Is this a circle jerk? If political parties are all corrupt, what good would a third party do us? Void might make sense as long as it holds the two party system to the fire, but when we start playing with third party nonsense…oh, well, skip it.

Posted by: Marysdude at August 23, 2010 01:18 PM

Marysdude, Read My Reply to Henry - never mind, I will quote it again:

Henry, Money is the toxin that causes the body politic system to break down, losing its integrity, becoming ill, and eventually expiring. There is only one vaccination against this toxin, and that is Voting Out Incumbents in greater numbers until the money in politics is reduced to non-toxic levels.

There is no harm in laying the foundation for a third party in anticipation that VOID’ing of incumbents results in real campaign finance reform which virtually eliminates the current legal corrupting influence of money on the parties and their candidates.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 23, 2010 05:05 PM

David,
“The primary role of political parties is to misinform”

Well, if that is the case than are the political parties misonforming the Citizen or Corporation? For why they are by Societal Contract suppose to protect a Humans’ Right to be Ignorant, are they doing their Duty and Responsibility as Elected Officials if their actions or goals are to build a Worse World?

Yes, Voiding the Incumbents of the 20th Century Mindset on Labor and Management is a step in the right direction; nevertheless, knowing that an Individual and/or Group can hold Americas’ Elected Officials to the Principles and Standards of our Founding Documents. I do belive it is the Civil and Parental Duty and Responsibility of Citizens and Corporations to educate and enlighten the Political Parties of the Far Left and Far Right why Political Correctness matters.

For example; would it be American if one was to use their Rights to introduce a bill that would fundamentally change every Americans life in order to achieve a personal advantage? Because why it is simple to build an electric car that is powered by man-made wind, knowing placing such a machine in the market would forever change the relationship betwen a Parent and their Teenager. Is it Politically Correct at this time to do so?

P.S. Is it Misinformation or Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders following their Guidelines established during the last Generational Change (avoiding talking about the solutions to Human Issues)?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 23, 2010 07:28 PM

Hentry,

In 1959, there were 12.16 acres per person, world-wide (i.e. 36.48 billion acres / 3 billion people).
In 2006, there were 5.46 acres per person, world-wide (i.e. 36.48 billion acres / 6.68 billion people).
By 2039, there may be only 2.81 acres per person, world-wide (i.e. 36.48 billion acres / 13 billion people).

With 6.7 billion people on the planet today, growing by 211,000 more per day (77 million more per year), wouldn’t it be wise to start thinking about sustainability?

Especially in the event of potential interruptions of food and other resources?

Especially in the event of the potential problems from global warming?

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 23, 2010 11:25 PM

Dan,
Why most Humans live in less than a 2000 sq.ft. area, I do understand what you mean by the amount of land per person. Yet, one of the problems I see in the 2010 Elections is we still have candidayes and incumbents looking at this Data like they lived at the turn of the last century.

For example;
Less meat, one only needs a garden of X sq. ft. to supply their family with fruit and vegetables. And why 21st Century technology has reduced that number to a few growing chambers which can fit into ones’ living space, I do believe even an arce can house the chickens, cows, and hogs a family would need to get their yearly supply of meat.

Thus, why a growing population does present any Government and Society with a long list of problems there is a difference between those living in the country and those living in the city. Yet, today people in the city are starting to find new ways to garden (roof top and empty lots comes to mind). And one can see the day where livestock is raised in 10 story buildings.

For why Big Corporation of the 20th century decided to consolidate the family farms, looking at long term sustainability and self-reliance I wonder what a 160 arce high rise farm will look like in the next 100 years. Since by stats a person in 2037 may only have 2.81 arces, is an 80 story urban farm building out of the question given tomorrows technology?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 24, 2010 12:23 AM

Henry, our politicians are doing what they have always done, as reams of political biographies and histories attest. The tool of their trade is their word of mouth, and they apply that tool in any manner necessary to obtain and keep power unto themselves, even to betraying party principles, the people, and the nation’s future, if necessary.

Sen. John McCain is a classic example of a politician who has crossed the bridge of his own positions and words, back and forth, so many times, it is nearly impossible to know what side of the bridge he is standing on from one day to the next. Blogojevich is another who would sell his mother to the devil if he could profit from it for money or power or fame. To varying degrees, our moneyed political system insures that integrity is almost impossible for a politician in our duopoly system.

Some would argue you can still see a ghost of integrity in Lindsay Graham or Russ Finegold. But, it is only an apparition. “The problem with political jokes is they get elected.” -Henry Cate, VII

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 24, 2010 03:14 AM

David,
Why I agree that most candidates and incumbents are sheep and will follow the Status Quo; however, I also know that Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Elected Officials and their Lawyers will listen to the “Common Sense of an Americam Layman” on what can be done by the Left and Right Political Parties when it comes to building a Better World.

And though I may not personally use what I know to start a political or religious group to challange the Status Quo. Now holding the ability to show the American Barons and Citizens of the 21st Century how the Labor of the Children of the 70’s has lead to the Children of the 21st Century being able to handle the Issues of the 20th Century. I wonder what political avenue is proper in this Day & Age to rekindle the American Spirit held by the Authority of the Learned and Unlearned of Government and Society? Since why political jokes are a problem, in America they seem to be the best teacher among man.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 24, 2010 09:33 AM

Who needs integrity when faking it works just as well in gerrymandered Congressional Districts.

Posted by: jlw at August 24, 2010 12:39 PM

Jlw,
As an American Layman Citizen I do need integrity as a Gentleman to insure My Guaranteed Civil and Consrirurional Rights. For why it may be the sworn duty and responsibility of Americas’ Denocratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders to protect the Ignorance of Man. Given the pleasure to be Anti-Authoritarian I do believe the Far Left and Far Right need a lesson in being Civilized.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 24, 2010 06:14 PM

David R. Remer wrote: Sen. John McCain is a classic example of a politician who has crossed the bridge of his own positions and words, back and forth, so many times, it is nearly impossible to know what side of the bridge he is standing on from one day to the next.

No kidding.

It’s mind boggling.

Yet, it looks as though he may get re-elected.
Please tell me I’m wrong.

His flip-flopping and pretending to be a maverick would be hilarious if the consequences of his re-election weren’t so dire. HHHMMMmmmmmm … what was his position a few years ago on illegal immigration?

Henry,
I’m not sure a planet of finite size and resources can support much more than the current 6.8 billion people. And natural disasters could easily lead to famine and death for many more thousands.

And consider the impact of sea levels rising 10 feet, when about half of the world population lives near the coast.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 24, 2010 10:52 PM

Dan,
Why a piece of land 5 miles by 5 miles may only support 5 families needing 1 square mile; however, how many more families can the same space support if they are stacked upom each other?

Yes, 20th Century Thinking will say that you cam only get so much coal, oil, etc. from the ground; nevertheless, seeing that Nature has been using compost and dung to create warm moist air and provide plants food for thousands of years. I do hope you take a look and educate your Elected Officials on the advantages Bio-mass material offer over the resources of the Status Quo.

And why it is easier for the Voter to blame Government for doing nothing, where are the Enterprising Peivateers in America who can bring to market such things as automobiles, trians, and planes which will force Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders to rethinking their political stances.

For example; Where is an Electric Car which can pay the Teenager to drive up Main Street and down Wall Street? For surely a 250 kw generator poweed by man-made wind would be more than enough energy needed to provide the electricity necessary to operate today’s electric cars. Or how about environmental chamber capable of producing all the fruit and vegetables the family needs. And than how about a 911 Community Emergency Services that can answer the health questions people have instead of declaring everything a medical emergency.

Thus, to a degree it is not the candidate or incumbent who is to blame for the Do-Nothing Congress, but the Nedia and Voter lack of teaching their Elected Officials how the technology of the 21st Century can work to address the Issues of the 20th Century. For just as the Chuldren of the 70’s were told to go teach their parents Right from wrong. Shouldn’t the Children of the 21st Century be set lose to teach their Community Elders and Peers the difference between being Politically Right and Wrong?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 25, 2010 01:46 AM

Henry said: “Why a piece of land 5 miles by 5 miles may only support 5 families needing 1 square mile; however, how many more families can the same space support if they are stacked upom each other?”

That was at the heart of the rancorous debate between Jefferson and Hamilton. Jefferson saw for America an agrarian economic based society with a weaker federal government and stronger State and local government. Hamilton saw the opposite, an industrial economy built around population centers and a stronger federal government and weaker state and local governments, according to a History program I watched about Jefferson’s life.

Appears Hamilton not only got G. Washington to side with him, but, his way prevailed for the society and economy as well.

Then there is the whole issue of the West where 1 acre per family would not even begin to supply a family’s need. The Indians argued their 40 acres were woefully inadequate to support a single family. And they were right !

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 25, 2010 03:49 AM

David,
I knew I heard that argument from somewhere. And to keep true to the American Spirit, I wonder if an universe is big enough for some? For why I can only imagine the time when Individuals learn they are the Masters of their own Universe, I’m not sure the Learned and Unlearned of Society are ready for such education and enlightenment.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 25, 2010 08:31 AM

Henry, While the Universe/Cosmos is infinite, the places we can reach in time to avert the horrible consequences of over-population are limited at the moment.

And not all land is arable.
Clean water is a growing problem already.
The seas are over-fished.

In year 2006, there were ONLY 1.15 acres of arable land per person, world-wide (i.e. 7.68 billion acres / 6.68 billion people).

By year 2039 (only 29 years from now), there may be only 0.59 acres of arable land per person, world-wide (i.e. 7.68 billion acres / 13 billion people).

Is 1.15 acres, much less 0.59 acres enough?

Arable land is being lost at the alarming rate of over 38,610 square miles (24.7 million acres) per year.

Therefore, by 2039, there may be only 0.53 acres of arable land per person, world-wide (i.e. 6.865 billion acres / 13 billion people).

At the current rate of loss of 38,610 square miles per year of arable land, and even if the population didn’t grow any larger, ALL arable land could be lost in only 310 years (12 million square miles / 38,610 square miles per year)!

Now consider the huge amount of coastal land that may be under saltwater in a miniscule blink in geological time.
What will happen if the sea level rises 10 feet in the next 50 years? Global warming is not caused by human activity only, because there are most likely other things causing global warming, but if only China and India have equal CO2 emissions per-capita as the U.S., there will be a staggering increase of CO2 emissions of 4700% !!! Even now, it’s extremely difficult to believe that the current emissions of 24 Billion metric tons of CO2 per year are having a neglible influence on global warming.

Yes, the Universe/Cosmos is very BIG, but where else even in our very own solar system is habitable, and would not require tremendous resources, cost to make it habitable?

That is, will the voters of the U.S. and the citizens of the world receive their Education in time to avoid their own extinction. That may sound extreme, but the potential to destroy ourselves is real, due to too much shortsighted selfishness and greed, instead of sufficient longsighted, logical, enlightened, intelligent self-interest.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 25, 2010 08:56 AM

Dan,
If I got my history correct 30 years ago it was said that every American could live in Texas and we would still have more living space than Asia and Europe. And why those numbers have changed over the years. The fact private space flight now exist gives the Wealthy among them a simple solution to the problems faced by the masses one has to wonder why some Humans oppose the Ideology of building a Green Sustainable Government and Society.

Now, I realize 30 years ago the ideas of environmental problems & overpopulation was thought by most to be so strange that they did not matter. And even today the short term thinking (next 20-40 years) of some believe Man cannot Harm Nature; however, considering the Status Quo Thinking thought Man would have blown up the world by now I do believe one of the short term goals of any political group should be educatoing its members on the difference between what can be; should be; and what will be as Americas’ Citizens, Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders face the Events and Issues of the next 100 years.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 25, 2010 07:21 PM

Henry, The issue is not only every square mile of land, but the amount of land that is arable and capable of producing crops, and that is now only 1.15 acres per person (on average, world-wide).

How much arable land per person is needed to sustain the current world population of 6.8 billion?

It is possible that it is already more than the existing 1.15 acres, since many thousands of people die annually from malnutrition and famine.

It is not far-fetched to envision growing world-wide as clean water and food become more scarce.

Over-population and diminishing resources could easily lead to wars and anarchy.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 25, 2010 10:21 PM

San,
Why open land farming may require large spaces, hydro farming requires a lot less space to produce the same amount of products. In facr, one could make the case that future grocery stores could use hydro farming technology to offer fresh local produce and provice the store with free electricity and plant food. However, on the other hand one can take it a step futher and produce environmental chambers to the American Consumer and Small Business Owner so they may grow their own.

Yes, like the 20th Century saw changes from the 19th Century method of farming. So will the Big Corporations of the 21st Century undergo changes as safty and environmental changes drive back up the price of food. For why some may laugh at the White House having a garden, somerging tells me future Chefs and Cooks will come to relearn the pleasure of growing and canning their own food.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 26, 2010 12:00 AM

Henry, In fact is, the (a)rate of demand for food and other resources are growing faster than the (b) rate of availability.

In year 1978, those two rates crossed.

Before that point, there ability existed (though that did not happen; never under-estimate human greed and selfishness) to distribute equally among all of earth’s population enough food so that no one would have to die of starvation. Since year 1978 however, Earth’s population has eclipsed our ability to grow crops (including farm animals). What this means is that even if we tried to distribute enough food for everyone to eat, many people would still have to starve to death annually because there currently isn’t enough to go around.

This presents one hell of a future shock scenario. Remember the days of gas rationing during the 1970’s? Well imagine calory rationing. 1000 Calories a day and pray you stay alive.

In the coming years, this will become increasingly obvious in third world nations first, where the famine will become very wide spread. Eventually though (and probably in the near future) the famine will spread to urban areas, developed countries, and even the wealthy may be affected.

Also, there’s the issue of clean water and polution.

David Pimentel, professor of ecology and agriculture at Cornell University, and Mario Giampietro, senior researcher at the National Research Institute on Food and Nutrition (INRAN), place in their study Food, Land, Population and the U.S. Economy the maximum U.S. population for a sustainable economy at 200 million. To achieve a sustainable economy and avert disaster, the United States must reduce its population by at least one-third, and world population will have to be reduced by two-thirds, says study. The authors of this study believe that the mentioned agricultural crisis will only begin to impact us after 2020, and will not become critical until 2050.

And all of this, and over-population, can be exacerbated and worsened many times over by corrupt government.

So, Henry, I’m not sure history, human nature, and existing conditions and trends support a rosy future outlook … at least, not any time in the near future.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 26, 2010 09:00 AM

Henry, we’ve been looking to the heavens nigh on 50 years now and no blue-green planets with lotsa water falls have been detected. Hydro-growing a few tomatoes seems doable for sandwichs but the world needs massive growth of fibrous products such as corn, wheat, soybeans, and the like.

As they say in the stock market all that futuristic stuff ‘is already figured in’ in discussions of over use - over population.

Some college students are playing with a +300mph electric car. Take a mighty strait road to handle those speeds. Could put a straight road above the buildings and terrain but would block a lot of sunlight, be hard to repair, buzzards running into it in the night, etc.

Rather than living while betting on the future I’d rather live based on present knowns, just in case the future doesn’t turn out as expected. One could just as easily suggest6 that someday we will be visited by a lot of aliens looking for a place to hangout since they trashed their old place. Hadn’t we best save some room and resources for those guys?

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 26, 2010 01:04 PM

There is a head long rush to centralize everything - a byproduct of the free enterprise capitalist model of economics. It is a monumental mistake in some areas of need. Example: energy. The centralized electrical grids as the sole model for electrical production and distribution is an enormous and very costly mistake. Decentralizing a majority of electrical production and distribution systems is by far the more rational, cheaper, and secure way of approaching electrical needs.

One solar storm can throw a centralized electrical distribution system off-line for months or years. Decentralized approach where households produce and businesses produce some or most of their electrical needs, and all of their essential electrical needs on premises, is vastly more cost efficient in the long run, can be shut down and safeguarded from solar storms, and provide incentive and motivation for consumers to reduce wasteful consumption.

But, where is the profit for the energy corporations in a decentralized model? Diminished, therefore, that is not a model that will be pursued. Better the whole world be thrown into the ‘dark age’ as a result of a solar storm, than lose profit potential and allow the public to survive such an event independently with electrical capacity intact for no more than the amortized cost of the installation and maintenance of the solar power system, or other type of local premise electrical production.

A city in the N.W. designed their city with work centers embedded into neighborhoods, such that car commutes to work are reduced or eliminated altogether. A decentralized approach which has paid benefits to labor and business alike, despite initial protests by business.

Practical solutions cannot be obtained if the profiteers are the only decision makers. Health care was a perfect example of this, and why the Public Option was never seriously considered by the Democrats in power.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 26, 2010 03:55 PM

That’s a good reason for decentralized power (solar, wind, geothermal, etc.). That probably would have been a better use of the stimulus money.

Also, I thought a true public option for health care insurance, for those that could not find affordable health insurance from FOR-PROFIT insurance companies, was a great idea.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 26, 2010 08:33 PM

d.a.n and David

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1305960/Most-detailed-image-sunspot-caught-camera.html

http://www.netl.doe.gov/smartgrid/referenceshelf/articles/06.02.2010_Broadband%20Over%20Power%20Lines.pdf

Looking for info on solar radiation and found these two interesting urls’. Didn’t find what I was looking for, information on the smart grid that addresses solar radiation. It seems that the smart grid would be able to switch in/out portions of the grid that might be effected by solar radiation. Seems that would have to be one of the priority issues to be addressed.

I do like the idea of broadband over power line and note that the high voltage relay lines are less prone to interference on digital signals than are lower voltage distribution lines, at least that’s what the lower url is selling.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 26, 2010 10:38 PM

Roy, Thanks for the links.
That sun spot (the size of Earth) is interesting.
I have wind and solar power on my cabin, and it works great.
The only deficit is enough power for heating in the winter, in which we use a large gas tank that lasts a year or so.

The idea of broadband over power lines certainly would be better idea than dial-up (at 24Kbps to 53Kbps). The internet is educational, so spending for more internet access makes a lot of sense.

If only the stimulus had been spent on things like that, such as infrastructure improvements, instead of so much rampant pork-barrel, cash for clunkers, home sales, expensive signs about stimulus spending, and other numerous forms of waste.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 27, 2010 08:39 AM

Dan,
Since all reports and studies are designed to inform the Dukes and Lords of Commerce and Trade I can see where one would get the idea nothing can be done by the Food Industry to stop famine. And why it is certainly true that the present methods of farming fall short of delivering the food required in meeting the demand of the Human Race. In the Spirit of Hamilton and Jefferson I do see two ways the Children of the 70’s and 21st Century can achieve the goal of ending hunger.

First, we could use high rise buildings to make the ultimate food factory. For example; why range feed cattle, pigs, and chickens IMHO are better due to several reasons one could erect a building that would allow grain and hay to be grown on the top floors. Thus, allowing the middle floors to house calves and milking cows while the lower floors hold the steers waiting for market. And though I am sure I have left out several necessary units of the normal farm; nevertheless, the waste and water needed to operate the facility could not only be treated onsite, but offer the owner the ability to generate the electricity needed for the day to day operations.

Second, we could learn from the parents and grandparent of the Great Depression and reinvent home gardening and raising farm animals. And though those without a Green Thumb will need more help than others, I do believe corporations like Hunts and Del Monte may work hard to oppose the idea since they would stand to lose millions. Nevertheless, healthier and through technology easier to grow the plants I can see some Enterprising Privateers making a fortune turning a sunroom into a living pantry.

So, why Greed or Necessity can expand Mans’ Food Resources over the next few centuries I do believe it is going to take a little more elbow grease than the Youth of the 60’s and Silver Spoons of the 70’s put toward the problem over the last 30 years.

Roy,
“Rather than living while betting on the future I’d rather live based on present known (knowledge) “

Glad to hear that because why the Youth of the 60’s and Silver Spoons of the 70’s got lost in the dream of flying cars, limited to what the Children of the 21st Century can prove to the Children of the 70’s and the Elders of the Human Race I don’t believe even today that flying cars are going to get past Grandma; however, limited to Zero Weight 100% Traction Vehicles powered by Man-made Wind for basic transportation. Something tells me with certain technology that the idea of a Super Highway with speeds in access of 300 mph might become reality by the turn of the next century.

Because why high rail trains already operate at those speeds, not sure how one redefines the words “Situational Awareness” without getting DOD involved. I’ll leave that up to the Lawyers of the 21st Century to figure out.

P.S. Check out DOD for protection against solar radiation (But Be Careful)

David,
Why the face of Energy Companies may need to be redefined (I think that is the proper word). If an energy company was limited to the buying and selling of the product as well as maintaining the individually owned facilities than wouldn’t they make a decent profit?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 27, 2010 09:24 AM

Henry, if growing food and livestock in high-rise buildings was such a great idea, why isn’t anyone doing it?

All of the roof-tops of all buildings all over the planet represent less than 1% of all arable land on the planet. Therefore, using high-rise buildings to grow more food and livestock is not a practical solution.

It would be easier to turn some non-arable land into arable land, rather than create arable land on top of high-rise buildings. Also, raising and lowering millions of tons of food, water, and other materials is a tremendous waste of energy.

It would be more economical to irrigate and convert non-arable land into arable land, than to produce more food and livestock on high-rise buidlings.

Also, have you ever been close to a pig farm, or dairy farm?
PPPHHHHHHHEEEEeeeeeewwwwwww !!!!!

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 27, 2010 01:06 PM

d.a.n, right about cow and pig farms. Though, some have converted to waste product conversion and production of methane to fuel their energy needs for the farm. There isn’t enough data yet to determine if such conversion systems are cost effective for hog and dairy farms of all sizes, but, the concept is sound.

Small community based fish farms are doable for supplying protein for local needs, but, only if the true cost of hog and cattle protein is reflected in their supermarket price. I am a big fan of bean substitutes for meat for everything from hamburgers to hot dogs to sausage. Great strides have been made in texture and taste such that the black bean burgers we buy actually taste better than cowburgers. Some of the hidden costs of hog, sheep, and cows are in the BLM grazing land, the methane contribution to global warming, and of course tax subsidies to the industries, especially in times of drought or fires to grazing land, or shortages of feed crops.

The way I see it, there is no lack of solutions, only the lack of political will to steer the markets toward better solutions due to the legal bribery of our political representatives by the industries that loathe change, and consumers who fear managed change.

John Boehner is out there this week stoking up the hatred of government and LYING his ass off about government employees being paid higher salaries than their private sector counterparts. Dummies are falling for it. A 3 minute session with Google will produce evidence of his lying, and hatred of government is akin to self-hate, very, very counter-productive for the nation. Boehner doesn’t care about the nation or future, he only cares about November’s elections. And if he is successful in generating all this hate toward government and his party wins, then what? That hate will only be fueled on by Democrats.

So, what does the Idiot Boehner think will be gained in the long run? The answer is, Boehner doesn’t know how to think logically, rationally, and for the long run. He is a politician, bought and paid for the corporate interests only concerned with the outcome of 2 year election cycles and promoting bribe taking and easily intimidated politicians in office.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 27, 2010 04:19 PM

HHMMMMmmmmmmm … lying about wages reminds me of someone else who did that same thing.

Short-sighted selfishness (which manifests itself as greed, laziness, hatred, delusion, etc.) is always the root cause (instead of long-sighted, enlightened self-interest).

I can certainly understand the hate for corruption, bloat, waste, lies, and the the worst offenders in government.

But John Boehner, nor many (if anyone else) in Congress (who gave themselves automatic raises), have any room to talk about corruption, bloat, waste, and lies.

But yes, hatred of government is sort of akin to self-hate, since the majority of voters repeatedly reward the incumbent politicians in Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates.

So, the majority of voters are culpable too, and the majority of voters are now starting to feel the painful consequences.

Most (if not all) incumbent politicians are experts at distracting the voters, to divide the voters so that a majority can never exist to oust the incumbent politicians from office.

John Boehner is doing the very same thing many other Republicans and Democrats do (in BOTH parties), which is fueling the circular partisan warfare between the IN-PARTY and OUT-PARTY.
It is VERY effective.

And there seems to be no end to all of the bickering and wallowing in the circular partisan warfare, while pressing problems continue to grow in number and severity.

Yes, John Boehner

David R. Remer wrote: “is a politician, bought and paid for the corporate interests only concerned with the outcome of 2 year election cycles and promoting bribe taking and easily intimidated politicians in office”,

… and so are most (if not all) of his peers in Congress.

And how about the rest of these Congress persons?

For years, no one has yet accepted the challenge to name 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, or even 268 (half of 535) in Congress that aren’t FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and/or corrupt.
And even if someone could list 50, or 100, or even 200, unless it’s half or more of the 535 in Congress, then does Congress provide any net benefit to society?
Personally, I believe that Congress has reached a point of not only providing NO-NET-BENEFIT to society, but is detrimental to society, as evidenced by the nation’s problems growing in number and severity for many decades.

Anyway, I see the two extremes of BOTH the Democrat and Republican incumbent politicians as being equally destructive:

• Extreme # 1: One extreme wants regressive taxation, unfettered capitalism and freedom to explore and wallow in every manifestation of unchecked greed (which we have seen plenty of lately).
  
• Extreme #2: The other extreme wants a nanny-state with citizens increasingly dependent on the government; with massive cradle-to-grave government programs (which are usually severely mismanaged) that nurture a sense of entitlement and dependency on government; tries to disguise envy and jealousy as demands for equality; wants to grow government ever larger (despite the already current nightmare proportions); rewards failure and laziness; and perpetuates the myth that we can somehow all live at the expense of everyone else.

Aside from their equally destructive extremes, there is no longer see any important difference between the majority of incumbent politicians and the majority of their cheer leaders (the voters).
And that’s most likely why the nation’s problems continue to grow in number and severity.

Too often, human nature is to procrastinate until unnecessary suffering results from it.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 27, 2010 05:39 PM

d.a.n wrote: “John Boehner is doing the very same thing many other Republicans and Democrats do (in BOTH parties), which is fueling the circular partisan warfare between the IN-PARTY and OUT-PARTY. It is VERY effective.”

Truer words were ne’er spoke. The political warfare trumps all other priorities, in both parties.

You ask if there is one reputable politician in Congress worth saving. For me, the answer is no. If a politician is not corrupt, and not subject to legal bribes, and not in it for themselves, then that politician remains, nonetheless, ineffective in persuading the rest of Congress to amend their ways. I personally respect the integrity of Russ Feingold, as far as he can realistically extend it and remain in office, and enormously respected the integrity of former Sen. John Warner. But, the reality is, neither were effective in reforming the Congress to address the nation’s and people’s needs above those of the wealthy contributing special interests or the corporate lobbyist blackmailers and intimidaters.

If we want reform, we the voters must force it upon our politicians, by conditioning our vote to reelect upon progress toward such reforms. In other words, we have to vote out incumbents in growing numbers, until the politicians accept the new reality that reelection depends upon making the reforms that a majority of Americans require for better government.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 27, 2010 06:45 PM

Dan,
Akthough I have not seen a 5 plus story barn, I have been in a few two and three story barns that actually uses gravity to help the farmer in their daily chores.

No, I’m not sure the Urbanites are ready to have a 10 story barn built beside their 20 stoty gigh rise commercial and residential building; nevertheless, if one is seeking to optimize space in order to produce food for the masses than like dirty industries I am certain communities can find a section of town where they can be built.

Beides, as long as it is not built by the Castles of the Rich who cares if the Working Poor has to live down wind from such smell?

David,
IMHO John Boehner would make a good poster child for those Americans interested in seeing America fail. For caught up in the political game of the 20th Century, I doubt or have seen no evidence that he even knows the National and International problems caused by President Bush failure to meet the challanges of the 21st Century.

And that IMHO is sad considering any Republican studing their political party history has the opportunity right here right now to add to their party legacy of fighting slavery.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 27, 2010 07:25 PM

I assume, had TED not drove across the bridge to nowhere he would have been re-elected yet again. I say that based on the recent win by John McCain in the Arizona runoffs. On what basis do you vote for someone who, in the middle of an election, changes their position on a major issue like immigration? So much for the year of anti=incumbency.

Does the Republican Party have a published agenda? Can politicos just change their mind at will and still be supported by the party and the voters? Will John change his mind on immigration again? The Republic Sentry Party would likely reject a politician from the party unless he/she could make a good case before their constituents as to the need for change. Did John broach his actions with his constituents?

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 27, 2010 11:02 PM

Roy,
Is the Devil you know worse than the Devil you don’t?

IMHO Johm McCain did not win the primary as much as he defended the Status Quo. For given the choice of a rejected imcumbent or the Political Dog of the Elders one has to wonder if the Republicans are scared of change or losing their National Status.

No, I cannot blame the Republicans for selecting John McCain over the other candidate; however, I do want to see what will happen in November against a moderate Democrat or an Independent.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at August 28, 2010 08:16 AM

David R. Remer wrote: You ask if there is one reputable politician in Congress worth saving. For me, the answer is no.

Well, let’s just say that voters should not worry too much about possibly ousting any good politician (if that’s even possible in the Congress of today), since for many years now, no one has yet accepted the challenge to name 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, or even 268 (half of 535) in Congress that aren’t FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and/or corrupt.

Perhaps Congress should be treated as a whole, much like the players on a football team, who all win or lose together? Perhaps then, Congress will start to police its own ranks, which is totally non-existent today?

For me, I have looked at most Congress persons voting records, and I am not sure I could name more than 5 Congress persons that aren’t FOR-SALE, incompetent, greedy, arrogant, dishonest, and/or corrupt. How many voted against their automatic raises?

Henry,
Barns would be only 1 story, if it weren’t for the cost of building materials. The reason for 2 or 3 story barns is not for efficiency, but to reduce the cost of the building (e.g. 2 to 3 more roofing for a 2 or 3 story building). I worked on a farm and can think of no benefit if storing hay in 2 or 3 story barns, which require machinery, energy, and work to move materials up and down.

Gowing food on top of all existing high-rise buildings represents a miniscule percentage of total surface area of all arable land, and presents many problems in moving materials up and down, which represents a lot of wasted energy. Also, not all exsting buildings can support the additional weight for soil, water, crops, and machinery. It’s simply not cost effective, which is why it doesn’t exist:

• That’s one of the reasons Bruce Bugbee, a crop physiologist at Utah State University in Logan, is critical of high-rise farming. He says the concept is too expensive to implement and would be a colossal waste of electricity.
  “We’re talking gigawatts of power, just huge amounts of power [to grow crops indoors], compared to free sunlight outside,” he said.

Also, how can greenhouses be stacked/arranged so that layers of crops get enough light to be grown in a vertical structure? Do you know of any 2+ story greenhouses anywhere?

At any rate, until then, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, repeatedly rewarding the duopoly, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 29, 2010 10:14 AM

d.a.n, I forget to mention Ron Paul. He truly towers above the rest of the candidates in integrity. The majority of the time, he votes against whatever bills don’t comport with his principles and for those that advance his principles. Don’t get me wrong, I couldn’t support Ron Paul in a million years. His understanding of economics is seriously flawed, and his libertarian stance that we are all in this individually, utterly contradict the principles I have adopted. But, I have to respect the man enormously for refusing to cave to his Party or special interests where his earnestly held principles are involved.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 30, 2010 07:53 PM

Dan,
Why some in Learned America may believe it is to expensive to build hogh rise farms today. I do believe Bruce Bugbee needs to check out how we are already building sun light into high rises.

Besides, why an acre of land may be cheap today at what price will it become profitable to sell existing farnland to develepors? And thus, we have a problem. For should we make it illegal to sell your property of have the government purchase the existing farnland and ploace them under the Public Domain.

No, multi-story barns and green houses may not be need on our lige time; however, given a growing global population, water shortage, and crop damage who is to say that in the next 30-60 years America may need the technology to stay the bread basket of the world.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 9, 2010 06:52 AM