Intergenerational Overlapping and the Oncoming New Age of Reason

Population Asymmetry

I.               From about 1965, we can observe the beginning of geometric population growth.  This indicates the beginning of “overpopulation,” or more accurately the asymmetry from increased births, greater longevity, and fewer preventable deaths from ancient norms.  This problem has begun to grow exponentially.

Crisis Nodes

II.             Although there are many other wars, conflicts, strifes to be considered, for our purposes of American History, and our nations birth in 1776, we observe six modern nodes of crisis:

a.     US Civil War

b.     The Great War

c.     WWII

d.     Moon Landing

e.     End of the Soviet Empire

f.      Beginning of Modern Information-based (Internet) Democracy

Era Names

III.           After the Age of Reason: Ironically, we inhabited the great genocide of America, and endured the pestilence of human slavery.  The zugzwang of the International Age of Industry required our participation in social norms, but as a nation not healed from the bitter civil conflict.  Our modern American identity was forged by the great European war where the conception of nationhood and nationalism forced us to unite.  The fourth era is so named the Age of Economy because this was the practical application of all the great theories, and became the natural growth of nations to once again end this era in another great mechanized war.  After the hard and bitter lessons of grand mechanical warfare a more indirect, yet no less vicious, period of proxy warfare began, and the emblem of the two great Superpowers was that of Space.  After America ostensibly won that war of symbolism, then an age of covert and more indirect paroxysm began in earnest to complete the defeat of the Soviet Union entirely.  Leaving an age of one Superpower left with all the various agents who would attempt to interact with, transform or gain from her.  We have entered an age where the conception of power is being transformed, not just by the application of ideas, but the ideals and ideas being transmitted by these transformational devices we participate with regularly in this era.

Node Zero

IV.           In American History we begin in the first thirty years of Simultaneous Corinthian Rebirth (CR), a creative destruction for survival, and the a ten year Birth;

a.     1760 – Doric Construction of Revolution

b.     1770 – Ionic Construction of Revolution

c.     1780 – Corinthian Construction of Revolution

d.     1790 – Birth of the Stable State (where the act of Revolution has been harnessed in active creation-destruction process we call government)

                                                     i.     1790 – 1793 sub doric: The King as President

                                                      ii.     1793 – 1796 sub ionic: The Various Powers

                                                        iii.     1796 – 1799 sub corinthian: The Reasonable Transitions

Generational Nodes

V.             After the Reasonable Institutionalization of Revolution, began the formation of parties and other emblematic themes, which allowed for the construction and destruction of ideas of governance and administration of law through institutional process, however this does not dismiss the massive genocide being conducted until 1974 upon the lands of what was to become territory of these United States of America.  Following Jefferson and a Revolution every generation (30 years):

a.     Rebirth (Transformational Period [Ricorso])

b.     Doric (Construction of Foundations)

c.     Ionic (Building of the Constructs)

d.     Corinthian (Decoration and Edifice)

Sub-Nodes

VI.           Confusing the issue, but now more clear with the benefit of oversimplification, is the illusion of cohort or sub-nodes within generations.  These do not attribute a “rebirth” sub-period, for the natural[1] progeneration of each individual, cohort, or generation is the very act of biological rebirth.

Primary Technological Achievement

VII.         At the advent of every new generation, there appears a clear signal from the prior generation as to how to better evolve the technology of our environment for survival and progress.  Although these are simplifications of the overarching achievement of the times, there are innumerable simultaneous progresses in every subject matter in order to allow for other generations to unlock achievements.  As with Node Zero, we find ourselves (at “node 8”) where the cumulative progress in every Scientific endeavor has come to fruition in every discipline—the start of a time of Science and Reason!

Longevity Asymmetry

VIII.       By Node Six, The Baby Boom Generation, Children were observing the first human cohorts to live into their 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s, in spite of the two great mechanical wars.  We entered into a node in 1999 where children being born until 2029 will observe human cohorts living into their 90’s, 100’s, and beyond (the estimated stabilization for longevity to become living naturally into 120 ~ 140 y.o., and with medicines and technologies 140+)!

Conclusion

The Population Asymmetry, Progenitor Asymmetry and the Longevity Asymmetry require from the intergenerational populace a sense of civility and abiding peace that are necessary for collective security.  We enter an era of unprecedented potentiality for every human being alive today, and have one of the best chances ever to enshrine Ethics, Liberty and Human Rights for the sanctity of all future generations.

Hypothesis

We will not be able to afford to not cooperate as a human species (as opposed to nation, or other group) upon this Earth, and the upside becomes material and quality of life gains from cooperation that will far outweigh perceived negatives.

The confluence of all these human events shall describe

1.     A grander sense of the Collective Consciousness and Higher Awareness

2.     More sublime and civil forms of diplomacy and warfare

3.     A concept of collective endeavor that will produce a massive efficiency, which we are already encountering

MAJOR EFFORTS FOR FUTURE NODES

Future Nodal Targets

A.    Commercial Space Travel

B.    Electricity Harmonization (We are in Node E1 and starting E2.  By E3 we will be at the edge of Robotic Sentience)

C.    Oceanic Mastery (deep water craft and body suits)

D.   Environmental Stasis (estimate Node I Env. will sustain up to 12BB pop.; Node II Env 16BB; and Node III 30+BB)

E.    Robotic Sentience

F.    Interplanetary Colonization

G.   Intergalactic Exploration / Deep Space Mastery

H.   Solar System Mastery

I.      Inter Solar System Colonization

J.     Galactic Mastery

K.   Intergalactic Mastery

L.    Intergalactic Colonization

Note:

            “Arab Spring,” is the current term to describe the actions of societies, many in the Arab States, gaining 21^st Century Technology at low or no cost and being able to organize democratically with instantaneous communications and information systems.  This will probably be referred to as the International Accurate Democracy Movement, or something thereabouts, because we also find ourselves in USA, amidst the advent of the ramifications of this technological advance and all that this implies.

---

[1] The Progenitor Asymmetry would be when genes can be spawned multi-generationally (even after the subject has expired)

4 years of low hanging fruit

Obama gave a somewhat inspired if not entirely exciting State of the Union.

The key notes I heard that I will hold him and the Democrats to account for in 4 years:

1. End the War
2. Universal pre-school
3. Access to benefits / retention of Obamacare-Social Security-Medicare
4. Improved Veterans Benefits
5. Active measures to improve the economy by improving Energy Independence and the Environment.

It is mostly on this last point that I will speak;

a. Tax Reform equals Environmental reform.
b. End subsidization of archane technologies and established players, back to investor of first and last resort.
c. Support STEMs in Education.

a. By closing loopholes in a conscientious and clear manner, there will no longer be a dispensation for making profit at all costs (where the environment takes the burden as resource and resolution).

Although not as clearly defined by the powers-that-be, the need for reform has a throughput onto the ideas introduced by Schumacher as Small is Beautiful. becomes that ecosystem and ecological thinking is in effect environmentally correct long-term economic development.

Obama was dancing at the edge of this thinking without removing any of his obvious commitments to the Corporate System.

However, a clever tax system will try to become clever by half playing "lets make a deal."  The second step to truly resolving the Environmental equation for Cost-Benefit-Analysis is for holistic and conscientious Tort Reform.  That is a hot potato in the Do Nothing Congress Part II we are effectively beginning to witness (although I am open to being wrong-- see Sequestration).


b. Corn Ethynol, Oil, and Fracking are all subsidized, although science clearly puts them in the back of the Carbon efficiency line (would that they list in order from most to least carbon efficient).  That carbon efficiency in conjunction with time for development (with unlimited resources) should inform what priority to grant and burse the otherwise limited resources dedicated to Energy and Technology.

As mentioned, the investments by the people for the people are best as first and last resort-- like radio and other experimental technologies the US government and the people have been the ones who "built the railroad," not the tycoons who then scooped up and organized for profit the activities.

Hopefully in four years we will have sensibly realigned subsides so that the only thing big oil is getting is small relief for the retooling of extant refineries to become clean, non-polluting, and carbon efficient.


c. All other social concerns aside, and with the full-throated support of the scientifically true "first five," as we call early childhood development, education and care in California, the next step is to raise a generation not afraid to do math, believe in science, or be transparent in their actions as citizens.

It is not the government that will lead the inevitable democratization of truth, rather it is the people.  Let's pay teachers what they are due for tending the most valuable natural resource we have, isn't it time?

I didn't hear a "socialist" argument as the Republicans over the decades are fond to label, rather a proactive agenda on education that accepted truths (like global warming) where for whatever reason the less than 1% of scientists disagree with the issue writ large (does climate change exist?).

A fact-based reality based education system will, informed by all the sciences and technologies, force a fundamental zugzwang by the Federal in favor of the local education officials-- and that is something I have heard every republican quick on the "commie," or "Socialist," trigger belly ache for power to rest in the local not Federal powers where education is concerned.

Yet, it was Bush II, who forced the random test driven multiple choice idiocracy called "no child left behind."

Incentivize the collaboration in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) with new and existing public-private relationships by also having the principles found in STEM, logic, and reason inform the process and development of this completely new world of education, knowledge, and technology, and any disadvantage from the retooling of our outmoded educational system (writ large) will fall away very quickly once children are given the access to tools already available-- just not very widely at time of publication.

Lets see if reason will spread like a disease in the next four years, or will we continue to appear as a gorilla chasing its tail to the rest of the world?

Modern American I-Ching

In these days of trouble and confusion, where can we turn for guidance and wisdom?

How about the ancient oracle called the I-Ching, more accurately YiJing, best translated as Classic of Changes? For those unfamiliar with this work from ancient China, there are 64 readings that, like Tarot cards, can offer general symbolic representations for the seeker to fill in the blanks and personalize to discover individual resolution and sense of peace.

I have developed this 80-page manual, entitled Mudita: Modern American I-Ching, from my recently copyrighted materials based on years of rigorous study in Yoga, Tai Chi, Martial Arts, Zen, Buddhism, and Taoism. Mudita is Sanskrit for “Joy,” and is unique in that it also presumes we can discover joy in the experience of the peace, joy, and happiness of others.

Each reading gives an image, a noun, a verb, and some hard-won wisdom based on Thomas Cleary’s eminent translations of Confucius’ Commentaries on the Classic informed by this larger concept of abounding, compassionate, and vicarious joy.

Ultimately, I hope the grand effort to accommodate the ancient guide for a new century, at a bare minimum may offer some comfort during these trying times.

I am a Zen Buddhist, and, as such, also hope, like any reading from the I-Ching, once the Seeker gains a sense of insight after opening the manual— the text itself might become transcended by the seeker.

It’s been an amazing adventure, filled by a lifetime of mistakes and confusion, in order to presume the honor of writing this book, which is No Book!

BUY MY E-BOOK

Remember 1994

We in CA are on the verge of a historical change where the ethically and economically unsound National stance on Hemp may soon begin its final chapter. I would like to offer a compare/contrast for those who are seeking to #Pass19:

I volunteered for Initiative 622 in Washington State in 1994 mostly giving the campaign free access to K.A.O.S. shows I was involved in, and in composing OpEds for broadcast and publication (almost entirely in the CPJ [Cooper Point Journal]).

I tried to look up last night what the final vote count was, but I just recall we got hammered. So, what, do I recall, happened (or more accurately what went wrong);

(1) Message. 622 focused on I. Industrial, II. Medicinal, and III. Recreational usage all being simultaneously legal. This was before CA landmark 1996 Prop 216 passed. It was too much too soon for such an "omni" approach, but now we have seen that for over 14 years Medicinal Cannabis has been legal-- society continues unharmed, if not improved.

(2) Organization. WA 622 had no real backers in the legitimate world. Mostly individuals making a good effort (and arguably laying the ground work as the frontlinesmen and women for CA 216) in organized chaos, where the adjective "organized" is, from what I witnessed, generous. On the contrary, Prop 19 seems to be enjoying major support from Labor, Law Enforcement, Religious, and other "real world" groups.

(3) Backing. 622 was social science at the state capitol. 19 was one of three major ideas from the leading groups with over 16 years of experience, 14 years of success, and better than a dozen years of profits from the result of that success! Although there are small contributers, having Lee's Oaksterdam as a backstop (as opposed to the NORML or Herrer initiatives that didn't gather enough signatures, but could have also conceivably had the same effect phenomenally) is very important!

(4) Continuity. 622 was like the Zen koan, "when a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound?" There was no real community of beneficiaries. There were drug dealers and users, and that was all the opposition had to point out. And they won. Now, in CA with Prop 19, there is a network of patients, lawyers, activists, industrialists, not to mention local and state government(s) who have seen the benefits of this nascent industry ready to burgeon, blossom, and recover from it's manufactured retardation by almost seventy years of criminalization.

(5) Timing. Both the major parties are showing up this election year as moral debtors: Republicans are asking us to take them back, even though almost none of what they propose is any different from how we got into this economic situation; and the Democrats are typically diffusive and lackluster in handling major issues-- gradual change we can eventually expect technical results from (as opposed to "change we can believe in"). Our state is leading the nation, but unfortunately this time it's in disastrous budgetary management.

Again, nationally, by continuing unsound Bushian fiscal policy, Democrats are arguing for a ~$3T unfunded tax break, while the Republicans are arguing for a ~$4T unfunded tax break by extending the previously unfunded tax breaks instituted during the Republican control of House, Senate and Executive. Both fiddling as Rome burns, and both, as usual, talking not listening to each other to fashion COMPROMISE.

Our state can go from worst to first, regardless of what Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dumb do in DC, by reversing the effects of the originally state led ban on hemp. It was state led in 1931, so let it be state led again in 2010! There is no constitutional argument for or against the ban. As it stands today, the US Government continues to outlaw a multi-trillion dollar industry that would lead to major solutions for our current major problems!


WHAT HASN'T CHANGED

FARMS. Hemp will allow under-utilized and marginal farmlands to be productive without major water demands, giving the small farmer a fighting chance.

FAMILIES. By eliminating criminality, arbitrary and capricious arrests of predominantly minorities will become that much less prevalent; Our heroic enforcement workers can focus on legitimate threats that undermine our collective safety; Our state can restore funding for social netting that has all but vanished; and people will be put back to work!

JOBS. I talked to one Union official off the record, and their number is ~40,000 Union jobs within a year. I had speculated with the entire Hemp Industry coming back to life the number to be ~100,000, and either way this tracks with the rule of thumb that for every 1 Union job another ~1.5 are eventually created. No one has a crystal ball on this one, but in effect California should enjoy a major first mover advantage when Prop 19 passes!

TAXES. Cities that allow Industrial Hemp and Recreation Sales will gain, Counties that create taxes and regulations will gain, and the State non-partisan Legislative Analyst's Office has estimated an annual tax boon of ~$1.4BB for our bankrupted state. This is a sorely needed dose of the cure.

REGULATION. By creating rules and regulations, we will enable all citizens greater liberty, by creating avenues of access. Further, for those of us who feel that Business needs clear and simple rules, we can only hope that our input is asked for at the appropriate juncture. Regardless, by bringing into light the dark economy, which is presently CAs #1 crop, we can expect greater civility-- a nice way of saying the International Drug Cartels will have to line up behind citizens to get licenses, permits, and then pay proper taxes, like the rest of us!

Let's be clear: (a) No one is saying people under 21 should have access. As it is, they already have as good or better access to the recreational use (with no clear comprehension of the commercial uses) of cannabis than to alcohol. (b) No one is saying it is okay to be under the influence of cannabis and work, drive, or operate heavy machinery. Again, think of how we tax and regulate alcohol. (c) Although there is some confusion by medicinal users on this issue, no one will be able to bring the provisions of 215 under the taxation or restrictions imposed onto non-medicinal users by the passing of 19.

I await proper logical rebuttal, but have not heard one for over 16 years!

BP Aftermath

Knock wood that there will only be an absolute minimum of oil spilt hereafter from the Deep Water Horizon Disaster.

That said, a quick reckoning, and I think the Obama Admin got this right:

My assumptions-- A leak of 80K BBL per Day with a straight line 1% reduction over 86 days to define the various captures, ruptures, and miscillaneous unknown variables (unless BP would like to submit the actual data, instead of somehow going from 1000BBL to 5000BBL to as much as 80000BBL per day-- I feel this method is fair); The fine is $4300 per barrel per day that such oil remains uncleaned;

What we come up with is just about $20BB as of today... BP you better get to cleaning!

(Here is my worksheet [sorry it didn't come out that great, but gotta go]:

Days BBL/dayTOTAL BBLs in MM gal Fine in $MM TOT Fine $BB
1 80000 80000 3.36 $344.00 $0.34
2 79200 159200 6.69 $684.56 $0.68
3 78408 237608 9.98 $1,021.71 $1.02
4 77624 315232 13.24 $1,355.50 $1.36
5 76848 392080 16.47 $1,685.94 $1.69
6 76079 468159 19.66 $2,013.08 $2.01
7 75318 543477 22.83 $2,336.95 $2.34
8 74565 618042 25.96 $2,657.58 $2.66
9 73820 691862 29.06 $2,975.01 $2.98
10 73081 764943 32.13 $3,289.26 $3.29
11 72351 837294 35.17 $3,600.36 $3.60
12 71627 908921 38.17 $3,908.36 $3.91
13 70911 979832 41.15 $4,213.28 $4.22
14 70202 1050033 44.10 $4,515.14 $4.52
15 69500 1119533 47.02 $4,813.99 $4.82
16 68805 1188338 49.91 $5,109.85 $5.11
17 68117 1256454 52.77 $5,402.75 $5.41
18 67435 1323890 55.60 $5,692.73 $5.70
19 66761 1390651 58.41 $5,979.80 $5.99
20 66093 1456744 61.18 $6,264.00 $6.27
21 65433 1522177 63.93 $6,545.36 $6.55
22 64778 1586955 66.65 $6,823.91 $6.83
23 64130 1651086 69.35 $7,099.67 $7.11
24 63489 1714575 72.01 $7,372.67 $7.38
25 62854 1777429 74.65 $7,642.95 $7.65
26 62226 1839655 77.27 $7,910.52 $7.92
27 61603 1901258 79.85 $8,175.41 $8.18
28 60987 1962246 82.41 $8,437.66 $8.45
29 60378 2022623 84.95 $8,697.28 $8.71
30 59774 2082397 87.46 $8,954.31 $8.96
31 59176 2141573 89.95 $9,208.76 $9.22
32 58584 2200157 92.41 $9,460.68 $9.47
33 57998 2258156 94.84 $9,710.07 $9.72
34 57418 2315574 97.25 $9,956.97 $9.97
35 56844 2372418 99.64 $10,201.40 $10.21
36 56276 2428694 102.01 $10,443.39 $10.45
37 55713 2484407 104.35 $10,682.95 $10.69
38 55156 2539563 106.66 $10,920.12 $10.93
39 54604 2594168 108.96 $11,154.92 $11.17
40 54058 2648226 111.23 $11,387.37 $11.40
41 53518 2701744 113.47 $11,617.50 $11.63
42 52983 2754726 115.70 $11,845.32 $11.86
43 52453 2807179 117.90 $12,070.87 $12.08
44 51928 2859107 120.08 $12,294.16 $12.31
45 51409 2910516 122.24 $12,515.22 $12.53
46 50895 2961411 124.38 $12,734.07 $12.75
47 50386 3011797 126.50 $12,950.73 $12.96
48 49882 3061679 128.59 $13,165.22 $13.18
49 49383 3111062 130.66 $13,377.57 $13.39
50 48889 3159951 132.72 $13,587.79 $13.60
51 48400 3208352 134.75 $13,795.91 $13.81
52 47916 3256268 136.76 $14,001.95 $14.02
53 47437 3303706 138.76 $14,205.93 $14.22
54 46963 3350669 140.73 $14,407.88 $14.42
55 46493 3397162 142.68 $14,607.80 $14.62
56 46028 3443190 144.61 $14,805.72 $14.82
57 45568 3488758 146.53 $15,001.66 $15.02
58 45112 3533871 148.42 $15,195.64 $15.21
59 44661 3578532 150.30 $15,387.69 $15.40
60 44215 3622747 152.16 $15,577.81 $15.59
61 43773 3666519 153.99 $15,766.03 $15.78
62 43335 3709854 155.81 $15,952.37 $15.97
63 42901 3752756 157.62 $16,136.85 $16.15
64 42472 3795228 159.40 $16,319.48 $16.34
65 42048 3837276 161.17 $16,500.29 $16.52
66 41627 3878903 162.91 $16,679.28 $16.70
67 41211 3920114 164.64 $16,856.49 $16.87
68 40799 3960913 166.36 $17,031.93 $17.05
69 40391 4001304 168.05 $17,205.61 $17.22
70 39987 4041291 169.73 $17,377.55 $17.39
71 39587 4080878 171.40 $17,547.77 $17.57
72 39191 4120069 173.04 $17,716.30 $17.73
73 38799 4158868 174.67 $17,883.13 $17.90
74 38411 4197280 176.29 $18,048.30 $18.07
75 38027 4235307 177.88 $18,211.82 $18.23
76 37647 4272954 179.46 $18,373.70 $18.39
77 37270 4310224 181.03 $18,533.96 $18.55
78 36898 4347122 182.58 $18,692.62 $18.71
79 36529 4383651 184.11 $18,849.70 $18.87
80 36163 4419814 185.63 $19,005.20 $19.02
81 35802 4455616 187.14 $19,159.15 $19.18
82 35444 4491060 188.62 $19,311.56 $19.33
83 35089 4526149 190.10 $19,462.44 $19.48
84 34739 4560888 191.56 $19,611.82 $19.63
85 34391 4595279 193.00 $19,759.70 $19.78
86 34047 4629326 194.43 $19,906.10 $19.93 )

Ethics 505: Health Care Solution-Koan

For all who would have an impact on treatment, care, practice, regulation, profit, expense, or any other involvement between the ancient and sacred connexion between physician and patient, they too must forswear all else for the primacy of the Hippocratic Oath, "Above all, Do No Harm."

(That includes Insurance companies, HMOs, Hospitals, Hospices, State and Fedral run Health programs... et. al.)

Memo from the Peanut Gallery to President Elect Obama's Economic Team

There are a multitude of complex issues to grapple with which separate and as a whole are unprecedented.

Great minds and scholars have been hard pressed for solid answers amidst the crisis.

So the few relevant words from a man who has barely cobbled a career from giving advice on real estate, mortgages, and finance is probably pretty low on any priority list, let alone item on the agenda.

Yet here in my own fantasy world known as my blog, I first have to point out this item from June 26th, which clearly defines some of the precipitous issues as it relates to market speculation and its forthcoming consequences as warned in other articles.

Next I would like to point out this article/commentary from 2007 which illustrates clearly the point of view of a humble and honest broker well before the Fannie-Freddy debacle.

And as this is my first commentary on economics and policy since the events of September 15th (a day which will live in infamy), please let me first make plain my assessment of the outgoing W administration, and secondarily the up shot of the Republican's as leadership:

1. The Soviet Union was founded upon less of a Nationalization of private wealth than as what has occurred in the "bailout" package.

2. Unlike the Soviets overtaking means for Production, this is similar to the mulligan that Enron took (Bankruptcy protection) after siphoning off billions of dollars from consumers and state purchasers (notably California).

3. If I was to make the argument that the solution(s) posited by the W administration's Paulson to Republican/Conservative people any time in my life starting in 1970 through to the "Bail out package," I would be considered a 'Commie,' 'Pinko,' or at best 'Looney Liberal.' Luckily I dont believe this is the best solution, although a necessary minimum of confidence was restored to the capital markets.

4. Although anti-free marketers are quick to assert this is proof that its a failure of free market concepts, unfortunately its not quite that simple. True free market principles would then suggest that we allow Wall Street to shatter into a million pieces, and allow the Phoenix of the Invisible Hand to rise from those ashes. The risk of Anarchy, Revolution, and War should not be a hinderance to those stoutest in defense of these principlea.

Rather what has happened is that the curtain has been unveiled upon the Wizard of Oz. Or more accurately Wizards: Power Elite; Ultra Rich; Super Rich; and their operatives... and as Gomer Pyle would say, "Sooprize sooprize," the W administration fits neatly into that last category (if not others).



The doctrine known as "free market," and, often as not, ascribed to as "trickle down," has been a fallacy waiting to happen since I took Economics in 1986 from my perspective. The fallacy is that the pitch (or soccer field to define the metaphor more readily) is absolutely not level (a lack of transparency of markets, trades, and companies-- let alone parity amongst status of trading parties), everyone knows this, but the referees (power elite) assure us that indeed the market is trading at a free clip, and they are doing their best to weed out the inept and destructive government (singular as in government is bad) in order to get back to those players to whom that unfair pitch advantage works against.

It is, like many convincing fallacies, a perfect ecosystem of utter nonsense.

What was revealed when the Wizard came out from behind the curtain?

The rules of the road were designed to insulate power elites from those market forces that every small business owner (not suckling directly from the teat of one or more of the power elite) faces yearly, monthly, daily, hourly, and even at a moment by moment level, wherein one bad decision can have the whole house of cards tumble down on them, their employees, and their families.

Perfect capitalism for 96% of the business owners in America, and pure communism for the ~4% that retain ~92% of the wealth and direction of capital.

The main difference here? That fallacy of "perfect" and "free" markets has been unmasked. For me it doenst make me less of a Keynesian or Miltonian (of which I am only some part in either case), rather confirms the sound logic of truth found within the mathematical models.

For all practical reasons, it wasnt the theories that were flawed, rather the implementation of those theories. You dont go golfing with Tiger Woods, and on holes 3, 7, and 12 receive a "0" on your score (an impossibility), then go on to say you bested Tiger Woods at Augusta for the Championship!

For lack of a simpler explanation that is what Corporate America has been doing for decades!

My Miltonian Tax suggestion of reducing tax paperwork to the size of a postcard, is premised on the fact that massive corporations with armies of lawyers can end up getting paid by the government, whereas the business owner will typically pay between 12 and 44% of GROSS EARNINGS in a profitable year to the Government!

LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD, PLEASE!!!

So, what are my suggestions?

A. Simple, Fair, and Flat Tax for individuals, businesses, and everyone and everything in between. I think if you make annually inflation adjusted exemption provisions for the first $22K individually, $38K jointly, $6K per child, and $40K for business plus $6K per employee, then a 13% flat across the board on first moneys and profits tax should suffice to amply maintain the Federal treasury. Double tax only counts in certain specific cases, but honestly the concept of a "double tax" is in itself a product of the Labyrinthine tax laws themselves. Simple, plain, and honest: You earn money, invest it and make more... you are taxed on the money you earn. So called "death" tax is a myth, and any exemption should be put onto a matrix which allows for inflation and number of legatees, but otherwise massive fortunes do need to have the same 13% (a lowering of current complex statues) flat tax after expemptions upon transfer of estate.

B. All regulation needs to be put into Plain English. There needs to be a rule book for all people that everyone who speaks a 7th grade level of English can understand, but moreover, each field of employ and oversight needs a smaller and comprehensive annual rule book for the relevant profession(s). If you are a Stock Broker, for instance, the SEC needs to publish a Plain English Guide to all relevant laws (including definitions of crime and punishment) which is the basis for testing and licensure. How do we expect companies to follow laws their people couldnt understand without a law degree? This will facilitate whistleblowing, self governance, and enforcement. (On that note free markets if given clear straight, and bright lines do have the ability to self govern.)

C. International Harmonization. Its well time to beat our swords into plowshares. NATO can also be an economic body which assists in (a la Bretton-Woods) harmonizing economic functions. Why limit it to NATO? Trade Areas can work, and do work. However, just as we need to (for lack of a better word) admit that NATO is also an economic force, we also need to create Fair Standards in order to proceed honestly with our Trading Partners-- applying that standard basket of goods (environment, civil rights, and labor standards) as a preset disposition for negotiations. If any free trading regions partners can all agree to certain basic workers rights, then there is no price advantage to using slave or child labor in order to queer the productivity quotients and balances. This esoteric set of ideas (which I have simply called Fair Standards) is the nutshell of why we have lost so many jobs over seas-- not just "tax advantages" as certain groups would have you believe.

D. Mortgage Relief. I will be writing a more defined explanation of this soon, but here it is in the nutshell version. There are many of the steps necessary to implement a comprehensive relief in place under the current "bailout" plans passed, but my addition would be EVERYONE NEEDS TO FEEL SOME OF THE PAIN. Borrowers should still be on the hook for the full amount of the mortgage when enjoying payment reduction, Lenders should be on the hook to not get their money back in time, and all the middlemen, servicing agencies, and investors need to accept such bi-lateral intervention (as negotiated in mathematical formulation by the FFT [Fannie-Freddy-Treasury] guidelines and agents) regardless of how much money they stand to lose-- BECAUSE THEY ARE JUST MIDDLEMEN! Investors, sorry, but tough turkeys, you put money on those bets, were told the money was at risk, otherwise the SEC and FBI can arrest the brokers for non-disclosure... that said I think most licensees put investment disclosures on their business cards (a financial industry joke). The Government should tread very lightly in using its power to "renegotiate" existing agreements, and that said it is the Lenders right to refuse a renegotiation and foreclose... otherwise we strip Rule of Law (and contracts).

E. Stimulus. See my article on what we can do with the money we save by ending the War. more... more....

Just my two cents.... you can pay me later.

On the Constitution

This is a complex subject, so I will defer to an excellent piece of new scholarship to set the tone to the latest and greatest technology in understanding the constitution, and how both sides of the "abortion debate," are both technically right, but that whichever view eventually prevails (with full acknowledgment that statutes on the books state a woman has a right to choose) both sides have a right to be heard, as per the 1st Amendment.

"Abortion and Original Meaning

JACK M. BALKIN
Yale University - Law School

Yale Law School, Public Law Working Paper No. 128
Constitutional Commentary, Vol. 24, No. 101, 2007


Abstract:
This article argues that the debate between originalism and living constitutionalism offers a false dichotomy. Many originalists and their critics improperly conflate fidelity to the original meaning of the constitutional text with fidelity to how people living at the time of adoption expected that it would be applied. That is, they confuse original meaning with original expected application.

Constitutional interpretation requires fidelity to the original meaning of the Constitution and to the principles that underlie the text, but not to original expected application. This general approach to constitutional interpretation is the method of text and principle. This approach is faithful to the original meaning of the constitutional text, and to its underlying purposes. It is also consistent with the idea of a basic law that leaves to each generation the task of how to make sense of the Constitution's words and principles in their own time. Although the constitutional text and principles do not change without subsequent amendment, their application and implementation can. That is the best way to understand the interpretive practices characteristic of our constitutional tradition and the work of the many political and social movements that have transformed our understandings of the Constitution's guarantees. It explains, as other versions of originalism cannot, why these transformations are not simply mistakes that we must grudgingly accept out of respect for settled precedent, but are significant achievements of our constitutional tradition.

The article applies this method to the most contentious constitutional issue of our generation - the constitutional right to abortion. It concludes, contrary to conventional wisdom, that the constitutional right to abortion is consistent with the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, and, in particular, its prohibition on class legislation that is embodied in the Equal Protection Clause.

The article criticizes Roe v. Wade's original trimester system, arguing that there are actually two rights to abortion instead of one. Finally, it explains how courts might have better implemented the constitutional guarantee of the two rights to abortion in ways that are more respectful of democratic politics.

[This article will appear in 24 Constitutional Commentary (2007). A response to critics, expanding on the some of the key ideas of the article, appears in Original Meaning and Constitutional Redemption, 24 Constitutional Commentary (2007), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=987060]"

Read the full text and see how he demonstrates how such bastions of the Right, as Scalia, are admitted "faint-hearted originalist," working from a theory that is flawed.

In other words, like all aspects of human society, we believe judges, as humans, must make a full attempt to interpret the constitution yet stay within their part of the balance of powers using the best Technology available to them, in order to ADHERE TO THE PRIME CONCEPTS ENSHRINED IN OUR BUNDLE OF RIGHTS AND THE BALANCES OF POWERS.

For those who would use the Constitution to outlaw Abortion or Homosexuality, we STRONGLY DISAGREE that this is the equation of human liberty set in motion by our founders.

Unfortunately, for those of us who may indeed believe that if it was our own physical womb which was holding a fertilized ovum that we would personally protect and defend that little critter with our life, it is clear that that homunculus doesn't pass the 5th Amendment or other tests of personage enshrined in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, for instance, as Balkin states, "It is hard to see how a fetus could be compelled to testify against anyone, much less against itself."

Scientific reason thus permits us to simultaneously imagine that the fetus may indeed be very valuable to society, the family it will be born into, etc., and yet comprehend why the fetus doesn't have (for instance) Miranda, or any other Rights. It is the mother who would be robbing a bank, be arrested, and required to be Mirandized (another example).

The brilliance of this argument isn't so much that we "love" abortions, in fact we would hope prudence and civil progress would create access to contraception, prevention, and abstinence using a scientific and reasonable basis. Further, that we believe Education (not just sex education, but science, math, sports, etc.) is one of the best contraceptives available.

No, the brilliance of this argument is that all the judges whose words are "final," at least until someone more brilliant, or a situation more enlightening occurs, are only human and thus limited by the technology of the day. That is why our "framers" developed a Constitution which contains an organized intrapreneurial methodology for the social revolts they knew, scientifically, were a regular part of human government.

Could you imagine if all our damn lawyers would focus their energy on constructive progression of the Science of Law, instead of frivolous lawsuits?

We are neither "originalist," nor "constitutionalists," rather we seek reason and wisdom which protects the principals of established constitutional and case law. We believe Congress or the Executive must be restrained from burdening the people and the Judiciary is that protection in the Balance of Powers. We believe in the enshrinement of our bundle of rights, and finally that all these laws and rights must be translated into plain English for common reference and daily use-- otherwise, at the rate we are going, we will end up a nation of lawyers.

Plain English

Okay, so I will now write this in plain English, more or less.

We believe that our government should only write laws in Plain English, or at least translate all laws into plain English.

We believe that in order for laws to be understood by all people there needs to be a reliable point of understanding.

In contract law, there are typically definitions at the start of the contract which identify all important terms. We believe every congress should publish two dictionaries. One would contain the Non-plain English words (such as legal terms, or phrases) defined in plain English. The other would contain all Plain English Words which can be used in writing the laws, and their dictionary definitions.

In Plain English, we choose the more commonly understood word if there are two words for the same meaning. Sometimes, "in law it is important to be specific."

A non plain English way of saying the last sentence would be, for example, "Specificity is relevant to constructing relevant laws." Yet both phrases are almost identical in meaning-- both sentences mean the same thing.

This is not talking down to people, rather it is making simple all points which are part of any citizens duty to obey. Otherwise how does the government expect the majority of people to be law abiding?

Plain English is not a mandate to make "English" the official language. Rather it is only to make it the official rule for writing all laws. Deviation from plain English is on a need only basis, and would then be explained (in the body of the law and) in the Dictionary.

We believe all current law needs to be translated into plain English.

We believe that once this happens, there will be fewer lawsuits, faster justice, better enforcement, and fewer crimes. If we think of Mao's little red book, from China, then we see this concept of a standard set of laws that all people can read, refer to, understand, and even remember can remove a large part of the natural ignorance of the law-- for which "their is no excuse," as the saying goes.

One final note on this subject is that when all laws are put out in plain English, and provided as an open publication on the internet (call it a little red, white and blue book), then certain ridiculous items such as crack possession laws will be also made plain.

Is it common sense to slap the person on the wrist carrying cocaine (the potent source from which crack is derived) while putting in jail the crack user for possession of only a fraction of the same substance?

Ideally with Plain English some common sense will also take hold, but just in case that isn't the case-- for whatever reasons-- we also believe laws should make sense.