Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Primary Elections and Reform Ideas

                                          Mojave County, Arizona, USA

The latest presidential race is unique in the number of 'debates' among the candidates, the power of the press and the growing power of the internet. However, it appears that the respective major parties are still in the predigital age.


The primary process is outdated and in need of overhaul, as are the east coast based party systems. During a recent expose' on the Dylan Ratigan Show about demands made on freshmen legislators to donate to the party on a consistent basis, I came to realize that the legislators should be in Washington D.C. to do their jobs, not fundraise from among the lobbyists present. Perhaps this party money in both parties is too much concentrated in one place, from my perspective out here in Arizona. These financial demands encourage legislators to take the easy way out and take lobby money and perks in return for favorable votes. Party money is then allotted to 'strategic' races across the nation. These 'strategic' races are coveted endorsements that produce cash for the candidate, like an out of state windfall that influences local elections.

Powerful individuals within the parties should not be making donation demands on legislators, nor should legislators be required to spend any time fundraising when on the job. A ban on lobbying and fundraising while in session needs to be instituted. No lobbying and fundraising in Washington D.C. should ultimately be the goal, as the halls of government should be free of special interests at all times.

Lobbyists are a chronic problem. Banning lobbying activities for the duration of the session is necessary to clear the halls and permit honest discourse without lobbyists interpretations and interference. Registered lobbyists should be required to wear badges that states the employer and the name of the individual, in order to remind and inform legislators and the public that these people are not their friends: they are hired to do a job on you for their employers. When a certain high politician talked about not running for another term, she evidently felt beholden to her donors to run again, not her constituents, her donors!

Term limits is another issue. Some long term legislators are unresponsive to their constituents because the lobbyists and donors become more important to their lifestyle. As long as big donated money and expensive media advertising dominates the voters, the politician can be voted in even though the overall voting record may not benefit the constituents, or even the nation. An argument can be made that term limits would enable the 'hired' people to run the government, but I suggest that study sessions on the issues and the legislation be made mandatory for voting members. Just the facts. Legislators need to study and learn about the issues, not spend their time in Washington attending fundraisers put on by vested interests. The national health insurance reform bill was not even read by most of those voting on it. That's ridiculous and decadent.

Money is greasing the system and those with money don't want the system changed. I think the moneyed class should admit that they found ways to control the economic system to their advantage but they also created the tea party and the occupiers and jobless college graduates. Riots and arrests in Oakland. Squatters in D.C. and a much heralded jobless recovery. What next? Financial control of the pundits on TV until the American people have only two candidates, both of which represent the groups gaming the capitalistic system? Business as usual, including the jobless recovery. And let's throw in some austerity in order to pay for the debts the politicians ran up with impunity. Give the schmucks easy credit using tax money so my associates can access the tax money using a property only worth a fraction of the price charged. Is capitalism now to be defined as access to tax money?

It's easy to create a game you can win when you control the players. The only problem is that capitalism is not really a game, but is a survival mechanism for our species created over eons of history. Creating a way to manipulate capitalism for short term gain of money and power is relatively easy compared to the task of maintaining capitalism in the face of declining availability of commodities per person due to the high population growth rates. Looting the system by creating new imaginary 'products' that the peons can't begin to understand, but that money managers are all too quick to invest money in, was hugely successful for a pitiful few gaming the system. With housing values down to a more manageable level, the disparities between existing mortgage values and new mortgages is actually growing, down some 45% here in Tucson, down 1% in 2011. Perhaps the perpetrators of the derivatives and mortgage securities frauds weren't so smart after all. Why did our legislators go for deregulation of the controls put into effect after the fall of 1929 and the Great Depression? Those who are not studious end up stupid and greedy. It's time to clean house, folks.

Back to reform of the primary electoral system. It appears that the nominee is always decided back east with a palliative thrown in by the Midwest. In the early primaries, the candidates don't run in the west or even the Texas powerhouse. According to the pundits, the primary will be decided in Florida and they have the winner all picked out by the polls for us. Voters in Texas, Arizona and California and Oregon have no vote, according to these pundits because all the money required to 'win' will exhaust the poor candidates while allowing the rich to shine. Yuk. I know this was not the intent of our founders. I'm sick of these people telling the viewers how the debates went, who won, what their latest unsubstantiated poll says and discussing ad nauseum the private lives of some of the candidates. The other night I watched a controversial issue discussed by three people, all of whom agreed. That's not journalism, that's manipulation and propaganda. So what are the credentials of the Media Judges? I think some are using the power of the media to influence elections.

True reform needs to happen. I suggest that the Primary begin in New Hampshire, then moves to Nevada, then to Georgia, then to Iowa and so on, representing all areas of the country in the early primaries, instead of all of them concentrated in the Eastern Seaboard. Let's have a Mexican border state represented also. How about a super Tuesday with several states from around the country to start it off? The primary is not fair to the rest of the states and regions.

To continue the meaning of true reform, campaign spending must be linked to the population of the state: no more than X amount per voter can be spent, and make the amount modest. If a business chooses to unilaterally support a candidate in ads, then the business and CEO must be identified in the ad. No more PACS. Limited campaign spending and more concentration on real issues needs to happen.

I liked the 'debates', although some were better than others. The debates that were actually debates, instead of the candidates answering different questions, were more fun but the questions allowed the candidates to express themselves, albeit in a tightly controlled manner. I liked the exposure to public view but saw that the glib candidates had a huge advantage over the others. I'm not sure glibness is the quality we need in a president. Studious intellect is sometimes not so immediately vocal. I think the future campaigns will be even more visual and more data will be available on the internet. Effective political campaigns waged on the internet are low cost and accessible, a level playing field, as it were.

The pundits on TV bother me because they are so sure of themselves and are usually unknown people with questionable credentials to critique the actions of others. Everyone has an opinion, of course, but the ceaseless self assured statements concerning the candidates 'performance' wear thin as they become an obvious attempt to influence public opinion. I really don't care what Miss X thinks of any candidate's 'performance' and I'm tired of this kind of 'reporting' instead of factual news. Miss X's opinion is a waste of my time and is deceptive as to value from the time spend on it. Give me some real information like a voting record analysis, speech clips concerning health care, tax records analysis and other relevant information concerning the candidate. I think it is interesting that the establishment candidates are the favored ones, with the reform candidates receiving bad ratings and reviews by the self appointed experts among most of the media. The media benefits from the campaign spending.

Campaign spending needs to be limited in order to save Democracy. The Internet must not be limited for it is the medium of free speech and will play a crucial role in future elections, giving power to the people to search for facts without a media filter.


Friday, January 13, 2012

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the Tea Party


                                         San Xavier Mission near Tucson Arizona


The Meaning of Civility


Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz expressed the possibility that the Tea Party might be responsible for the lack of civility she perceives. Perhaps the 'incivility' grew out of financial frustration with the massive ripoffs that occurred during the financial crisis. The Tea Party is a symptom of the same problem that created the Occupiers.  The Tea Party is a sympton, not the cause. 


Please, Rep. Schultz, listen that the assailant was a known nut case in town that some perceptive people knew was dangerous. In response to a legal problem, the assailant was said to have received mental health treatment, but I do not know if any follow ups or treatment took place. The assailant has been declared insane.

What is actually uncivil is to convince a buyer they can afford a property, set the debt up in a way that you know they will fail, and to sell the mortgages generated this way to somebody far far away who then resells them as AAA securities to the unwary investor. Who does this leave angry and frustrated?

• All who lost their property through foreclosure

• The investors who bought the securities while their brokers bought insurance on the failure of the same securities, payable to the broker, not the investor.

• Anybody who had money in funds affected by mortgage derivatives

• Any investor who lost money

• Construction workers who lost their jobs

• Laid off workers in construction related industries

• Property owners with upside down mortgages

• Job seekers

• Students with debt and no job prospects

• Voters who oppose bailouts

• Can you think of anybody else?

I define civility in public life as the behavior that is produced from fairness, transparency, honesty and a moral commitment to keep free enterprise going in such a way that perpetuates the system, instead of gaming the system. I define civility as a respect for law intended to keep people safe and perpetuate the system, not wealthy individuals controlling what law is produced and profiting from their control. Face to face civility tends to become less important when your family is evicted and you can't find a job. Face to face civility is comfortable, but should not be a shroud for wrongdoings and a reckless disregard for future consequences beyond immediate profit taking.

Our nation is not a game of chess where the King and his cohorts have all the wealth and the others are dead. Are the honchos really expecting that Americans can all compete among themselves for a portion of the 1% allotted to them through the legal process of public debt, foreclosure and taxes? Sickening terms like 'jobless recovery' float from the mouths of politicians and financiers while they deal in 'jobless securities and insurance', gambling amongst themselves while the 99% become restive and maybe a little uncivil.


Sunday, January 01, 2012

New Year's Resolutions I Wish the Media Would Make


Here it be Resolved:



That editorialists and reporters are identified.


That every time a blooper is shown, they must show one of their own.


That news readers may not slant news or give their opinion.


That the bimboid look on the part of newscasters be entirely voluntary.


That the candidates be given equal time.


That the pollsters must post their own accuracy stats when quoted.


That the duty of the media is to inform the public of facts.


That it is not the duty of the press to influence elections.


That the media can assist with the problem solving needed today.


That the media can produce more mini documentaries based on facts related to problems.



This is not a negative critique of the media. I appreciate all the money and time spent producing programming to inform and entertain and attract the audience. I spend time watching news shows and I learn and observe more every day. It is a wonderful opportunity for everyone.

However, a few canyons are created in credibility by some practices on the part of media. I get tired of the barracuda partisanship of some editorialists who act like what they emphasize is hard news. Financial problems loom and a possible global economic reorganization could be in progress. Disparate elements of the political system need to work together to solve problems. Ridicule of a political figure who could become important is short sighted and demeaning to our political system.

The question of the status of women arises when the bimboid look appears to be a requirement on some news shows. I'd like to see the males showing as much skin as the females, all in the name of equality. Would the male's credibility be strained by their attire if they showed that much skin? The spectacle of a woman in a skin tight, thigh high dress sitting with her legs tightly crossed, attempting to report news defies common sense. How can you be taken seriously when your buttocks are visible?

The political candidates are a whole another story. I get tired of endless emotional analysis of the candidates. Analysis should be limited to actual data like voting record and other verifiable information. I feel sorry for some of the candidates who were subjected to yellow journalism rather than rational analysis. Endless reruns of bloopers and salacious news is not only boring but wastes valuable time that could be spent on important stories. It takes tremendous courage to run for office. The candidates deserve respect.

Lastly, lest we be blown to smithereens, let's talk about the specter of nuclear war. It appears that some in the media are warmongering and talking about WMD again. I think it is time to face the reality that everybody is going to eventually have a nuclear capacity. What if a nation thought not to have a nuclear weapon did in fact have one and when attacked, might use it? Nobody knows everything about everything and to warmonger is irresponsible. At least produce a pro and con debate instead of the one sided pro war stance. The consequences of more war for this nation are bankruptcy and insolvency and debt slavery.

Anyway, thanks to the media for all that they do. I'm just glad we have the internet as an alternative source of information.




                                                     Happy New Year!







Saturday, December 24, 2011

Fannie and Freddie Scam

Fannie and Freddie were formed to assist in home ownership for citizens. Their mission was to increase homeownership through responsible lending. Note that I said responsible lending.


Since this mission was subverted, the mission of Fannie and Freddie became to create as many mortgage securities as possible and resell them rapidly. The mission of increasing homeownership became the excuse for the behavior that led to the subprime mortgage and bogus mortgage securities scheme.

It's like they said one thing to get approval, but the real motivation was different. Responsible homeownership includes making a payment if one exists. Getting people in homes for a few months or years and then foreclosure and then reselling the appreciated homes was the scheme, while the mortgage derivatives were worth more than the actual worth of the houses they were based on. Foreclosures only became a problem when houses stopped appreciating because the loan money dried up, because the problem with worthless mortgage derivatives had become apparent. It was quick money for a few, however.

It's interesting that anybody who did a short sale cannot get a loan for years, but the house they purchased after an appraisal was not worth what they paid, not then and not now. It was not like you could choose; all prices were sky high and if you wanted or needed to buy a house, you had to pay. The punishment of misled homebuyers is quite a phenomenon.

I would like to see a list of names and positions of those who originated the mortgage derivatives schemes and who are perpetuating them. Mr. Geithner, Mr. Paulson, Mr. Bernanke, and private sector people will probably be on the list. Is Federal Reserve money being used to purchase mortgage derivatives?

Since executives at Fannie and Freddie are rewarded with bonuses if they obtained a larger market share, that is apparently why the chief executives received some $12 million in bonuses, even though they are demanding billions in tax money to fund their deficit spending. I think Fannie and Freddie have 78% of the market share in housing loans now, which is a significant increase. What is wrong with this picture? This is deliberate direct competition with the private market in origination of more mortgage securities, which is the apparent prime goal of Fannie and Freddie. The people these government organizations are supposed to serve are forgotten or used as pawns in order to create more mortgage derivatives.

Obtaining a bigger market share? That was not the mission. Why are chief executives being rewarded for capturing a larger market share? How about paying the executives to do their job and no bonuses? Bonuses are being used by somebody making policy to direct the course of events, which has proven to be a bankrupt way to manage home loans. We need a comprehensive policy statement in Fannie and Freddie that states loans to institutions can be made if they loan it out to deserving homebuyers and that the mortgages originating from those loans will be serviced by those originating those loans. Responsible lending would immediately result, but of course the profits are modest.

I think mortgage derivatives should be relegated to casino bets and the institutions Fannie and Freddie and all their contacts should be disbanded. If a new government institution is created to 'help' homebuyers, no derivatives should be allowed.

It looks like foreclosures are up and I do appreciate the efforts of the law to recoup losses by forcing buybacks of delinquent mortgages packaged as wonderful investments by crooked rating agencies. The inflation in home prices was encouraged because the number of loans increased due to the dropping of lending standards. "If you could fog a mirror, you could get a mortgage", I was told. If they had stopped the scam with those who actually qualified for a mortgage, the foreclosures would have been within norms, but they had to have more mortgages to fuel their scam, so they just handed them out like popcorn to pigeons. Anything to keep the number of mortgages up so more mortgage derivatives could be sold. I knew people who would buy several houses at once and flip them 2-3 months later for tens of thousands more than they paid.

This inflation hit the consumer hard but the immediate effects were softened by various mortgage schemes that focused on the immediate payment the buyer would pay, rather than devious adjustable rate mortgages, interest only for a few years and other schemes designed to keep the payment low for a while, then escalating the payment to a level the buyer could not afford. Since by then there were no homes for sale the buyer could actually afford, these schemes became attractive since the buyers were assured their homes would continue to rise in value. Of course, that trajectory was unsustainable but what did the average schmo know?

It's amazing to me that the federal government is operating an agency that has as policy capturing a larger market share from the private enterprise market. The executives are awarded bonuses on the basis of market share statistics, rather than success in the mission to provide housing opportunities for the responsible buyer.

I suggest a review of the policies surrounding these 'bonuses', who wrote them and why and the consequences of encouraging particular courses of action without heed to future consequences.

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Football Cult

This football scandal tops them all. Graphic details zoom around the world and it looks like the pagan worshipers of a sport have ignored feet of clay on their idol while the gold they worshipped filled their eager hands. The Golden Calf rules over the pagans who put more belief in their obsession than in moral certitude.


What disturbs about this scenario is the dubious value to the countless children who have been indoctrinated to believe that success at football is equitable with your value in the world. See a vision of a child's future that is defined by a sport that requires large size to succeed at the moneymaking trough narrows the field in that child's mind. What has happened to our moral fabric when a moneymaking game takes precedence over the students and the populace? They kept their insular trip going as long as they could.

The public schools and sports should be separated. Let the municipalities handle competitive sports while the schools teach academics and health for life. Profits from the competitive sports would help fund the schools and the municipalities. The competitive sports programs should be open to all on 8-12 grade level, with subsidized bus passes to the programs. Grade performance guidelines would apply to eligibility. Tutoring would be offered on site.

We are told that our local university funds other sports programs from football and basketball proceeds, yet contributions to the academic program lean towards getting instructors fired for giving bad grades to players or having special classes for the players, instead of them becoming a part of the university community and attending normal class. Our local athletic director has stated he will raise the graduation rate of the players, which has been abysmal under the recently retired long time coach. The hangers-on who suck a living out of the sports programs using the university name don't even bother to bolster up academics. It's all about money first and sports second .

Look at the Fiesta Bowl scandal. Free trips for state legislators, free tickets and free hotel rooms and meals, all to obtain influence and cooperation on key legislation that benefits their scheme. So the head of the Fiesta Bowl has access to all this money, which he spends on trips and freebies for himself, when the educational institutions represented get little cut out of all this lucrative action. I'm talking academics here: all that strange stuff like mathematics and the sciences and liberal arts, and the like. Most of that profit should be diverted into funding academics instead of puffing up the pay of the dealmakers and giving freebies to lawmakers .

The moral failure of the 'football leadership' did not live up to the hype fed children through the public schools and universities. Pressure applied by how many people resulted in a cover up that damages the students and the standing of the institution? Who participated in the cover-up? Who should go to jail for putting selfish interests ahead of right and wrong? Who would be better off today if they had stood fast and reported the truth until somebody actually heard it?

Tuesday, November 08, 2011

Debt as Tyranny


                                               The High-born Ladye



Debt as Tyranny


Thinking on the national debt and the local city debt is enough to create insomnia. City debt is more familiar to me and with that is a bit of contempt for the decision-making that mired the city in debt and more debt continues to be an attraction even though insolvency looms as borrowing has been the budget crutch in the city for the past few years. Why is borrowed money considered income in the accounting? Borrowed money is not income to be lumped in the general fund and spent on whatever. Borrowing money is a focused enterprise, hopefully with increased income or better conditions as a result of the cost of borrowing money. Around here, the real cost of borrowing money ranges about 30-50% of the principal, which is usurious but seems so desirable to the politicians who are courted by the lenders to borrow.

Politicians who borrow against revenue streams are indebting those streams for years after their term of office is over. They are often long gone and the taxpayers are still paying on those debts, ill conceived or not. The power these politicians have over our lives and environment is now reaching into the future lives of our descendents, as the politicians' insatiable urges to control cash seems to be more important than planning for the future.

Apparently in Greece, the deal seems to be that the Greeks are expected to borrow money at 85% interest and if the latest bailout plan works, the holders of the risky Greek debt will rake in the principal plus 85% interest, all paid for by whomever is paying for the bailout. Since our President did not agree to pay this bailout, then the taxpayers are off the hook to pay that usury and allow those investors to collect big. Nobody should pay that money. A cyberspace rumor is floating around that a banker is going to take over the reins of government in Greece. If the spring drifts north all bets are off so the foolishness of creating a climate perfect for new species will result in unwarranted competition, in ecological terms. Doesn't anybody remember the plight of the Germans after WWI when they were forced to pay war reparations to the point they had nothing left? That political economic mistake led to WWII.

I think the moneylenders need to take a haircut and either go broke or get on with it. They deserve that for all the easy credit they offered on all levels, without checking to determine if any of the borrowers could pay it back. Liberal tax codes allowed for massive tax deductions on defaults. Tax deductions for these losses should not be allowed, since the evidence shows a lack of responsibility on the part of the lender in vetting potential borrowers. So incompetence in the workplace is compensated for by the government in the form of tax breaks? Just think of all the money paid in commissions to lenders who set up these deals. "Fund managers" who invested pension funds and other critical money should be liable for these reckless losses and 'bailouts' should be aimed at the pension funds, not the clown who handled the crappy investments.

Back to the politicians who recklessly borrow and spend, whatever happened to bond elections, where voters had to give permission for borrowing? Around here, the euphemism for borrowing is 'certificate of participation', which bring in millions in debt. The RTA is issuing bonds after receiving .5 cent sales tax to do a job. The borrowing adds more than 30% to the cost, but was it in the voter proposal as an expense? So we were told that it was always understood there would be borrowing. They're wasting over a third of the money they get on debt, but they get to dole out the millions. Refinancing existing debt by rolling over the old debt and starting over with the principal after fees are paid and a few bucks doled out keeps the taxpayers in hock for a longer time, but what the hell, let's spend that cash now and leave nothing but a hole in the ground for posterity. Your kids can pay for it too; it's worth it to somebody. Let's have some legislation that calls a debt a debt and demands voter approval for incurrence.

Debt is tyranny. A forced payment brought on by government borrowing. The spending of tax money on moneylenders is outrageous and should not be allowed above a certain point. It is called the debt limit, which is now an object of ridicule. How about establishing a realistic debt limit and limits on what borrowed money can be spent on? Prosecute officials who spend borrowed money on anything else or who build up costoverruns resulting in partial completion. Somebody has to take responsibility.

Fannie and Freddie, the Fed lending houses that eagerly buy mortgage securities, are a losing proposition, where mismanagement has resulted in a request for billions more tax money subsidy every year, owes the taxpayers $141billion and is now paying top executives $12million in bonuses this year. Who else gets a reward for running a heavy deficit when the Federal government is running a deficit and making it all worse by billions? Close them down. We don't need any more mortgage securities or derivatives and who likes them is totally irrelevant to what needs to be done. Make the lenders responsible for what they lend locally. The power of the mortgage brokers needs to be broken. Real estate prices might fall, which would identify more potential buyers.

One way to avoid more public debt, particularly that foisted off on the voters without permitting a vote, is to adjust the size of the contracts to be awarded. Smaller contracts would favor local workers, while the huge contractors want huge lump sums borrowed and given to them on a large scale. These smaller contracts would be contingent upon receipt of the tax support, which would have some consistency. Smaller, shorter term contracts based on actual revenue would favor local, small contractors. The money paid them would stay in town circulating instead of flying out of state or even out of the country. It is time to set up the local bidding process in such a way as to favor local small contractors who employ local workers without forced union representation. This is a right to work state. Costs need to be lowered on all fronts, which would create more jobs. Smaller contracts contingent on revenue would avoid debt and would allow for incremental building of projects using all of the assigned money with none going to the moneylenders.

Another problem is the 'underwater mortgage' problem. Remember the last real estate boom, the Subprime Boom? During the boom in Vegas, houses were actually selling for more than the asking price, the bidding was so fierce. Inflated housing prices were the norm. If you could fog a mirror, you could get credit. If you wanted to buy a home, you had to pay, like $275,000+ for a cheap 1200 sq. ft. cookie cutter. Around here that overbuilt item is selling for around $40-50,000 and falling. How far can the prices drop? Maybe until the average Joe can actually afford the loan payment.

The debt pervasiveness also keeps rents jacked up so the principal and interest on the debt can be paid, with a profit for the leinholder after that. Renters are expected to pay the subprime boom mortgage price for the lienholder plus more for maintenance costs and profit. The stagnation of the real estate and rental market is due to a heavy debt load that absorbs cash and does not produce jobs. Debt jacks up the price of everything.

The tyranny of debt has brought economic exploitation and now protesters to the streets. We need legislation to prevent politicians from borrowing anything over a reasonable debt limit and any borrowing has to have the consent of the voters. The voters need control because the voters pay for it. It's easy to blow money when somebody else pays for it. No more Certificates of Participation or any other disguised borrowing. The Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) is claiming power to indebt based on the 1/2 cent sales tax they command and I question their legal right to indebt this fund without a vote of the people.

Our legislators can help the voters get control of public indebtedness and the time to act is nigh. No more moneylenders in the temple of government.



Monday, October 31, 2011

The Legacy of 2012

The Legacy of 2012

The Mayan Calendar ends with the winter solstice of 2012, heralding a new calendar cycle and a new era in world history. The new beginning is not defined in the prophesy but can be likened to the invention of domestic corn and this latest migration to the Americas, which produced the world in which we now live.

Monumental change will be the result of choices made today. The issue of what choices to make is the most important of the day.

Possible choices divide into three categories: Inevitable and Preventable and Attainable

PREVENTABLE

o Nuclear War

o Biological War

o Huge Income Disparities

o Population Growth

o Deforestation

o Pollution

o Growing Poverty

o Economic Collapse



INEVITABLE

 Petroleum Depletion

 Mineral hoarding as supplies decrease

 Higher prices for nonrenewable resources

 Climate change

 Competition for resources



ATTAINABLE

 Curbs on population growth

 Due to finite nature of Earth's mineral resources, extraterrestrial resources must be exploited.

 Research into energy sources and energy savings, due to ongoing petroleum depletion

 Protection and regeneration of fisheries

 Development of new agricultural products

 Plan for global climate change to prevent catastrophic food production losses**

 Localize food production as much as possible

If population growth not curbed: constraints will appear in freedom, food, water, living space, recreational space, wealth, and goods. Those kinds of social conditions will result in higher prices, war and depopulation. In the animal world, overpopulation results in a die-off of that population back to a sustainable level. One would hope that civilized minds could avoid such an outcome in the new era.

Social engineering as an action plan might take a back seat to survival economics in a new era. The various social structures found around the world hark back to pure environmental survival, like what did help us survive was perpetuated like immunity in the DNA. The modern world is changing so fast, this kind of adaptability must be supercharged as compared to the past.

Consider myself: Born mid twentieth century, as a child, I have known people who lived in Civil War times long before the telegraph and the automobile. I did not live in those times, but I heard stories of how it was and what you had to do to survive out there on your own in the wild world or in the world of man. I heard it! And just me can remember before TV and when a typewriter was a prized possession. TV came into Tucson around 1950. Ray Bradbury and A.E. Van Vogt were my ticket off the planet. And now just look at us with computers and space stations and wireless and cell phones! As a teacher, I rode the wave of change so I could teach the students the newest and latest in technology. I am so thankful for that opportunity.

What could a new era bring, considering the changes in the last hundred years? Could anyone have imagined satellites and cell phones in 1900? Jules Verne and H.G. Wells were sensations.

What could we invent?

 A mining network including moon, asteroids and Mars.

 Payload delivery from Earth orbit to the surface

 Solar smelting in a vacuum

 Solar Sail technology

 Nuclear energy research

 Wireless research

 New uses for light

 Genetics research

 Magnetics research

 Endless possibilities..

 *Increased lifespan

*Medical research has led to an increased lifespan, which in a sustainable world would result in a slowdown of replacement population. Longer lifespan = lower birthrate. Medical ethics and the prolongment of life are all issues here but cannot be ignored. I think requiring the lawyers and medics to bankrupt the families must be curbed. Balancing the birthrate with the deathrate leading the way is the only way to morally approach the problem. Discouraging excessive population production should be part of public policy and expressed in the tax code.

Worldwide, the problem of immigration caused by overpopulation in Mexico and the availability of jobs in the USA was mimicked in Europe, where Africans immigrate to where the food supplies are, in biological terms. Population stability needs to be achieved without mass migrations. In plain language, most of Mexico has a religion that discourages birth control, so the excess population migrates north to fill up spaces in the USA. Is this fair or responsible? For the political boundaries to mean anything, this problem must be addressed by the Mexican government and their religious leaders. The USA is not a population outlet for nations with high reproductive rates.

The national jurisdictions should be required to publish a research report on population dynamics and an action plan to achieve population sustainability to the United Nations. A recognition of the connection between population densities and wars must be made and the subsequent importance of population growth cannot be underestimated. High unemployment leads to civil unrest.

Capitalism as an economic success is dependent on renewable resources, discovery of new resources and the opening of new markets. The growth mantra has been uttered so often nobody thinks of the philosophy of an ever expanding population within a finite space. Since new resources are now few and far between, any growth must be at the expense of other economic interests. This kind of cutthroat competition and subsequent monopoly causes unemployment. We are now a nation of buyers of goods, rather than a primary producer of goods. The relentless erosion of regional self-sufficiency leaves too many at the mercy of importation of necessities and also leaves many unemployed. Unfair trade policies are not capitalism, but are rather exploitation. The USA has been exploited and now is broke and unemployed and in debt. Foreign interests now exploit our mineral resources while politicians assist and applaud.

Job creation should have a goal of perpetuating the system as well as employment of workers. Makework projects without a clear economic objective are too expensive for the economy to support, so job creation should occur in sustainable occupations like greenhouses, health care, energy production, research and development, where something of value is created ongoing. For example, instead of wasting money on a solar company proposing to use old technology to compete with the Chinese using their subsidized industry, why not consider a solar company that uses solar catchment units that have easily removable elements that can be retrofitted as the industry R&D continues? An adaptive solar unit! Or instead of building huge culverts where it rarely rains, build solar electricity producing units and export electricity, an ongoing profit making enterprise or provision of plenty electricity for that locale.

One example that comes to mind is the federal subsidy of the installation of a streetcar line made under the stimulus program that will leave the city of Tucson in deeper debt, has devastated the water company with borrowing, and has actually created very few temporary jobs in Tucson, but did export jobs to Oregon where seven streetcars are to be built with borrowed money, which raises the costs by at least one third. After the streetcar line is in operation, the maintenance costs will be paid by the city and are estimated to cost several million a year, all out of the general fund. The city of Tucson has borrowed money the last few years in order to avoid cutting programs and this streetcar will only add to the deficit, since no attempt will be made to make it into a paying operation. Thus, the stimulus just caused more debt, a few temporary jobs, and a lasting maintenance charge to add to the city deficit. Proponents of the scheme say that sales tax revenues along the route will be a money maker and more housing will be built, all this in an economy with a huge surplus of housing.

There are skeptics concerning the stimulus spending, long term debt obligations and the effect on jobs. More debt service = less money in circulation. How stimulated is Tucson right now? The streetcar operation and maintenance requires jobs, but these jobs must be subsidized by the city in a deficit situation. In tight economic times, this means cuts elsewhere in order to keep the streetcar running and the unions are demanding top money and benefits. Should the politicians borrow money to meet the added deficit? Already, the 'modern' streetcar has destroyed the efforts of a private outfit running an old streetcar here in town. So much for the stimulus, which also paid for 'Fast and Furious'.

Proposed spending for job creation must be analyzed carefully. Suppose a foreign mining company says they are creating jobs in Arizona by using local workers to extract copper using local water. This slurry will then be shipped overseas for refining and of course they will possess the metals, which raise in value every year. There's a big rush on this so they can quick get their hands on the new monetary standard, the metals. Why not build a state of the art smelter that can do slurry and recycle? There is plenty of room over in Mojave County along the railroad line: it is time for a smelter. Then the state metal resources will be exploited by local workers, the supply stays within the USA and more jobs are created here. And the huge wealth of the metals will remain here.

The old mining law dating from the nineteenth century must be revised. Perhaps the Feds should spend some time considering the critical long term resources of this country, get legislation passed that protects our national interest and revise that antiquated mining law. Jobs based on finite resources will be gone while somebody else makes off with the loot and leaves a big hole and poisonous waste in the groundwater. Being in a hurry to get jobs might hurt the economy in the long run, like selling Manhattan Island for a handful of bright beads didn't help the Indians long term. Selling all you have of valuables without economic replacement is not a way to get ahead.

The issue of excessive regulation must be addressed. The smallholders are tied up by local zoning laws that prohibit home based businesses, which is a violation of land rights. It appears that zoning laws have required someone to live in one place and have a business in another, which benefits those owning 'commercial' property. This expense defines what businesses can exist and the commercial land holders will charge as much as they can possibly get for any use of their properties, because of the liberal tax code that allows for heavy tax deductions for empty units, thus driving up the rents. Nobody cares if businesses cannot exist because of the high rents and the impossibility of using your own property to have a business, anything from a law office, hair salon, candy shop and so on. Of course, not allowing businesses in homes causes one to have to drive or ride the bus somewhere else to shop for everything every time. Excessive regulation and fees and licenses and super dooper inspections of larger businesses discourage investment, when the governments cuts itself in off the top even before any profits are made. Health and safety inspections are one thing that came out of excesses of the sweatshop age, but harassment and favoritism by petty local officials is expensive and nonproductive.

So the legacy of 2012 will be a new direction, either the choice of more and better technology and an outreach to the stars, or face the problems of population sustainability on Earth, with no more population outlets but death and takeover of resources. War and competition must give way to stability and regional sustainability.

Define sustainable regions, producer regions, needy regions.

Sustainable: self producing in energy, food and water @ 33.3% each for initial rating, then refine to exporters of energy, food, water and then consumers of energy, food, water.

For example, a predictable outcome would be heavily urbanized areas require energy and food to be brought in but are sometimes self-sufficient in water, depending on where they are located. Another predictable outcome would be that some cities in the southwest USA are self sufficient in nothing, due to the population buildup after World War II. Recent Central Arizona Project public policy changes undermine agriculture while increasing water allotments for more housing developments, which shows the foolishness of policymakers, who choose a quick buck over long term local benefit. Five days worth of food in the stores is not much of a cushion against a domestic emergency. Mexico is within these spheres of influence because of important food imports.

The old time methods of population control include mass executions, rolling heads down pyramid stairs, gas chambers and other cruelties all aimed at seizure of the properties, ethnic warfare and other extermination campaigns. The world cannot continue these methods in order to cope with overcrowding. In the absence of a migratory population outlet, populations within existing political or religious or ethnic jurisdictions must stabilize without encroaching. World population stability is a job to do and of course there are those who would try to obtain or maintain supremacy, but the vision of supremacy changes with time.




**http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2011/10/24/independent-study-confirms-that-global-warming-exists/