Imploring the Wealthy to Share, Or Spend

SEVERAL NEW STATISTICAL revelations about the overall economy should be sufficient to raise our collective eyebrow. There's been a lot of discussion about the federal minimum wage lately, and studies are now showing that if it were raised from the current seven twenty five to ten an hour, as many as five million Americans would be lifted out of poverty. Amazing what a little thirty percent increase in income can do. Those opposed to this argue that it would reduce the number of jobs. Maybe. Or maybe it would reduce profit margin, or the salaries of executives, or dividends for share holders. But it would definitely help the minimum wage workers. Another recent study is a bit mysterious, but still illuminating. Roughly one out of five children in America has regular episodes of unfed hunger, amazingly, in a nation so wealthy. Worldwide, millions of children go hungry, many starve. Calculations indicate, and this is all abstract math, that a rather small part of the profits of the super wealthy, the upper one percent, would be enough to feed all these hungry children. Incredible, if you think about it. The world's hungry greatly outnumber the world's ultra wealthy. Nonetheless, they'll need help convincing the world to redesign its economic system to let the trickle down begin. Also among the super rich, the savings rate has increased drastically, to about thirty seven per cent, which is incredibly high. The average American savings rate, including all the poor people and everybody else, is about, what, one percent, or negative one percent? It used to be negative, I recall. So, the rich people are hoarding their money, sitting on huge unused piles of cash. Must be a lingering fear from the recession, or something. The corporations are doing the same thing. In a healthy economy, the poor save their money, and the wealthy spend and invest theirs. The next time the Occupy Wall Street movement emerges, maybe it should have as its message " if you won't share it, will you at least use it?"

High Times In Colorado

THE FIRST DAY OF MARIJUANA sales in Colorado was a rip roaring, smashing success, with millions of dollars of pot being sold to thousands of happy high flying customers. Nobody died, nobody got arrested, nobody got hooked on harder durgs, society didn't fall apart. All this good news, even though the price of marijuana in these new stores is about twice as high as it should be, twice as high as it is on the illegal "black" market, in most parts of the country. Obviously, there isn't enough competition, there aren't enough marijuana stores. The market demands more, so, for some fortunate future entrepeneurs, the opportunity is there. The legal price of pot should decline to less than the pre legalization price, and it undoubtedly will, over time. Incredibly, money made in marijuana sales is not accepted at banks chartered by the federal government, which is most banks. This will have to be changed. Far off Washington has its laws; the good people of Colorado just don't care. A classic expression of American freedom, freedom from the federal government. When tne tax revenue from pot sales starts rolling in, and Colorado starts having budget surpluses, the other states will finally get the idea, and legalize marijuana. Or maybe half the states will legalize pot, the other half won't, and we'll have another huge civil war. Or not. In fact, nationally legal marijuana could provide a great source of revenue for the government, and reduce the unemployment rate, and stimulate the economy. But the corporations would have a hard time controlling the industry, since pot can be grown in anybody's house. America's corporate community will continue to vigorously oppose marijuana legalization, because it would be beyond their control. The marijuana stores, in most cases, will be small single owner business, rather then corporate entities. We hope that the employees are being paid fifteen an hour, at least. Marijuana advocates tend to be liberal lefties, and lefty liberals believe in sharing the wealth.

Protecting the Wealthy, Avoiding Democracy

MY FATHER, A WORLD WAR TWO veteran, lawyer, and patriotic American, once said that, if you think about it,the best form of government is a benevolent dictatorship. Key word "benevolent". The problem with democracy, is that the poor people always greatly outnumber the wealthy, and if you have a political system in which everybody has equal power, then the poor will gang up on the wealthy, and since they outnumber them, will take their wealth away from them. People in general think this would be unfair, understandably. In other words, in any country with a big gap between the rich and the poor, like the United States, democracy is impossible. There are two possible solutions to this. One is to reduce or eliminate economic inequality. Aristotle thought this was the best idea. The other solution is to avoid having a democracy, and instead have a republic of the wealthy, and this was the solution James Madison, and the founders of the United States, chose. The American system was designed to give everyone as much freedom as possible, and to protect the property of the property owners, by keeping real political power away from the poor teeming masses. Madison called it "mob rule", meaning, poor people ganging up on the wealthy, like himself. So, the poor in America are "represented" by the wealthy, if "represented" is what you want to call it. It could also, in past times, and in our modern times, be called "ignored". The Senate was designed to be the domain of the wealthy powerful, and so it remains to this day. The less powerful House of Reps was designed to be closer to the people, but less powerful. In the beginning, America's wealthy powerful were land owning, educated men, and they are the ones who worte the rules. Today the American wealthy powerful are the corporations, and they are the ones who pay for the politicians, who write the rules, which, unsurprisingly, favor their corporate patrons.

America, Suing Obama

OK, SO NOW SENATOR Rand Paul is going to file a class action lawsuit agaisnt President Barack Hussein Obama. The complaint will be that the President has presided over a massive and illegal surveillance operation which has penetrated the privacy of essentially every American. Accordig to Paul, or his spokespeople, potential parties to the lawsuit include every American who has a cell phone. Sounds pretty exciting, eh? I personally would consider being a party to the filing on two conditions: one, that the decision to participate be mine, not someone elses, and, two: that I don't have to testify in open court. I would consider doing a deposition, but I really don't feel like traveling, or dressing properly for court. Now I'm confused about who can sue whom. I always thought "the king can do no wrong", and that the President of the United States is immune from prosecution. Shows how much I know... Rand Paul certainly wouldn't file a lawsuit illegally against our Presidednt, would he? Well...if The People vs the President results in a verdict for we the people, what will the compensatory phase consist of? Its a civil suit, right? In that case, we would all be entitled to reasonable compensation, a monetary settlement for damages. What, a few thousand bucks per person, times three hundred million? (only infants fail to have cell phones in AMerica, and they never have long to wait). Another question: didn't all this government surveillance stuff all start long before Obama was president, or even born? He inherited all this, right? Well, maybe that's not allowed as an extenuating circumstance.

Getting Excited About Life, Elsewhere

THE NEWS JUST KEEPS GETTING better and better, astronomically. The search for intellignet life. More than ever, we are absolutely convinced that the galaxy is full of life, and intelligent life, like us. The discovery of new planets is like an avalanche now, as our equipment and methods become better and better, finding thousands of planets, and soon, tens of thousands. Its time to get excited. What'll eventually happen is that we the human race will make better and better telescopes, and eventually be able to look right down on top of planets all over the galaxy, and observe the life on them. That's probably what's happening to us right now; we're probably being observed, from a distance. The aliens can probably see through your bathroom walls. Be careful how long you stay naked, if you don't wanna be observed by aliens. We tend to think that aliens will come to this planet, and show themselves to us. But what may happen is that we end up being the ones who reach out to them, and make contact. The latest discovery is that many of these alien planets we have recently discovered have clouds, skies filled with clouds. That's incredibly exciting. Atmospheres, on earth sized earh like planets. How long can it be before we are looking through our telescopes, and through the clouds of other planets, and watching intelligent life function, in all its glory, just like they're doing to us now? (you just know we're being watched). Discovering clouds on planets orbiting other stars is the first step in observing life, intelligent life, elsewhere in the galaxy. And, perhaps, interacting with it, communicating with it. Its time to get excited.

Acceding to Ghosts

WHEN I HEARD THAT THE SCHOOL WHERE all those kids and adults were murdered a little over a year ago was being torn down, I immediately understood why, and anyone would. And let's all agree that it has much more to do with human primal fear and irrational superstition than pragmatic common sense. And that's not a put down of us, its simply the truth. On a purely pragmatic level, there was/is no reason whatever to tear down a perfectly good school building. Heaven knows its expensive enough to build a new even when its really needed. Its not like we can afford to tear down buildings every time something really bad happens inside them. If ghoests of the murdered are going to linger, is ther less chance that they will linger in a replacement bilding than the original? somehow must know the answer to that, but I don't. Obviously, we as a people believe in ghosts enough to tear down a perfectly good building, and spend millions of dollars replacing it. O(ld bildings are haunted at a high rate, but the one in which the shootings took place wasn't very old. The ghosts of children come forth often; they did not know they were gong to die, and are confused, and upset, so the theory goes. when the new schooo bilding inNewtown gets up and running, I hope they have some sort of monument to the victims, like a wall with names, or something. NOt just to appease ghosts or honor the fallen, but as a reminded that we must all strive ceaselessly to sliminate cush violence from our world.

Creating Joy, Under All Conditions

EVERYBODY WHO LIKES CLASSICAL MUSIC has a favorite Beethoven symphony. As he wrote them, they tended to become longer, and, most people believe, better, culminating with the magnificent ninth symphony, his final and perhaps greatest achievement. When I listen to the ninth, I turn up the fourth movement loud, real loud, after the fashion of a teenager from 1973, big engine growling, windows rolled down, Deep Purple blaring out the window on eight track, and down the street. Give it a try sometime. (Beethoven's ninth, not Deep Purple) Its a magnificent experience, one you'll never forget. Particularly the voices in the latter part of the movement. Particularly the female voices. Like goddesses, serenading us from heaven. Incredibly, Beethoven, who took about four years to write the ninth, the "Ode to Joy" symphony, was almost totally deaf during its composition. He never heard it, except in his imagination. But he put every note in place, perfectly. There is a lesson for all of us in Beethoven. First, be careful what you wish for. Beethoven's Third symphony, the "Eroica", or "Hero" symphony, was Beethoven's tribute to Napoleon Bonaparte, the new liberator of Europe. About a decade later, after a decade of Napoleon, Beethoven wrote the ninth, the "Ode to Joy', because of ths great joy he, and millions of other Europenas felt, at the defeat and departure of the Emporer Napoleon. During Beethoven's time, European culture was full of great music, but questionable political processes, let us say. The greatest lesson from Beethoven, however, is: follow your passion, and conquer that mountain, even if you never get to completely experience the joy of it yourself.

America, Accepting Gay Marriage, Finally

I CUT OFF CALBE TWO YEARS AGO, with no regrets, but I almost wish I had seen the Tournament of Roses parade, from Pasadena, CA, yesterday, on TV. Two gay dudes got married, front and center, right? They were part of the parade, true? (see how culturally illiterate I am) Evidently it was quite the event, but one wonders what the repurcussions will be. Will the Christian community refuse to have anything to do with the Tournament of Roses Parade and Rose Bowl football game henceforth? One must marvel, if nothing else, at the changes our society is undergoing. Thirty years ago an aspiring Ph.D candidate proposed writing his dissertation on the subject of gay marriage, and was turned down, by several professors at several universities, for various reasons. One group thought it was perverted, and another department thought it was utterly irrelevant, since it would never happen in real life. Within a few years every state in the United Stes, except perhaps Oklahoma, Texas, and a few ultra conservative western states, will've legalized gay marriage, thank goodness. Now maybe we can begin to get that issue out of the way, and work on others, such as, um, saving the planet! All religions and all chosen forms of marriage are acceptable, and we are free to ignore, as individuals, any we don't happen to like. Nobody is forcing anybody else to like gay marriage, only to allow it, as a civic institution, since straight marriage is a civic institution, and in America we believe that government should not discrimminate. In America, we believe in fair play, and fair rules, for all. Right?

Correcting Our Work

MY NINTH GRADE SCIENCE TEACHER held up a small paperback book, and read from the back cover: "during the time it takes you to read these words, four people will die of hunger." Some smart ass kid in the back shouted out "then stop reading those words!" We laughed, but I knew the teacher wouldn't like it, and he didn't. The book was "The Population Bomb" by Paul Ehrlich, published in about 1968, a best seller. Ehrlich predicted that by the nineteen nineties there would be starvation all over the world, because the population was growing so fast, and the increase in food supplies would never be able to keep up. And it is a very persuasive book. Even today, when we know how wrong the book was, it is persuasive. You almost feel as if it still could happen, just not as soon as Ehrlich predicted. The population bomb is still ticking, unless I'm mistaken. Yeah, the birth rate is down, and all that, but...still, the world's population continues to go up, fast, and is closing on seven and a half billion now. Soon it will be eight billion. Then what? How far will it go? How far CAN it go? What Paul Ehrlich didn't take into account was the enormous increase in agricultural production during the past forty years, due mainly to science and technology. And we can continue to increase the food supply, to a point. In Ehrlich's time we didn't know about global warming, which is now, obviously, our biggest problem. So mass hunger might not be our downfall after all. Ehrlich is still a professor at Berkely, and well respected. It is no sin to be wrong in science; the only sin is in not admitting it, and correcting your work. Ehrlich has done this. Now we humans need to do it, collectively, and immediately.

Predicting Future, Checking Results

ISAAC ASIMOV WROTE ALMOST FIVE HUNDRED books, maybe more than anybody in history. Definitely, Asimov wrote more intelligent books than anyone else. He was a certified genius. He hated travel, and in fact hated leaving his New York apartment. He spent all day, every day, writing. Whatever works. His 1964 essay, which appeared in the New York Times, is drawing interest now, because Asimov made predictions about what the world would be like in the year 2014, fifty years in his future. At about the same time, I was a child, and spent much of my own time reading science fiction, dreaming about the distant future. Asimov and I made the same mistake: we both thought that by 2014 a bunch of people would be living on the moon, and we both thought that by now everybody would be driving a flying car. Back then, everybody thought that. But Asimov did predict flat screen wall TVs and video cell phones. Asimov himself didn't much like being out in nature, didn't like getting out much, and this biased his predictions. He predicted that by the year 2014 we would, for the most part, be living apart from nature, in sealed off, underground communities, with our high tech lifestyle. Well, here we are, in the year 2014, and we seem to be more in love with nature than ever, more determined to embrace it, experience it, preserve it. In 1964, people didn't have any idea about global warming or the threat of environmental catatastrophe, and Asimov said nothing about that. He was worried about atomic bombs. So were we all. In 1964, fifty years ago, I often hid beneath my desk at school, with everyone else, practicing hiding from an atom bomb. It worked like a charm.

Having Fun In Colorado

WHY WOULDN'T SOMEBODY move to Colorado, or visit Colorado? Why wouldn't everybody? Someone asked that question on the internet, and it is a good one. Oh, what a party it could be, all seven billion of us, lined up patiently down the streets and around the corners of the various newly opened marijuana stores in Colorado! The one negative report I heard is that as the day (yesterday, Jan, 1) went along, the price of pot steadily, greatly increased. Is this true? Well, if so, welcome to the world of free enterprise capitalism. What can I say. A real bummer for those in the back of the line. Yes, recreational and/or self medicating drugs should be allowed to float on the free and open market, no? If the marijuana stores in Colorado aren't careful, people'll go home and grow their own. Likely as not that'll happen anyway, and the prices, in the free market, will saty low. Marijuana is probably the perfect commodity upon which to observe and marvel at the natural beauty of capitalism. Always in high demand, always plenty of supply, with no hope for monopolization, non essential commodity. Marijuana, dear reader, is far, far less harmful than alcohol or tobacco, and really, all things considered, we do pretty well with legalized alcohol and tobacco, compared to any alternative, and we probably should and will keep them legal, and heavily taxed. All true consrvatives want legalized marijuana. William F. Buckley did. How about you, Rush Limbaugh? The liberals want government regulation and taxation of pot. We the American people can raise a boatload of money for our national treasury from marijuana taxes. Enough to pay for Obamacare, and a lot of other things. Just look at 'em go in Colorado! Massive economic activity on the first day of pot, happy people, no problems, and it'll only get better. Many many Americans love marijuana. And freedom.

An American Four Party System

YOU CAN COUNT ON ONE THING IN 2014: it'll be a lot like 2013; nothing will get done. Nothing will get done to deal with any of America's main issues: what to do with twelve million illegal residents, what do do about the seventeen trillion dollar national debt, what to do with Obamacare to make it work, things like that, things that need to get done, but won't. The liberal democrats and the conservative republicans will cancel eath other out, as usual, in gridlock. We seem to have forgotton how to compromise in America. A culture of stubborn arrogant leaders who think in terms of winning and losing, not in terms of problem solving. Maybe what America needs is more political parites. The two that we have don't seem to be adequate. Its already happening on the republican side, with the emergence of the tea party. Two kinds of republicans: conservatives, and ultra conservatives. The left wing of the democratic party, such as it is, might be better off to do the same thing on the left. To separate, like the tea party has done on the right. A socialist labor party, like every other western country has, would meet the needs of the American electorate; a four party system. Then, at long last, the working class would have real political participation, which it has never really had before in American history. A poor people's political party, to at least somewhat counter balance the three wealthy people's parties: republican, democrat, and tea. Issue by issue, in a four party system, temporary coalitions would form and reform, as each issue has its own solution. In most cases, the socialist labor party would probably get left out, until such time as it ever grew large enough to win elections. Otherwise, workers would be left out, as usual.

The Pope's Speech

EACH YEAR THE POPE give a speech to tens of thousands of people on New Years. It would be quite an adventure to be there, but how would you hear it, if you weren't right up front? Does he speak into an enormous speaker system? The Pope did two things that are vital, and admirable: he told the truth about the state of the world, without trying to make it sound better or worse than it is, and, he expressed hope for the future. Without hope for the future, there is no reason for the present. Pope Francis is obviously extermely frustrated and angry about the high level of violence in the world, like most of us are. Anger and frustration are two sources of violence. It was almost as if he was saying "good grief, people, Can't we all just get along"? Amen. Another overwhelming impression that its tempting to come away with is that the Pope is an extremely good person, down deep, where it matters. And that, of course, seems logical. Every pope in my lifetime, starting with John 23 and Paul 6, and on to Francis, has seems like such a person; caring, compassionate. there is a bittersweet memory of the gentle Pope John Paul 1, who never really had a chance to work his goodness upon us. You suspect heaven is where we'll see him again. The pope believes that folks should pretty much have the freedom to do with their money as they please, but also that there should not be two economic classes, rich, poor, wolves, sheep. With good role models like Pope Franics and Jesus, we should be able to do the one, and to avoid the other.

Governing the Self, in America

TODAY IS A GREAT DAY for America, because its the beginning of a new year, which is bound to be better than the old year, and because its the first day of Obamacare, and legal marijuana sales in Colorado. Here's why those two events are so great. At some point, one way or another, the human race is going to have to cooperate, going to have to work together, for our survival, and for the far more ambitious goal of happiness, health, and prosperity for all. Obamacare, if nothing else, is a step in that direction. You prefer free enterprise capitalistic health care? That's dead, or didn't you know? Even the two dollar stores, side by side in my tiny American town don't compete. They don't have to. The competition between Wal Mart and Target is about as competitive as it gets in America these days, business-wise, and that seems pretty tame. Either we the people the government will handle health care, or the corporations will handle it. And the corporations won't be competing against each other, they will be working in happy harmony, just like the pharmaceutical corporations do now, as well as the oil corporations, and the health care insurance providers, to name but a few. Either way, we the people are screwed. (just kidding) As for legalized marijuana, starting in Colorado today, the marijuana stores will be doing a booming business, and people can walk in and buy pot with which to get stoned, not to fight cancer. And that's a good thing. Let's let all the self medicators, and the recreatinal drug dealers out of prison, and regulate their industry, deriving the public revenue therefrom. We're going to have government in our lives, one way or another. Let us make it self government.

Contemplating the Remote Future

HOW DELIGHTFUL, to awaken on New Year's Day, alive. Its as if you've been put in a time machine, and shunted into the future. I was a "patrol boy" in sixth grade, 1966-67. Got to wear an orange belt over the shoulder around the waist, and direct fellow children across the street on their way to and from school. It was a great honor to be a patrol boy. All the boys in the class got to do it, from time to time, and when it was your turn, you went for it. You got to serve as a patrol boy for one week. We even wore badges. Every boy got to be captain of the squad, for one glorious week. My turn came way at the end of the school year, in May, but I got to be captain for a month, not a week. Long story. (everyone else had already had the job) No girls allowed. I have no idea whether there are still "patrol boys" anywhere in the U.S. A. and its elementary schools, but if there are, I can guarantee you that girls are now inclluded. Back in the day, I didn't think a thing about it. No girls allowd was just the way it was, no questions. One day, on patril, I was standing there, daydreaming. Must've been slow traffic. I started thinking about the future, and the far off year, 1968. It seemed to me that the year 1968 would never ever arrive, so remote was it to even contemplate. Boy, was I ever wrong. In 1966, I was interested in science, and science fiction. The year 2014 sounded like a voyage into the far distant future, and indeed it was. It seemed like that yesterdy. And today, on New Year's Day, I'll be damned it if still doesn't seem that way.