A topnotch site

Rigged Electoral College

New Court Decision Imperative

Just as a recent court decision has decided reapportionment in 2011 in Wisconsin was discriminatory against Democratic voters, the Electoral College ought to be ruled unconstitutional.  The Electoral College violates the One Person One Vote doctrine because swing state voters have vastly more power than non-swing state voters do.  The Electoral College also violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, not treating all voters equally.  Nations around the world have adopted many parts of the US constitution, but no one has ever adopted anything like the Electoral College.  What we call the “popular vote”, is “the vote” in other countries.  Supreme Court Justice Kennedy looks like a possible swing vote in favor of ending gerrymandering as we know it, and may well vote to abolish the slave era Electoral College as un-constitution according to the amendments passed after the Civil War.  A case in favor of the popular vote winner and against the Electoral College could emerge from the DC appellate court where snubbed Supreme Court Justice Nominee Merrick Garland presides.  However, a 4-4 Supreme Court tie would then let the Appellate Court decision stand.  Then Hillary Clinton would be the presidential winner.  Her 3% margin of victory is much greater than the 1960, 1968, 1976 and 2000 margins.

Past Rigged Elections

In 1876, Democratic President Tilden won the popular vote by about 3% and then cheated out of office in favor of Republican Rutherford B. Hayes by the Electoral College.  Rachel Maddow gave an account of the affair on her show this week.  Rachel pointed out that three states offered competing slates for the Electoral College vote, Louisiana, Florida, and South Carolina.  Hayes made a deal to pull federal troops out of the South and abandon all the Southern black elected officials and governors to the tender mercies of the KKK.  Reconstruction was over, and the path to Jim Crow was wide open.  Also on MSNBC Monday night, it was stated that Podesta was told the vote in Michigan was shown to match the exit polls in paper ballot optical scanner areas, but was 7% in favor of Trump in electronic voting machine areas.  This is similar to the 6% shift in the 2004 election where swing states dominated by electronic voting without a paper ballot audit trail showed a shift from the 3% Kerry national win in exit polls to the 3% Bush win.  Numerous voter suppression and counting discrepancies county by county were documented in a 62 page report by Congressman John Conyers on the Ohio 2004 vote.  Conyers, a black progressive from Detroit, was the only elected official ever endorsed by Martin Luther King, jr.  Nearly all the swing states in 2004 were going to Kerry in the exit polls, but went to Bush in the reported vote.  The one swing state with a paper ballot trail and optical scanner counting machines, Wisconsin, went to Kerry by the exact same margin in both exit polls and reported vote of 0.4%.  Similar stories of October surprises and/or rigged elections pertain to the elections of 1960, 1968, 1980, 2000, 2004, and 2016.  Electronic voting analysts have stated that the Obama victories were understated, but the margins were too big to make a difference in the outcome.

Electoral College Designed to Benefit Slave States

Three-Fifths Compromise (from Wiki)

“The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise reached between delegates from southern states and those from northern states during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention. The debate was over whether, and if so, how, slaves would be counted when determining a state’s total population for legislative representation and taxing purposes. The issue was important, as this population number would then be used to determine the number of seats that the state would have in the United States House of Representatives for the next ten years. The effect was to give the southern states a third more seats in Congress and a third more electoral votes than if slaves had been ignored, but fewer than if slaves and free persons had been counted equally, allowing the slaveholder interests to largely dominate the government of the United States until 1861.[1] The compromise was proposed by delegates James Wilson and Roger Sherman.”

Justice Becomes New Law

One Man One Vote (from Wiki)

“The phrase was used in this form in an important legal ruling in the United States related to voting rights; applying the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution, the Supreme Court majority opinion in Reynolds v. Sims (1964) ruled that state legislatures needed to redistrict in order to have congressional districts with roughly equal represented populations. In addition, the court ruled that both houses of state legislatures needed to have representation based on districts containing roughly equal populations, with redistricting as needed after censuses.[1]

Equal Protection Clause (from Wiki)

“The Equal Protection Clause is part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause, which took effect in 1868, provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction “the equal protection of the laws”.

“A primary motivation for this clause was to validate the equality provisions contained in the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which guaranteed that all people would have rights equal to those of all citizens. As a whole, the Fourteenth Amendment marked a large shift in American constitutionalism, by applying substantially more constitutional restrictions against the states than had applied before the Civil War.

“The meaning of the Equal Protection Clause has been the subject of much debate, and inspired the well-known phrase “Equal Justice Under Law“. This clause was the basis for Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the Supreme Court decision that helped to dismantle racial segregation, and the basis for many other decisions rejecting discrimination against people belonging to various groups.

“The Equal Protection Clause itself applies only to state and local governments. However, the Supreme Court held in Bolling v. Sharpe (1954) that equal protection requirements apply to the federal government through the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.”

Electoral College is ‘vestige’ of slavery, say some Constitutional scholars

By Kamela Kelkar  PBS Newshour  November 6, 2016

“The ability of states to make voting more difficult is directly tied to the legacy of slavery,”  Juan Perea, a law Professor of Loyola University Chicago said.  “And that ability to make voting more difficult is usually used to disenfranchise people of color.”

“It’s embarrassing,” said Paul Finkelman, visiting law professor at University of Saskatchewan in Canada. “I think if most Americans knew what the origins of the Electoral College are, they would be disgusted.”

Rigging the Election

When Trump started repeatedly saying the Election was Rigged, the rigging by forces who wanted him to be elected president was already well underway.  Hillary had been demonized and compared to Satan since 1992, and Bill’s referring to the concept of a co-presidency alarmed many on the right who expected her to bake cookies instead.  Putting her in charge of health care exposed her to constant vilification on the right.  After serving as Secretary of State under Obama, her approval rating soared to 68% and the right knew they had to bring that down.  Benghazi hearings, eight of them, were started as Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy admitted on camera, in order to pull her ratings down.  Her eleven-hour testimony in the final set of hearings lead to the committee chairman conceding they had found nothing on her.  However, the fishing expedition did lead to discovery of the private email account she used for unclassified discussion, as recommended to her by Colin Powell, who had done the same.  Nevertheless, she used a private server in her home.  When all this was discovered, she knew the right wing would use anything to vilify her.  She knew from long experience about the vast right wing conspiracy to destroy her politically.  Therefore, she released the work emails and desperately tried to keep the personal emails confidential, expecting they would be unfairly used against her by her opponents.  She expected violations of her constitutional rights not unlike the Russian hackers who hacked campaign emails in an operation reminiscent of the Watergate situation that brought down the Nixon presidency in the seventies.  This time we still do not know how much Trump operatives Richard Stone and Steve Bannon were working with the Russians.  Putin was overjoyed when he heard Trump had won.  We do know Rudy Giuliani was boasting something was coming up just before Richard Comey threw the election to Trump by unethically bringing up unfounded charges against Clinton eleven days before the election.  Richard Comey, FBI Director, violated the Hatch Act according to Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid.  He knew better than to bring up unfounded charges sixty days before an election, so he clearly intentionally sabotaged the Clinton campaign.  The evidence for this is the college-educated women Republicans in places like the Philadelphia suburbs suddenly switched back to Trump when they were going to vote for Hillary after the “Access Hollywood” tape was released.  Trump went from 81% support among Republicans to 86% support among Republicans before and after the Comey political assassination.  Hillary, the most honest Senator Senator Tom Harkin had ever served with, had been smeared by the vast right wing conspiracy into the more dishonest candidate.  Politifact, which judges campaign statements on their honesty, rated Trump 72% dishonest, the all time record worst for any presidential campaign, and Hillary was rated 27% dishonest and Sanders was rated 28% dishonest, the most honest in 2016 compared to all the Republicans and Trump.  In the rural areas of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, Trump outperformed Romney by about 12%.  Whether that can be explained or that is an indication of vote rigging had yet to be decided.  The recount may not be enough to prove the case one way or another when there is no audit trail on electronic voting machines, but will help focus attention on major discrepancies between the presidential results and other races down ballot and other ways of discovering cheating. Three other important ways Republican legislatures, governors, and courts have stacked the deck against Democrats are 1) suppression of the vote.  Suppression includes closing voting dates and locations, requiring voter IDs that blocked hundreds of thousands of older and younger voters from voting in each of five key swing states, and allocating more voting machines in white districts compared to black districts by a factor of two to one or worse. 2) Destroying public unions and creating “right to work for less” states leading to lesser Democratic get out the vote efforts. 3) Allowing unlimited private funds thanks to the Supreme Court decision in “Citizens United” to advertise in elections and ballooning those employed in the ground operation from 680 under Romney to the 3000 claimed by Reince Priebus and the Republican National Committee.  These all contributed greatly to Trump and the Senate.  In all 34 states voting for the US Senate, the presidential and Senate races went to the same party.

Recent 22 page history of 2004 documents, a situation much like the 2016 election:

Dr. Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Nominated and vetted for the Nobel Peace Prize 2016,

Real Economy Institute,



High Interest Releases

Certain older press releases from my first year in this three-year series were growing outside of my knowledge of the 50 most current press releases.  Some of the older 90 attracted much more interest than others did, in this hidden after market. Here are ten of those oldies but goodies that attracted much more interest after the initial modest exposure.  I start with a surprise big hit this year on my account: “10 Scientific Revolution Facts” suddenly took on new interest after my Nobel Peace Prize nomination in January 2016, outpacing all others by a factor of five this year.

10 Scientific Revolution Facts, 12-21-14

This book review of Thomas Kuhn’s famous book highlights the key points I’ve personally found to be true in my work.  There are few paradigms in social science research and acceptance comes slowly and with much difficulty.  The world views of social scientists and engineers are very different.  When an engineer comes into the field with a revolutionary new perspective, that is empirically precise, it is hard to accept that work as cornerstone work it truly is.

SF Earthquake Predicted, 8-26-14

The Richter 7.0 earthquake in the San Francisco area  8-24-14 came a perfect cycle 108 years after the devastating 1906 earthquake, but fortunately much weaker.  Other predictions are also cited.

Politician in Eugene Oregon, 5-14-14

I had many successes in party politics in the eighties, building a strong reputation in Eugene and the state of Oregon.  My Madison Wisconsin experience since 1993 has been a disappointment compared to that situation.  With the Doctorate in 2009 and the Nobel Peace Prize nomination in 2016 my reputation worldwide is growing stronger as some peer reviewed work is slowly being added to my extensive portfolio of 140 press releases.

Peace Econ: How I Did It, 6-21-14

The miracle of Peace Economics, this is the story of how it all happened thirty years ago, back in the eighties.  Luck is when preparation meets opportunity.

Ukraine, Crimea, History, Context, 3-4-14

This paper challenges the mainstream wisdom in the United States about what is going on in Ukraine and why.  NATO encroachment against Russia in violation of 1991 agreements is the under-reported story.  Similar to the manifest destiny encroachment against Native Americans in America’s formative years.  This is why some of us have problems with the American Exceptionalism doctrine including the role as world policeman. The CIA and blowback better explain many events.

10 Ways Heat Affects People, 9-8-14

This is a pithy version of the Climate Economics paper two papers after this one.

Why Were Murder and Crime Cut in Half in the Nineties? , 12-5-13

The findings I reported in Strength Through Peace in 1989 show that military spending levels clearly define murder and crime levels internationally.  They also show up in regional comparisons of the 28 Northern States compared to 22 Southern States of the United States of America.  Criminologists are at a loss to explain the drop in crime in the nineties, but my work clearly shows that to be related to the reduction in military spending after the Cold War ended.

Climate Economics:  Much More than Costs & Disasters, 12-3-13

Temperature has a direct effect on the productivity of humans.  This is proven three ways, from industrial engineering studies, to the prosperity of the temperate zone countries compared to the tropical countries, to the ups and downs of one five year period to the next in a 95 study of American history.  Cooling is prosperous, heating diminishes prosperity, common to all three cases.

Egypt-Britain Climate Change, 1-24-14

This builds on the timeline and temperatures cited in Australian social journalist James Burke’s Maryland PBS two hour global warming documentary.  I’ve added my own “color commentary” of the rise and fall of civilizations in the last 3000 years.  It is apparent that the great civilization events in Europe are strongly driven by the ups and downs of climate change over the centuries, from Egypt to Rome to the Middle Ages, Vikings, Spanish and Portuguese explorations, and finally the Industrial Revolution in Britain.  As the ideal temperature zone moves North or South, the corresponding civilizations emerge or decline through time.

Peace Economics or Peace Studies? , 1-9-14

This posting lead to great interest among the academics of the Peace and Justice Studies Association.  The eight categories I chose to define my work in my dissertation are each compared to traditionally peace studies approaches, and a chart is the last page of the twelve page paper.  I believe the precision of my science creates a basic backdrop to understanding the times we live in.  Empire, empirically defined by the level of military spending, shapes sociology and history, politics and economics.

Here are all ten releases in a twelve page pdf:

Dr. Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Nominated and vetted for the Nobel Peace Prize 2016,

Real Economy Institute,



Thirty Year Class Warfare

Who knew when they voted for Ronald Reagan that they would be voting for thirty years of class warfare?  Ronald Reagan’s budget director David Stockman wrote a tell all book explaining that the three year fazed in tax cut was a “Trojan Horse” for bringing the top tax rate on the rich down from 70% to 28%.  That tripled the national debt from just fewer than one trillion dollars to three trillion dollars when Reagan left office and four trillion dollars when his successor George Bush Sr. left office. That left a 25% gap in the budget from which we have never recovered.  Clinton balanced the budget, then George Bush Jr. followed the same Reagan formula of military increases, massive tax cuts, and wildly out of balance budgets.  Trump promises more of the same, even after we now know the top 1% have quadrupled their income and flat-lined the middle class.  Reagan repealed the equal time provision on radio and television news in 1987 and right wingers were suddenly free to lie until they were blue in the face on the air, creating the current extreme division in politics with no respect for the other side.  That’s not quite the Roman “bread and circuses” formula but the circus part is there in the form of today’s news information entertainment shows, as corporations gutted the budgets of media news departments forcing reporters to drop investigations and be stenographers to power instead.  Then the Supreme Court turned so far right that moderate Republican appointees became liberals and hard right appointees gave corporations and the rich the right to spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns.  Now the right wing Senate refuses to hold hearings on Supreme Court appointees unless we go even further on this thirty year class warfare on the middle class.  Trump does not offer change, only regression and more of this discredited trickle down theory.

How We Got Here

Hedrick Smith, in his 2012 book Who Stole the American Dream?, blames it all on the Louis Powell 1971 memo to right wingers that we have to stop losing to the left by bolstering corporations and the rich. About this same time, Leo Strauss became a popular philosopher on the right with his teachings that we need just one religion for the society, Christianity, in spite of his own Jewishness.  Leo Straus also preached that elites must decide what is best for the people and then tell lies to get the people to follow their policies. The Powell approach began with seventies right wing institutes being set up along these lines such as the libertarian CATO institute and the conservative Heritage foundation and the Koch brothers American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).  In 1976, George Bush Sr. was CIA director and ordered the CIA to estimate Soviet Military Spending two ways.  The traditional A team way was an honest assessment, the new B team way would price Soviet tanks planes missiles and ships at the cost of those same items produced in America.  This wildly exaggerated Soviet military spending while not accounting for the huge gap in quality of weaponry between the two nations, where the Soviets were typically eight years behind.  All this was a reaction to the Civil Rights and Vietnam War opposition movements.  It complemented Nixon’s Southern Strategy where the Lincoln party of Civil Rights changed into the party of segregation and the New Jim Crow (2010), Michelle Alexander’s book of the same name.  Nixon’s War on Drugs was the prime vehicle to mass incarceration of black men.  Jimmy Carter has said there are six times as many black men imprisoned today as there were when he was president 1977-1981.  He has also said we no longer live in a democracy, we are living under an oligarchy of the rich, and he is empirically supported by the new Princeton study of how the top 10% get what they want out of congress while the middle class majority at the 50th percentile is ignored.

Empire, the Real Underlying Cause

Seventy years of empire since World War II is the real problem.  With the largest share of military spending in the economy of any Western or NATO nation over that whole period of time, diversion of research and capital out of the manufacturing sector into the military sector has given manufacturing a half life of thirty years, 40% in 1950, 20% in 1980, and 10% in 2010.  Because we do not understand well even today that the Smoot Hawley tariff law of June 1930 was the real cause of the Great Depression.  The economy was just fine until June 1930, the stock market crash of October 28, 1929 was a reaction to the special session of congress reporting the bill out of committee four days before, the Thursday before the Monday crash.  The agricultural trade war that ensued with Europe left the main agricultural power of Europe, France, especially weak and vulnerable for the 1940 defeat.  For a generation after the war America was fine except for the gradual erosion of share of the world economy.  Incomes doubled across the board, high low and middle incomes prospered proportionally until the seventies oil crisis.  Funding for monetarism under Nixon turned economists away from the Keynesian theory of government spending stimulating the economy, and the new right wing think tanks formed after Vietnam propelled Reagan into office in 1980 with a new surge of the Cold War.  Reagan helped things along with his anti-union policies as mergers and acquisitions pushed the stock market up 1981-1984.  However, Reagan stalled the 2% growth of 1981 with the biggest peacetime increase in military spending ever in 1982, causing the 10.8% unemployment recession before the full phasing in of the three-year tax cuts lead to 6.4% economic growth in the 1984 re-election year.  People voted with their feet to join the military economy of the Eastern Seaboard and California at the expense of the manufacturing heartland of the Great Lakes region.  Nevertheless, Reagan had to increase the deficit twice as much (3.0% GDP) compared to the military spending increase (1.5% GDP) to lift the economy up with classic Keynesian stimulus.  Reagan would never give Keynes the credit, however.  Productivity increased just as much after Reagan as before, but now the newly empowered and under-taxed rich refused to share the wealth with the 99%.  Yes, it is the 99% because in the 1979-2007 congressional study, if you take out the top 1% from the top 5%, there is minimal change over the thirty years for the next 4%, so the rich did not share the wealth with even their top managers just outside the top 1%.  Greed was good according to Ayn Rand and the movie “Wall Street.”

SAGE Military Keynesianism

This article starts with a discussion of classical Keynesian theory about military spending.  The theory treats military spending like all other government spending, treating it as putting money into the economy.  The big difference with military spending is that it overpays and gets the best and brightest scientists and engineers and then does not give a product back into the economic mainstream.  Military resources deplete investment capital reducing the economic growth rate.  Military resources sit idle in peacetime and destroy things in wartime; they do not create goods to distribute around the rest of the economy like manufacturing does.  The military is dependent on politicians instead of the free market place.  Military engineers make things expensive and more complex; market place engineers make things efficient and low cost.  Most defense contractors are forced to specialize in the military because one-third higher paid military engineers cannot function well in the civilian economy and would have to take a pay cut.  I think of the military sector as socialism for the upper middle class.

This links to one of two 2000 word peer reviewed listings coming out in the SAGE Encyclopedia of War in October 12, 2016, one on “Political Economy of War” and this on “Military Keynesianism”


Dr. Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Nominated and vetted for the Nobel Peace Prize 2016,

To be announced October 7, in Oslo Norway.

Real Economy Institute,



Letter to Nobel Committee

I am writing this letter two days before the final Nobel Peace Prize decision on October 7, 2016.

The Robert Reuschlein peer reviewed entry called “Political Economy of War” comes out this month in the SAGE Encyclopedia of War. This letter draws extensively from that 2383 word entry and the complete writing is now on my website with a link at the bottom of this open letter.  This is the latest attempt to bring thirty years of work, 24 years before my doctorate, increasing up to peer review standards.  My regional economic work runs throughout the entry with the basic stagnant economy point that military spending displaces manufacturing, regionally, state by state, and nationally.  Thus, one part of a country will benefit at the expense of another part of the country.  In addition, the country as a whole will lose output and growth.  Moreover, over the long run high military societies will fall behind low military societies, making the high military societies weak and the low military societies strong.  These findings are at the heart of my other more precision work as an engineer and accountant in 1986 before becoming an academic in 2009.  The precision findings that demand a “reduction of armies” for national survival are these two:


Election Implications

Politicians in general do not understand the trade issues.  American politicians in particular do not understand how some European countries can keep factories from moving overseas by controlling the capital flows.  Ignorance about military spending’s role in the economy is equally simplistic and fails to understand that military spending reduces a nation’s capital supply, the major cause of reducing manufacturing. Talk of an information economy detracts from the vital role manufacturing plays in successful economies.  The rise of the service sector is a hallmark of a declining empire as manufacturing disappears.  Trump’s approach to trade is a lot like that of Herbert Hoover.  So independent economists estimate a lose of 3.5 million jobs with Trump, and largely because of Clinton’s infrastructure and green jobs program independent economists predict her plan will net 10 million jobs.  Since mainstream economists do not understand the impact of military spending, they will have not included the military buildup loss of jobs under either Trump or Clinton.  That will be worse under Trump’s large increase than Clinton’s moderate increase, but both are set on increases, which will hurt.  Mainstream monetarist economists also may underestimate the tax increases or decreases each is asking for.  Hillary’s tax on the rich may hurt the economy, while Trump’s tax decrease may help the economy.  However, as of two weeks ago, Trump dropped the middle class tax cut in his plan, while Hillary does have a middle class tax cut.  Sales are more important to business than capital, so I give a slight edge to the Clinton approach.  However, the nine-year cycle may strike next year giving us a cyclic recession regardless of whom we elect.  2008-9 plus nine years is 2017-18, so look out for the Juglar cycle. Talk is of an investment bubble.  The possibility of a one-term presidency exists.

Benefits of Awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Robert Reuschlein

The million-dollar prize and publicity would make it possible to introduce the world to a new way of thinking about military spending, the economy, and global warming.  With the staff to research new stock market strategies and national strategies to finally, force politicians to recognize the huge drawbacks to keeping military spending excessively high for long periods, especially in peacetime but also in wartime.  There is no safe level of military spending, like radiation, the lower the dose the better.  Haven’t we learned from the Balkans, Syria, and the implosion of the Soviet Union?  My 140 press releases the last three years show a vast need for further research forever changing the way we look at our world.  Let the paradigm shifts begin.

SAGE Political Economy of War

This article starts with a discussion of the military industrial complex.  The second section shows how the founding figures of America feared a standing army.  Then the discussion explains what happened to America after the Second World War.  The third section goes into various impacts of military buildups worldwide over the last seventy years. The fourth section goes over the total military spending of the world and the several categories of military impacts in the United States total that are left out of the narrowly defined Defense Budget. The fifth section describes where the major military plants are located and how all elected Cold War presidents of the United States came from high military states.  How the system operates is also in this section.  The sixth section explains what happens regionally in a military buildup or builddown in America. The seventh section goes over the Obama drone war, the Bush Iraq War, and the Reagan Cold War buildups.  The last section is about summary conclusions followed by a bibliography.

This links to one of two 2000 word peer reviewed listings coming out in the SAGE Encyclopedia of War in October 2016, one on “Military Keynesianism” and this one on “Political Economy of War”.

Dr. Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Nominated and vetted for the Nobel Peace Prize 2016,

To be announced October 7, in Oslo Norway.

Real Economy Institute,



How Many Are Going Wrong

What is holding back the widespread acceptance of my basic Peace Economics theories is that other people cling to notions in their respective fields that are just plain inadequate or wrong.  This is where winning the Nobel Peace Prize could make a scientific revolution difference, with a million dollars to help get the word out.  So this paper is devoted to some of the long list of groups or occupations that are handicapped by inadequate understandings held by their narrow fields of expertise.  My work started with economics but it rapidly grew into much broader interdisciplinary understandings because military spending and empire are at the heart of so many other issues.  What makes it possible for me to do this work is that I have a deep understanding of many important fields, nine listed on my resume, and that keeps me from getting stuck in the limitations of any one field.  I have politics for breadth, and engineering for depth, both words and numbers.  Then there is business and accounting for different ways of looking at the economy.  My war-gaming background helps me understand history and war.  Sports, religion, and art are not in my list of nine specialties, but I have extensive experience in each area and have woven those three into my work as well.  Forecasting expertise is another specialty strength not explicitly emphasized on my resume.


While economists work with numbers and charts, just as I do, they are very good only with microeconomics, business economics, supply and demand, not very good at macroeconomics as many will readily admit.  Forecasting is clearly a weakness.  The adherence to one of three schools, Monetarists, Keynesians, and Marxists (sorry Vienna I put you in the first group) resembles that of religion more than that of science.  Each school seeks to outmaneuver the others to support their particular belief system, using numbers, charts, and argument.  They are social scientists working in the area of partial truths rather than verities, so argument is left to resolve the ambiguities.  Peace Economics found some bedrock truths to build a model on and that model had solid accuracy because it was carefully built up (see 28 steps) on solid findings.  Peace Economics rises above the soft social science world of the other three economic theories into the hard physics accurate world of the Newtonian physics that dominates most of the engineering fields.


Politicians are by nature generalists and word people, seldom any good at numbers like I am.  They are usually among the 90% of the population who are number-phobic.  They are fond of the phrase, “lies, darn lies, and statistics” because they are so used to abusing statistics to make an argument.  Political scientists are interested in getting votes and who gets the most votes, so they often live in a world of emotion rather than hard realities.  They live by the word and die by the word, numbers just confuse people they think.  They see the military spending going into prosperous communities but fail to see the reverse effect to productive industries, especially manufacturing, during those same military buildup years.  They see the power attached to military spending but fail to see the enormous toll of crime and corruption that goes with that same power in those same communities.


The biggest fallacy in the world of history is that history is biography.  Many college students get a history degree because there is no math requirement, hence many historians are number-phobic.  One local radio show historian showed his bigotry against numbers and me by calling me a numerologist.  This same person incorrectly cited Boeing stock going up after 9-11 when in fact it went down.  That’s because he didn’t know 80% of Boeing’s business was commercial aircraft, and unlike most other major defense contractors, like Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, Boeing was not almost solely dependent on military spending.  Arnold Toynbee got it right that high military spending is a big factor in the demise of most all empires, but he and Paul Kennedy are the rare exceptions from the biography is destiny majority of historians.  Most historians tend to overlook or underplay the military spending role in the economy.  Many even think military spending leads to economic prosperity, while in reality military spending is taking resources from those that can’t stop military encroachment.  Perhaps they ignore the development economic literature that resource based economies seldom prosper in the long run.  Militarism can sometimes prosper in the short run, but backfires in the long run.  Science, imagination, and goods production are the real enduring sources of prosperity.


The religious believe that world peace can be attained one person at a time.  They believe we can change hearts and all will be well.  They fail to see that the military industrial complex can easily arouse the people into a war fever.  They fail to see that politicians know they need a good war to go down in the history books as a great leader.  They fail to see that politicians court the military when seeking power, as guns are seen as more reliable than prayers.  Stalin once famously said “How many divisions does the Pope have?”  Nonviolent movements succeed twice as often as violent ones do, but tell that to the people of Syria today.  Leaders with a conscience are malleable, but ruthless leaders are a much tougher nut to crack.


The depletion of resources and soil can bring down an empire eventually.  But the islands of Japan have built prosperity with little in the way of resources, employing trade and low military spending after militarism didn’t work in World War II.  The world is in deep trouble due to excessive carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from increasing use of fossil fuels worldwide.  But the science of the greenhouse effect is also subject to the laws of diminishing returns.  I attended one global warming class where students were to experiment to see the effects of different changes on a climate model.  They were instructed to go out one century to see the results.  One student went out two centuries and saw the temperature rise leveling off in the second century.  This accords with the science that shows that each doubling of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will give a certain rise in temperature.  That means the response is not linear, but actually slows the increase over time with a linear input increase.  But when the IPPC has 205 specialties and does not include the 54 year cycle, they are left grasping for straws to explain the fifteen year stall in global warming since 1998 until the last two years.  Because differential evaporation rates occur over land and water, the land heats up three times as fast as the ocean for 27 years before the ocean starts bringing the land back into balance over another 27 years creating the great land ocean cycle on Earth.  At the peak relative temperature, first a decade of  droughts happens before the peak, then a decade of floods just after the peak.  The environmentalists are either geographers or meteorologists.  One thinks in terms of millions or thousands of years and the other thinks very short term like days, weeks, or a few years at most.  No one focuses on the work lifetime level of 54 years.  Even if they did, they would not see results repeat in one working lifetime for field studies.  Of the hundreds of academics studying the cycle, only I have sought to connect and explain the three cycles of temperature, economics, and wars.


Modern American criminologists are at a loss to explain the sudden drop of crime in the nineties.  That’s because they fail to see the crime is a function of militarism.  When the military spending share of the economy suddenly dropped at the end of the Cold War in 1991, it took several years for the crime to drop to the new low levels of the late nineties.  That’s because it took time for the people raising the next crop of children to lower the level of fear and anxiety and less young adults were being taught the skills of mortal combat.  Prison rates are considered a function of the number of people aged 18 to 30.  I expect the delay to be related to the 18 years of raising a child to adulthood or the phasing in of the lower military force impact on the twelve years from age 18-30 of crime likelihood.  The statistics look more like the early twenties aged military force level is key to the overall crime rate, as it gradually dropped from 1991 to about 1996, mainly that first five years after the military spending drop.  Detoxification takes time.  Once the drop was in place, the level stayed low in spite of the rise in military spending after 2001, although that rise was small compared to the Cold War levels.

Trade Treaties

Those looking at trade treaties to blame for the loss of manufacturing jobs in the developed world are usually overlooking an even stronger factor.  Sure there is the attraction of low wages in the developing world, but there is also the Military buildup withdrawal of resources (like research engineering and capital) from manufacturing.  That loss to the military adds vulnerability to trade deals by not upgrading manufacturing to higher quality levels, like the Germans do.

For the complete 24 page booklet enclosed in the Peace Economics video:

For definitive proof that Peace Economics is a new level of precision scientific discovery:

A later update of this formula for another 13 years to 1996 showed the formula still accurate.

Twenty-first century tests show the basis principles continue to apply and predict.

I have two 2000 word peer reviewed listings coming out in the SAGE Encyclopedia of War in October 2016, one on “Military Keynesianism” and the other on “Political Economy of War”.

Dr. Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Nominated and vetted for the Nobel Peace Prize 2016,

To be announced October 7, in Oslo Norway.

Real Economy Institute,



Empire Explains USA Best

America is going through a lot of problems right now.  Americans for the first time in their history no longer believe the next generation will be better off than their parents’ generation.  Manufacturing employment, 40% in the fifties has shrunk to 10% today.  For many decades, America had trade surpluses, now since the eighties it has had trade deficits.  The national debt has grown to the size of the annual economy for the first time since fighting World War II.  Income inequality has hit historical highs, even higher than just before the Great Depression of the thirties.  Crime is at record levels compared to other developed countries, although half the rate of the last decade of the Cold War.  Politics is in gridlock.  How did we get this way and is there a way out?  Looking at America as a modern empire is the best way to explain it all.  High military spending leads directly to all those consequences given enough time.  Lowering military spending is the only way out.

Modern Empire 8-6-16

This traces the evolution of society and institutions over time as militarism gradually changes the nature of a society.

Football Baseball Empire 5-28-16

Pure sports are healthy, empire sports are full of violence and militarism.  This paper explores how the top sport of a nation can shift under the pressures of empire and widespread war.

Control Freak Society 3-14-15

Power and control are the opposites of freedom and ingenuity.  An achievement society has healthy economic growth, a power and control society comes from an excessively militarized society.  Control freaks are much more prevalent in a more militarized society.

Modern Feudalism 2-21-15

If the complete absence of military spending is world peace, the extensive presence of militarism all around a society is feudalism, like the Middle and Dark Ages of Europe.  This paper discusses these issues, lords and serfs, castles and moats, and explains the nature of that system compared to present times in America.

Religion and Empire 1-3-15

The cooptation of the Christian religion by the Roman Empire has turned the church away from nonviolence allowing war under just war theory.  This is a clear contradiction with the gospels.  This revisits the historical and religious records into a new interpretation of scripture.

12 Days of Empire 11-29-14

This is a parody of the Christmas song.

Capitalism vs Empire 11-23-14

Socialism and the two capitalistic economic theories, monetarism and Keynesianism, each have some evidence in their favor and some evidence against.  These three types are belief systems rather than scientific systems.  I seek to replace all three with Peace Economics.  Empire Economics is the best way to explain Peace Economics other than by mathematics.  The uncanny mathematical precision of my theory is the basis for my confidence in this.

10 Empire Warps 10-12-14

These are examples of distortions military spending and militarism will eventually inflict on society.

12 Stages of Empire 9-29-14

This is the earlier version of the Modern Empire paper mentioned first in this list.

Work and Empire 7-26-14

This takes a closer look at work and occupations that fit the empire mold.

Empire Concept 2-18-14

This looks at the importance of the empire concept to explain the many deviations from previous norms affecting American society.

Health and Crime 12-13-13

The Spirit Level book provides a rationale for poor health and crime resulting from a developed nation’s level of income inequality.  But their correlations on the main factors of their index are only half as accurate as my military spending long term averages correlating to those factors.  Empire is a better explanation than income inequality for these ugly statistics.

Crime and Empire 12-5-13

Murder and crime are proportional to the long term average military spending of a developed nation.  Here is the statistical connection between the social decay of empire and the military spending that brings an empire down.  The two decades it takes to raise a child to adulthood are the formative years.  The military spending percentage of an economy during this time determines the crime rate.

For the complete texts of the thirteen press releases:

Dr. Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Nominated and vetted for the Nobel Peace Prize 2016,

To be announced October 7, in Oslo Norway.

Real Economy Institute,



War Decision Mechanisms

There’s an excellent new book in this subject area by Rosa Brooks “How Everything Became War and the Military Became Everything” that I just heard about on C-SPAN Book TV.  But here are seven former press releases I chose to bundle together on this issue.  The first two are basic natural cycle understandings, the next gives a defense strategy for the fact that military depletes the economy, then two issues about the executive branch roles.  The last two are classic Peace Economics with a variety of unusual observations of the economic record about war and a refutation of the much overstated case that war produces important innovations.

War Cycle, 54 Years Long

This first piece needs the important additional information that the long cycle, after extensive research, clearly seems to come about because the land of the planet heats up much faster than the ocean.  This happens because evaporation is by some estimates up to 85% of the solar radiation hitting the Earth’s surface.  By simple algebra using the fact that land is 29% and ocean 71% of the Earth’s surface suggests that evaporation is 90% over ocean and 73% over land.  Then the remainder of solar radiation directly warms the land 27% and the ocean 10%, confirmed by a variety of effects.  Thus the land warming much faster than the ocean leads to 27 years of warming ending in severe droughts followed by the ocean rebalancing the Earth with floods at first in the next 27 years of cooling.  These effects drive economic changes which drive the war cycle as detailed in the article.

Major Wars Happen in Cold Years

The midpoint and end of the economic growth cycle tend to have major wars, and amazingly these wars tend to start after a two or three year burst of cooling hits a relative low in the Earth’s temperature cycle.  For some reason the wars tend to start in these low temperature episodes, as detailed in this article.

Low Level Military Defense

National defense in the long run depends on a strong economy.  But military spending depletes capital investment and the manufacturing sector.  What then becomes too much military in the long run and too little military in the short run?  This was the basic issue in the Defense Strategy chapter of my 1986 book Peace Economics.  This is also the essence of this article published in December 2015, still the most popular press release of the last two years, although the July 2016 “Nature of Military Spending” is a close second and might end up passing “Low Level Military Defense.”

National Security State

This classic was born in a sociology class I took in about 1985 from Val Burris of the University of Oregon on power structure.  I compared Secretaries of State and Defense since World War Two back then and the pattern continues today.  State tends to be hawkish and Defense tends to be dovish.  The reasons why are enumerated in this article.  This is the reverse of most public opinion.

CIA Presidents: Obama Clinton 

This piece cites the post-Cold War experience of electing presidents.  The Cold War experience is that all 11 elections were won by candidates from high per capita military spending states.  The other prominent CIA president would be the first George Bush elected in 1988.  There is a picture of a man that looks just like George Bush watching the Kennedy assassination in 1963.  He later became CIA head under Ford, inventing the A team and B team CIA estimates to inflate the Soviet threat.  He was important in the October Surprise of 1980 and Iran Contra in 1986, although he escapes serious scrutiny in all these cases.  But this piece is mainly about Clinton and Obama showing that covert militarism has replaced overt military spending in the presidential candidate’s home state for Democrats in the post-Cold War environment.  The powers that be aren’t about to let someone be elected “emperor” of the world without some important connection to the national security state.

War and Occupy Economics  

This account goes over a variety of lessons learned from examining the year by year record of the last century or so regarding war and the economy.  All war “booms” are followed by post war “busts.”  What creates a war boom is usually a large deficit, so most wars are borrowing sprees and post war paying off the debt will depress the economy.  Economies under occupation under-perform by about 40% and neutral countries have flat economies while their neighbors are at war.

The Worthlessness of War  

This is a retort to the puff piece book that inflates the record of innovations during wartime.  Much research originates in the civilian sector and then gets used in wartime “innovations.”  What would modern warfare be like without the civilian inventions of the railroad, the automobile, and the airplane?  Inventions like fire and the wheel were not for warfare.  The internet came after inventions by British and Swiss scientists led the way.

For the complete text of the seven press releases:

Dr. Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Nominated and vetted for the Nobel Peace Prize 2016,

To be awarded October 7, in Oslo Norway.

Real Economy Institute,



Special Recognition Award

The Dr. Peace train is gaining momentum.  The West Suburban Faith Based Peace Coalition of Chicago, mainly Du Page County centered, has an annual dinner to celebrate their peace essay contest.  The basis of their peace essay is the Kellogg Briand Pact of 1928 outlawing war and the threat of war in international affairs.  Unfortunately, this agreement is largely ignored in the world today.  Students in particular were encouraged to enter.  An 800 word letter to a significant person in the world is sent out and the reply is included in order to be eligible to win the first second and third place cash awards.  Dr. Peace was encouraged repeatedly to send in a submission, but when he did, he found out about the reply.  Sending to presidential candidates was too much to ask for such busy people, and even broadening the request out to third party candidates Jill Stein of the Greens and Austin Peterson of the Libertarians left no reply.  Still the committee apparently liked my entry enough to earn a Special Recognition Award and a give me a five minute acceptance speech at the banquet on the anniversary of the agreement August 27, 2016.

It was noted at the banquet that the main speaker, Kathy Kelly, is a three time nominated person for the Nobel Peace Prize, and that I was a one time nominee.  The main winner of the award was not present due to being from another country far away, but had a representative there.  It was my random good fortune to end up at the same table as the second place winner, son of a staff person for Democratic U.S. Senate Leader Harry Reid.  His letter was addressed to Senator Reid who did reply to the letter.  I was able to enjoy conversation with his dad as I gave both of them the flyer I passed out to everyone about the “Paradigm Shifts of Peace Economics” which would have been the subject of the last monthly coffee house meeting until I had to cancel due to a schedule conflict.  Encouraged by the conversation I also gave both the son and the dad copies of my “Summary of Military Dis-Economics” one page summary of the thirteen key correlations that define the essence of my theories.

When the moment came for my speech, after the main speaker and before the award winners, I decided the best idea to focus in on was the concept of empire, how military spending leads to empire decline and how that decline shapes the health, safety, civic structure, and politics of the whole society as a direct result.  The main organizer sent me this thank you:  “Thanks, Bob.  You added a lot to the success of the program and you did a wonderful job of summarizing your contribution to the understanding of the benefits to a peace-focused economy.”  My colleague present thought I was a highlight of the whole event.  At the end of my speech I awarded copies of my video to the main speaker and a peace columnist for the Chicago Tribune.  The aide to Senator Reid asked for a copy of the video and I went back to my car and found two more copies and gave him one and took a donation for the other copy from a lady I later found out to be another one of the organizers.  Every one standing around afterwards was eager to talk with me, as I talked with several people.  I urged a social scientist to nominate me for next year’s Nobel Peace Prize, as I expect the process could take several years.

Next month, October 2016, the SAGE Encyclopedia of War is due to be published with two peer reviewed entries of mine in it, each 2000 words, “Military Keynesianism” and “Political Economy of War.”

For the text of the contest entry letter:

For the five paradigm shifts in the flyer distributed:

For a one page summary of the scope and accuracy of my work given to the Senator’s aide:

Dr. Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Nominated and vetted for the Nobel Peace Prize 2016,

to be awarded October 7, in Oslo Norway.

Real Economy Institute,



Denmark the Land of Hamlet

I had an amazing week in Denmark, also attended the conference on Engineers for Social Justice and Peace August 10-12, 2016.  I talked to a reporter in the Copenhagen airport.  He is very tired of all Trump all the time news, skeptical of Hillary’s hawkishness, loves Obama.

I learned some lessons from the developed nation highest on the happiness index.  Felt the wind that makes Denmark the leader in wind power.  Saw the slogan in the train station.  Paraphrasing, it says life moves too fast, you have to slow down and enjoy it before you miss it entirely, the attitude of a happy nation.  Cigarette smoke everywhere, explaining why the lifespan is unusually short for a developed country.  The smoke makes me think of America fifty years ago and a 1994 Lufthansa overseas flight on a trip to Berlin, where the air continuously circulated from the smoking section to the rest of the plane, leaving the smell of a dull haze of old smoke everywhere.  Also reminds me of the Oslo, Norway airport in 1999 where the smell of smoke was always strongest near the “Niet Roken” no smoking signs.

On the happiness front, another commuter offered both of us a Tuborg beer on the Friday afternoon train ride.  Must be legal is my first thought.  Probably happy Swedes was the second thought.  The impromptu party was fun.  The next day as we waited for train tickets, someone came around offering everyone a cherry on top lemon on bottom popsicle.  All this was very good for the happiness quotient of the Happy nation.  Someone explained to me that this all relates to a Danish cultural norm of some kind, he gave me the multi-syllable word for it.

The hotel computers weren’t easy to use until you found a way to convert to English.  I could update my spreadsheets at the Scandic but not the Cabinn. was on the blocked list when I arrived, but they fixed that one day later.  Denmark is not a terrorist haven nation or hacking nation like Russia, so the person in charge of the press release website was happy to get my feedback to correct the list of nations eligible for the website information.

Highlights of the Trip

Meeting my nephew and his friend on Saturday was a clear highlight of the trip.  My nephew went abroad Junior year at Cornell and stayed in Copenhagen long enough to become a permanent resident of Denmark.  Although he wanted me to not talk about Peace Economics, he was impressed with the Nobel Peace Prize nomination and vetting.  I talked a lot with his friend, to the point his friend wanted my website address.

At the conference we were given five minutes to introduce ourselves.  The first speaker took 12 minutes and others about three minutes.  When I took 12 minutes I was cut off by the moderator just before my finish, which was interesting to most of those present according to my colleague.  Later, on a ride to the country, the driver got a good dose of my high level thinking, and later I gave him a copy of my video dvd pamphlet combination.  The moderator of much of the program later asked for a copy of my dvd.  The moderator cut off was the first of three rude interruptions of my comments, the other two were American women in small four person groups.  Even though I was clearly making a presence, I was snubbed by many old timers in the conference.  I suggested an important addition to the final discussion of communes visited, but the other 12 minute introducer couldn’t remember who had suggested that three commune summary.  Some people are impressed with my Nobel Peace Prize nomination and others are put off by a newcomer making such strange claims.  Almost nobody knows how to handle the precision of my results and models, which leaves very little room for the many half baked normal findings by such an academic community.  Accuracy should govern, but skepticism seems to rule the day.  As the Thomas Kuhn book suggests, when a new paradigm comes along, the old guard resists the new paradigm until they die.  Then the next generation takes over and makes the new paradigm standard.  Living through this process is very hard on me.  It just isn’t true that if you make a better mousetrap the world will make a path to your door.  Marketing comes first.  I’ve been slow and reluctant to publish peer reviewed articles, knowing how much better the theory is put all together than as thirteen separate articles.  Still just this year I have written two 2000 word encyclopedia listings in the SAGE “Encyclopedia of War” for the social sciences.  One was for “Military Keynesianism” and the other for “Political Economy,” both to be released October 2016.  It took many edits with the editors, but many important points made it into the final text.

The communes we visited were classic.  The first was out in the country and began with a purchase of an old country manor.  The second was not a commune at all, but a community center for refugees, which included social services and entertainment events.  Legal cases were prepared for there.  The last commune was formed in 1971 when old military barracks were taken over by squatters.  Like the first one out in the country, they employed a consensus model of group decision making.  This was the famous part of Copenhagen called Christiana, where marijuana is openly sold by vendors despite the law against this.  Arts and music also were a major feature of the urban center commune with a population of 800, including 760 adults.

During and after the conference, views of my website soared to make Denmark go from complete obscurity (outside the top ten) to number two for the year, second only to the United States which gets 85% of my viewings.  Oddly, the only viewing from Denmark for the year until this and last month was in March, immediately followed by extremely intense interest around my “10 Scientific Revolution Facts” based on a book review of Thomas Kuhn’s famous work.  This led to a lot of US only views of that press release blog entry.  I suspect someone from the US embassy in Denmark heard about my work, perhaps from the Norwegian Nobel Committee, and suggested it to others.  That could have been the CIA head in Denmark, given the facts of the case.  This led to five times as many views for “10 Scientific Revolution Facts” as the second most viewed blog this year.

One page summary of the scope and accuracy of my military and temperature work:

I have been vetted for the Nobel Peace Prize 2016, 

to be announced October 7, in Oslo Norway.

Dr. Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Real Economy Institute,


information hub:

Modern Stages of Empire

#1.  Isolation and Growth. An emerging society with potential can grow if ignored by older militarized neighbors and allowed to devote resources to economic growth rather than wasteful military spending.  Separation from others by large bodies of water can also help.  Navies are a low cost way to achieve superiority over other nations tied down with large land army costs.

#2.  Economic Dominance. The emerging nation over the course of several decades will eventually overtake the slower growing militarized nations around it and becomes the dominant economic power.  Access to resources and fertile land can help a lot along the way.

#3.  Military Domination War. Economic domination usually leads to military domination after war between the top two economic powers. Usually the other power has been dominant but has limited its growth through militarism allowing the new power to catch up and overtake it.

#4.  Military Control of Others. Military domination leaves the new power in an unfamiliar position, leading to maintaining high levels of peacetime military power in the mistaken belief that it is now a rich society and can afford to maintain a higher level of military spending.  This feeling of hubris comes from the sense that the society is just better than others, not understanding that the low military start was what allowed that society to emerge, not some intrinsic superiority.

#5.  Economic Control of Others.  The new power can dominate now both militarily and economically and proceeds to do so.  The military asserts that they are the reason others trade with the power, falsely claiming that resources will only be made available to those with the most power.  In reality, resources are available to those who are able to pay the price.

#6.  Military: Source of Political and Economic Power Internally. The military now becomes a dominant internal force and begins to dominate and control politically and economically within its own original nation.  The government taxes slow down growing industries in order to pay the new huge military budget.  Control of that huge military budget becomes a major source of power.  Government control goes with the territory of the new high military landscape.  In turn, the military now captures control of those in power.

#7.  Destination for the Young.  The new dominant society attracts aspiring young people from around the world who want to be a part of the highest level of civilization.  This reflects the saying that “all roads lead to Rome” in the case of the Roman Empire.  In America, 75% of immigrants are talented professionals and businesspeople, earning two and a half times as much as average Americans.

#8.  Military Industrial Complex Dominates Government.   The high levels of military spending lead to the formation of a military industrial complex that turns its dependency on the government around and starts to dominate and control the government.  Which came first, the chicken or the egg, doesn’t matter as each depends on the other.

#9.  Generating Wars to Dominate Internally and Externally.  The new military economy justifies itself to the larger community by generating and rationalizing new wars to increase its domination both internally and externally.

#10.  Economy Erodes as Scientists, Engineers, and Capital Wasted.  The economy erodes with the new high levels of military spending as the best resources of scientific talent, engineering talent, and capital investment are consumed in the nonproductive military economy.

#11. Workforce and Society Stagnate and Change. The new slower growing economy that emerges now demands a “sideways” workforce to manage the stagnation. Soon the whole society changes to meet the new situation. The command and control nature of the military reinforces these internal changes. Top down management dominates over collegial management as income mobility becomes more difficult from one generation to the next and a class oriented society emerges.  Crime, poor health, and income inequality grow. Drugs, lotteries, and other forms of desperation emerge.

#12. Collapse or Replacement.  The now collapsing society can salvage some of its former glory by abandoning expensive overseas entanglements, or seeking another society to take over its formal role of dominance.  New international institutions can help make either task easier.

For more information about how these twelve points apply to America:

Dr. Robert Reuschlein, Dr. Peace,

Nominated and vetted for the Nobel Peace Prize 2016,

to be awarded 11am October 7, 2016 in Oslo Norway.

Real Economy Institute,



Post Navigation