bobreuschlein

A topnotch WordPress.com site

Archive for the month “February, 2015”

Scott Walker of Wisconsin

The leading Republican candidate for President in some polls, Scott Walker, Governor of Wisconsin shows a consistent pattern of indifference to the law and the truth in all his elections. Born in the high military spending high crime state of Colorado, he was the son of a Baptist Minister and a bookkeeper. After five years they went to Iowa, then at age 10 to Wisconsin where Scott graduated high school from a small town. Attending but 34 credits short of graduation, Scott Walker was disgraced from the Student President race at Marquette University in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The student newspaper reversed their endorsement when Walker resorted to a last week smear campaign against his honorable opponent and lost the race in a landslide. His campaign also stole all copies of the student newspaper when the bad endorsement came out.

When Walker ran for Governor, six members of his Milwaukee County Executive staff were indicted and convicted for working on Republican political campaigns, including his, while drawing paychecks as public employees. Walker was the subject of that John Doe investigation, listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in that process. This becomes a common Walker practice to throw others under the bus in pursuit of his higher ambitions. When he defeated the recall, the only governor in American history to do so, he took advantage of a loophole in the fundraising statutes in Wisconsin to raise almost unlimited amounts of Koch brothers’ money to outspend the other side two to one, about $70 million to $30 million, unprecedented sums for Wisconsin politics. Just like in his student president race, his first election to governor, and his reelection to governor, he has denied his intentions to attack the existence of public sector unions the first time and private sector unions the second time. However, he revealed his intentions when a donor of $1.3 million to his campaigns was caught on tape in a film about Janesville, Wisconsin, asking him about right to work laws. His reply was first public sector unions, using a divide and conquer approach. His outrageous sneak attack on public sector unions in Wisconsin brought 500,000 protestors to the capital in February March 2011. He was caught on tape entertaining the thought of introducing troublemakers into the peaceful crowd, which he later decided not to do. He lied to the Oshkosh newspaper one week before the 2010 election saying he would negotiate with the unions. After the election he immediately began ALEC research on legislation the first week and refused to accept $800 million in federal railroad money between Milwaukee and Madison. Walker’s action led directly to the end of thousands of jobs in a Milwaukee factory. Then in office, he gave a tax break to corporations in January enough to create a budget crisis. He then used that budget crisis to strip away public sector union rights. This overreach was way beyond the health pension and wage cuts needed to balance the budget after the Bush 2008 recession and the new revenue cuts.

For the reelection, he continued the lying by claiming job growth although he had half the jobs he promised in the 2010 election, and Wisconsin fell behind ten other Midwest states in job growth during his first four years. His give away to the rich tax cuts are the exact opposite of Dayton in Minnesota, with Minnesota now ranked #9 for business climate by the Wall Street Journal among states while Wisconsin is ranked #32. He claimed to reduce the deficit in reelection to half a billion, but after reelection he admitted it exceeded $2 billion. In Minnesota, when taxes were raised on the rich rather Walker’s lowering them, the deficit went from $4 billion to a surplus of $1 billion.

Now Walker is pursuing “divide and conquer” again as he first took on the Universities in the budget, then a couple of weeks later announced a surprise special session to pass so-called “right to work” laws to allow freeloaders to avoid paying unions for the services and pay raises earned by those unions.

Dignity or Rankism at Work
by Dr. Bob Reuschlein

Wisconsin is passing so-called “right to work” laws this week. People who do not believe in democracy or real equal rights under the law especially resent fair treatment in the workplace. They reward freeloaders who want to enjoy the benefits of a union without paying for them. They want wage slave work under a dictatorship in the workplace. They want the feudalism of lords and serfs. They also seem to want to destroy the meritocracy and replace it with birthright capitalism, a self perpetuating aristocracy of those who were born on third base and think they hit a triple. For example, the inherited wealth Koch brothers who want to buy the next election with 989 million dollars. In the government world, when a majority votes for higher military spending, those of us who object can’t just refuse to pay our taxes. But with Wrong to Work (mislabeled “right to work”) legislation, an employee can refuse to pay union dues while still being entitled to the rewards of those union dues. This freeloading is encouraged by the same people who often complain about the poor “freeloading” off of society, a very strange double standard. So it’s okay to undermine democracy in the workplace, but you can go to jail if you undermine democracy in the greater society. A Great Civil War was once fought in this country over the right to separate from the Union. Those states who lost that Civil War have taken over the modern Republican Party so much so that it is no longer the party of Abraham Lincoln. This effort to diminish the rights of workers is nothing if it is not a clear case of rankism, favoring those in power over the dignity of those subject to the power of others. Jesus’ challenge to those who would abuse others with their power and riches is exactly why he ran afoul of the religious and Roman authorities on Good Friday. So these same people don’t hesitate to inflict harm on workers, while claiming to love Jesus. With such twisted logic, no wonder some of them believe the president doesn’t love this country.

Four page sermon on “Jesus and Empire”:
https://www.academia.edu/9979093/JESUS_and_Empire_12-4-05_4_p._2005

So here in Wisconsin, Scott Walker continues to tell lies during the election season and then do just what he has said he won’t do, when actually elected. The consistency is to say anything to get elected, then do as much as you think you can get away with to destroy the political base of the opposition party. The new so-called right to work law is a case in point. The legislature will fast track this bill in a special session while ignoring the very real budget problems that might have justified a special session. The point is to punish his political opponents and weaken their opposition, although it is supposedly to improve the business climate. But TV commercials claim 400 businesses don’t want the law changed because they will lose business. So the agenda is set in the high military high wealth parts of the country the Koch Brothers live in. Scott Walker, born in high military spending Colorado, does not love Wisconsin, he loves power. He wants to destroy the Wisconsin Idea and the many educational strengths of Wisconsin. I still fail to see how less money for the middle class can possibly improve business sales or attract better workers, but that’s just me.

More on the uncivil wrongs of rankism:
https://www.academia.edu/11020728/RANKISM_Robert_Fuller_Concept_1_p._2006
Dr. Peace, Dr. Bob Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute
best contact to ask Bob to speak to your group: bobreuschlein@gmail.com
to leave message: 608-230-6640
for more info: http://www.realeconomy.com
(Real Economy and/or Peace Economics free pdf on request by members of the press)
An archive of this yearlong press release campaign can be found at: https://bobreuschlein.wordpress.com/
National press release edition: http://www.expertclick.com/NRWire/Releasedetails.aspx?id=66874

Advertisements

Modern Feudalism, Two Cases

What happens when an advanced civilization breaks down and leaves feudalism in its wake?
One case is when the global temperature changes and new areas are favored while other areas are left behind. The other case is when an advanced civilization becomes an empire and the erosion caused by high levels of military spending steadily reduces the civilization into a lower state of existence.

CLASSIC FEUDALISM

Classic feudalism or medievalism refers to the down period in European development between the end of the Roman Empire and before the Renaissance of the Modern Era. With the overrunning of the well organized society by barbarians, the breakdown was replaced with rampant warlord militarism leading to many fiefdoms dominated by castles with motes. The lord would give protection to those working the land in his or her castle at night and from time to time as these workers were called serfs. The lord serf relationship features high income inequality. The lack of intellectual development as martial skills are instead rewarded leads to a lack of what we in the developed world call progress in the sciences. The church steps into the void in scientific progress and becomes a dominant institution.

ROLE REVERSAL

Just as one great religion rose at the peak of the Roman Empire, Christianity, another great religion, Islam, rose at the peak of the Byzantine Empire. As the Western European world was in decline, the Arab world was in ascendancy with the invention of algebra, the zero, and the spreading of Islam across the Southern Mediterranean and into Eastern Europe and Asia. The reaction to all of that was the Crusades.

Then the tide turns with the Renaissance and the Industrial Revolution, as Christianity once more became ascendant. The reaction to all of that were the rejection of colonialism and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism. The recent attacks on the president for mentioning the Crusades in the same breathe as the current religious extremists just goes to show how determined to be wrong the right usually is. The Middle Age world warming that favored more Northerly Europe over the more Southerly Middle East lead to the Crusades, which lasted about as long as the farming in Greenland, both ending as the world cooled. The first Crusade when it reached Asia Minor, now called Turkey, descended on a town there where every man woman and child were killed. It turned out they had unwittingly chosen a Christian community. So the Crusades of yesteryear did not lack in barbarity in comparison to today’s religious militants.

MODERN EMPIRE DECLINE

Today’s America seems ascendant in every way on the world stage, but the rot from within is well advanced. While China and India graduate ten times the engineers the US does, we send our best talent into financial schemes on Wall Street. As the rich get richer and the middle class fails to obtain pay raises at all, we devolve more and more into a lord serf relationship society. Indeed, the military seems the only way out for many in poor white rural communities. When the technology manufacturing sector is in decline and the retail and service sectors are ascendant, that is the surest sign of a declining empire. When 4% of the world’s population houses 25% of the prisoners, crime is at epidemic rates in America. When America has the highest homicide, prisoner, mental illness, teen birthrate, and obesity rates in the developed world, surely it is because of high income inequality and militarism, as shown in my tables in the Empire Economics presentation listed second immediately below:

More on the climate change scenario:
https://www.academia.edu/4485586/CIVILIZATION_Changes_with_Climate

More on the empire decay scenario:
https://www.academia.edu/4044446/EMPIRE_ECONOMICS_Peer_Review_AWARD

Dr. Peace, Dr. Bob Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute
best contact to ask Bob to speak to your group: bobreuschlein@gmail.com
to leave message: 608-230-6640
for more info: http://www.realeconomy.com
(Real Economy and/or Peace Economics free pdf on request by members of the press)
An archive of this yearlong press release campaign can be found at: https://bobreuschlein.wordpress.com/

Creating Economic Model

Creating Economic Model, 28 Steps
by Dr. Bob Reuschlein
#1 Bar chart from Ruth Sivard found, military vs manufacturing productivity
#2 Graph the bar chart
#3 Correlate raw data
#4 Drop one country and correlate again
#5 Weighted average three continents and correlate r = -0.997
#6 After perfect cross continent proof, look for long term model in leading economic country US
#7 Graph economic growth rate plus military spending
#8 Recognize deficit offsets military spending to explain World War II
#9 Recognize Kondratiev Wave explains the fifties
#10 Recognize manufacturing productivity explains better than economic growth
#11 Look to establish parameters for long term US model
#12 Use a variety of multi year moving averages to locate peaks and troughs over time
#13 Use formula given by a friend when peak to trough and trough to peak matches that formula
#14 Know that the answer to all differential equations is a sine wave
#15 Compute amplitude of sine wave using peak and trough of economic growth wave
#16 Compute values each year and compare to actual values
#17 When annual comparisons show differences, compute running total of variations over time
#18 Note that running total approaches zero periodically
#19 Consult Encyclopedia Britannica on economic cycles
#20 Note that periodic perfection of running total error follows Juglar 8 to 10 year cycle
#21 Note that model drops to 7.0 lower rate during Great Depression
#22 Note that model drops 3.7 lower rate during seventies Oil Crisis
#23 Note that down periods perfect out at lower level every three years or so.
#24 Note that down periods just mentioned return to normal after about a decade
#25 Note that starting period 1920 to 1922 requires using a three year average for the 1921 year
#26 Note that 1939 to 1947 data gap fills smoothly with no productivity gain for the four war years and average productivity assumed for the years 1940, 1941, and 1946
#27 Note the linear reduction in total model volatility in six successive Juglar cycles from the twenties to the eighties.
#28 Note that model was extended for another thirteen years with similar accuracy r = .999

Full eleven page explanation of this process including numbers used:
https://www.academia.edu/7632773/PROOF_of_Peace_Economics_11_pages_1986

Dr. Peace, Dr. Bob Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute
best contact to ask Bob to speak to your group: bobreuschlein@gmail.com
to leave message: 608-230-6640
for more info: http://www.realeconomy.com
(Real Economy and/or Peace Economics free pdf on request by members of the press)

World Governance 10 Points

#1. Coordinated structures work better than uncoordinated structures.

After the American colonies’ successful rebellion against Britain in 1781, they formed into an Articles of Confederation. Unfortunately, this led to chaos as border clashes broke out among the Northern states of New York, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania and each colony had its own currency. So they unified the structure much more with the Constitutional Convention of 1787. Then after the Civil War of 1861 to 1865 the United States of America emerged as one country more than ever before.

After the World War of 1914 to 1918, the League of Nations was born thanks to US president Wilson. But the harsh peace of Versailles imposed on Germany by the fourth ranked power in the world, France, still bitter from the Prussian defeat of 1871, led to another World War. That plus Wilson’s stroke and weak economy after the war from 1919 to 1921 lead to failure of the US to join the new arrangement.

#2. Direct democracy works better than indirect democracy.

In US history the indirect democracy of appointees running the Articles of Confederation was much weaker than the direct democracy of an elected congress and president in the US Constitution. Beginning with Oregon in 1906, direct election of US Senators worked better than US Senators appointed by state legislatures. In 1858 this had led to the appointment of Douglas rather than Lincoln to the US Senate from Illinois. In 1860 direct election of the US president led to Lincoln defeating Douglas in Illinois as well as nationally. Today an appointee run United Nations is much weaker that a directly elected European Parliament.

#3. Too much central power in too few hands is dangerous.

Dictatorships can go to war much more easily than democracies. As Rome evolved from a Republic run by the Senate to dictatorship of the Emperors, Rome moved into a period of many civil wars. As America moved into the quasi empire of the period after World War Two, declarations of war were replaced by resolutions and the imperial presidency emerged as superior to the congress, somewhat like the Roman situation, with many small wars the result.

#4. League of Nations

Lacking an enforcement mechanism, the League of Nations fell apart in the thirties as Hitler marched Germany into war. The normal course of history was upset in 1917 when an outside power took the win away from number one European economic power Germany as the war was about to turn in Germany’s favor as they defeated Russia and brought the troops on the Eastern front over to the Western front. Then America stepped in enough to turn the tide and award the victory to number three European economic power France. France was still embittered by the loss to Prussia almost fifty years before. Greater economic powers Britain #3 and America #1 allowed the fourth ranked world power France to impose such a harsh treaty on Germany #2 that it bankrupted the Weimar Republic in the twenties and led to Hitler’s rise in the thirties and a new war. No less a figure than the most famous economist of the twentieth century, John Maynard Keynes, on the British negotiating team, wrote a book about how the Versailles Treaty of 1919 would lead to another war.

#5. United Nations

The United Nations chief asset was the Security Council and its chief flaw the veto of the permanent members. The indirect appointment by governments of representatives to the United Nations also contributes greatly to its weakness. These representatives have only secondary authority to represent their peoples, making the United Nations an association of governments rather than a democracy of the world’s peoples.

The UN Security Council was weakened as the moderate Franklin Roosevelt was not there after the war to broker deals between the extremes of Churchill and Stalin. Even though Henry Wallace, Roosevelt’s moderate vice president during the war was replaced by the hawkish Truman in the 1944 Democratic Party Convention, even though Wallace was preferred by 62% of the delegates on the first vote. But since a two thirds vote was required, the hawks engineered the election of Truman instead. After that, the Cold War was inevitable and that resulted in the dysfunction of the Security Council.

#6. European Union

The European Union is kind of a United States of Europe. But the countries of Europe are multi-lingual with long independent traditions, compared to the colonies of America. Both are good models for a World Federation that could be the next stage of evolution for the United Nations. The European Union has entrance standards and direct election of the European Parliament. Direct elections make the members of the Parliament authorities in their own right and tie the peoples of each country more directly into the European project. Nationalism results from appointees as is the problem with the present United Nations.

Higher standards required to join the European Union stand in sharp contrast to the lower standards model of the World Trade Organization. Requiring democracy and human rights such as health care and education as a condition of membership avoids the least common denominator problem in trade regimes. Unlimited expansion of the European Union could eventually lead to a government of the world’s democracies, with those left out needing to adapt democracy and social standards to avoid being left out of the world party.

#7. World Trade Organization

The world trade organization is a form of world government of by and for the corporations and against the human amenities of the governments. Unfortunately, this organization operates behind closed doors, secretly plotting against the rights of the world’s peoples in the name of profit. The key flaw is the lack of disclosure and accountability to the peoples of the world. The ethos is that business organizations have superior rights to those of human beings and the democratically elected governments of human beings. Exactly opposite to the European Union, the WTO lowers human rights standards while the EU raises them as entrance requirements.

#8 Regional Associations

The United Nations is flawed and incomplete. Regions and continents of the world each have different needs, problems, and opportunities and all politics is local. So it makes lots of sense to have countries in different regions of the world work out common policies and positions on various human issues. Solving problems at the regional level, like South America, North America, Africa, Arab League, Far East, etc., allows for experimentation and a variety of approaches that can avoid leaving regional needs out of global agreements.

#9 Regional Federation

Regional associations can grow into Regional Federations like the European Union or the United States of America.

#10 World Federation

The biggest problem with a World Federation is the problem of a world dictatorship. No one wants one person in charge of the whole world, with no where to run to or no where to hide. Switzerland does not have a chief executive, it is run by a small council. That is one approach to the world federation dilemma.

Another approach is a two thirds majority vote requirement for world legislation three ways. The United Nations could vote based on a nation’s population in one vote, by a nation’s economic size in another vote, and under the current structure of one nation one vote that protects the small nations from the large ones. Thus world law would have to pass a stringent test of approval, a modified consensus if you will, that could be vetoed by either the developed nations, the populous nations, or the small nations. Hence the United States and Europe could veto some proposals, while India and China can veto others. And small nations can veto large nation domination in the current General Assembly. Military matters would continue to be controlled by the Security Council.

In some ways the current system is unfolding along these lines, but piecemeal in one area at a time. Trade is the first block of a new world order, while democracy and human rights are being left out because of the lack a broader general world organization.

Empire

If we do not find better ways to pursue world governance, we are doomed to wars and empires. Here is the scenario of the stages of empire dominant civilizations go through:
https://www.academia.edu/5415354/STAGES_of_EMPIRE
Dr. Peace, Dr. Bob Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute
best contact to ask Bob to speak to your group: bobreuschlein@gmail.com
to leave message: 608-230-6640
for more info: http://www.realeconomy.com
(Real Economy and/or Peace Economics free pdf on request by members of the press)
An archive of this yearlong press release campaign can be found at: https://bobreuschlein.wordpress.com/

Regional Military Economy

Top 10 Regional Empire Issues by Dr. Bob Reuschlein
#1. The rise of the Sun Belt and the demise of the Rust Belt is mainly due to the massive transfer of wealth. How? By taxing the low military North more than they get back in military spending and giving excess military spending above the taxes paid in the high military South. Half of the Cold War spending represented the amount transferred from the Northern 28 states to the Southern 22 states. The South had twice as much military spending as the North at the end of the Cold War.
#2. The first proof of this problem is in the unequal growth of the regions in the Bi-Coastal economy report by the congress in 1986. Clustering the states in 17 regional mini economies and running the correlation coefficient the economic growth rates are proportional to the share of the military buildup received, r =0.975. The period of the report covered was 1981-1985 inclusive. (See pages 8-9 in the BOOKLET mentioned in the link at the bottom.) In this military buildup, 15 of the top 18 state increases in military spending were associated with obvious important federal politicians. Thus military spending is about 80% allocated by politics and perhaps 20% allocated by merit.
#3. The second proof of this problem is the unequal unemployment rate changes for the period 1985-1991. Comparing to the military spending changes as a percentage of each state’s economy; for the 78% of America East of the Rockies, the correlation coefficient is r = 0.97, with the states clustered in 12 logical mini-regions. For the remaining four Far West state’s regions, r =0.93. (See pages 10-11 in the BOOKLET mentioned in the link at the bottom)
#4. The third proof of this problem is the military buildup jobs recession after 9-11-01, where the low military states lost three times the jobs compared to the high military states. The national population is equally divided between low and high military states. (See http://www.realeconomy.com/Military%20Econ.pdf )
#5. Closely related to these problems is the case of the disappearing manufacturing sector of America, largely located in the industrial Midwest Great Lakes states. The higher a state’s military sector, generally, the lower the state’s manufacturing sector. While the correlation may be about r = 0.35 for the states, if clumped into mini-regions like #2 and #3 it would probably be in the nineties like those are, and visually when rank ordered by military spending, the inverse association looks quite compelling. (See pages 4-5 in BOOKLET mentioned in link at bottom)
#6. Comparing military spending to total government spending in the twenty most populous states, the correlation is r = 0.83, very robust. But it is often the case that politicians who say they are for lower government spending usually exclude the military spending that often makes the same states they come from “high government states.”
#7. Among the smaller states, many of the Great Plains and Rocky Mountain states that are low in military spending are nevertheless high in government spending. These same states are usually “net takers” (i.e. federal spending exceeds federal tax revenue) from the federal government even though their politicians often claim to be in favor of lower government spending. These states usually have lots of land owned by the federal government.
#8 Usually the high military states are represented by powerful politicians such as presidents, speakers of the house, senate majority leaders, and key appropriations committee and defense appropriations committee chairpersons. Even lesser leaders like majority leaders, whips, and caucus chairs usually come from high military spending states. (See here for more nuances: https://www.academia.edu/5740273/MIDWEST_and_the_Military )
#9 When a political party goes out of power it usually has less military states leadership and when a political party goes back into power it usually has more high military states leadership.
#10 The major reason one state gets more spending from the federal government than the revenue it sends to Washington DC, is usually due to very uneven distribution of per capita military spending compared to the national average. In 1984 this correlation was r = 0.90 at the height of the Cold War, and in 1994 when the Cold War had ended the correlation was about r = 0.69. In the 1984 Cold War case the variance from the average of the 22 states with a top 25 metropolitan area in them, about 80% of the variance was due to military spending and 20% of the variance was due to all other federal spending. This was true in spite of the fact that military spending was only 25% of total federal spending. In the post Cold War 1994 case, the variance was closer to 50% and 50% even though the federal spending was 15% military and 85% non military. This largely continues into the present. (See http://www.realeconomy.com/federalspending.htm )

More military economy details in this 24 page booklet enclosed in each Peace Economics video:
https://www.academia.edu/4108656/BOOKLET_for_Peace_Economics
(See page 24 for current situation in BOOKLET in link above)

This apparent pro-military spending local economic stimulus is in sharp contrast to the national nature of military spending as lost capital investment and lost manufacturing productivity. This apparent contradiction is explained on pages 4 and 5 of the BOOKLET in the link above.

Dr. Peace, Dr. Bob Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute
best contact to ask Bob to speak to your group: bobreuschlein@gmail.com
to leave message: 608-230-6640
for more info: http://www.realeconomy.com
(Real Economy and/or Peace Economics free pdf on request by members of the press)
An archive of this yearlong press release campaign can be found at: https://bobreuschlein.wordpress.com/

Post Navigation