bobreuschlein

A topnotch WordPress.com site

Archive for the month “July, 2017”

Senate Power Republicans

Friday three Republican Senators stepped up to stop the massive tax cuts for the rich that would provide loss of health care to 16 million or more middle class Americans.  These heroes were uniquely powerful members of the key Armed Services and Defense Appropriations Committees.  Lesser Senators were intimidated by the power structure.  When half the discretionary budget goes to one agency, the Pentagon, members of those two Senate Committees are uniquely powerful in the whole Congress, including their counterparts in the same two House Committees.  Here is the rest of the story of how those four key committees and people from the high military spending states have come to dominate national politics like no one else.  Senate legend John McCain was chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee from the 13th ranked military state, Arizona.  Lisa Murkowski of third military ranked Alaska and Sue Collins of ninth military ranked Maine, are sixth and fifth ranked Republicans on the Senate Defense Appropriations Committee.  Armed Services can favor weapons systems, but ultimately Appropriations funds them.  Arguably, the 122 members of the House and Senate Armed Services and Defense Appropriations Committees are the most powerful in Congress, other than the overall Leadership like Speaker Ryan and Majority Leader McConnell.  Among the overall leadership, McConnell of seventh ranked Kentucky is second ranked Republican on Defense Appropriations and Senate Assistant Minority Leader Dick Durbin of lowly 43rd ranked military state Illinois is Ranking Member of the Senate Defense Appropriations Committee.

Power from the Military Down

Seventy two years after the epic hegemonic Second World War, all three branches of the American government are dominated by the military budget.  All presidents elected during the Cold War came from “above average military spending per capita” states.  Based on the 1984 data it looks like two term presidents come from states about twice the military average and one term presidents came from states about the military average.  Today that power level has subsided only slightly, but still about 75% of the cabinet (78% for Clinton), Supreme Court, and congressional leadership positions come from the half of the country that is high military spending by state.  And the military level tends to rise higher among parties in power and drop a little lower among parties out of power.  The general rule seems to be, the closer to the top, the more direct the military money connection.  The key is not your states total military spending, it is your states per capita military spending that indicates the mutual dependency between the politician and the military.  Democrats who tend to oppose military spending and wars, tend to do so only somewhat, often leaving claims about military spending out of their websites and campaign materials.  Even Obama who opposed the Iraq War had to triple troop levels in Afghanistan to compensate.  Bernie Sanders opposed wars easily but made no mention of cutting the military budget to fund his 14 budget proposals on the campaign website.  Jesse Jackson took 14 issues to the 1988 Democratic Convention, each had some accommodation except the 10% military freeze cut.  Democrats tend to cut weapons funding but not military payroll.  This kind of bowing to the military god goes on and on, leaving many in the peace movement angry at Democrats despite their 90% voting record in congress on small cuts in the military budget.

Women and the Military

When you look at the four key committee 122 military power positions in congress, 29 are filled by women, about 24% of the total, very close to their overall percentage in the congress.  But a closer look reveals the glass ceiling operates similar to the overall discrimination against those from low military states.  For example, when the Senate Republicans crafted health care bills in secret recently, no women participated.  When you break down the percentage of women on the big four committees from high military states versus low military states, 21% are from high military and 29% from low military states.  Military state Republicans are 13% women, while nonmilitary state Republicans are 17% women.  Military state Democrats are 31% women, low military state Democrats are 44% women.  Joni Ernst of Iowa overcame these obstacles to be a powerful woman Republican in the Senate, but it took her being a lifetime member of the Army Reserve or Guard rising to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel while five of the six states she served in were high military.  That’s how you overcome coming from the 46th ranked military state of Iowa to sit on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Military Economic Changes

The biggest change in military state rank from 2010 with the Democrats in power to 2015 with the Republicans in power was Mississippi rising 23 places from 29th to 6th place.  You can thank the Senate Appropriation Committee Chairman and Defense Appropriations Committee Chairman Republican Thad Cochran for that spectacular move.  The big move for a Democrat is Rhode Island Senator Jack Reed, who is ranking member of Armed Services and also sits on Defense Appropriations, so Rhode Island went up 16 places from 26th to 12th.  Maine had bipartisan teamwork going for it as it rose 14 places from 23rd to 9th.  Republican Senator Sue Collins is on Defense Appropriations while Independent (who caucuses with the Democrats) Senator Angus King is on Armed Services.  In the other direction, Wisconsin is a spectacular falling 23 places from 21st to 44th, where Senator Tammy Baldwin seeks to reverse that collapse of the popular Iraq war IUD proof truck sales from Wisconsin manufacturer “Oshkosh Truck”.  She has moved over from Budget to Defense Appropriations.  Typical Democrat, she is shy about the move with no mention on her website, as Madison Truax field will soon be adding F-35s.  She mentions Agriculture Appropriations on her website, her other subcommittee on Appropriations.  She wants more Wisconsin contracts without angering her liberal base as a member of the Progressive Caucus, a tough juggling act.  Health care has always been her top priority and a committee assignment, but coming from the Dairy State, Agriculture Appropriations is also very important for the upcoming 2018 re-election bid.

Summary

While the 22 high military states have equal population to the low military states, they have 70% of the military budget compared to 30% for the low military states.  The representation on the four key military committees in congress is also split about the same, 66% from high military and 34% from the low military states.  It has the appearance of all of them being proportionately representative of the military money.  When the White House threatens to punish Alaska for Murkowski’s vote on health care, the threat rings hollow because she not only sits on Defense Appropriations, but the other Senator from Alaska, Sullivan, sits on Armed Services, just like the situation in Maine with Sue Collins.  Alaska will continue it’s long standing position among the top three with Virginia and Hawaii long after the current President is gone.  Another powerful Senate tandem is Feinstein of California and Murray of Washington who represent drone production and research respectively, and both sit on the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.  California military rank has risen 9 places from 26th to 17th from 2010 to 2015.  California has a total of ten members on the key four committees, while Washington has three.

For further reading, here is the detailed link to my very popular peer reviewed entry on the “Political Economy of War” in the SAGE Encyclopedia of War:

https://www.academia.edu/28849523/SAGE_POLITICAL_ECONOMY_OF_WAR_2016_6p

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, and one of 76 Given Odds (tied for 31st)                                         for the Nobel Peace Prize 2017
contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, info: www.realeconomy.com

Advertisements

Middle Year Empire Update

Making a big impression wherever I go has become standard fare for me now.  Resistance or passive resistance from some social science types has also become standard for me.  The social science view of the scientific method is quite different than the hard science view.  Fortunately the overall tide of acceptance has steadily gained strength, especially this year.  Thomas Kuhn, in his Structure of Scientific Revolutions would expect as much.

Liberal Arts Prejudice Against Professional Schools

The ivory tower concept can apply to all academic schools to some extent.  But it is especially true for the academics in the social sciences, who deeply resent the higher pay earned in professional schools like business, engineering, law and medicine.  When they have control of campus wide awards systems, they may systematically exclude academics from the professional schools from those awards.  As an undergraduate, I experienced this exclusion from the Phi Beta Kappa honors fraternity and as an engineer had to settle for the Phi Kappa Phi all university “equivalent” with a “separate but equal” feel to it, not unlike racial discrimination may have felt a century ago.  While blacks have made great strides, women still face glass ceilings in many academic settings.  A woman who got more votes than Obama in the 2008 primaries and more votes than Trump in the 2016 general election is still not president, because of the caucus system in the first case and the electoral college in the second case.  Recent attempts to eliminate memory of the first black presidency and his legacy show how far we still have to go in racial matters.

Peace and Justice

So after years of making presentations at the Peace and Justice Studies Association I am suddenly excluded in 2016 after supporting an “unpopular” woman presidential candidate on the list-serve and being attacked on the discussion list once for using the word “stupid” defending myself against a slur by “one of their own” against me, and another time by someone posting “refutations” to a small part of my statement in mild support of the Democrat running against their favored Socialist candidate.  A black woman who stood up for Hillary was later hounded out of the group.  This unethical retaliation through peer review is only possible because of the distinctive nature of my work, which makes blind evaluation not possible.  That some clique calls my work unpopular and tries to limit my expression is clearly refuted by the website reaction to my 36 releases a year.  Enthusiasm for my work is growing internationally and lately among Gary Gygax fantasy gamers, recently pushing me into the top 1% on academia.edu.

My point was that the Socialist refused to call for cutting defense to fund any of his dozen proposals, each specifically paid for with specific taxes on separate links of the official website and never with defense cuts.  The Socialist candidate was anti-war on his official website but never called for defense cuts specifically.  This is a common ruse among mainstream national candidates who do not want to lose any swing states with high military spending.   Sanders himself has said on television that he did not come up with the “Feel the Bern” slogan, although he wishes he had.  In that second case, large font quotes were taken from the Sanders independent website FeeltheBern mostly against war and some against military spending, twisting my words and falsely calling me inaccurate, refusing to admit this is tantamount to calling me a liar.  Gee, thanks.  Shouting against me and then saying you did not call me a liar.  Such courage.  Later this same board member openly put down my Nobel Peace Prize nomination rather than celebrating it like a decent human being would.

Methodology

Then a second person of the threesome putting down my Nobel nomination on the list-serve accuses me of not being methodological when I describe the process of creating my pinpoint accurate sixty year model of US manufacturing productivity.  That second person disagrees with my use of continental measuring of economic activity.  This assumes the social science process of creating questions first before surveying for their answer.  That is not the physical science method of observing first before you build your hypothesis.  Precision is not expected in the social sciences because it is generally only found in the physical sciences.  That difference changes everything, including what is considered the scientific method.  Professional schools rely on more traditional scientific methods but that does not make them non-methodological. This is another example of social science bias against professional schools.  It may be that crowds and human nature are viewed as unstable in the social sciences, but in the physical sciences more leads to more stability, just as in economics, moving from the individual to the family to business to the city to the state to the nation to the continent tends to reduce inaccuracies and add clarification of results, thanks to the law of large numbers.

Science and Society

In another instance, an academic organization dedicated to science and technology studies was busily talking about the differences between cultural and socialism versions of feminism when the topic turned to Russia suddenly and I pointed out some Russian history and the group suddenly disbanded and branded me as a Trump supporter which I am not.  At the next regular meeting of the group my hand was raised and for the first time not acknowledged before the group discussion ended after a presentation.  Once again Letters and Science discriminate against an interdisciplinary individual with practical professional real world experience.  Pure high minded academics don’t want to get too close to the dirty business of politics; they just want to talk about it.

Conference in Toronto

In a history of economics conference in Toronto one month ago, I raised a question in the general session that challenged the speaker’s thoughts on religion and was thereafter banned from further questions.  Most conferences and presentations welcome my questions, but some control freak moderators occasionally try to stifle me.  My own presentation was greeted with a lack of questions from a large group of 27 people.  This was the second time I’d tried to present the whole of my accurate economics theory with a similar result.  When I feature one aspect of my theory at a time, I get great receptiveness, but when I bite off more than they can chew, I get stony looks and cool receptiveness.  It was ironic in that one of the keynote speakers went on and on about how economics is not a science, a widespread belief among economic historians, that was well received.  But when I present my tightly accurate results of the science I’ve created about economics, it is a bridge to far for them, that’s not possible they are thinking.  When I break the ideas down to digestible chunks, they usually greet the material warmly.  Once again, Thomas Kuhn would not be surprised by any of this.  Toronto has a wonderful Quaker meeting house group, a Whole Foods that acts like a cafeteria at lunchtime, and a vibrant high tech industry with the Toronto newspaper leading the way.  Baked Lays potato chips are far more delicious in Toronto than the flat shaped and flavorless variety sold in the United States.

Fields of Knowledge Addenda

Main Ideas July 2017, the link to further reading on academia.edu for this press release, consists of seven pages:

The first three pages are 8 PowerPoint frames each on three main topics:

First is “Social Decay of Empire” and Stages of Empire,

Second is “Weather Wealth and Wars” or Global Warming Cycle

Third is “Dungeons and Dragons” Origins of Gary Gygax’s Work

Fourth is “Summary” Military DisEconomics thirteen key correlations

Fifth is “Reductio Ad Absurdum” about the New Macroeconomic Model

Sixth is the “Nine Areas of Mastery” needed to build the Reuschlein Model

Seventh is “10 Scientific Revolution Facts” by Thomas Kuhn

An eleventh point by Kuhn is that an outsider or newcomer like Reuschlein is usually the person who comes up with the new paradigm.  Here is the detailed link:

https://www.academia.edu/33884446/Main_Ideas_Summary_July_2017_7pages

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted and Given Odds for Nobel Peace Prize 2016-17
contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, info: www.realeconomy.com

Math: Reductio Ad Absurdum

Economists tend to say “one the one hand, on the other hand.”  A lot of people get frustrated by this overly cautious social science way of doing things.  In the math world, there is the principle of reductio ad absurdum, that if you cannot disprove a theory after you’ve tried and tested it every way you can think of, it must be true.  Or more literally, if its opposite is shown to be false, then it is true.  (See my SUMMARY paper on my academia.edu website for several other key tests besides the model building.)  Reductio Ad Absurdum is the principle that has allowed me to develop Peace Economics.  Here are the 28 steps I followed to develop the Peace Economics model of manufacturing productivity over the last eighty years of the United States economy in the twentieth century.

General Characteristics of the Model

The idea that military spending is essentially economic waste has the following characteristics.  Models are more accurate the larger the economy and the longer the time period measured.  Military spending has a place holder function in the economy, as it acts like manufacturing by distributing money to the stakeholders.  But it is unlike manufacturing because no consumer product is being produced.  This interrupts the cycle of producing, testing against the marketplace, and refining and improving a product, and giving something to the consumer.  Alternatively, military spending looks like lost capital investment.  Adding the capital investment lost in military spending tends to reach a common total among leading Western economies.  Because military spending mimics manufacturing, it correlates positively in the regional models with economic growth and employment changes.  Actually this positive correlation is misleading, because it also lowers manufacturing when military spending increases, so the positive in high military spending states is offset by the negative in low military but high manufacturing states, with a net loss overall.  That makes military spending a transfer program like social safety-net programs, which stabilizes society but does not produce a net economic benefit.  The beneficiaries of this warfare state are usually upper middle class, unlike welfare state beneficiaries who are usually lower working class.

Creating Economic Model, 28 Steps

Each of these 28 steps are followed in capital letters by one or more of the nine fields of expertise that enabled me to develop Peace Economics, as listed in my RESUME paper or Curriculum Vitae on my academia.edu website.  Then at the bottom are the total mentions of each experience of each of the nine fields.  Each of these nine fields represents a minimum of at least three full time equivalent work years.

#1 Bar chart from Ruth Sivard found, military vs. manufacturing productivity.  POLITICS

PEACE ECONOMICS

#2 Graph the bar chart.  MATH WARGAMING

#3 Correlate raw data.  MATH BUSINESS

#4 Drop one country and correlate again. WARGAMING (VISION SENSE)

#5 Weighted average three continents and correlate r = -0.997.  ACCOUNTING

#6 After perfect cross continent proof, create long term model in leading economic country, US.  MATH (TRIANGULATE)

#7 Graph economic growth rate plus military spending.  ENGINEERING (MODELING)

#8 Recognize deficits offset military spending to explain World War II.  ACCOUNTING

#9 Recognize Kondratiev Wave explains fifties.  ENGINEERING POLITICS GLOBAL WARM

#10 Recognize manufacturing productivity explains better than economic growth. BUSINESS

#11 Look to establish parameters for long term US model.  ENGINEERING

#12 Use a variety of multi year moving averages to locate peaks and troughs over time.  MATH

#13 Use formula given by a friend when peak to trough and trough to peak matches that formula. POLITICS ENGINEERING GLOBAL WARMING

#14 Know that the answer to all differential equations is a sine wave.  MATH ENGINEERING

#15 Compute amplitude sine wave using peak and trough of economic growth.  ACCOUNTING

#16 Compute values each year and compare to actual values. ACCOUNTING ENGINEERING

#17 When annual comparisons show differences, compute running total of variations over time. ACCOUNTING SCIENCE

#18 Note that running total approaches zero periodically.  ACCOUNTING MATH ENGINEERING SCIENCE

#19 Consult Encyclopedia Britannica on economic cycles.  BUSINESS

#20 Note periodic perfection of running total error follows Juglar 8 to 10 year cycle.  BUSINESS

#21 Note that model drops to 7.0 lower rate during Great Depression.  ENGINEERING

#22 Note that model drops 3.7 lower rate during seventies Oil Crisis.  ENGINEERING

#23 Note that down periods perfect out at lower level every three years or so. BUSINESS

#24 Note that down periods just return to normal after about a decade. WARGAMING

#25 Note that starting period 1920 to 1922 requires using a three year average for the 1921 year ACCOUNTING ENGINEERING MATH

#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.  ENGINEERING

#27 Note the linear reduction in total model volatility in six successive Juglar cycles from the twenties to the eighties.  ACCOUNTING SCIENCE

#28 Note model extended for another thirteen years with similar accuracy r = .999.  SCIENCE

Fields of Knowledge

Fields of knowledge used at each stage of these 28 development steps, ranked ordered by steps depending on that knowledge:

ENGINEERING 11, ACCOUNTING 8, MATH 7, BUSINESS 5, SCIENCE 4,

POLITICS 3, WARGAMING 3, GLOBAL WARMING 2, PEACE ECONOMICS 2

The top three, engineering, accounting, and math are mentioned 26 times, while the bottom six are mentioned only 19 times.  Clearly my engineering accounting and math skills are more important than economic skills to produce this model.  I had to drop out of a Ph.D. Economics program because they were taking me down the wrong path in spite of recognizing my major points.  I consider my engineering degree my most challenging degree, with accounting second, both far more difficult than an economics degree.  Politics was essential with an exposure to the social sciences and a broad liberal education coming from that pursuit, and with the two most crucial pieces of the puzzle coming from that exposure.

Conclusion

The proofs of this model are so many and so detailed, that it is impossible to imagine some other true model coming along to take its place.  The dead end nature of military economics, the lift from borrowing provided by deficits (in the economy of the nation whose currency is used as a reserve currency for two thirds of banking worldwide), the 54 year cycle and the nine year cycle are all conclusively embedded in the super accurate model created.  Take any of those elements out of the model, and you can continue the ambiguity of all other economic models of the past and present.  Or you can recognize that economics has just moved a step closer to being a real science, like the physical sciences.

Full eleven page explanation of this model including numbers used:  PEACE ECONOMICS

https://www.academia.edu/7632773/PROOF_of_Peace_Economics_11_pages_1986

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted and Given Odds for Nobel Peace Prize 2016-17
contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, info: www.realeconomy.com

Wargamer to Peace Economist

Looking back over my life, asking how I got to this point of nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize, I have to consider my Avalon Hill wargame experience crucial.

Math and Games

I started with things like Erector sets, Lincoln logs, American bricks, and just blocks.  But there were four siblings and we played board games together a lot, like Careers, Monopoly, Risk, and many others.  I fell in love with two things early on, Games and Math.  Getting encyclopedias when I was seven, and later the Time Life book on Mathematics really got me going.  I loved the way that math book showed all 36 possible combinations of two dice, one in red and one in green.  Dice became the passion that united my two great interests, games and math.  I went on to play games on Democracy, Summit, and standards like Checkers, Chess, and Go.  You name it; I’d try it and be good at it.  But they were all too simple until my older brother and I discovered the Avalon Hill game Chancellorsville in 1961.  We also tried Tactic II, Gettysburg, and D-Day, and I never let him win.  So I needed a new challenge and along came the Avalon Hill General magazine in December 1964.  That was my freshman year moving from five frustrating years in the public schools to a Catholic High School.  That was the last semester in high school I had anything less than an A in math or science.  This was decades before the grade inflation of today, and I was top of my math classes the rest of the time in high school.  I found opponents wanted in the General from other high schools and UW Madison and for the next ten years spent about three times a week, fifteen hours a week, in wargames.  I was a master at the math and probabilities and also the rules, and these two, rules and math, were my edge.  I loved the maps and terrain and playing counters and movement just as well.  Soon I was inventing new rules, new games, and reinventing math before being taught it in the Trapezoidal Rule, the Pythagorean Theorem, and the Binomial Expansion Theorem.  Endless imagination and experimentation became the norms of my life.

Technician in Society

I became a great Nerd.  But humans are social animals, too, and I was a lonely boy who needed a social life.  Opponents Wanted ads and a genius wargamer 90 miles to my Southeast came to the rescue.  No one wrote more articles for wargaming magazines than Gary Gygax, inventing and imagining all the things you can do with wargames.  This local role model noticed me and invited me into his new wargaming club, the International Federation of Wargaming.  I started writing articles too, and inventing games, and starting a wargaming convention in Madison the year after his convention in Lake Geneva.  I attended the first seven GenCons from 1968 to 1974 inclusive, winning Waterloo and tying Afrika Corp the first two Avalon Hill wargames tournaments in 1973 and 1974..  Then I gave up wargaming and Gary agreed to sell my stuff on consignment the last time I saw him in 1974.  Gary welcomed me into his world and I made many trips to Lake Geneva and he came to my first wargames convention in Madison in June 1969.  I had learned the social skills of being a wargaming organizer in Madison, Wisconsin.  I learned many skills, math, games, rules, strategy, geography, military history, and organizing in those ten years of wargaming averaging 15 hours a week, three years of full time equivalent work.  That creative foundation laid the way forward for my fifteen year career in politics from 1978 to 1993 where I learned the issues, campaigning, lobbying, and creating legislation and debates, submitting the 1984 National Delegate Selection Plan for the Democratic Party of Oregon, and meeting at a high level Rainbow Coalition meeting with Jesse Jackson in Chicago in February 1987.  Everywhere I was getting great things done.  Politics is where I discovered Sivard’s work on military spending in 1983.  I discovered the Kondratiev Wave in 1981 from a close friend (Lyman G. Hill, XIII).  We were both in the YMCA Singles Association; where I was president in 1978 and group facilitator from 1978 to 1981.

Summary

These formative experiences combined the endless variety of games and the endless variety of politics into the necessary knowledges that made the Peace Economics breakthroughs possible.  In both macroeconomics and global warming theory these complex yet precise and elegant models will define how people see the coming century.  In both cases stubborn academic bureaucracies have resisted the compelling math of my discoveries.  But I have Thomas Kuhn on my side, knowing that new generations will adopt these basic discoveries and the resistant old order will eventually die off.  The new paradigms will revolutionize the stock market and predictions of the future as the naysayers and doubters are pushed to the side.  Sometime around the year 2025 the world will cool off for two or three years leading into a major war followed by global warming at a faster than ever pace and we will be prepared to mitigate these circumstances or we will blunder ahead ignorant of my discoveries.  The choice is up to each of us individually.  Collectively, if we learn, I will get my rewards.  Today my term “Peace Economics” is routinely marginalized by peace groups as just a large sum of money, seldom if ever considered a major driving force of lost opportunity in the economy, by groups like the Berlin Peace Congress last year and Code Pink this year.  Please stop using my terminology for misleading and understated purposes.  Nations and peoples rise or fall with their choice of military spending levels.

Here is the suit pocket sized booklet for the twenty-fifth anniversary of Peace Economics:

https://www.academia.edu/4108656/BOOKLET_Peace_Economics_11_charts_24p._2011

Here are a few key pages about the climate cycle ending in 2025, warned about above:

https://www.academia.edu/6002772/WEATHER_CYCLE_5_p._WWW_course_9p._2014

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute,

Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize 2016-2017

contact  bobreuschlein@gmail.com for more info www.realeconomy.com

Post Navigation