bobreuschlein

Military Empire and Climate Cycle Views

Archive for the month “December, 2018”

Military Place in Society

While more and more professions have come into disrepute in recent decades in America, the military remains in high standing among the people.  Studying a 2013 Gallup poll of the professions on honesty and ethics gives rise to many insights on militarism and empire.

Overall

Nurses top the list at 82%, followed by a four-way tie for Pharmacists, Teachers, Doctors, and Military officers at 70% or 69%.  Makes sense that nurses are the main contact point when one is seriously ill and can offer confidences even more than doctors.  Pharmacists are important when so much of medicine these days is in the form of a pill.  Education is the secret to success.  But military officers?  Why do we glorify those who lead us into the life and death meat grinder of combat?  Certainly, life and death decisions are foremost among almost all these top tier professions.  Almost all US presidents come from either political or military careers.  Military is not just worshipped in empire, but seemingly in all nationalism.  But empire makes militarism and the military much more a part of everyday existence and importance.

The next tier of trust are Police 54% and Judges 45% or Clergy 47% and Daycare 46%.   Here is the domestic equivalent of the military officers, the front-line police and those who run our courts, the judges.  Their decisions are life and death sometimes but less vital most of the time.  Then there are the Clergy and Daycare workers who educate on ethics and take care of our vulnerable populations, the nurturers.

The third tier are mixed trustworthy people.  Nursing Home 32% and Auto Mechanics 29% are somewhat trusted, but the economics people less so include Bankers 27% and Business 22%, followed by the public figures in Local Office 23%, Reporters 21%, and Lawyers 20% all visible but flawed people we know.

The fourth and lowest tier include State Offices 14%, Advertisers 14%, Car Salesmen 9%, Congress People 8% and Lobbyists 6%.  We take everything these people say with skepticism.   Note that those pushing loaded points of view are treated with the most skepticism.  Some of these people do a lot of talking about things they know little about or in contradiction with everyday people’s hard-earned experience.

Partisan Differences

The partisan divide shows up strongest in five professions.  The Police (68-44), Clergy (63-40), and Military (78-64) are trusted much more by Republicans.  Judges (51-41) and Reporters (25-15) are trusted much more by Democrats. Perhaps Republicans are more accepting of authority (and authoritarians) while Democrats are more questioning of authority.  But note that both have a high level of trust of the Military and a low level of trust of Reporters.  Also note that the Police and Clergy are underwater with Democrats and Judges are underwater with Republicans.  Note that the highest levels of respect for Republicans are a virtual four-way tie for Nurses 81%, Pharmacists 80%, Doctors 78% and Military 78%, a kind of trust for high authority figures.   For Democrats only two are this high, Nurses 85% and Teachers 76%, a kind of trust for the more personal authority figures.  Pharmacist (80%-69%) and Doctors (78%-69%) are the next level of partisan differences, with Republicans trusting them about ten percent more than Democrats.

Military Place in Society

Polling shows the military has an unusually high level of trust usually reserved for only the most respected people in society.  Why would that be?  People respect those who risk their lives for the sake of the rest of us, like the military, police, and firefighters.  People also have high respect for health workers and educators of our children.  The rest of us, not so much.  People have low trust for those working for the general public who are either often in error or seeking an advantage or in an advocacy role of some kind.  Jobs like bankers and businesspeople or lawyers, officeholders, reporters, and lobbyists are low trust people probably because their roles are too broad to possibly be right all the time.  Greed and fame seeking also seem problematic for this group, so they are viewed in a harsher light.  Note that the politicians and pundits who send people off to war are held in lower repute, but the people who fight our wars are held in high esteem.  Because they are willing to risk it all, we hold them in a high place of honor, and are less likely to question what they do on behalf of all of us.

Peace Economics

To politically protest wars and the military seems unseemly to many, seems to question the valor and patriotism of those willing to make the “ultimate sacrifice.” Euphemisms abound in war and around the military.  Many of the highest paid professions revolve around death, such as mortician, medicine, pharmacy, and life insurance sales.  I once had a sign made that said, “Military Robs Midwest Jobs” and was questioned if I was anti-military by the office supply worker that made it for me.  To question the motives of those in the military is unseemly.

Funding for even unpopular wars is sold as “supporting the troops,” taking advantage of the popularity of the individual soldiers.  We honor the warrior even more than the war.  Even the Olympics is presented to us as a nationalistic event, with athletes parading into the stadium wearing national colors.  Even the United Nations is more of an association of governments than a meeting together of the world’s peoples.  Delegates are appointed by each nation, not elected by the peoples of the world.  In most politics worldwide, nationalism seems more powerful than socialism which in turn seems more powerful than environmentalism.  Nationalism is the one religion one does not have the freedom to not join in.  That makes nationalism stronger than religion, seemingly exempt from the concept of freedom of religion.  Religions no longer believe in human sacrifice, yet nationalism continues that tradition with the military and wars.  Religion remains a major underlying cause of wars.  In a church grotto not far from where I live, one arch has stones spelling out patriotism on it and the other arch spells out the word Christianity. 

Pairs of Contrasting Words That Define Empire Society:

https://www.academia.edu/11421799/MILITARISM_CONTROL_Empire_Social_Decay 6p

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2018, December 28), “Military Place in Society”, Madison, WI:  Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Military-Place-in-Society,2018165973.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute, Nominated Vetted 2016 (2 Looks), Given Odds 2017 (3 Looks), Strongly Considered 2018 (48 Looks) Nobel Peace Prize, Possible Favorite in 2019 Nobel Peace Prize Announced October 4th.
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Advertisements

Technology Loser: Military

Many believe that military spending is good for the economy.  Nothing could be further from the truth.   Comprehensive, thorough, and painstaking research and modeling over the decades shows the general wisdom to be very false.

General Economic Wisdom

Manufacturing with technology growth is a better path to prosperity than resource-based economies.  Military spending absorbs but only partially contributes to market-based and market-tested technology growth.  Military spending is power oriented rather than achievement oriented.  In fact, resource-based economies tend to be militaristic, mercantilist, and corrupt with limited growth potential.  Two good examples of this today are Russia and Saudi Arabia, both of whom have leaders willing to kill journalists and political opponents to keep their power, and feel free to use their military power to achieve national objectives.  High levels of military spending correlate well with corruption and crime, as even America has killed muckraking journalists Michael Hastings and Gary Webb, who dared to take on the military industrial complex directly.  Militaristic America has a very low rating compared to other G7 countries by Reporters Without Borders, especially on so-called national security issues.

Displaces Economic Manufacturing

Opportunity Cost theory explains why diverting key resources away from the civilian based production cycle leads economies into stagnation.  Resources devoted to power politics are diverted from the normal focus on economic growth of the general civilian economy.  What you aim at is what you get.  The double negative of the destruction of your enemy is still a negative result, not a positive result, a destruction, not a construction.  The military achieves political ends, not economic ends.  Locally it is a good substitute for manufacturing, bringing money into a community, but the source of that money comes from other communities competing in the economic market place, sinking or swimming as products are either improved or become obsolete.  Manufacturing, construction, agriculture, and mining all suffer paying the taxes to support the military sector.  And these vital economic industries also suffer competition for talent with the overpaid engineers, managers, and workers in the military industry.  The whole economy suffers loss of capital investment and manufacturing productivity growth rate when there is a military buildup and prospers when there is a military builddown.  This constant negative of the military economy is easily offset with deficit spending, especially in wartime.  In recent decades in America, ever since Ronald Reagan, Republican presidents have created these deficits by pairing military buildups with tax cuts.  This has made the national debt grow dramatically over this period.

Models Confirm the Story

Modeling of the military economy shows essentially no economic growth results from that part of the economy.  Key resources like capital investment, scientists, and engineers all lead to economic growth in the normal economy, unless they are diverted to the military economy where their growth potential is stymied by the constraints of the military mission.  Manufacturing is turned into a service in the military sector losing almost all its economic growth potential in exchange for devotion to the national defense.  The modeling and studies clearly show the military changes drive changes in the economy.  This shows up in both international comparisons and regional comparisons within a country.  This leads to an accurate new model of long-term economic growth in the United States and Germany.  Thirteen correlations document how this applies to politics and the social decay of empires, even climate change.  Those thirteen correlations include eight that are 99% of a perfect fit and average 97% for all thirteen.  Combined, all these findings lead to new scientifically accurate models of economics and climate change.

Dead End Technology

Technology designed under conditions of secrecy and for too military specific purposes loses two thirds of its usefulness for the civilian economy.  Often such technology is driven to suit the political purposes of congressional committee chairs, party leaders, and the president.  These power figures usually serve the interests of their home state military industries and bases.  The purposes of power usually triumph over true merit-based achievement.  Having the best proposals for new weapons systems is less important than having the political clout of a home state’s congressional and presidential delegation.  Only ten percent of the military budget is for research, ninety percent is for hardware, supplies, troops, and the pentagon civilian bureaucracy.  Thus 90% of the military budget acts as inert economic filler for local economies, while most of the research component 10% rarely produces duo use products to use in the civilian economy.

Two Pages showing the 17 major claims of the Peace Economics research:

https://www.academia.edu/37217512/Findings_and_Special_Claims_November_2017_2_pages

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2018, December 21), “Technology Loser:  Military”, Madison, WI:  Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Technology-Loser:-Military,2018165803.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, Given Odds 2017, Strongly Considered 2018 Nobel Peace Prize, Possible Favorite in 2019 Nobel Peace Prize Announced October 4th.
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Born in the United States

Listening to various music on the plane back to America from Norway, Bruce Springsteen’s album “Born in the USA” inspired this Peace Economics approach to these song titles.

Working on the Highway

This song reminds me of the story of American on the rise.  United by the Civil War and ever expanding Westward, America started the twentieth century a rising industrial power with the largest economy in the world.  Frederick Taylor, inventing industrial engineering in the age of railroads in the 1890s, found out that productivity for laying railroads peaked at 64 degrees Fahrenheit.  As temperatures increase above that level proportionately less work gets done.  This shows how capital accumulation and the economy improves slightly with slightly lower temperatures or slows down slightly with slightly higher temperatures, as most capital, economic progress, and infrastructure starts with construction.  A century of data confirms these patterns.

 

Glory Days

This song about those that peaked in high school reminds me about America’s fixation with World War II (WWII) and the so-called Greatest Generation.  Yes, the Marshall Plan was infinitely better than the 1919 Versailles treaty which gave us WWII.  But even the Marshall Plan only supplied 10% of the internally generated capital in Japan and Germany in the 1950s.  Important startup capital, but low military spending was the real secret ingredient that gave both Japan and Germany average economic growth rates over 8% for the decade of the fifties.  They both thank America for democracy, especially the more modern parliamentary type, including Japan’s antiwar constitution and Germany’s equal representation with owners for workers on corporate boards.  Thanks America.  The military burdens of empire have held America back ever since WWII, hence the fixation with those glory days of the so-called good war.  Most wars ever since have ended badly.

Born in the USA

America’s 329 million includes 47 million immigrants, largely thanks to the 1965 Immigration Act. That’s 14.4% of the US population.  In the age of empire after 1945, immigrants have bolstered the economy with one Newsweek article suggesting that immigrants make about 2.5 times as much as other Americans.  This “all roads lead to Rome” keeps the American economy a world leader, despite the economic erosion of the highest military budget in the world.  Many physicians, dentists, lawyers, engineers, scientists, accountants, and rich businesspeople are among those immigrants often educated in the US and seeking to stay.  Meanwhile ever since the number one nuclear weapons contractor spokesperson Ronald Reagan tricked people into cutting the top tax rate 60% while only helping the middle class 15% in the name of a 25% tax cut, income inequality has quadrupled top 1% incomes while the 99% have had their incomes frozen for forty years.  Yes, that stagnancy even includes the rest of the top 5%.  And the real winners are the top 0.1%.  Only about 25% of immigrants are the poor South of the border type, and about 80% are legal.

I’m Going Down

Peace Economics shows strong international comparison correlations with high crime, corruption, and low health for the higher militarized economies.  This is the essence of the social decline of empire that accompanies the slow steady economic decline.  Even today political crisis pervades the three most militarized countries in NATO, America, Britain, and France.  Trump has disrupted America, Brexit befuddles Britain, and Macron’s elite policies with a blind spot to income inequality in France have created turmoil in all three countries.  All three have faced unwanted Russian interventions.  Meanwhile the most successful economy in Europe, Germany, has had up until now the lowest percentage of military spending at a mere 1%.  That 1% military has been the secret of success for pre-WWII America and post-WWII Japan.  The last three decades Japan has grown little while Japanese capital has brought up the whole Far East neighborhood, starting with the Four Tigers of Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and South Korea and proceeding after that with China.  The Fujian province next to Hong Kong is where the high growth started in China in the 1980s.  Hong Kong was taking over China economically before China took over Hong Kong politically in 1999.  And low military Italy overtook Britain in 1987 in per capita income, the same year Japan passed America in per capita economy.  Then Britain found North Sea Oil, and Japan peaked in 1994 at 40% higher per capita income over America and has slumped to 25% higher in 2000 and continues to slump.

No Surrender

Americans famously used the Alamo “no surrender” policy to fend-off the Mexican army long enough to rally enough troops to defend Texas in 1845.  Much later, America adopted the unconditional surrender demand for fighting the tyrants of World War II.  Then the Republican Party took the idea too far, applying it in domestic politics, led by Newt Gingrich in 1994 as the first Republican Speaker of the House in forty years.  Extremism and the politics of personal destruction took hold after 46 years of the Cold War, ironically just after the Cold War ended.  But the excessive militarism of the long high military spending in peacetime years of the Cold War (1945-1991) had kind of baked into the cake the habits of empire.  So entwined was the nation in militarism that George H. W. Bush had to tempt a cash starved Iraq (drained by the Iran war) into trying to reclaim oil rich Kuwait as the 18th province separated from the rest of Iraq by the British in 1921.  He told his ambassador to Iraq to say the US didn’t care about border disputes after encouraging the Kuwaitis to slant drill underground for oil under the ground in Iraq.  Then he acted with outrage and rallied the UN to “free” Kuwait.  This saved the military from appearing irrelevant after the end of the Cold War, holding the Cold War defense budget cuts to 25% while Europe cut their forces 50%.  Empire was saved enough to be restored in the second Bush presidency after eight years of peace and prosperity.  Meanwhile, the second Democratic presidency after the Cold War was met with total noncooperation from the Republican Party and the Republican Party brought their Southern style politics North in 2010 to rebuke the first Black president.  Extremism was normalized, making Trump possible, in a new post-truth society of unlimited propaganda.  America had the equivalent of Caligula, the crazy emperor of Rome who lasted four years.

One Page Principles Summary of Peace Economics: https://www.academia.edu/4044456/SUMMARY_Military_DisEconomics_Accuracy13_1p. 13

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2018, December 14), “Born in the United States”, Madison, WI:  Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Born-in-the-United-States,2018165532.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, Given Odds 2017, Strongly Considered 2018 Nobel Peace Prize, Possible Favorite in 2019 Nobel Peace Prize Announced October 4th.
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Post Navigation