bobreuschlein

A topnotch WordPress.com site

Pride Leads to Empire Fall

Historical Pattern

Why does a nation time after time follow the same patterns rising to empire-like power and then expanding the military to control others?  Emerging nations arise from the void of older established nations neglecting them, as they are on the outskirts of the main power play action.  Britain and Japan off the continent.  Later Germany ignored in the tussle between France and Britain in centuries past, rises to great power status in the World Wars.  Low military spending was the key to the Prussian school system excellence before those wars.  Now America, protected by two oceans, emerges and militarizes after World War II.  The pride makes them think they are invincible, not realizing that the military economic diversion will ultimately lead to the fall of the empire.  Poor science, and the military Keynesianism mistake of John Maynard Keynes, leads powerful nations to believe they can afford to spend a lot on the military.  Short term thinking also leads to poor high military budget decisions.  But ignorance of the Reuschlein findings, model, and defense strategy are prideful errors that really hurt.  Most people are number-phobic and don’t see the negative consequences of military spending.  They recognize the economic boom in military buildup areas, but fail to see the compensating decline in manufacturing in the rest of the country, especially the industrial Midwest Great Lakes states in America.  Then the deficit and war bonding lift the economy in major wars, unless they don’t match the military spending as in the economic decline in 1944 through 1947 for America in World War II and the two years after the war.

Famous Presidencies

America was very fortunate to have Washington as their first president.  He set the pattern of limiting himself to two terms to avoid the tendency of leaders to cling to power.  Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  But it’s hard not to notice all of America’s top presidents have a war associated with them.  Wanting to set the historical record is very tempting to presidents and national leaders.  Winning a war is a big part of being a big part of history.  So the lure of fame urges many a leader into war.  Switzerland, run by a committee, is war averse, while most single leader nations are war prone.  Another characteristic of major war presidents is that they were not around to see the previous major war first hand.  Average age for starting a war among American presidents is 57, hence the 54 year cycle of major wars leaves them all too young to participate in the last major war.  Having served in a war can temper a leaders judgement, avoiding the reckless rush into war.

Hottest Downloads Exceeded

Since the publication of my “Hottest Downloads” press release April 14, 2017 three more academia.edu papers greatly exceeded anything on that list in the next half year.  These three new blockbusters were first “Dear Future US President” posted on May 8, 2017 soared to 87 downloads on 103 views, an astonishing 84% download to views rate.  The second came out as I renewed my association with “Dungeons and Dragons” founder Gary Gygax’s followers.  Telling my story of how the ten years of wargaming with Gygax lead to his invention was so fascinating that 130 downloaded and 229 viewed “History of Gary Gygax and War Economy” with a download to views rate of 57% this was posted on June 18, 2017.  Then in August 2017 “Military Complete Geography” was posted with its summary of the military political economy of the 50 United States.  This was viewed by 158 and downloaded by 163 with most downloading two copies each. This is a download rate of 103%.  My press release of almost the same name August 8th looked mainly at the top 32 states, with some small inaccuracies and incompleteness.

Nobel Prize Interest Peaks in Third Year   

No one but the Norwegian Nobel Committee has tried to look at all my 183 press releases on ExpertClick.com.  That signature convinced me they were very serious about my nomination from the starting two months of February and March 2016.  Then nothing happened for a while as the Columbian President won the Peace Prize in 2016.  But in 2017 some very strange things started happening.  Twelve days before and 10 days before someone looked at 24 of the most recent press releases.  I thought this meant the chair and vice chair of the five member committee were studying me.  Then the same thing the night before the announcement, perhaps a search for a third vote.  Then the award went to an anti-nuclear group ICAN with no coverage except the live broadcast on the BBC.  The world said “ho hum”.  Since then twice in November, three times in January, four times in February and on March 8th the signature pattern repeated, looking at the last 26 or 24 in a row.  Of these ten different visits since the last announcement, three may have come from Germany or France, one from Australia, and one from Switzerland, since the wordpress.com website seems to precede the access to the ExpertClick.com press releases.  Thorbjorn Jagland, Secretary General of the Council of Europe since 2009, works in Strasbourg, France and may live across the river in Germany.  He has the economics background to follow me most closely.  Australia could be a false lead, and Switzerland could be Thorbjorn Jagland on assignment in say Geneva, since he is the Secretary General of the Council of Europe.  It seems like I may be a favorite this year, look out October 5th.

For the original number one downloaded paper on academia.edu website:

https://www.academia.edu/34337629/MILITARY_COMPLETE_GEOGRAPHY_2017_9_pages

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2018, March 11), “Pride Leads to Empire Fall”, Madison, WI:  Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Pride-Leads-to-Empire-Fall,2018155054.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, Given Odds 2017 Nobel Peace Prize

Possible Favorite in 2018 Nobel Peace Prize October 5th.
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Advertisements

Constitutional Costs of War

Introduction

In the US constitution the power to declare war is reserved to Congress.  Congress is considered superior to the executive in that it is defined in Article One while the Executive is defined in Article Two.  But there has been no declaration of war since World War Two.  Since World War Two the congress has let the executive choose our wars.  This has been referred to as the Imperial Presidency.  Since World War Two America has acted more as an empire than a republic.

This modern transformation of America resembles what happened to the Roman Republic as the institution of Emperor dominated the Senate as the Roman Republic became the Roman Empire.  Today we call that process America becoming the world’s policeman.

The founding persons were well aware of the dangers of too much militarism.  The father of the constitution, James Madison, deliberately under funded the War of 1812, because he knew that excessive militarism inevitably leads to a loss of civil liberties.  George Washington warned us of the dangers of excessive foreign entanglements.

The cost of war and empire is enormous, starting with the diversion of key resources away from the pursuit of happiness and economic productivity to the pursuit of death and destruction.  Jefferson’s life liberty and the pursuit of happiness are all jeopardized by the pursuit of endless war, such as the 186 incursions into Latin America during the twentieth century and the extension of the Monroe Doctrine worldwide with the Iraq War in 2003.

Reporters Without Borders gives America a low rating, especially during the Iraq War, because one of the liberties that suffers during war is the free press.  Censorship runs higher during wartime.  Jefferson has said he would rather have a free press than the right to vote.  His reasoning was that with a free press the right to vote is more likely to come, while the right to vote can be meaningless in a controlled press society.

Habeas Corpus was a right taken away during the American Civil War by Lincoln and in modern times with the prisoners in Guantanamo, Cuba, during the wars against terrorists.

US Constitution System of Checks and Balances

  • Article I, Section 8: “Congress shall have the power to declare war.”
  • Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Papers: President is to be Commander in Chief.
  • Hamilton: Congress declares wars, raises and regulates fleets and armies.
  • Article II: President leads foreign policy.

Founding Figures (Rule of Law vs Rule of One)  

George Washington warns us of the dangers of foreign entanglements and standing armies.  James Madison engaged in War of 1812 frugally to avoid the loss of civil liberties.  Thomas Jefferson would prefer a free press over elections.  (With a free press elections are possible, without a free press elections are meaningless.)

Imperial Presidency 

Rome started out as a Republic with a powerful Senate, but ended as an Empire ruled by an Emperor.  America started out as a Republic but with WWII changed to the Imperial Presidency.  Presidential powers in Foreign Policy today often overextend into war starting, with the Congress an after-thought.  Empire, Military Spending, Feudalism, Power, Control, Violence, Corruption, all have lots in common.

Civil Liberties and War      

Historical Wartime Abuse examples:  1798 Sedition Act, 1846 Spot Act, Habeus Corpus lost in Civil War, Japanese internment in WWII, Cold War controlled press, 1964 Gulf of Tonkin.

Perpetual War (Empire):  1947 National Security Act creates CIA with covert operations and media control Operation Mockingbird; Monroe Doctrine with 186 incursions in Latin America in the 20th Century;  Iraq War:  worldwide Monroe Doctrine; Terror War, widespread telephone and email invasion of privacy as Homeland Security budget quadruples in from 2002 to 2006 and grows to match that of the CIA with present estimate of $80 billion each.

Military Controlled Government

Regional Military Economics R=.97No major component of the US federal budget is extremely unequally and politically distributed among the 50 states than military spending.  This gives overwhelming political clout to those in charge of the military budget, especially presidents, congressional leaders, and committee chairpersons.  Those regions and states that get more or less than their pro rata (tax load) share of the military budget gain or lose economically & politically accordingly.  Military spending depletes the productive economy and redistributes to the regional “warfare” economy:  creates “middle class” type welfare-like program.

“How Democracies Die” Steven Levitsky, Daniel Ziblatt, 2018.

Trump has four authoritarian aspects:  Attacking the Press (and the courts), threatening Election Opponent “Lock Her Up”, Anti-immigrants,  Condoning violence at rallies.  Fortune 500 founders are 40% offspring of immigrants, like Steve Jobs whose parents were from Syria.  Ben Franklin tells lady on street that the constitutional convention gave us a “republic, if you can keep it”.

14 Characteristics of Fascism Dr. Lawrence Britt (5-28-03 Rense.com):

  1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism, 2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights, 3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause, 4. Supremacy of the Military, 5. Rampant Sexism, 6. Controlled Mass Media (40 million tweet and facebook followers plus FOX news for Trump), 7. Obsession with National Security, 8. Religion and Government are Intertwined, 9. Corporate Power is Protected, 10. Labor Power is Suppressed, 11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts (climate hoax), 12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment, 13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption, 14. Fraudulent Elections.

World Press Freedom, Reporters Without Borders: 

(2011-12 Index: G8 countries); 10) Canada, 16) Germany, 22) Japan, 28) United Kingdom, 38) France, 43) United States, 57) United States (extra-territorial), 61) Italy, 142) Russia.

(2017 Index: G8 countries); 16) Germany, 22) Canada, 39) France, 40) United Kingdom, 43) United States, 52) Italy, 72) Japan, 148) Russia.  Both of these lists are roughly in order of the national military percentage of the economy, except that Italy is low due to Berlusconi being both owner of the media and the government, and Japan in 2017 in the midst of a constitutional crisis over changing the constitution to grow the military.

Banking and the Military    

American corporate profits went from 7% to 12% of GDP in the last forty years.  Financial profit share went from 6% to 30%.  Financial profits GDP has gone from 0.4% to 3.6% of GDP, a nine-fold increase overall.  The industrial triangle book of Gordon Adams showed that major banks and major defense contractors had corporate interlocks of 15% between just those two industries, the same percent for all interlocks in other companies.

Empire “Opportunity Cost”           

Military Spending is both wasted manufacturing & lost capital investment. Military Spending takes away from the productive stream of the economy key research and capital resources.  Such resources normally keep manufacturing competitive producing new products constantly being tested by the consumer and business marketplaces.  Military Spending converts such resources to a national service that does not enhance the economy.  90% of military spending is for this national service.  A small part of the 10% spent on research returns as civilian spinoffs.  Military Spending is like a junk food diet, filling but not nourishing, Fat & Carbs without Protein to build muscles.

Military Spending National Economics     

The following four correlations studies best illustrate the nonproductive nature of military spending:  R=-.997 Manufacturing Productivity (G7+Sweden, Denmark)(1960-1978, Sivard Reuschlein);  R=-.993 Capital Investment (NATO 4+Sweden)(1960-1979, Sivard Reuschlein); R=.999 Productivity (3+2 factor) US Model (1920-1996, Reuschlein); R=-.97 Economic Growth vs Net Military Burden (1941-1948 World War II, Reuschlein)

Crime, Murder and the Military    

Using combined data from 1973-75, 1984, 1991 always indexed against the US, I was able to put all these countries on one graph.  Focusing on the G7, leaving outliers Britain and France out, the correlation was R= .996.  Later I noted that Britain and France correlated well (R= .93) with New England and Virginia, the four hundred year old mature societies.  Japan, Germany, Italy, Sweden and the United States are all about 150 year-old societies.  The older countries and colonies were at 40% crime levels relative to their military spending compared to the younger societies.

Social Correlations with Military Spending         

In rank order from high to low, here are some of the leading developed world international social factor correlations with military spending, largely from the 2010 book “Spirit Level”:  Social Class Mobility R= -.923; Factory Productivity R= -.868, Prisoners R= .852, Teen Births R= .818, Homicides R= .803, Work Hours R= .794, Mental Illness R= .789, Income Inequality R= .765, Press Freedom R= -.763, Obesity R= .753, Infant Mortality R= .679, Unsustainability R= .548, Recycling R= -.482.

Spirit Level Comparison     

Health & Social Problems index correlates -0.878 with military and -0.875 with inequality.

The above index from the Spirit Level book does a better job of proving the empire theory over the income inequality theoryThese next 6 robust correlations are from the components of the “Spirit Level” health and social problems index above:  showing the military economy correlation first and the inequality correlation second, the strongest six correlations are:  for reduced social mobility .923 and .934, for increased prisoners .852 and .658, for increased teen births .852 and .735, for increased homicides .800 and .571, for increased mental illness .789 and .737, and for increased obesity .753 and .524.  Overall the military is a much stronger average of .823 over .693.  The military and inequality factors are themselves strongly correlated at .765.  Based on this I would strongly suggest empire levels of military spending are a better explanation than just growing income inequality for all these disastrous social statistics.

Current History, Great Recession   

Bush military buildup is similar to the Reagan military buildup.  One difference is the much smaller tax cut under Bush (Less Deficit Lift).  Repeal of Glass-Stiegel made crash worse under Bush (Derivatives grew 10 times since repeal).  Real Estate problems developed under both military buildups.  The role of the military buildup is almost completely ignored.  I publicly predicted a recession in January 2007, predicting disaster for the $70 billion Iraq Surge.  It takes about six months to deploy troops in Iraq, and sure enough, the unemployment rate started going up in July 2007 and worsened continuously for two years.  The Financial collapse made conditions worse, but the military buildup started the downhill slide which exposed the weaknesses of the financial structure.  The 2008 military budget is twice the increase of years before and after.  The four economic quarters of the fiscal year 2008 are the four steepest drops in economic growth rate in recent memory.

Summary

Empires decline because they divert economic achievement resources to power projection.  Military spending and manufacturing capital draw from a common resource pool so as one increases the other decreases.  Low military high growth societies incentivize new product creation and achievement.  High military spending low growth societies incentivize market share nitpicking & control.  High Military Spending States give us 80% of US key political leaders, especially presidents, including all eleven Cold War elections.

Solutions        

There will be no recovery from the collapsing nature of empire until and unless the military is reduced.  The US industrial Midwest swing states that decide presidential elections will all benefit greatly from reduced military.  Even the military itself will benefit from faster future growth after the initial reduction.  All Great Lakes states are half the national average in military spending per capita and will benefit the most from the initial military reduction.  The parasitic mostly coastal Financial and Military industries can’t be allowed to kill the inland industrial “goose that laid the golden egg.”

For original eight per page power point slides with charts and graphs at Telos 2018 Conference:

https://www.academia.edu/s/3ec205248a/constitutional-implications-of-war

 

Constitutional Theory as Cultural Problem: Global Perspectives  TELOS February 17, 2018, 3pm China House, “Constitutional Implications of War”  Professor Robert Reuschlein, EE, CPA, MBA, Ed.D., Real Economy Institute, www.realeconomy.com, bobreuschlein@gmail.com

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2018, March 4), “Constitutional Cost of War”  Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Constitutional-Cost-of-War,2018154802.aspx

 

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, Given Odds 2017 Nobel Peace Prize

Possible Favorite in 2018 Nobel Peace Prize October 5th.
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Terrorist Cost to Society

Goal of Terrorists: Raising the Cost to Society, Asymmetric Warfare Conference, TELOS January 14, 2017 Professor Robert Reuschlein, EE, CPA, MBA, Ed.D. Real Economy Institute, www.realeconomy.com bobreuschlein@gmail.com

“Goal of Terrorists:  Raising the Cost to Society”

by Professor Robert Reuschlein

ABSTRACT

Asymmetric Warfare raises the cost to society of warfare. Those in the military industrial complex believe that warfare can enhance themselves and their society. This belief led to the Iraq War. Those employing asymmetric warfare believe they can punish the military society’s population enough to make them give up. This was the strategy that won the Vietnam War. The asymmetric warrior (aka “terrorist”) believes a militaristic society will implode when enough pressure is put on them. These so- called terrorists are even more right than they realize. The eight years of the Reagan Military Buildup tripled the national debt (quadrupling if you add in the 4 Bush years).  The eight years of the second Bush military buildup wars led to the Great Recession, particularly the Iraq $66 billion surge in fiscal year 2008. Blowback was immediate and internal, and unemployment escalated for two years from July 2007 to October 2009. This is exactly what Osama Bin Laden wanted out of the Western response to his provocations, saying in an alleged 2005 speech: “So we are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy.” In my empire economics speech, I will outline the true cost of militarization on America, depleting our capital and research resources leading to economic and social decay, including high crime. Empire stagnation includes the stagnation of the political process in America. Militarization lead to the direct depletion of the manufacturing sector even faster than the more obvious and visible trade treaty losses of factories. In the decade after 2001 terrorism has quadrupled. Goading us into attack has been a goal of the terrorists.

Alleged Osama Bin Ladin 2004 Speech Goals

BANKRUPTCY  “The Mujahideen bled Russia for ten years, until it went bankrupt and was forced to withdraw in defeat. So we are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy.”

PRIVATE COMPANIES  “Leaders cause America to suffer human, economic, and political  losses without their achieving for it anything of note other than some benefits for their private companies”

POLITICS  “Resemblance it bears to the regimes in our countries, half of which are ruled by the military and the other half which are ruled by the sons of kings and presidents.”

Empire “Opportunity Cost”

Military Spending is both wasted manufacturing & lost capital investment. Military Spending takes away from the productive stream of the economy key research and capital resources.

Such resources normally keep manufacturing competitive producing new products constantly being tested by the consumer and business marketplaces.  Military Spending converts such resources to a national service that does not enhance the economy.  90% of military spending is for this national service.  A small part of the 10% spent on research returns as civilian spinoffs.

Military Spending is like a junk food diet, filling but not nourishing, Fat & Carbs without Protein to build muscles.

Military Spending National Economics

The following four correlations from studies best illustrate the nonproductive nature of military spending:

R=-.997 Manufacturing Productivity (G7+Sweden, Denmark)(1960-1978, Sivard Reuschlein)

R=-.993 Capital Investment (NATO 4+Sweden)(1960-1979, Sivard Reuschlein)

R=.999 Productivity (3+2 factor) US Model (1920-1996, Reuschlein)

R=-.97 Economic Growth vs Net Military Burden (1941-1948 World War II, Reuschlein)

Evidence Military Hurts and Deficit Helps Economy

The four proofs on the prior slide show:

That by R the odds favor 1 billion to 1 that military spending hurts the economy

That by R2 the odds favor 100 million to 1 that military spending hurts the economy

By the R=.999 model, and WWII R=-.97, only deficit spending offsets the negative impact of military spending in short run.

Military Spending Regional Economics R=.97

  • No major component of US federal budget is more unequally and politically distributed among the 50 states than military
  • This gives overwhelming political clout to those in charge of the military budget, especially presidents and congressional
  • Those regions and states that get more or less than their pro rata (tax load) share of the military budget gain or lose economically &
  • Military spending depletes the productive economy and redistributes to the regional “warfare” economy: “middle class” welfare

Where Does Socio-Economic Decay Come From?

Low military spending leads to a rich and prosperous society with greater equity.

High military spending leads to reduced manufacturing & capital investment, which leads to economic decline, social decay, and high income inequality.

I will contrast the economic model of two societies: the emerging growth society and the stagnant empire society to show the forces of stagnation. These forces have favor “sideways” occupations over growth, and caused health & crime problems.

Crime, Murder and the Military

Using combined data from 1973-75, 1984, 1991 always indexed against the US, I was able to put all these countries on one graph.  Focusing on the G7, leaving outliers Britain and France out, the correlation was R= .996.  Later I noted that Britain and France correlated well (R= .93) with New England and Virginia, the four hundred year old mature societies.  Japan, Germany, Italy, Sweden and the United States are all about 150 year-old societies.  The older countries and colonies were at 40% crime levels relative to their military spending compared to the younger societies.

Social Correlations with Military Spending

In rank order from high to low, here are some of the leading developed world international social factor correlations with military spending, largely from the 2010 book “Spirit Level”:  Social Class Mobility R= -.923; Factory Productivity R= -.868, Prisoners R= .852, Teen Births R= .818, Homicides R= .803, Work Hours R= .794, Mental Illness R= .789, Income Inequality R= .765, Press Freedom R= -.763, Obesity R= .753, Infant Mortality R= .679, Unsustainability R= .548, Recycling R= -.482.

Economic “Pie” Model

In the control/empire stagnant society when a person earns a bigger share of the pie, someone else is more likely to lose and become unemployed or homeless (left out).

In the achievement/growing society, when someone earns a bigger share of the pie, it doesn’t usually hurt others because it is from the ring of growth, not from the ring of basic needs. Also, to achieve the new frontier of growth, all people’s ideas are needed and valued more, so inequality is lessened.

Characteristics of Empire Versus Emerging Societies

An Empire Society features Power and Control, growth is Stagnant and Sideways, with heavy Lawyering to mend fences and a strong Service sector.  The empire society is Win Lose with a lot of rich poor inequality.  Militaristic sports dominate like American Football with language about the bomb, blitzing, and in the trenches.  Drug Use, Crime Debt and lotteries will proliferate in an effort to mitigate the pain of chronic underachieving.

An emerging great power will feature Achievement and Growth, moving Forward, lots of Engineering and Manufacturing.  The nature of the emerging society is more equal and Win Win.  Baseball was the national sport in emerging low military America and post World War II low military Japan with the non-militaristic goal of reaching home plate. Success, Satisfaction Saving are other hallmarks,

Summary

Empires decline because they divert economic achievement resources to power projection.  Military spending and manufacturing capital draw from a common resource pool so as one increases the other decreases.  Low military high growth societies incentivize new product creation and achievement.  High military spending low growth societies incentivize market share nitpicking & control.  High Military Spending States give us 80% of US key political leaders, especially presidents.

Banking and the Military

American corporate profits went from 7% to 12% of GDP in the last forty years.  Financial profit share went from 6% to 30%.  Financial profits GDP has gone from 0.4% to 3.6% of GDP, a nine-fold increase overall.  The industrial triangle book of Gordon Adams showed that major banks and major defense contractors had corporate interlocks of 15% between just those two industries, the same percent for ALL interlocks in other companies.

Economic Pattern of War

The high growth period creates a new world peck order of nations and these two wars test that new peck order.  Wealth is maximized at the end of the period, when the major war occurs.  The second largest war happens half way through the high economic growth period. The current high growth period is 1994-2021.  Opponent is often a small power.  Examples:  Iraq 2003, Korea1950, Spain1898, Mexico1846.

The largest war happens at the end of the high growth period just as wealth peaks and three years into the low growth period with the last cooling. Opponents are usually #1 power vs #2 power.  China 2025? Vietnam (Russia proxy) 1965, Germany 1917, South 1861, Britain 1812

Current History, Great Recession

Bush military buildup is similar to the Reagan military buildup.  One difference is the much smaller tax cut under Bush (Less Deficit Lift).  Repeal of Glass-Stiegel made crash worse under Bush (Derivatives grew 10 times since repeal).  Real Estate problems developed under both military buildups.  The role of the military buildup is almost completely ignored.  I publicly predicted a recession in January 2007, predicting disaster for the $70 billion Iraq Surge.  It takes about six months to deploy troops in Iraq, and sure enough, the unemployment rate started going up in July 2007 and worsened continuously for two years.  The Financial collapse made conditions worse, but the military buildup started the downhill slide which exposed the weaknesses of the financial structure.  The 2008 military budget is twice the increase of years before and after.

 

Solutions

There will be no recovery from the collapsing nature of empire until the military is reduced.

The US industrial Midwest swing states that decide presidential elections will all benefit greatly from reduced military.  The PARASITIC Financial and Military industries can’t be allowed to kill the industrial “goose that laid the golden egg.”

For original power point with charts and graphs at Telos 2017 Conference:

https://www.academia.edu/32759407/EMPIRE_and_CLIMATE_Economics 29_slide_5p._2017

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2018, February 25), “Terrorist Cost to Society” Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Terrorist-Cost-to-Society,2018154542.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, and Given Odds for the Nobel Peace Prize 2017

Possible Favorite in 2018 Nobel Peace Prize November 5th.
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

How Empire America Emerged

There are two distinct versions of America in American history, the America before World War Two and the America after World War Two.  The rise to a world power status began in 1898 and peaked in 1945.  The transition to the complete empire state started by Truman was then completed under Ronald Reagan, 1980 to 1988.  Trump may unwittingly be ending American dominance over the world and may usher in a humbling return to a new kind of international normalcy.  The American century may give way to the Chinese century.

World Power Beginnings

The 1898 Spanish American War started out as just another Monroe Doctrine war in Cuba.  But when the Naval Secretary was out of town, the deputy Theodore Roosevelt ordered the fleet into Manila Bay, and next thing you know US invaded the Philippines, making the US an international power. George Washington warned the US about international entanglements, but the die was cast.  Next thing you know we get involved in an European war, two years after the Lusitania “passenger ship” half loaded with munitions bound for Britain was sunk by a German U-boat.  Wilson waited until after the 1916 re-election, campaigning on peace, to declare war in April 1917, the first full month of the second term.  German Americans were vilified as was Progressive Republican Senator Robert La Follette of half German Wisconsin, who opposed the war and started the Progressive Magazine.  Still, after both wars America returned to the low 1% GDP military America had always had in peacetime.  The founding figures rightly feared the negative impacts of excessive militarism, preferring a minimal peacetime military filled with volunteers during wartime.

Causes of World War Two

In a normal hegemonic war, the largest economy normally wins, in the First World War that was Germany, with Britain second and France third.  But America was the world leading economy, twice the size of Germany.  When Germany finally defeated Russia and brought those troops to the Western front, they finally began winning the war.  American entry into the war changed all that, awarding the victory to an undeserving France, bitter from the 1870 Prussian victory and the huge losses of the war, where for the first time in 500 years a major European war cost three times the usual 1.5% of the European population, with a whopping 5% of Europe dying in the war.  A young John Maynard Keynes, future economic genius, was on the British team working on the Versailles peace treaty.  He wrote a book in 1919 predicting the peace treaty would lead to another war.  He accurately foresaw the second world war.  With American banks financing the German reparations debt, American farmers shared some of the German hurt.  Hoover in 1928 campaigned on relief for American farmers in the form of the Smoot Hawley Tariff, triggering the trade war that caused the Great Depression and weakened the farm based French economy so much that they later easily fell to Germany in 1940.  Should have listened to George Washington about foreign entanglements.

Entry into World War Two

Churchill and Roosevelt needed some way to get peace loving America into the war in 1941. They had cracked the German and Japanese codes, so they knew the enemies’ plans.  The key was the Philippines.  With that Asian US entanglement, the US was sitting astride the sea lanes between Japan and the Indonesian oil fields.  In October 1941 the US stopped selling oil to Japan.  This forced Japan to take Indonesia to get oil for the Chinese war.  Japan, seeing a collision with the US as inevitable, then decided to gamble on crippling the American fleet in Pearl Harbor in a combined surprise attack throughout the South Pacific.  But because the US knew the plans, Roosevelt made sure the aircraft carriers were safely at sea when the attack came, leaving obsolete dreadnoughts in the harbor for emotional impact to whip up a war fever.

End of World War Two

Truman was US president for the last months of World War Two.  Japan was defeated and demoralized, ready to surrender, when the atom bomb became available.  Roosevelt had urged the Russians to help with Japan so when they finally entered that front in Korea, Truman wanted a demonstration of the atomic bomb to threaten the Soviets.  The war in Europe had ended with 10 million German troops on the Russian front and 5 million German troops on the Western front.  When the mayor of Hiroshima asked why the bomb was dropped on them, Truman used Pearl Harbor as his reason why.  The Cold War became the rationale for the high levels of military spending at the five or ten percent of the economy level, instantly making America an empire.  The 1947 National Security Act launched the Cold War economically.  The large standing peacetime army avoided for America’s first century and a half gave way to the rationale of empire, with the false illusion of military Keynesianism pretending America could afford it.  Eisenhower Truman and the Secretary of State outvoted the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of War who wanted to continue the founding persons conservative approach.  The Act changed the Department of War to the Department of Defense and created the CIA which immediately established Operation Mockingbird to control the media.  Like when Rome went to the emperor system, the imperial presidency and Pax Americana were born.

Cold War America

Covert Operations of the CIA was the American mechanism of controlling the world.  For about a generation after World War Two, the old America still existed culturally, but after 1980 the empire was firmly put in charge.  President Kennedy tried to reverse course with the Peace Corp, the Alliance for Progress in Latin America, and plans to pull out of Vietnam, abolish the CIA covert operations, and a negotiated mutual disarmament with the Soviet Union.  Khrushchev cried when Kennedy died, and Johnson stopped the peace plans.  Brezhnev deposed Khrushchev in 1964 and immediately began the military buildup that doomed the Soviet Union in the eighties.  When the Germans doubled military spending in the sixties after the Berlin Wall of 1961, that decade is remembered by the Germans as the lost decade.

Problems of Empire                                                                                                                         

Development tends to stall and many social indicators tend to worsen as empire gains a tighter grip over a society.  These changes tend to be closely related to changes in military spending, worse when military spending increases and better when military spending decreases.  Ronald Reagan worked for the number one nuclear weapons contractor, General Electric, for many years with his Death Valley Days show in the fifties.  He implemented many of the changes that have haunted America to this very day.  His Budget Director David Stockman called his 25 % income tax cut plan a “Trojan Horse” to bring the top tax rate down 60% from 70% down to 28%.  This has led to quadrupling the income of the top 1% over the next thirty years.  Meanwhile he fired the PATCO air traffic controllers for going on strike, even though they had donated to his campaign.  Then the middle class who got only a 15% income tax cut from Reagan have had no gains since 1973.  He shamelessly promoted the military, blaming Carter for the second recession in three years. The relatively mild Carter oil shock recession of 1980 have been followed by the 1981 recovery year 2.1% growth.  Reagan’s biggest military increase in peacetime US history in fiscal year 1982, took the 1981 recovery year back into recession with a  highest unemployment rate since the Great Depression of  10.8% for the year or 11.2% for the worst month.   Even the 2008-2009 Great Recession only reached 10.2% unemployment rate for its worst month.  Republicans blamed that Bush recession on Obama to recapture the congress and 26 states in 2010 and lock in control for ten years with gerrymandering.  Reagan also abolished the “equal time” rule for political coverage by the media in 1987 leading directly to the rise of Rush Limbaugh and the FOX News channel giving Trump a propaganda channel.  Russia has used bots for years to promote American division through the issues of guns, immigration, and white supremacy and along comes Trump to take advantage of these new propaganda vehicles.  Russian donations have tripled NRA funding from $10 billion four years before to $30 billion to help the Trump election.  The Cold War and Reagan policies still haunt America.  While America leads the developed world in 16 negative socioeconomic categories, US is still #1 in military spending with triple the economic percentage of other developed countries and even the rest of the world combined.  A major cost of empire is the economic and social decay that comes with the slow collapse of empire.

For additional information please see these thirteen pages about empire ideas:

https://www.academia.edu/28545758/EMPIRE_Explains_America_Best_2013-2016_13p

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2018, January 28), “How Empire America Emerged” Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/How-Empire-America-Emerged,2018153441.aspx

Academics, Politicians, can nominate Robert Reuschlein by February 1st for Nobel Peace Prize: https://www.nobelpeaceprize.org/Nomination.

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute,                            Nominated Vetted 2016, and Given Odds for the Nobel Peace Prize 2017,                  Possible Favorite in 2018 Nobel Peace Prize November 5th.
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Interdisciplinary Shutdowns

Just as in politics it takes a lot of different points of view to come up with a good compromise, in academics and many other professions multiple views are crucial.  In my dissertation, I discovered the average Midwest US College with a peace studies program had ten interdisciplinary programs.  Much lip service is given to interdisciplinary work; but most colleges still reward tenure based on the narrow needs of the discipline the academic comes from or is housed in.  One device to overcome this problem is to give interdisciplinary programs a voice on tenure decisions.  It would be good if all the interdisciplinary programs were represented by a department of interdisciplinary programs or a dean of interdisciplinary programs.  Some examples of the benefits of interdisciplinary thinking follow.

Religions Example

In my younger years I experimented with five difference religions.  This gave me much greater perspective on the common practice of prayer.  I was once practicing my Buddhist chanting when I compared notes with my landlady’s saying of the rosary.  The benefits were remarkably similar.  Then it struck me that meditation, prayer, chanting were all similar practices and mental disciplines with similar benefits.  Having multiple religious views allows one to better comprehend the great truths about ourselves and humanity such as the golden rule, found in all religions.

Physics Example

Locating a point in three-dimensional Euclidean space requires triangulation.  Even our eyes work this way, as two eyes allow depth perception estimates of how far away things are.  Likewise, in space, two observatories or measurements of one observatory taken from different parts of earth’s orbit over time can determine the distance of an object far away in space.

Peace Studies Example

Like the historians who think biography is history, my peace studies colleagues too often believe in individual efforts and personal change are the keys to peace, and too often underestimate the role of institutions like the military industrial complex.  When they do look at military spending they overemphasize alternative ways to spend that money.  They underestimate the lack of human economic progress because the capital and research diverted to the military undermines the civilian manufacturing sector ability to grow and provide better jobs and products for the rest of us, as seen in the strong German economy.  Opportunity cost is a lost concept on them.  Too often the humanities perspective denigrates and ignores the business perspective.  And too often the business perspective also only focuses on the money and ignores the direction the society is moving, expanding our horizons or futilely trying to control our enemies.  Too often looking at our enemies as evil rather than misguided leads us into overreactions that only serve the purposes of multiplying them.

Peace Economics Example

Economists, caught up in the history of economic thought, focus too much on microeconomics, believing that macroeconomics will never become a science.  Too use the analogy of physical matter phases of gas liquid and solid, economics starts with a focus on individual decisions (gas) building them up into business decisions (liquid flow of society).  They fail to see “solid state” of peace economics that lost capital sent to the military stalls growth while deficit spending adds to growth in the annual records.  In the longer term the land ocean 54-year cycle leads directly into the same economic long cycle and the major war cycle.  In the medium term the Juglar capital investment cycle of about nine years balances out the annual errata.  Together these forces produce a scientific model of economic productivity growth.  Without the precision in the historical record, economics would still be in the squishy liquid phase, with proverbial “too many factors” preventing the movement into a new level of science.

54 Year Long Cycle Example

Global warming science has been so captured by a mutually peer reviewing in group of scientists that they claim 97% certainty about the greenhouse effect.  However, I have audited four local global warming scientists’ classes and learned how the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing.  Undeniably there is a Greenhouse Effect and Earth could be an ice ball without it.  But I have witnessed some of the scientists distorting the record to prove their points and to avoid healthy criticisms.  They have shown an unhealthy defensiveness against new ideas thanks to pressure from the fossil fuel industries.  One student paper showed the model used in class projects leveled off in the second century of warming without changing the trajectory of fossil fuel usage.  Students were instructed to model for one century only.  But even though energy models clearly show a huge amount of solar radiation immediately evaporates water when it hits the surface, they stubbornly resist analyzing the differential impact over land versus ocean as I have.  Even though my modeling is obviously true, few share my understanding except for a World Future Society audience of fifty in Chicago on July 20, 2013.  Other less sophisticated audiences are just stunned.  I have 56 repeat events roughly equally divided in the three basic categories of natural, economic, and political (mostly wars) with 20 precise fits to the year and 95% accuracy overall.  I have three levels of different proofs for each transmission mechanism from natural to economic to political.  But when I talk to climate scientists they fail to recognize the work of industrial engineers like Frederick Taylor, businesspeople like JW Forrester and economists like Sivard, Kondratiev, and Juglar. When I explain anomalies of the temperature record are easily explained by my evaporation theory they look like deer caught in the headlights and move on rather than try to understand me.  Few people can match the nine fields of specialization I have, so they remain restricted to their narrow fields and can’t keep up with me, except for the renaissance people who have nominated me for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Summary

The breadth scope and complexity and basic research style of my work could not be matched without my nine fields of specialty of math, science, wargaming, engineering, accounting, business, politics, peace economics, and long cycle theory.  And I left out history art and religion.  Interdisciplinarity allows me to make connections, plug holes, and otherwise see around corners that others do not see.  Leadership experience teaches me the art of making complex decisions and understanding the psychology of other leaders, such as the war decision.  The world will change dramatically for the better with less wars in the future when leaders recognize the self-defeating nature of excessive military spending levels that leave a nation with a much smaller economy to win future wars with.  And long cycle theory tells us when to expect those future major wars. Together these things change the high military mantra of peace through strength into the reverse low military high growth mantra of strength through peace.  Academics and politicians please consider nominating me to the Norwegian Nobel Committee at

https://www.nobelpeaceprize.org/Nomination.

 

For additional information please see this key seven pages about my ideas:

https://www.academia.edu/33884446/Main_Ideas_Summary_July_2017_7_pages

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2018, January 1), “Interdisciplinary Insights” Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from:  https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Interdisciplinary-Insights,2018153181.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, and Given Odds for the Nobel Peace Prize 2017

Possible Favorite in 2018 November 5th.
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Trump Russia Fire and Fury

Trump Russian Timeline

The timeline of events and important facts of the Trump Russia story are often mentioned only once while the media overemphasize other facts.  This account features those lesser known facts and assumes many of the media redundant facts.  The British spy dossier points out that Russia tries to cultivate Western businesspeople and had been doing so with Trump for at least five years by 2016.  That implies since 2011, two years prior to the Trump Miss Universe selection in Moscow 2013.  Then in April May 2015 the CIA noticed an unusually large amount of communication between Trump Tower and Russia before the June 2015 announcement of the Trump presidential run.  Rachel Maddow noted on her show that Trump signed a letter of intent to build a Trump Tower in Moscow the morning of the third Republican presidential debate in October 2015.  Rachel further noted that Trump was unusually quiet in that debate.

The new buzzword is that Trump is a transactional person with no permanent values, always the business deal maker.  Truth means nothing to him as he reaches 2000 lies in his first year in office.  So, when seasoned politicals would have called the FBI when Russians reached out to his campaign, his operatives all acted opportunistically instead.  So, when Papadopoulos reached out to the Russians shortly after the March DNC hackings, he quickly reported to Sam Clovis in April 2016, campaign co-chair, and then leaked the connection to the Australian British ambassador in May.  That escalated to the famous June 9th meeting with Donald Trump jr., Paul Manafort, and Jared Kushner and a Russian delegation of five led by a lawyer.  Two days before Donald Trump sr. promised a new dirt on Hillary in a major speech soon.  Experts suggest there is no way Don jr. would not have immediately told Don sr. because that’s the way they operate.  The quid pro quo of it all is the view of Russia by Trump as a vast market to reach, rather than a traditional enemy of the USA.  Then he lets Manafort, who successfully managed a pro-Russian presidential campaign in Ukraine, move to take arming the Ukrainians out of the Republican Platform.  Much later, when the senate votes 98-2 for Russian sanctions on July 27, 2017, Trump signs the bill but does nothing to implement it.

The right-wing spin machine has been trying to blame that British former spy dossier for the FBI counterintelligence investigation begun in July 2016.  That is incorrect; a foreign policy advisor from the Trump campaign leaked the story over drinks with the Australian ambassador to Britain in May 2016, four weeks after his April visit to Russia where he learned of the March 2016 Russian hacking.  That Australian ambassador then reported to the US about the Russian hack of Hillary campaign related emails from the DNC.  So, at that point it was known that the Russians had illegally hacked the emails for the express purpose of helping the Trump campaign.  So, when Trump suggested in July 2016 that the Wikileaks material might have come from a 400-pound man living in his parents’ basement in Ohio, that was a red herring lie.  Donald Trump junior was in constant contact with WikiLeaks and knew full well the Russian source of those emails.  Diane Feinstein has clobbered the anti-Mueller anti-FBI anti-Hillary attempt to obstruct or distract justice by the House and Senate Republicans, especially Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan in the House.  Her courage releasing the Fusion GPS transcript of testimony about the Dossier explodes the Republican false narrative about those events.

Jared Kushner oversaw the Trump ground campaign.  Shortly after he met with the Russian ambassador in September, in early October 2016 massive file transfers occurred between Trump Tower New York and the Russian money laundering Deutsche Bank.  This is probably the source of necessary voter microtargeting data needed for the fake news bots used by Russia to help carry swing key states like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.  Kushner was renegotiating a loan with that same bank at that same time, but the volume of data for that would be much less.  Both Donald Trump and Jared Kushner bank there as the bank recently settled a $10 billion Russian money laundering fine.  Together with Republican voter suppression laws and vote total suppression in Democratic areas this was enough to swing the election by 70,000 votes in those three states, despite Hillary’s three million popular vote majority nationwide.  For example, an estimated 200,000 voters in Wisconsin were disenfranchised by the new voter ID law there, and 85,000 people from mainly Democratic areas in Michigan mysteriously did not vote for president.

“Fire and Fury” Fallout by Michael Wolff

The new book shows the universal opinion of Trump staff that Trump is not qualified for the job and not very intelligent.  However, other recent Republican presidents since Nixon are estimated to have only average intelligence.  Still the low opinion of staff is not there for Ford Reagan and the Bushes like it appears to be for Trump.  Bannon’s humiliation may end up working for Trump as political figures need to be either feared or loved to succeed, and this episode shows Trump should be feared.

Summary

Trump wants to do business with Russia and admires other authoritarian figures like Putin in Russia and Erdogan in Turkey.  He is a figure of resistance against the browning of America.  He does not understand the essentials of democracy like checks and balances, a free press, and an independent judiciary.  He resists the cold war bureaucracy of the modern military industrial complex while championing the cause of the military.  He supports military strength while resisting foreign policy orthodoxy.  These impulses have driven him into the arms of Putin the master spy manipulator and the current cooperation with Russia to get elected and to make deals around the world.  This puts him squarely in the sights of the obstruction of justice problem and possible impeachment.

Presidents and Emperors

Parallels exist between the American and Roman Empires.  Nero fiddled while Rome burned.  George Bush jr. fiddled at a fundraiser while New Orleans drowned from Katrina.   Emperor Caligula lasted four years and was considered the crazy emperor.  His name comes from his reputation for small boots.  Trump is the crazy president noted for his small hands.

Nobel Prize Update

The same usual pattern of viewing all my expertclick.com press releases in a row tipped me off that the Norwegian Nobel Committee was interested in my nomination.  That same pattern recurred 12 days, 10 days, and 1 day before the last announcement October 6th, 2017.  So, I came very close last time.  Then November 3rd and 10th both Fridays, tipped me off that they may have had buyer’s remorse not picking me last time, with 5 German and 3 French views on those two days, where my assigned committee member is located as Secretary General of the Council of Europe.  Evidently Thorbjorn Jagland works in Strasbourg France and may also connect to the internet across the river in Germany on occasion.  February 1st is the deadline for nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize.  Associate Professors of Social Sciences and related areas as well as government officials and members of national assemblies are among the many eligible to nominate.  The Norwegian Nobel Committee has launched an on-line nomination form.  Please read more here: https://www.nobelpeaceprize.org/Nomination.  I thank those who have nominated me the last two years and anyone who does again this time.          

For additional information about election stealing in the USA:

https://www.academia.edu/30092060/ELECTION_Stealing_2004_&_2000_24_pages_2004.doc

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2018, January 1), “Trump Russia Fire and Fury” Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Trump-Russia-Fire-and-Fury,2018152922.aspx

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

Peace & Security Economists

The following report was published in the November 2003 Newsletter of “Economists for Peace and Security”.  It is typical of the differences between my science of economics and the traditional nature of far left economists who still stubbornly cling to the notion that economics is a social science.  It’s all just a matter of degree and perspective.  Water can be gas, a liquid, or a solid.  Economics is like the gas state at the individual level and like the liquid state at the business level.  When economists say there will never be a science of economics they really mean there will never be a solid state for economics.  But when solid state like qualities are found in macroeconomics as in my 20th and 21st century modeling, economists of all stripes are inclined to stick to their training rather than accept a new truth.  Even a hard science like physics can resemble the social sciences at the quantum physics level. But without the uncertainty of the Schrodinger wave equation we can not explain the solid state circuit board of all our modern electronics.  Uncertainty becomes certainty as activity reaches modern levels of trillions of dollars and billions of people.  All we have to lose is our illusions and build new models from scratch and common sense as an engineer and accountant would.  This was written before my 2009 doctorate.

War and Empire: The Political Economy of US Militarism by Robert Reuschlein

Meeting from August 23-26 2003, members of the Union of Radical Political Economists, URPE, considered war and empire. The David Gordon Lecture was given by Michael Perelman of Cal State Chico on War, Empire, and Economic Decline. He said empire emerges with weakening of the economy. (I would take this a step further to say that “empire” with high levels of military spending causes a chronically weakened economy.) He went on to say the US was outsourcing production to concentrate on distribution, and that deindustrialization was acceptable to the public. (I find this an inevitable result of wasting key resources on the military, thus hollowing out the technological base of the economy to leave only the service and distribution sectors at world class competitive levels as “empire decay” sets in.)

He alluded to strategic overreach, saying “ever new acquisitions bring ever new frontiers of risk.” He said the military would not save the economy, that postwar busts follow wartime booms, and he mused that WWII might have marked a height for demand helped by war. (But I say the 1946 economy was the same size as that of 1941, setting America back five years, and that the manufacturing productivity growth rate for the forties was 40 percent below average, suggesting four lost years, most likely the war years. Of course others suffered even more: Russia was set back 8 years, Germany 13 years, and Japan 17 years by the war.) He said the military squanders talented resources making civilian industry less competitive.

Other speakers were Bob Pollin, Alan Campbell, David Laibman, and Paddy Quick. Pollin, who will soon host the URPE office at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst, anchored a Sunday morning panel on The Effects of War and Empire at Home. The speakers were good; it’s just that they all seemed to agree that military spending stimulates the economy, a point for which I find precious little evidence. (Even in World War II, when war bonding failed to keep up with war spending in the third and fourth years, the economy slowed and then halted. So I believe that deficit and adrenaline war booms happen in spite of a military drag on the economy, not because of military spending.)

Pollin’s lecture discussed the Clinton years as a 36 percent cut in the military and a 10 percent to 20 percent drop in social programs producing the surplus: that’s the peace dividend. He argued that the stock market boom helped boost private consumption from 62 to 68 percent of the economy, creating the growth wave as local government grew and federal government shrank from 22 to 18 percent. He thinks the best way to stimulate the economy would be for the federal government to bail out the states. Nothing in his lecture suggested the negative effects of military spending as outlined by Michael Perelman. Pollin believes in military Keynesianism, ignoring the possibility that large cuts in military spending after the end of the Cold War propelled the nineties boom. He sees military spending as a political negative but an economic positive.

Alan Campbell was the coordinator of workshops and plenaries. The group is certainly egalitarian, and tries to give everyone a workshop. He also presented a slide show demonstrating a rich understanding of the Cuban economy.

David Laibman used his thorough grasp of the ins and outs of macroeconomic analysis for an imaginative workshop showing aggregate supply and demand models with their sundry price level variables and feedback loops.

My workshop on the “Social Decay of Empire” focused on the ways societies with high military spending become stagnant and frustrated internally.

Robert Reuschlein, a member of ECAAR, is an MBA engineer and CPA and a war-gaming mathematician who has published and spoken widely on issues of war and economics. See http://www.realeconomy.com.

Economists for Peace and Security http://www.epsusa.org

 

For additional information please see this Published Article (with details added):

https://www.academia.edu/23034796/TECHNICAL_Peace_Economics_8p._2014-2016

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2018, January 1), “Economists Peace & Security”  Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Economists-Peace-&-Security,2018152413.aspx

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

Scientific Methods Variety

What is the scientific method? 

According to Google these are the seven steps of the scientific method:

  • Make an observation.
  • Conduct research.
  • Form hypothesis.
  • Test hypothesis.
  • Record data.
  • Draw conclusion.
  • Replicate.

How is it used in the social sciences compared to the hard sciences?

The hard sciences like physics and chemistry follow the scientific method more closely, more traditionally, more quantitatively.  The social sciences are usually looking for more nuance and focus on proceeding from a scholastic literature review of previous work in the field of choice.  So they are starting with the “form hypotheses” or questions stage after a literature review, the third step in this process as described by Google on 11-29-17.  Only then do they proceed with the more basic research approach with the first two steps of observation and conducting research.  This is more of a qualitative approach than the more quantitatively oriented basic research approach of the hard sciences which follows in the same order of the Google approach.  The basis for most social science work is the APA standard of the American Psychological Association.  The social sciences have a bias and assumption that they reflect the complexity and diversity of the human species and human civilization, hence psychology sets the standard.  As one sociology professor once told me, a correlation of 0.30 is significant, and perfect fits are inherently suspect.  This is very different from the basic research approach of the hard sciences, where the last step, replication, is expected to be exact.  Close is considered good enough for the social sciences where ambiguity of results is expected to resemble the diversity of the human experience.

How is it used in economics? 

Nobel prize winner in 1973 economics sciences, laureate Wassily Leontief, has said that 97% of the economics literature consists of articles about other people’s articles, and 2.5% is for model building and 0.5% is basic research.  So when Robert Reuschlein pursues modeling and basic research as his primary focus he is already outside of the mainstream.  Economics History Society co-founder R. H. Tawney, rejecting the Marshallian economics of his day, asserted that “There is no such thing as a science of economics, nor ever will be.”  This remains the common belief of the average economist today.  See “The Nobel Factor” subtitled “The Prize in Economics, Social Democracy and the Market Turn” by Avner Offer and Gabriel Soderberg (2016), and reviewed by Jim Tomlinson (2016).  These views are furthered by the department head’s views when I was admitted to the University of Oregon Economics Doctoral Program.  His view was the starting with the data was cheating, that the reasonable hypothesis must come first.  This makes sense if you are constructing econometric models of fifty some “three or four variable” equations, because the degrees of freedom with make the results meaningless.  This doesn’t make sense for a three factor elegant scientific sixty year model such as created by Robert Reuschlein. Following the elegant basic truths of the hard science methodology is completely different from the traditional social science methodology, where 97% of the economic literature is perfectly happy to do.

Does peer review help or hinder scientific revolutions? 

Peer Review can easily lead to the situation where new ideas can be considered inappropriate, as has often happened to a colleague of mine that has repeatedly offered new path breaking articles in emerging new fields.  I find this in my own work on Peace I can leave the crowd so stunned they do not know where to begin with questions.  This is very frustrating so I have turned to blogging in an effort to simplify the material enough to make partial progress.  The wordy diversity junkies of the social sciences simply do not have the patience to follow the systematic building of a long string of engineering steps that lead to a physics like solid conclusion.  Some have called me “dry” as I carefully seek to clarify simple important points.  Others call me arrogant for the courage of my convictions based on provable math.  If you do not have the understandings of business, you can easily accuse me of self promotion, but without promotion branding and marketing, new ideas go nowhere.  If you think avoiding war or social movements are the only acceptable paths to peace, you fail to see how reducing military spending and better understanding the causes and time periods for war can lead to much happier lives and prosperity for whole populations.  If you do not see the connection between military spending and murder rates or poor health outcomes, you are giving military spending too much credit, underestimating the domestic destruction of militarism.

Does it help or hinder interdisciplinary studies?

Peer review  and differing interpretations of the scientific method can be great impediments to new thinking that can only be truly appreciated in an interdisciplinary way.  Interdisciplinary thinking helps clarify basic concepts by looking at them from several angles.  This is the same kind of triangulation that is used in astronomy to estimate how far away objects are.  Differing religions can put barriers between people, but all religions have their version of the Golden Rule.  Hence multiple religions can better triangulate basic principles of good.  Some religions say pray always, while others encourage chanting singing and meditation to the same effect.  History, politics, economics, sociology, and psychology should be unified in their thinking, not at war  with each other in their separate silos and linguistics.  Empire theory helps unify these different disciplines at a basic level.  Having a common backbone can help the various social sciences relate to each other.

For More Information:

https://www.academia.edu/5558307/ACCURATE_ECONOMICS_MODEL_US_18ppt_3p._2014

Published Article:

https://www.academia.edu/23034796/TECHNICAL_Peace_Economics_8p._2014-2016

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2017, December 10), “Scientific Methods Variety”  Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Scientific-Methods-Variety,2017131789.aspx

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

Findings and Special Claims

Since the Norwegian Nobel Committee seems to be taking me very seriously lately, it’s time for a catalog of my findings and special claims.

  1. Manufacturing Productivity growth rate reduces in proportion to military economy. Ruth Sivard provided the bar chart of nineteen years summary of G7 countries plus Sweden and Denmark in 1981.  Nils Petter Gledisch correlated the data at R=-0.81.  Reuschlein combined Europe and North America improving the continental correlation to R=-0.997.  Claim:  this proves the non-productive nature of military spending.  Reuschlein 1986.
  2. Capital Investment reduces by the amount of military spending. Ruth Sivard in 1983 published this bar chart of the G7 countries plus Sweden over a twenty one year period.  Reuschlein claims that for five of these countries R=-0.993.  The outliers of Italy and Canada are secondary countries in the two main continents, 3.5% GDP lower than the main top four NATO countries, and Japan is 4.5% GDP higher due to a strong cultural bias towards savings. Reuschlein 1986.
  3. American economic productivity model from 1920 to 1983 shows a correlation of R=0.999. All parameters were independently arrived at from annual historical data analysis.  Claim:  this model proves the existence of the 1926 Nicolai Kondratieff 54 year cycle and the Clement Juglar 1860 nine year investment cycle.  This model also has trade loss Great Depression factor and oil shock seventies Oil Crisis factor.  These special factors also repeat confirm their accuracy on a three year basis. Reuschlein 1986.
  4. Defense Strategy model 1985 and 1986. Here is where my war-gaming background comes in handy.  Claim:  this is the key concept why it is imperative for nations to reduce military spending or suffer long term national security disaster in a next major war decades from now.
  5. Decade by decade GDP of these same countries from 1900 to 1980 shows countries rising on low military and falling on high military generally. Best examples, USA, Japan, Russia, Germany.  Claim:  rise and fall of nations depends on level of military spending.  This supports 1972 Toynbee claim that 23 of 25 empires fell because of their high military spending.  Reuschlein 1986.
  6. Murder and Crime rates of five of same countries are proportional to the military economy. The five are from high to low America, Germany, Sweden, Italy, Japan, R=0.996.  This works best for murder rates, and crime index of murder, crime, criminals.  Sweden does not fit for crime index because of definitional issues such as misdemeanors added to felonies.  These five are all 160 year old societies.  The 400 year old societies of England, France, Massachusetts, and Virginia also correlate, R=0.93, but at a 60% lower rate.  The additional 240 years divided by 400 years is 60%.  This indicates a reduced crime rate for being a stable society, but still affected by the military economy size.  Claim:  social decay of declining empires is a direct result of the military spending levels, both because of the economic stagnation and the level of militarism.  Reuschlein 1989.
  7. Regional Growth proportional to military spending changes R=0.97. Analysis of Bi-Coastal Economy report of 1986 shows this when adding military spending changes and grouping states together around regional hub cities or other logical economic clusters of 17 state cluster mini-regions. Cluster idea partial credit goes to Los Angeles Book Award “Cities and the Wealth of Nations” and Reuschlein’s accounting background.  Reuschlein 1987.
  8. Kondratieff wave not only in economics, but also in droughts, temperature, and in wars. Reuschlein 1991.  Claim:  my list of 56 major events, natural, economics, and wars, shows 20 exact year fits and an average departure of 1.5 years from the 54 year cycle.  Drought data prepared by NOAA in 1988, presented on C-SPAN, started the three year project.
  9. Reuschlein finds 54 year cycle in a variety of volcanic, drought, flood, temperature, precipitation, hurricanes, blizzards, earthquakes, and El Nino data. “Trends 90” a key statistical help with other sources.  Working with 14 temperature and 2 precipitation data sets I gradually discovered the pattern.  The difference in hemispheres North and South confirmed the pattern.  My forecasting prowess once earned top honors in a business course on production 1976.
  10. Found nine year cycle in precipitation records 1991. With nine year and 54 year cycles in both temperature and economics, what is the connection?  Failed trying to find it in agriculture.  Then the business production class bails me out as I remember Frederick Taylor’s work finding an ideal temperature to build railroads of 64 degrees Fahrenheit.  A 1986 Climate Change video aired on Maryland PBS by Australian Journalist James Walker leads to Ideal Temperature Zone concept.  Claim:  humans respond to excessive heat with lethargy, creating the link between economic cycles and weather cycles.
  11. Goldstein 1987 finds fifty year cycle in major wars in Europe last five hundred years. Reuschlein extends this to three hundred years of Roman Empire, 200 years of America, for a total of 1000 years with 6 of 17 major war years projected onto the future year 2025.  Pattern is usually #1 versus #2 power after 27 year high growth period when wealth is maximized and new economic differences are maximized.  Then about three years into the new low growth period, at the end of a major cold year two or three year trend, leaders seek a distraction into war and the major war breaks out.  Claim:  both economics and temperature lead to major wars.
  12. Finding: unemployment rate variance across the states fluctuates greatly with the military spending.  For the 1984-1992 period, US military spending % GDP drops 23% overall while the Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell’s home state Maine increases 100%. 12 state clusters representing the Eastern 78% of the country correlate directly with the military changes, R=0.97.  The largest rise in unemployment occurs in Massachusetts as Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill retires in 1986.  Opposite pattern of #7 but same correlation, as the sixteen states that benefited most under Reagan military buildup have fourteen of the highest unemployment rate increases.  The two exceptions?  South Carolina and Georgia with the chair and ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee representing those two states.  Reuschlein 1992.
  13. Richard Schneider asks me to teach my course on “University of the Air” Radio for Peace International 1997. Finding:  recognizing the manufacturing nature of military spending taken as a whole.  1991 University of Colorado professor invites me to write up the manufacturing productivity connection explanation.  Finding:  must look at arms manufacturers as suppliers to the military “factory”.  Then military “factory” is light manufacturing with heavy equipment manufactured by arms industry.  Then absence of a positive product that helps meet human needs like food, clothing, shelter, transportation, fuel, and other hard goods explains how military spending inputs can nourish local communities while giving back only a political service to the larger community or nation.  Necessity is not the issue, national defense is not the issue; lack of a consumer product is the economic flaw in military spending.  Input Output analysis is the key to this understanding.
  14. Spirit Level 2010 by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Puckett shows that income inequality leads to disastrous social and health outcomes. Finding:  Military Spending has much stronger correlations on the six strongest components of their index.  Claim:  Decline of empire is more responsible for poor social conditions than income inequality.
  15. Doctoral Dissertation on Peace Economics in Peace Studies 2009 finds that of eight key concepts in Peace Economics as I define it, Peace Studies programs are very weak on two. Those are the regional state by state economics of military spending and the long cycle of history of booms and busts and wars.  The 54 year cycle is hardly mentioned.  Claim:  not understanding the local impact of military spending and politics beyond the usual generalities avoids findings like all presidents elected during the 11 elections of the Cold War came from an above average military spending state.  Claim:  not understanding the long cycle leads to poor prediction of wars, which leads to military over preparation for constant wars and war threats.
  16. Finding: Klyashtorin’s spectrum analysis of Greenland ice core data shows a very strong 55 year cycle in temperature data over 1400 years.  A friend on a global warming list-serve shared that research from decades ago in circa 2005.  Finding after Hurricane Sandy in 2012:  Running a 55 year moving average over the 1850 to 2010 annual global temperature data smooths the graph into three straight lines, with the last two correlating at .998 and .997 respectively.  Claim:  this proves the existence of the Kondratieff wave   and the natural origins of that cycle show that the economic cycle is not human made but comes from a cycle between land and ocean caused by differential evaporation rates over land and ocean.  Like the four seasons over 12 months this super season occurs over 54 years and occurs despite background changes to the underlying trends caused by the Greenhouse Effect.

Summary

  1. Claim: Recognition of this body of work will lead to better severe weather and major hurricane repeat events predictions as historical records are analyzed and regionalized better.

Claim:  Fortunes will be made in the stock market as the regional impact of major military budget changes is seen to change the fortunes of regionally concentrated stocks and as military states and manufacturing states are seen to move in opposite directions.  Claim:  downward pressure will be strong on all military budgets everywhere as nations begin to understand the self-defeating role high military spending has on a nation’s real defense strength, its economy, over the course of a few decades:  a better balance will be struck between short term defense and long term defense.  Claim:  economic benefits as well as social benefits will accrue to those who find a lower balance of military spending as the way to go.  The million US homicide deaths that occurred in the thirty years after John Lennon’s death could have been cut in half if the military budget had been cut in half, saving 500,000 lives.  Claim:  science will be enhanced greatly as economics and climate change each improve in accuracy by an order of magnitude, with many benefits to the billions of people on this planet.  Claim:  all of these benefits and more will only occur if someone like the Norwegian Nobel Committee helps me get over the publicity and recognition hurdles, so that thousands of scientist can help take this work to the next level.

Seven Page Summary of Main Ideas:

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

 

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2017, November 16), “Why Is the USA an Empire?”  Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Findings-and-Special-Claims,2017131181.aspx

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

Why Is the USA an Empire?

Many make the mistake of defining an empire by its legal structure or the formal way it projects its power overseas.  That is too narrow a definition.  Who is considered a citizen and what lands are possessed by the empire often are the basis of traditional empire definition.  A better modern definition of empire would look at the flows into and out of a country to better define the scope of empire.  Those who recognize America as an empire often begin with the 700 or 800 foreign military bases the United States has worldwide.  Those who would call America an empire would often refer to this as Imperial Overstretch and consider this a main cause of the decline of empires generally speaking.  I myself find the large standing military and overseas political entanglements a better definition of an empire society.  Because the military budget itself defines and measures so much of the rate of economic decline and the rise of various forms of social decay and political control, that is the single best measure of empire as I see it.  Control of large areas of land outside of the original nation state is just not the way Americans like to do business or see themselves; they like to think they are a democracy, not an empire.  But post World War II America not only adopted a large standing army, it also projected its democratic image in a variety of world institutions like the United Nations, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.  However, the mixture of America’s elites (often Ivy League) among the areas of dominance in business, politics, law, media, and the intelligence agencies has created a ruling class.  This ruling class has over time become ingrown and stifles social mobility among the various income groups.  There are still success stories among the land grant college graduates and the military, but America is now more of a class based society than Europe; just the opposite of the situation around World War II, the hegemonic war that lead to US world dominance and empire.

How Did We Get This Way?

The start of the modern American empire was in 1944, when the Democratic Party Convention failed to keep the liberal Wallace as Vice President.  He earned 63% of the vote, but the rules required a two thirds vote.  Early the next morning, moderate Truman was voted in.  Truman was determined to oppose the Soviets and use the atomic bomb, taking the Churchill side of the debate and setting up the rise of the Cold War confrontation.  Then in 1947 the national security act was passed creating the CIA and the Nazi spy network in Russia was absorbed into the CIA.  All this was opposed by the Secretary of War and the Joint Chiefs of Staff who wanted a traditional small army between wars rather than the large standing army of the Cold War.  So Truman raised the military to 5% of the economy rather than the traditional 1% between wars that went back to the 19th Century.  After Korea, Eisenhower then doubled that rate to 10% of the economy keeping the Eisenhower economy under a 2.5% annual growth rate.  Oddly, in both 1953 and 1961 Eisenhower warned us about the military industrial complex even as he was their agent.  Under Kennedy through Carter, except for the Vietnam War, the military was brought back down to the Truman pre-Korea levels of 5% of the economy.  Then Reagan reversed course raising the military to 6.5% of the economy, supported by a tax cut deficit twice the rise in military spending to keep the economy from collapsing.  Kennedy brought military spending down to 7.7% of the economy by 1965 that together with the Kennedy targeted tax cut investment tax credit created the sixties boom.  The four years after 1965 had a 5.6% growth rate, the next four years 4.0% and the next four years 3.6% as the Vietnam War dragged down the economy under Johnson and Nixon through 1973.  The next sixteen years of four presidential terms averaged about 2.5% growth in each term as the post-Vietnam oil crisis recession, the Carter 1978 tax, and Reagan military buildup weighed down the economy into mediocracy.  The Bush senior term suffered from the 1990 tax increase and the post-Cold War and post-Gulf War recessions that elected Clinton in 1992.  Then the drop from 6.5% military to 3.0% from 1965 to 1999 returned the economy to sixties like high growth rates under Clinton. Bush junior then ruined the surplus and the economy with a Reagan like military buildup to 5.0% of the economy with a too small tax cut.  A suddenly surging military buildup, in fiscal 2008, doubled the increase of the military compared to years before and since, and leads to the financial collapse of 2008-2009.  Deregulation of derivatives in 1999 lead to a ten-fold increase in derivatives that set the table for the financial collapse, but a quarter by quarter economy analysis shows the four quarters of the fiscal year 2008 were the worst economic quarter results in that period of several years either side of 2008.  So the Iraq War surge, that actually began in July 2008, lead directly to the economic collapse, combined with the bank deregulation and lack of SEC oversight to make matters worse.  The economic recovery under Obama was slow as he tripled troops in Afghanistan, keeping Bush levels of military spending, but picked up in his second term as the military budget finally went down. This link gives you a better detailed historical account of the American presidencies and supporting data: https://www.academia.edu/4044532/HISTORY_Presidents_Military_Economy_1910-2009_3p._2013

What Are Some Effects of Empire Levels of Military Spending?

As Toynbee (1972) noticed, 23 of 25 civilizations studied collapsed due to high levels of military spending.  Control of the military budget is two way street, corrupting the political system while giving power to those who dole out the money.  The social decay of empire is a result of the economic lost energy represented by the dead end purpose of military spending.  Not meeting people’s needs as they multiply under a stagnant empire political economy structure leads to poor health, lack of social mobility, and high anxiety and crime.  Just as Rome’s Nero fiddled while Rome burned, Bush fiddled while New Orleans was drowned by hurricane Katrina.  Just as Rome once had a crazy emperor for four years named Caligula for his small boots. America now has a crazy president noted for his small hands. Empires tend to emphasize power and control in their social structure, while healthier societies emphasize achievement.  Here are a wide variety of comparative aspects of an empire society including power/achievement, control/opportunity, win/lose, feudalism/ingenuity, boredom/excitement, high crime/low crime, football/baseball, bomb/home, forgiving/unforgiving:

https://www.academia.edu/11421799/MILITARISM_CONTROL_Empire_Social_Decay_WWW_97_6p

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2017, November 5), “Why Is the USA an Empire?”  Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Why-Is-the-USA-an-Empire?,2017130884.aspx

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

Post Navigation