bobreuschlein

A topnotch WordPress.com site

Archive for the tag “military history”

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

Advertisements

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

Changing the World Views

How Mastering Macroeconomics and Climate Change Created Kudos and Backlash

My academic work creating a perfect science-like model of economic growth proves that military spending is the biggest impediment to a powerful nation’s economic growth.  That in turn leads to my new defense strategy requiring a nation to minimize military spending or fall into decline that will inevitably be eclipsed by another power.  Many falsely assume this decline to be inevitable, when in fact it is the result of prolonged over-militarization.  The Norwegian Nobel Committee’s failure to recognize this new reality of science only delays, it does not stop, the inevitable recognition that excessive militarization is self-poisoning of a society.  It does not stop the fact that huge stock market gains are possible following the moves of the military industrial complex better and recognizing the Great Lakes states region moves in the opposite direction of the military budget.  That is because military spending drains key science and capital resources away from civilian manufacturing industries that can be restored by reducing the military budget.  Even the military will benefit from initial lowering, because that results in a better future for them and the society around them as the new high growth glide path “tide lifts even the military boat” ever higher faster.

History of Campaigning to Change the World

My campaign to change the world began with a brochure with a bar chart by Ruth Sivard in 1983.  I took it to the walls of legislative workspace of the 1983 Oregon legislative session with blown up copies of that bar chart.  Finding that in my files after the 1985 Oregon legislative session, I realized the world was ignoring her great work, so I began to test it.  My tests lead to the first presentation of material in December 1985 to the Lane County Commissioners, including Jerry Rust who offered to submit my material to the Pulitzer Prize committee back then and in 2016 submitted my first nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize.  Then Frank Arundel offered me his MacIntosh to complete the first edition of “Peace Economics” in 1986 which I extensively footnoted unlike these blogs.  That remains my clearest and most convincing work of the Economic Model that results from the nonproductive nature of military spending.  PRIO, the “Journal of Peace Research” in Oslo Norway where the Nobel Prize is awarded, asked me to submit an article, but I did not know how to, so I ignored them.  I taught three academic years my Peace Economics course from 1987 to 1989 at the University of Oregon.  My enrollment for a Doctorate in Economics at U.O. ended in my withdrawal due to the fact my professors agreed with me that military spending was non-productive, yet it was not in the model we were expected to study for the first year.  Frustrated at the University, I turned to being a monthly columnist 1989-1997 with Peter Bergel’s Oregon PeaceWorker which had a circulation of 10,000.  Soon all the Democratic Congresspersons knew of my work and Peter DeFazio asked me to write a piece for him to read on the floor of the House, but I was intimidated once more, fearing I might be too critical for a political body like that.  Then Richard Schneider of Radio for Peace International asked me to offer a University of the Air shortwave radio course in 1997 until 2004 when RFPI folded.

The New Campaign

Having met a professor at an anti-war rally in 2003, she later helped me find a new Doctoral Program without the obstinacy of Economics.  From 2006 to 2009 I completed the Doctorate in Educational Leadership from Madison, Wisconsin’s Edgewood College, next to the Edgewood High School I once graduated from and earned the first of many subsequent listings in Marquis Who’s Who I am listed in, later including America and World.  My day job for many years had been as a CPA working for my father, but now I could finally get on with my real life’s work establishing the new scientific economic theory no one in the field of economics even thought was possible.  Economists and Accountants don’t have the scientific training of an engineer, my first degree, so I knew the only way was to advance my ideas to academics and the public until the anticipated foot dragging of economists was overcome.  To that end, I turned to blogging press releases on expertclick.com, recommended by an author I had read.  I now have 119,000 views on Expertclick.com over a four year period, 5443 views on Academia.edu, 5014 views on WordPress.com, and about 10,000 views on Realeconomy.com which has links to all the other detailed websites and is the best place to start.

Favorites of the Press

ExpertClick.com shows me constant updates I check daily for the most current 50 press releases sent out to their list of 7000.  Of those who have left the 50 list, but remain on access to site visitors, I update those results once a year.  The full lists ranked by both views and chronologically are at the link at the bottom of this page.  The most popular old releases in the last year are, in rank order of views this last year, in parentheses (all time total), and date:

Predictions 200 (1067) 8-26-14, Global Citizen 190 (1289)     6-28-14, Walker Work Dignity 154 (722) 2-28-15, Politician in Eugene 151 (789) 5-14-14, Scientific Revolution 142 (687) 12-21-14, Nepal Chile 127 (595) 4-28-15, Grandpa Horicon Marsh 121 (695) 3-1-14, Elections Plus 114 (553) 11-13-14, Military Terror Policing 101 (1222) 8-17-14, Modern Feudalism 99 (863) 2-21-15, Religion and Empire 99 (795) 1-3-15, Heat Hurts 99 (652) 9-8-14, Baltimore Riot 97 (613) 5-2-15.

Favorites of the Academics

Academia.edu lists my 72 papers, including seven peer reviewed articles, several six per page power point conference presentations, many chapters of my unpublished book based on the Radio for Peace International course, the most important Defense Strategy and Economic Model chapters of “Peace Economics”, and many special papers on key topics old and new.  These are ranked by downloads as a marker of serious interest in the link at the end of this article. Unfortunately, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has focused only on the superficial ExpertClick.com press releases and not enough on this academic papers section.  The most important work of all is the 1986 Economic Model and the 1986 Defense Strategy chapters from “Peace Economics” worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize.  The Climate War Cycle power point from 7-20-13 World Future Society presentation and the Weather Cycle paper document the 54 year cycle work that is worthy of the Nobel Physics Prize.  Both of these together are worthy of the Nobel Economics Prize.  Alas for me, the world is full of very slow learners. The ranked lists of state, country, and topics are all shown in the link at the bottom of this page.  This is my best source for people and places interested in my work, and show an evolution from mainly US interest, to mainly British Empire interest among the foreign interest, to strong global acceptance of my work beyond the British Empire countries including more US and worldwide gamers from the Gary Gygax and Dungeons and Dragons crowd.

Favorites of the Mostly Political Friends and Public

BobReuschlein.wordpress.com is where I put all my press releases, and it allows typos to be corrected so it is the best version of my press releases and includes some excellent work just before I started with ExpertClick.com in October 2013 including the first interest by the Pentagon and the CIA in my work. This general list to the public and my mostly political friends has very different priorities than the other two.  Much of this comes from referrals.  Here are the 16 most interesting articles according to the common folk out there, in rank order of views:

1133 Scientific Revolution Facts (Thomas Kuhn), 114 “Where to Invade Next” (Michael Moore), 104 Wargaming with Gary Gygax, 92 Game Master Gygax History, 70 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee, 58 Politician in Eugene Oregon, 53 History US Military Economy, 51 The New Weimar Republic, 47 Are Chili and Nepal Related?, 47 Modern Stages of Empire, 43 Scott Walker of Wisconsin, 42 To Hillary Clinton Critics, 40 Paris Terror, Who Gains?, 40 CIA Presidents:  Obama Clinton, 38 Baltimore Riot the New Watts, 38 Odds on Nobel Peace Prize.

For complete ranked lists of viewings by topic, state, country, by websites:

https://www.academia.edu/34794541/CHANGING_WORLD_VIEWS_2013-2017_13p

Please cite this work as follows:

Reuschlein, Robert. (2017, October 8). “Changing the World Views”.  Madison, WI: Real Economy Institute.  Retrieved from: https://www.expertclick.com/NewsRelease/Changing-the-World-Views-Robert-Reuschlein,2017130137.aspx

Dr. Peace, Professor Robert Reuschlein, Real Economy Institute

Nominated Vetted 2016, and one of 76 Given Odds, tied for 31st Nobel Peace Prize 2017
Contact: bobreuschlein@gmail.com, Info: www.realeconomy.com

Military Complete Geography

Wherever the military industrial complex resides it co-opts those around it in many ways.  This release is mainly an analysis of the Fiscal Year 2015 Defense Spending by State published by the US Department of Defense compared with my own prior analyses of related matters.

Military Concentrations in America

Military concentrations by state always start out with the big four, Virginia, Hawaii, Alaska and the District of Columbia.  Then the rest of the top ten are usually Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Connecticut, Alabama and Arizona.  I have looked at 1980, 1984, 1990, 1992, 1994, 1999, 2003, 2007, 2010 and 2015 over the years.  In 2015 these are all in the top 14, with Kentucky, Maine, and Rhode Island, rising to this top level.  Among the big eight population states, California, Texas, and Florida have consistently been in the high military category, while New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan have been consistently low military, a clear South versus North split.  Indeed, the nation as a whole tends to follow this North versus South split, with few and rare exceptions, except the coastal corners, Washington and New England.  In 1991 dividing the nation into 28 North states and 22 South states, the South had twice the military spending level of the North.  In 2015 the 22 high military spending states had half the US population comparable to the 28 low military spending states.  But the military spending was clearly split 70% in the high states to 30% in the low states.  The lowest military spending region is clearly the Great Lakes states including New York, Pennsylvania, and Iowa.  Other than the Eastern two, these are commonly called the industrial Midwest states.  This is a common pattern among all the states, where the military is high, the manufacturing is low and vice versa.  This is also the common pattern when the military budget is changing, the high military buildup states’ economies move in the opposite direction of the low military high manufacturing states.  This pattern is well understood in military states but rarely understood in manufacturing states. Manufacturing state economic volatility is greater than military states.

Most Militarized States in America

The 2015 report shows three clear high military spending counties in America.  Fairfax in Northern Virginia where the CIA and Pentagon are nearby, San Diego California where the Pacific fleet is based, and Tarrant County Texas where the F-35 aircraft is manufactured by number one defense contractor Lockheed Martin in the Fort Worth western suburb of Dallas.  Fort Worth is located in Texas Congressional District 12 of the chair of the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee, while Texas District 13 adjacent to 12 has the chair of the House Armed Services Committee.  Former President Bush awarded the F-35 contract to his home state, a very common political practice.  But while the $15.3 Billion for San Diego, and the $13.6 Billion for Forth Worth’s County look very impressive, the Fairfax Virginia total of $17.0 Billion is just a part of the $25.7 Billion including adjacent Virginia Counties, and the $44.1 Billion in the DC metro area including ten entities in DC, Maryland, and Virginia.  No wonder the nation’s capital has seven of the nation’s richest counties located there, with various studies showing one third higher pay for military contractors:  white collar, blue collar, and engineers,  compared to other manufacturing.  Other studies show defense consultants making multiples of medical doctor pay.

States Ranked by Large Military Complex

  1. Virginia (per capita #1) has the largest cluster with $25.7 billion in Northern Virginia with the CIA and Pentagon. It also has the second largest with $16.8 billion in Southern Virginia.for the Atlantic fleet. Virginia has three members sitting on the four key military committees, including the former vice presidential candidate Senator Kaine (D-VA). Senator Warner (D-VA) is ranking member on Intelligence, a key committee looking into the Russian election tampering.
  2. California (per capita #23) has the third largest cluster with $15.3 billion in the San Diego base of Pacific fleet. The Los Angeles metro cluster is $14.7 billion including the site of the San Bernadino terrorist attack and Santa Clara Sacramento worth $11.3 billion includes Silicon Valley. California has 10 members on the key four committees lead by Senator Feinstein (D-CA) on Defense Appropriations while Senator Boxer has just retired from Armed Services.
  3. Texas (per capita #20) has that famous Fort Worth aircraft factory $13.6 billion ($12.6 billion Lockheed Martin) that Kennedy was on the way to when he died. Johnson had the F-111 rebid twice before taking the bid from Boeing. House Speaker Wright came from that district when the Cold War ended. Texas has both House chairs of the four key military committees and eight members all told including Senator Cruz (R-TX) on Armed Services.
  4. Maryland (per capita #5) has $11.2 billion in four counties in the DC area, Lockheed Martin has $1.5 billion and John Hopkins University (foreign policy) has $0.7 billion, two House members on key military committees. Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) ranking Foreign Relations.
  5. Missouri (per capita #10) has $7.6 billion in St. Louis, Boeing $6.4 billion, where the F-15 was built. Dick Gephart represented that district when he ran for president in1988 and won the Iowa Caucus. Back then St. Louis was the top military spending per capita large metro area in America. Republican House members Hartzler and Graves are on Armed Services, Senator McCaskill (D-MO) on Armed Services, and Senator Blount (R-MO) on Defense Appropriations.
  6. District of Columbia (per capita #6 if it were a state) has $7.2 billion. No Senators or voting congressperson, no statehood, Georgetown University #1 for CIA internships.
  7. Alabama (per capita #4) has Madison County with Huntsville Space Center $7.1 billion. Alabama has seven members on the four key committees, including a Senator on each key committee. Senator Shelby (R-AL) Defense Appropriations is also the chair of the all powerful Senate Rules Committee.
  8. Hawaii (per capita #2) has $6.8 billion spent in Honolulu. Four members serve on the key committees including a Senator on each one. Courageous Senator Hirono (D-HI) voted on the key Health Care bill even though she has stage four kidney cancer.
  9. Massachusetts (per capita #17) Middlesex County has $6.1 billion (Raytheon $3.9 billion, MIT $1.6 billion). Senator Warren and Congresspersons Tsongas (D-MA) and Moulton all sit on Armed Services. Warren (D-MA) and Moulton (D-MA) have presidential ambitions.
  10. Pennsylvania (per capita #27) Philadelphia Counties $6.0 billion, two House Armed Services.
  11. Connecticut (per capita #9) has $5.6 billion for United Technologies in Fairfield and Hartford. Senator Blumenthal (D-CT) and Congressperson Courtney sit on Armed Services.
  12. Ohio (per capita #35) belt of Southwest Counties $5.5 billion, Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) ranking member on Banking, four House members, two each, on key military committees.
  13. Arizona (per capita #12) Puma County has $4.9 billion with Raytheon $4.2 billion of that. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) is chair of Armed Services with four House members on Armed Services.
  14. Washington (per capita #14) King County $4.7 billion (Boeing $4.1 billion) has Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) former Budget chair sitting on Defense Appropriations with two House members on Armed Services. Research for drones is done principally in Washington.
  15. North Carolina (per capita #26) Cumberland County area (Fayetteville, Fort Bragg) $4.6 billion, Senator Tillis (R-NC) Armed Services Committee, Jones (R-NC) on House Armed Services.
  16. Colorado (per capita #15) has $4.3 billion spent in El Paso County, home of the Air Force Academy. Only two House members (R-CO) on Armed Services.
  17. Kentucky (per capita #8) has $4.2 billion in Jefferson County (Louisville) where Humana has $3.8 billion. Senate Majority Leader McConnell (R-KY) on Defense Appropriations with Rogers on House Defense Appropriations. No wonder Leader cares so much about Health Care.
  18. Florida (per capita #24), Orange County (Orlando) $3.9 billion, Lockheed Martin $2.5 billion, Senator Nelson (D-FL) sits on Armed Services and is ranking member on Science (Space), one House Defense Appropriations, and two House Armed Services.
  19. Illinois (per capita #42) Cook Lake DuPage $3.7 billion, Senator Dick Durbin ranking member Armed Services only military committee.
  20. Georgia (per capita #19), Cobb Fulton Counties (Marietta, Atlanta suburb, Kennesaw State) $3.4 billion, Lockheed Martin $2.6 billion, long gone are the Senator Nunn days for Georgia, today only three people sit on the four key military committees. Senator Perdue (R-GA) sits on Armed Services, House has Graves on Defense Appropriation and Scott on Armed Services.
  21. Minnesota (per capita #32), Hennepin County area (Minneapolis) $4.0 billion, United Health Group $2.8 billion, McCollum (D-MN) on House Defense Appropriations, only military.
  22. New Jersey (per capita #36), Burlington County area $3.0 billion, $1.6 billion Lockheed Martin, Lobiando (R-NJ) Norcross (D-NJ) both on House Armed Services.
  23. New York (per capita #49), Long Island Counties $2.9 billion, Senator Gillibrand (D-NY) and two House members all three on Armed Services.
  24. Oklahoma (per capita #18), $2.7 billion in Oklahoma County area, Senator Inhofe (R-OK) sits on Armed Services, with three in the House: Cole on Defense Appropriations; Bridenstine and Russell on Armed Services.
  25. Mississippi (per capita #6), Jackson County (Pascagoula) $2.5 billion, HuntingtonIngalls $2.0 billion, Senator Cockran (R-MS) chairs Defense Appropriations, Senator Wicker (R-MS) on Armed Services, and House Kelly (R-MS) sits on Armed Services.
  1. Utah (per capita #22), Salt Lake area $2.2 billion, Bishop (R-UT) House Armed Services.
  2. Alaska (per capita #3) Anchorage Borough $2.0 billion, Senator Murkowski (R-AK) on Appropriations and Senator Sullivan (R-AK) on Armed Services, none on House Committees.
  3. Rhode Island (per capita #11), Five Counties $1.9 billion, Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) is the ranking member of Armed Services and also on Senate Defense Appropriations combines with the state’s only congressperson Langevin (D-RI) on House Armed Services.
  4. Michigan (per capita #48), Detroit Counties $1.8 billion, Senator Peters (D-MI) Armed Services.
  5. New Mexico (per capita #13), Bernalillo County (Albuquerque) $1.7 billion, Senators Udall (D-NM) Defense Appropriations, Senator Heinrich (D-NM) Armed Services (Emerging Threats ranking member), none from House.
  6. Louisiana (per capita #29), Orleans Parish area $1.7 billion, Abraham (R-LA) House Armed Services
  7. South Carolina (per capita #16), Charleston County $1.6 billion, Senator Graham on both Armed Services and Defense Appropriations, Wilson on House Armed Services.
  8. Indiana (per capita #33), Marion County $1.4 billion, Senator Donnelly (R-IN) & House Banks (R-IN) Armed Services, Visclosky (D-IN) ranking member House Defense Appropriations.
  9. Nebraska (per capita #31), Omaha area $1.3 billion, Fisher (R-NE) and Sasse (R-NE) on Senate Armed Services, Bacon (R-NE) House Armed Services.
  10. New Hampshire (per capita #25), Hillsborough Rockingham $1.3 billion, Senator Shaheen (D-NH) Armed Services, House Shea-Porter Armed Services.
  11. Nevada (per capita #28), Clark County $1.2 billion, Rosen (D-NV) House Armed Services.
  12. Kansas (per capita #21), Sedgwick (Wichita) $1.1 billion, Geary (Fort Riley) $1.1 billion, Boeing $0.3 billion, Raytheon $0.2 billion, Senator Moran (R-KS) Defense Appropriations.
  13. Maine (per capita #7), Sagadahoc County $1.1 billion, General Dynamics $1.1 billion, Senators Collins (R-ME) on Defense Appropriations and King (I-ME) on Armed Services, no House.
  14. Wisconsin (per capita #45), Winnebago County $1 billion, Oshkosh Truck $1 billion, Senator Baldwin (D-WI) on Defense Appropriations, Gallagher (R-WI) on House Armed Services.
  15. Arkansas (per capita #34), Pulaski County area $0.8 billion, Senator Cotton (R-AR) Armed Services, Womack (R-AR) House Defense Appropriations.
  16. Iowa (per capita #44), Linn County (Cedar Rapids) $0.8 billion, Senator Ernst (R-IA) chairs the Armed Services subcommittee on Threats.
  17. Oregon (per capita #50), Portland area $0.8 billion, Nobody on military committees.
  18. Tennessee (per capita #46), Coffee area $0.7 billion, Senator Alexander (R-TN) and Two Members on House Armed Services.
  19. North Dakota (per capita #30), Ward County $0.4 billion, Nobody on key military committees.
  20. Delaware (per capita #38), Kent County $0.4 billion, Nobody on key military committees
  21. Idaho (per capita #41), Elmore County area $0.4 billion, Nobody on key military committees.
  22. Montana (per capita #37), Cascade County $0.3 billion, Daines (R-MT) Tester (D-MT) Senate Defense Appropriations.
  23. South Dakota (per capita #39), Pennington County area $0.3 billion, Senator Rounds (R-SD) on Armed Services
  24. Wyoming (per capita #43), Laramie $0.3 billion, Cheney (R-WY) House Armed Services
  25. Vermont (per capita #40), Chittenden County area $0.2 billion, Senator Leahy (D-VT) Defense Appropriations
  26. West Virginia (per capita #47), Kanawha County $0.2 billion, Nobody on military committees

  

Summary

High military states lead 80 to 42 in holding key military committee assignments and have about the same share of military spending.  Many large Northern states have little or no representation on the key military committees, thinking the defense budget doesn’t affect their state.  Nothing could be further from the truth as huge amounts of research and capital are drained from manufacturing in the low military states during military buildups.  Likewise, upper Midwest industrial states prosper greatly when the military is lowered.  But this is the best kept secret around, as few peace studies programs study regional economics.  The low military half of America lost three times as many jobs as the high military states in the two years after 9-11-01. Construction was twice as strong in the industrial Midwest states three years after the Cold War ended in 1994. The “Hole in the Donut” nature of military spending is essential to understand how the military economy can boost some local economies while depleting other (mainly inland) regions, depleting all other manufacturing, and slowing the national economy.  Here is the link to that story:

https://www.academia.edu/5740273/MIDWEST_and_the_Military_3_pages_2005

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