When You Know Something Is Wrong With America

When politicians use talking points rather than evidence and anecdotal evidence rather than reasoning. Then call it a Lincoln Douglass Debate. http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN/

Malthus Theory

(UPDATE: Before reading I suggest http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=human-population-reaches-seven-billion) Malthus was the person who founded your fears of overpopulation: his theory that population would rise far rapider than food production. The J-Curve is his idea in mathematical terms, named after the bottom part of a cursive capital J. The prediction was made 200 years ago. Since then agricultural advances i.e. green revolution have increased crop yield and new lands could and were exploited. New technologies such as better tractors have proliferated over the world increasing standard of living. This would appear to solve the production problem and a simple distribution solution would be in order.

Domestication of new animal species and higher yielding crops have created a new ecosystem designed for our tastes. Salmon, Bass, Tilapia, and other species have become affordable to mass markets in Europe, China, and the United States. Corn and Soy have fed a chain of livestock and filled the supermarkets. All progress in 60 years worth of time.

However soon after the adoption of dangerous pesticides, waste in the food chain, and a reworking of the environment we understood the damage done to ourselves. The path to prosperity was unclear and inefficient. Malthus theory was looked again as guide to our future.

Recent crop failures in the world have indicated that food production may not work in the same way as in recent past. For the green revolution simply turned our food supply into a stop-gap system. Ammonium fertilizers is the bridge and trucks are the bricks that hold it together (the river is our food supply). New evidence (University Minnesota) shows our current agricultural system alone is not enough to supply 9,000,000,000 (9billion people) by 2050. This means the J-Curve is back.

Technology may save us again, but we must take a different path. Soilless growing, hydroponics, a 300 year old technology hailed for its spacial and yield efficiency may create a new revolution.

Organic hydroponics encompass three important technologies: aquaponics, vermiponics, and true organic hydroponics. Organic nutrient lines such as Fox Farm Grow Big, bought today at my local hydroponics store are unsustainable as our current system. The ingredients are, in Grow Big:

KNO3, MgNO3, K Phosphate, Ammonium Phosphate, Ammonium Nitrate, CaNO3,

Earthworm Castings (sustainable),

Norwegian Kelp (not sustainable),

and trace minerals.

True organic hydroponics can be derived from the urine of any animal, even human; it's safe if aged to the point where urea turns into Ammonia. Add worm-castings and supplements, if necessary and you've got a highly efficient hydroponic system. Aquaponics is the process by which fish waste is converted to usable plant food and plants clear the excess nutrients for the fish—thus cleaning the water. A book has recently come out on the subject: Aquaponic Gardening by Sylvia Bernstein, creator of theaquaponicsource.com. This book is on my list of books to read. Vermiponics is basically a soilless compost pile that acts as a clear nutrient input out-put station.

Many commercial aquaponic farms have sprouted up in recent years: Growing Power, Sweet-Water Organics, Friendly Aquaponics, and Green Acre Organics to name a few. Aquaponic infrastructure has been created in recent months and hydroponic infrastructure is booming. Not only is hydroponics affordable, when done correctly, the rumor of tastelessness is not true. Because of these things hydroponics may sustain us in the next 40 years.

So, shall Malthus be correct or are we going to do something about it. I appeal that we garden in the space we can. Hydroponics can help us.

The True Value of People

In America there is hate. You may be desensitized to it or possibly you could be a victim. More likely you are a listener—to a hate that is pervasive to all American life. A typical High-School Student will likely listen to hate every day, whether they are the subject, the bystander, or the perpetrator. Words such as slut, faggot, fag, bitch, illegal, and other words can be seen throughout a day. Some ask why, some are radicalized by such words and others couldn't care less.

When some ask why the youth of America are vicious to fellow human beings one must ask how much you value a person.

Everyday in the world a person at a benign setting will blame immigrants, Jews, Muslims, and any combination stated or not for the world’s problems—earshot from children. A person can either stand for justice or watch bigotry invade the lives of all. A phobia of others drives reasonable to false conclusions of people.

Are we not all humans? Yes someone may have crossed the border to live in a country they didn't consent. But, suggestions like "shoot them" cannot exist in a group.

Illegal immigrants are people. What is the value of a person? If your answer is uncertain then you've been distracted.

A person is a person—no more no less. To the answer of "they take jobs from Americans": respond with kindness for a person has a job. We are all humans—a job is a tool for humanity to prosper. Yes, it hurts to be left out, but the majority of jobs that shunned peoples take are disparaging and exploitative. Immigrants are economic refugees forced from their homeland, illegal or not people deserve sympathy for their sufferings.

Many illegal immigrants are afraid to interact with the gated community that is America; the only jobs readily available are working in the hot sun. Imagine a sunny day, you run along a park, are you tired afterwards? Try bending, running, and working before the sun rises till after the sun sets. This is agricultural work on a mass scale, and 70% of people who do this work are illegal immigrants (nationally). This proves that, like the characters in many Steinbeck Novels, we leave work too horrible to the poor to people we protest their existence.

We are a nation founded on the general welfare that, apparently, undermines basic human rights.

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." (Martin Luther King) If you believe some people do not deserve to move when their situation compels it, then you've taken that right from everyone. Unless of course you believe that some people are more valuable than others. I hope love guides you to a better conclusion.

I submit the following policy changes:

nullify quotas for regions;

allow all immigrants under 18 a path to citizenship;

and a federal program to offer workers a path to citizenship.

Finally, some, drawing lines in the sand, wait:

“ I've reached my limit. This may bring my Presidency down, but I will not yield on this.”

- President Obama to Eric Cantor and Congressional Republicans in a closed-door meeting at the White House.

It seems as though all that progressive noise from the professional-left has inspired change in the… oh god this is not the time. You had an entire two-and-a-half year’s president and now’s the time you won’t yield. What about the public option or, single payer, what about Wall Street Reform, to say the two most anger-infused things thus far, what about every single legislative accomplishment of your entire time as president. Now is not the time to hold-out. If you pull this off it will be great, but if the entire financial sector goes to pieces then it will be mostly the republicans fault but you’re not faultless.

However, thank you for not yielding to republican incompetence… oh whatever. (I think this blog is getting a bit angry)

Debt Deal:

Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader, has put forward a proposal to effectively allow the President of the United States to raise the debt ceiling. Well, that sounds like a good deal; our nation will not be among third world nations as a bond-risk; veterans and social security recipients will get paid, sounds wonderful. The debt'pocalypse will be averted... and after thinking about this for a second we start to notice something: “effectively allow the President of the United States to raise the debt ceiling” I'm fairly sure that's extremely unconstitutional:

“ All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives...Section. 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States...” [sic]

Ok, let’s see the important part for this piece: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives… To borrow Money on the credit of the United States”. (warning: hyperbole ahead) They’re both in the same article, just in case the […] made you think I was splicing the constitution for a false argument. (end noted hyperbole here)

Funny how that happens, a congressional power is being given to the President. In my opinion, as long as congress doesn’t give away a basic power to the executive branch, I don’t care if the government is shut-down. The executive branch is powerful enough without ripping the balance of power once called a three ring circus. Our entire system of constitutional-governance may well be sick if a branch of the government is forced by the American People, rhetoric from the President, Barack Obama has yet to make a statement, to my knowledge, of approval for the plan, and congresses incompetence.

As the tea party would say—be true to the constitution or we’ll vote-you-out, then going on to say how democrats are the ones destroying the constitution with spending. (that last clause is for another day) This is not, I repeat, not constitutional and Mitch McConnell should be ashamed that he puts tax breaks for the wealthy ahead of the actual “fucking” constitution. Congress if you’re dysfunctional enough to give away your basic rights to a overreaching part of government, not related at all to the start of the 44^th presidents term,

then perhaps we need a change.

Change 2012!

For the constitution click here: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

The date of the founding of our nation is today.

We are here today as Americans in our quest for justice. Justice for all people who walk upon this Earth. The same justice for men, women, all religions, and non-believers, all peoples, and all creeds. The United States of America celebrates today, not as a celebration of power (as fireworks might suggest) , but as celebration of liberty for all peoples. We are the people of this world, and in the United States of America we protect those here, more often than some might think, and around the world.

We were faced in the hot summer of 1776 with a choice: we could break away with the motherland which would include injustices of war, or continue to be underrepresented in our own government, and the consequences of that thereof. We chose treason, and after eight long years we became a new imperfect-nation. A nation still evolving is a nation ready to act for justice. (sorry for the generic words)

Here's the document: Declaration of Independence. Have a fun and thoughtful 4th of July: and be safe, if you want to (it's a free nation) .

The bill to increase pollution, endanger the public health, and not address taxes in any way.

The yeas are 255 are the nays are 172. In the federal House of Representatives the bill passed with a 58.6% majority. The bill will, if enacted into law, take away the right of the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. At a time when government appears to shut down, till politicians can act like adults, the vote distracts and plays a partisan game with impeding consequences. The consequences being the nation’s inability to control the highest per person emissions rate in the world. The entire world will feel the effects of this vote, as of yet denied by house members. The fall back will be the senate, but even a majority of 53 democrats cannot preserve this essential function of the Environmental Protection Agency. Many democrats are in the grip of big coal and if there was only a "up or down" vote the people would lose.

This name, not official, was proposed by Jared Polis (D) Colorado's second district, to reflect accuracy. The name is accurate because, the welfare of "we the people" is at stake, the welfare of the world is stake, and the welfare of the environment is at stake. If politicians don't respect that, we have to make politicians see what the majority of us think. But, what are politicians supposed to do the majority of them "stick their heads in the sand", or willfully be ignorant. The people are to learn why the Environmental Protection Agency must keep its right to regulate carbon dioxide, like any other pollutant.

If Congress does not create a law then the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency must come into effect, an authority given by Congress. If carbon dioxide is not regulated then, as stated in previous blog posts, our standing in the world might suffer and the immanent consequences of climate change. There are many options but, by far, the best one is to allow the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate carbon dioxide emissions.

Our government can sometimes feel like a bought subsidiary of "Big Coal", but we should know that the grip of "Big Coal", are not as strong as 100 years ago. These words keep me hopeful.

The way we do it in Washington. Update unions

The way we do it in Washington! (state) This sentence was repeated again and again by my governor Christine Gregoire, in her announcement of a collective bargaining agreement with union workers, in the state ferry system. (Friday March 4^th) Unions came at the bargaining table to talk about, salary reduction, organizing management, and operational costs. This agreement saved $10,000,000; and all with respecting collective bargaining. Unions are not money grubbing, they are helping the state fix its budget crisis. “It was a very difficult and tough negotiation,” said Capt. Tim Saffle, but we came to an agreement. This if anything is a slap in the face towards governors taking away rights. We in the state of Washington can be civil and respectful towards our employees.

“Since 2000, we’ve transferred over $850 million to ferries from other accounts,” she said, and those accounts are now gone. Over the next decade, she says, they’ll need another $900 million, she said. Although it is a band-aid fix, it was a necessary one. (this is, possibly, a direct quote from the governor or, a paraphrase)Yes, this is true and we need to fund our aging ferry system, with new taxes. (or if they cut from other programs) The genius of this agreement is not the monetary value, but the process. Since this was peaceful and civil; this has my support. We in the state of Washington are an example, but we should not remain an example, but the norm.

She ticked off a list of several agreements they’ve come to, then said: “To be frank, there is a limit to how much we can ask the 1,600 people who ensure our ferries are safe,” at least our state knows this. We know that taking away rights, then checks, is the wrong way to approach our budget. We also know that we should have proud workers. (unless they strike eg: 2008 teachers strike Bellevue, opinion only for this parenthesis)In the state of Washington we stand by our workers, what about Wisconsin.

For more information about Washington state politics, or want to know where these quotes are from go to tvw.org, or their blog http://www.tvw.org/capitolrecord/.

Update: Similar union busting bills move to other states

Indiana: state legislators have left the state to stop its own anti-union bill restricting collective bargaining or, eliminate it. As stated this is a dangerous precedent and must be stopped. My home state of Washington has a bill that would do the same but, it died. All around America our eyes are on Wisconsin, but keep a wary eye on your own state. We must fight for our rights ordained by the people. In order to pursue happiness we must have unions; the labor movement created a better atmosphere for success, for all classes rich or poor.

I won’t bore you with more opinion, just keep vigilant. Here are some readings to help; I’ll throw in some conservative opinion to keep the scale from falling through the floor. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-17/public-employee-union-protests-spread-from-wisconsin-to-ohio.html Some scope for this one. http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/02/22/indiana-democrats-walk-out-to-protest-union-busting-bill-deny-quorum/ this opinion/news is important to note. http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2011/02/23/follow-the-money-what-the-wisconsin-education-association-isnt-talking-about/ this is the conservative one to sort of balance the scale (notice the grammar in the title)

Hope for Equality (some context for my thinking)

Started writing this during the extension of the bush tax cut debate. Ended writing this around the time the tax cuts passed.

In the course of human events a people rise to the challenge of inequality. Our world riddled with the man made curse of inequality; in America there is a great divide within nations and the continent. “…extends almost all of the Bush tax cuts, including income tax cuts for the nation’s wealthiest families, for two years and sets the estate tax at 35 percent for individual inheritances of more than $5 million.” (The hill, Alexander Bolton) A tax cut for all of the republics people in times of budget alleviations is creating wealth at taxpayers’ expense disproportionately to the wealthiest 2%, giving haven to billionaires and millionaires to continue their destructive ways, is unacceptable. People who make less than 20 thousand dollars a year, well below the mean income of taxpayers’ will get a smack in the face in the form of a tax hike. However in developing nations the suffering of the people in the face of opulence is at such great heights, wars erupt from the danger of inequality.

Fair is the glorious word to which we emancipate ourselves from the tyranny of undeserved riches from trusts, which hoard power and leave tiny scraps of wealth, to aristocrats who’s only claim to luxury is that their ancestors worked. Fair is the epitome of great ideals, fair leads hope through tragedies such as recessions. However my convictions stand, economic anarchy and complete economic control is both amoral and impractical. People all over the world have tried these options and failed, while most end of in totalitarianism. Fair is equivalent to equality, but equality is not the epitome of same. People ought to be treated with the knowledge he/she can do whatever his dreams desires, but with the ideals come a responsible society and we shall stand by that knowledge with actions.

In our world industrialized nations use their wealth to provide services to its people through taxation. The people with the means to support themselves a few times over helps pay for hardworking people who finance a standard of living of modesty instead of abject poverty, because of social programs. Most industrialized nations provide, life saving, health care to all its citizens in one way or another. Canada provides universal health care through a single payer system, this helps people live and makes everyone equal for health.

In the United States of America we have social programs to help the elderly and the impoverished, to a certain degree. America the wealthiest society is in class warfare fought only by the wealthiest Americans to gain access to the wealth taken from the impoverished of the world. The tax code is a known vice for favoring aristocratic Americans, in the face of common people. Our liberties may be intact, but what of our right to be who we want to be, is that a just cause worth taking. The American constitution states " We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Are the causes of a more perfect union and the general of the people not a worthy cause? Should we as a world not aspire to our greatest ideals? Should we as humans continue our destructive ways? Should we as a people condone greed in the face of poverty and despair? Perhaps we should clearly draw a line in the sand without ambiguity that we as a world are not helping the few rule the many. Perhaps we should even encourage the many to rule the many. Perhaps we should save all who come from the adversity of inequality.

The depolarization of America, handbook, (sort of)

The depolarization of America, handbook

The United States is facing a recurring enemy, seen everyday yet hidden. Because, of this enemy we fear things and people/peoples that are irrational to fear. Fear drives this enemy and bias fuels it, leading to unforeseen problems in our political landscape, where suffrage is granted to any non-federal criminal over 18. (i.e.: the gullible and easily uninformed are allowed to vote). The media is the exploitation aggregate for partisans. Our media outlets, today like Fox News and MSNBC; various newspapers from the New York Times to the Wall Street Journal, and the blogosphere; hype news stories in an echo chamber respective to its partisan side. The two echo chambers combined, coined “the conflictonator”, constantly bicker and the blogosphere stokes the flames for the next controversy. (i.e.: set of bickering) Though humans are biased we should expect our news to be as objective as possible, in order to make an informed and ultimately opinionated decision, although that is an ideal form of informed democratic society that is not the current situation. In fact, a Harris opinion poll says quite the opposite: the nation as a whole was misinformed about the Iraq War in 2004. 62% of people thought Saddam Hussein had strong links to Al-Qaeda, and 41% thought Saddam Hussein helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the US on September 11, 2001.” (Harris opinion poll October 21, 2004) A diagnosis for the media’s behavior is that to make money you need partisanship in a significant part of the schedule, especially prime time. This leads to a misrepresentation of the facts when editorial shows are a large portion of the “24 hour news cycle”, or a majority, as in the case with Fox News. So instead of fighting this enemy on its terms, the sane majority must fight it with what it does best, reasonable dialogue.

People should lobby news organizations such as Fox News to renegotiate terms with inflammatory stars such as Glen Beck and organizations such as M.S.N.B.C., Ed Shultz, to find better rhetoric for his views.* This will keep pressure on organizations that display bias, and people that lie to fit a narrative. Narratives are important to the “lamestreem media” not discourse. Therefore any sort of pressure will influence organizations and media stars for renegotiations of terms, firings, and resignations. If even one voice that seeks to divide is toned down then “the conflictonator” as a whole is toned down, as a part of the feedback loop is ended. Therefore lobbying organizations is an effective mechanism to reduce noise from “the conflictonator”.

Since the media is inherently biased, we must read multiple sources in order to create our own opinions on the subject. A study by Harvard University found: “Free Republic’s apparent anti-Republican skew disappears, replaced with a slight (albeit insignificant) skew against anti-Republican stories, while Daily Kos appears even more skewed against Republicans” (http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/mbaum/documents/BaumGroeling_NewMedia.pdf) (page 353 starts on page 345); this was during the 2006 election cycle and these are both blogs on the opposite sides of the spectrum. If the American people, and people around the world relative to this situation, read both blogs then their view might not be as jaded if a person read one blog. When media becomes biased people must be able to influence their own readings as a way to stay sane. (i.e.: reasonable)

Protesting the “conflictonator” as a whole will equally if not more effectively than both of the proposals combined; this will continue the effort for media objectivity. The Rally to Restore Sanity/ and or Fear, was a protest on the national mall with comedians John Stewart and Stephan Colbert, to raise attention to the polarization of politics due to rhetoric in the media. The success of the protest was in that it created a new national dialogue on reasonability and rhetoric, for example Keith Olbermann, the (former) host of Countdown, suspended his hyperbolic series “Worst Person in The World” in honor of the protest. The left in some ways, visible at least, (as little as it was) the response and toned down redirect. Therefore protesting gives voice to reason and effects the “conflictonator”.

Lobbying, reading multiple sources, protesting, all being necessary for our democracy, will increase the chance of the demos not being manipulated for monetary purposes and partisan purposes. As a nation there is a choice to be made; to allow America to slip back into an abysmal period of zero compromise, or begin to begin understand others for their beliefs and finally compromise. The nation must choose the second; although both options are charted, the former is dangerous.

“I understand that people have a hard time with the concept that we get to decide what is news and what isn’t, and what is fair and what isn’t” (McCumber, 2007).

*Since Ed Shultz is a liberal Glen Beck of some sort. I put them together; however I feel that unlike Glen Beck; Ed Shultz can watch what he says. Glen Beck however I believe is completely crazy and no appropriate rhetoric can be found.

Wisconsin protest rant. (trying to be less Glen Beckish)

“We the people of the United States of America, in order to form a more perfect union… promote the general welfare…” by busting unions? Unions create better lives for its members, created all bargaining rights, created non-work hours, such as the weekend, created the minimum wage laws… ect. Yet they are portrayed in the media as money grubbing, job-killing, working class hating, organizations hell-bent on the destruction of the economy and your way of life with it. (I hear this from the Republican Party at least) We are the change yet, how can we create change without institutions we rely on, unions. If the unions go away a cornerstone of the progressive agenda will be ruined, but make no mistake this was not a conscience decision by the colluding corporations and their pet buddies the Republican Party. This was a decision made by people who believe part of this crap. (i.e.: ruining the economy)

Union busting is a republican as it is democrat, think of turn of the century America, yet ever since the unions aligned with the “New Deal Democrats”; Republicans have fed lies upon lies from a trough of corporate money. Now 78 years later we are seeing people create substantial public polices not seen since the Reagan era, to destroy unions. Wisconsin, one of the states who voted for the progressive party in 1924, is the staging ground for this all out assault on unions. We must stand in solidarity with the hard-working people of Wisconsin, who’s only objectives are to preserve “life” for themselves and/or their family. Are we as a nation to decide that people who serve this great nation deserve just compensation? Because, if we do then people must have collective bargaining rights, (i.e.: union) to preserve their livelihoods. If we favor a more 19^th centaury system for the employees of the people, then strip these working people of their bargaining rights.

Yet I will warn Scott Walker and the republicans, that there are reasons we have the right to unionize and that is the famed act of striking. If the bill is passed expect to see uproar not seen yet, not 30 thousand protestors, but perhaps 50 thousand chanting in unison for their right to unionize. These people are teachers, expect unused schools, these people are the backbone of your state and if you neglect them; then trouble is a brewing. The benefits they get actually improves the economy; as people have more money and worry less about their health, they are more likely to spend. Then again didn’t we call that argument Marxist about 2 years ago? Giving people benefits from the public sector today will encourage benefits for the private sector, or is that also Marxist. It is true that giving more money to people means less money for other services, but are these people not working like you say they should to deserve these benefits. However what is the price of a stagnate economy, does economic growth not help the general society as a whole, or does believing people should be lifted from despair make me a Marxist.

Scott walker and Wisconsin state assembly created the budget gap and it is their responsibility to fill it responsibly. How is union busting, and making teachers pay more in pensions responsible? Call me any label you want but, this is the most irresponsible plan I’ve heard in a long time. How can a teacher teach if he/she can’t pay the bills, let alone buy school materials? Teachers are underpaid as is, why would anyone want to neglect what provides the future generation with skills in the real world. After all the young pay for the old, in the form of social security, teachers are the key. Teachers have the most power of all yet, when powerless they are unable to help. If promoting the idea of everyone can be able to do what they want makes me a Marxist, then so be it. Unions provide for their workers they are as necessary as they were over a hundred years ago, why ruin this precious asset to America.

For the argument of unions move jobs overseas, how would you like to be paid $2 dollars an hour without overtime pay, health benefits, lunch-breaks, and harsh working conditions? Well, this is a back to the future moment for America, will we go down a regressive path or at least keep the vice status quo. Perhaps we must build unions, not destroy, for America.