Eliminate Subsidies to the Fossil Fuel Industry for the Sake of the Polar Bear

Eliminate Subsidies to the Fossil Fuel Industry

Apparently, we still subsidize the oil industry, see Triumph of the Drill to the tune of about $5 billion per year.  Of course, the oil companies help the Republicans (mostly) with campaign contributions and so the subsidies stay in place.  It is an example of the trend we see in American politics were the rich and powerful help each other make more money at the expense of the ordinary American.  International subsidies to the fossil fuel industry run about $5 trillion a year.  

What are the effects of the subsidies to the oil industry:

1. One, of course, it helps keep the republicans in power.
2. It gives a financial advantage to the fossil fuel industries compared to green power (they get less subsidies), and
3. It leaves America less incentive to go to green power.
4. It makes global warming more profitable.

Free Trade or Power

As Americans we say we believe in free trade, capitalism, etc. but then give one of the most powerful industries in the world subsidies to make them more profitable and powerful.  Why, simple, it helps other powerful people stay in power.  

If we want to be honest Americans, we have to say that we do not really value free market capitalism.  We value power.  Sad.

Global Warming

By supporting the fossil fuel industry with subsidies we are in effect subsidizing global warming.  To make it clearer,  we are saying we want more global warming.  We say to the polar bear, screw you.

Note: This is one of the 7 Steps to Reduce Global Warming.

The Polar Beer - The Poster Child of Global Warming

The polar bear has been the poster child of global warming.  I watched a sad show last night called Ice Bear about the struggle of polar bears, and one bear in particular called Ice Bear.  It turns out that Ice Bear had a rough year because of a long summer but he survived.  In his survival he did a lot of new things like climb cliffs to get to baby birds, eat baby whales stranded on the rocks, and get beaten up by some walruses when he tried to eat their babies.  But, another polar bear learned to follow the walruses and attack them when they stopped on rocks to rest.  Another female polar bear turned to cannibalism to feed herself and her babies.  In short, the ones that survived adapted to the effects of the longer summer.

But then I did a little internet searching and discovered that 
there does not seem to be definitive studies showing if polar bear populations are growing or declining.  Surely, we before they used him as poster child of the effects of global warming, they would have converted their theories about how global warming was killing polar bears to some counting before making him the poster child.  The primary argument is that their habitat (ice over the water) is declining, so their population will decline. And apparently there is some evidence that the younger polar bear population is under stress. 

There has been a general decline in the size of the polar cap over the Arctic since about 1980.  But, in 2013 it reversed and grew by 60%.  I understand that it also grew in 2014 but I have not seen the data yet.  This does not necessarily negate the global warming theory since yearly variations may override long term trends, but then on the other hand it might.  

As a reasonably good scientist in my own area, I am annoyed when others (like my bosses) make superficial judgments based on limited observations backed by inaccurate science.  So, I realize that I am not a meteorologist or a climatologist so I tend to give the experts respect in their field.  That does not include Al Gore because he has not spent his career as a scientist and is only fame to claim in my book is always voting yes for every bill ever submitted to him. But, scientists do not usually vote as a group as they have been lately about climate change.  Scientist typically propose theories to explain the data better than their cohorts and then debate it while looking for more evidence. 

One also has to be careful when money gets involved in science.  As far as I have been able to find there has been hundreds of grants to study potential bad effects of global warming and no grants to study the potential good effects of global warming.  Does anyone know of any exceptions to this?  There are only CONS to global warming, REALLY?  Sounds like the person handing out the grants might be biased.

Sea level rise seems to present strong evidence of global warming, but it ain't as simple as it looks, see this article for an example of the complexity. It turns out forever we have been going through mini-ice ages followed by a warming period because of variations in the earth's orbit and variables in the wobble and tilt of the axis. In the warming period ice all over the planet melts and sea levels rise.  So the argument goes that this time it is rising faster than normal because of industrial activity.  Maybe so ... so does that just mean we get to the end game (when most of the ice on the planet is gone) sooner, or is the end game somehow different?  Again, I trust there are some scientists out there that could answer these questions better than me.  Trouble is, I don't hear the hard questions being asked, much less being answered. 

Does that mean I don't think we need some changes in the way we use energy.  I still think it is a finite resource that needs to be used wisely and with consideration for future generations.  As far as I know, there are not going to be another dinosaur age to make more oil, etc.  I think taxing energy uses makes a lot of sense especially compared to our present destructive income tax system.  

Here is what I believe to be true:

1. The planet is in a warming cycle.
2. Some of the warming is caused by human activity.
3. The warming would continue (possibly at a slower rate) if humans were removed from the equation. 
4. Warming of the planet will put some people and animals under stress, some will adapt, some will not. 
5.  The Arctic Ice cap seems to shrinking (last two years are an exception).
6. The Antarctic Ice Cap is not (yet) shrinking and is actually expanding slightly. (The scientists say there are good reasons for this that do not negate the theory of global warming ... I will accept that for now especially since we seem to be in a normal warming cycle.)

What I don't know to be true:

1.  What is the end-game.  What does the planet look like after it gets hotter.  For one, I assume there will be no land ice?  What else?  How does this compare to previous warming cycles? Are we just accelerating what will happen (no land ice) or will the end game be different if we get there faster? 
2.  How much faster will we get to the end game (no land ice) because of CO2?  For example, if we reduce CO2 will we get there ten years later anyway, or is it a 100 years later?
3. What are the beneficial effects of a warmer planet. Does a warmer planet mean the next ice age will be less severe?  Does a warmer planet means there will be more rain since the partial pressure of water increases with temperature.  I assume some people that now need more rain will get it?  Who?
4.  Who needs to adapt, people and animals, and how does the cost of adapting compare to the cost of slowing CO2 production?  I assume some mixed strategy will be optimum.  Has this study been done?

In conclusion, I still tend to believe the experts, but how much as the message from the experts been tainted by the political pressure of those in charge?  Who profits from global warming be real and us responding to cut CO2 emissions?  In short, I guess I want to hear a debate among scientists and hear the pros and cons and a cost benefit study of various scenarios.  Perhaps the science is not good enough to do such studies, and if so, then the call to action may have to be modified.  This is not an all or nothing issue as it has been painted.  What steps are wise to take now, what steps should be taken conditional on some key outcomes ... like the Arctic resuming its shrinkage or the Antarctic starting to shrink, etc.  

Of course, we have to realize that our dysfunctional government is not going to do anything right now, so this will give us a couple of years to continue studying global warming.  One final note, maximizing the U.S.'s GNP is not the only criteria/value to consider in this debate.  How we affect other countries and other animals on this planet should be part of the discussion. 

Remorse and Ferguson

As an individual I can look back on my life and for the most part hurt my arm patting my back on the good I have done in my life.  But, of course, there are half a dozen regrets where I have not been the person I aspire to be, a gentle, kind and open human.  I have remorse for a few of these regrets, like not working on my relationship more with my late wife or spending more time with my children when they were younger or how I told an old lover about a new one, etc. I don’t try to discard that remorse, I like to carry it with me with the hope it will shape me into a better person. 

 Hopefully, that remorse will guide me when another regret-making moment is in progress and I will subtly or dramatically change my direction for a better outcome, one that is free of future regrets.

In Ferguson, I would hope Darrel Wilson will one day have some regrets  about his part in the shooting of Mike Brown.  Perhaps, some remorse will guide him in the future that may give his voice a different tone and be better received.  

Of course, we can image if Mike had lived through it, he might have regrets about not focusing his anger on something more constructive.  The Mike we see stealing the cigars in the video did not look like someone that was about to make a positive difference in the world; sorry if that is judgmental, but it was not okay how he treated that store owner.  If Mike’s story had a happier ending, perhaps one day he would be feeling remorse about his angry days in Ferguson.

Finally, the looters who did a great disservice to their neighborhood by burning down stores and businesses in their community should one day have regrets about their actions and be filled with remorse.  The police and national guard should have remorse about protecting downtown near the police station while putting almost no resources to protect Brown’s neighborhood, perpetuating the different treatment of blacks until the bitter end.  Its not okay to loot, and it is not okay for the police to look the other way.  The police learning when to yield to a peaceful demonstration and to stand strong when a crime is in progress is still out of their grasp.  

And our country should have remorse that after nearly 40 years since Martin Luther King we still are unable to come to grips with our history of slavery and abuse of the black man and other people that are different than us.  And, it is just not us white folks, the anger of the blacks in Ferguson, the willingness to remain the victim and to not strive to overcome the injustices is another form of resignation and prejudice.  Acting out as looters is childish and hurtful.  We should be full of regret and remorse should linger in our bones that this is the best we can do.

Our people should feel remorse all those times we act out of fear and instead of love for our fellow man.  For all the times we make laws that are based in distrust for our fellow man instead of a common hope that we shall rise above our faults.  We have a nation that still has an incredible legacy and unbounded potential that is spending its time name calling and unwilling to do the hard work of compromise to move forward in the many issues facing this country, good jobs for everyone being at the top of this list.

We are at an impasse created from our fear and lack of courage to reach out and take our opponents hand, trust them and look for common ground in this new world that we find ourselves in.   Where is our commitment as Americans to help everyone find a meaningful purpose to their lives and a way to make a good living for themselves and their family.  What happened that we are not the most educated country in the world anymore?  Any regrets or remorse?  What turns in the road have we taken that leads to the destruction of our middle class and the growth of the super-rich.  Any regrets about that?  

Ferguson is not an exception, it is part of the whole.  We are not creating opportunities for our children, our minorities, the disadvantaged.  We have been systematically making a country that is very good for the very rich, not so good for the rest of us.  We should regret that we have not been able to grow our middle class and we should search for the reasons.  Not in the present hate-filled rhetoric of the day, but in a passionate search to understand our situation and make the needed changes in directions as a country.  Changes that will make Ferguson look like the day we changed course and started down a new road.

Behind the Eight Ball in Ferguson

Michael Brown was no angel.  His behavior in the convenient store is one of an angry, frustrated black man.   On the other hand the predominantly white police force would not be accused of being angels either, Are Our Sins Coming Home to Roost in Ferguson?

It's typical of many cities in the south for the majority population to be black and/or Hispanic and the power structure to still be white. This is in my opinion a strong indicator that racism is not dead in that community.

Among many other problems, we have created a welfare system (We Created the System, Chicago Gang Violence) that does not encourage growth and families, nor does it support individuals in getting education and/or job training to move out of poverty.   And we selectively enforce laws against the minorities (A War on Black People that Do Drugs) that continue to keep the brown and black man in this country behind the eight ball. And yes, the problem extends to all poor people, but here again blacks are disproportionately represented.  (Its beyond the scope of this particular blog to address all the why's.)

And actually, the problem is even broader than discrimination against minorities, there is a systematic destruction of the middle class in this country that accentuates the black man’s struggle.  If the number of chairs in the middle class are decreasing, it is much harder for those not already having a seat at the table to get representation.  

There is something called the Gini Coefficient and it rates the income equality/inequality of a country.  Small numbers say 0 to 30 represent countries where the wealth is spread around.  China for example has a Gini Coeff. of 42 to 47 depending on who is doing the rating. The U.S. gini coeff. is 45 to 48.   That’s not how you see the U.S. is it?  That our wealth inequality is about the same as China’s.  Even worse, they are getting better we are getting worse.  For comparison Denmark’s Gini is 24, Germany’s is 30.  This is just a statistically method of saying what we already know, the middle class is becoming a dinosaur in America.  It will be much worse for our children the way this is headed.  There simply are not enough jobs (If they don't work, Neither Shall They Eat) -- the results will be growing unrest and possibly violence (another time, another blog).

The problems in Ferguson are just a subset of the bigger problems in America.  There is a loss of opportunity and fairness for the little man in America.  Our country is run by the elite, for the elite (Wolf Pac: Our Democracy is at Stake).  Perhaps the only way to reclaim America for the people is what is happening in the streets of Ferguson? Do you see another way?

7 Steps to Profitably End Global Warning by Robert R. Odle, et al.

Let's consider an innovative approach to fight global warming: let's make do it in a way that does not put the U.S. industry at a handicap, but actually gives it an economic advantage over the rest of the world.

Global warming, I have a few questions, but overall I think I defer to the experts at least for awhile.  Becoming more energy efficient and using more green and nuclear energy does not seem at odds with prosperity, especially if we decide a tax system that encourages 1) energy efficiency (more good and services from a unit of energy) and 2) less taxes for a smaller CO2 foot-print compared to your neighbors and competitors.

First, I assume as a "good" country we want to stop global warming and that we are willing to lead that effort as the biggest economy in the world.  But, I am not talking about just leading by example, I am advocating leading the world through a combination of technology, good example, and our economic clot.  We led, and those that want to work with us as partners become our trading partners, those that don't will face increasingly strict import taxes on their goods based on a carbon-based import tax.  Below are the seven steps of this plan.  We will flush out each of the seven steps in a series of papers.  Your input is welcome via the working draft of this document.

1. Measure energy consumption at all levels.

2. Eliminate all subsidies to the oil, coal and fossil fuel industries.

3. Replace income taxes, company and personal, with a carbon emissions tax.

4. Tax all imports according to their carbon-energy input.

5. Encourage/subsidize modern nuclear reactors.

6. Guarantee solar, wind and all non-carbon based energies access to the grid to sell their excess electric power at fair prices.

7. Having set up a system that rewards wise energy use, sit back and let American business optimize under a new set of rules.  Do not try to over-regulate the approach business takes to be successful.

Stay tuned for details … your input welcomed.  Go the working version of this document and write on it ..

Is Ebola Winning?

Our blog a few weeks ago, How Ebola is Going to Get Your Ass, got it's share of readers, but not many comments.  The theory proposed then was that Ebola would jump from city to city in Africa (there are 50 cities with over a million people) and then spread into the middle east. 

Well, right now that assessment has only about 50% chance of being true.  Right now by looking at this data as we into half time, Ebola is up by a field goal in a very tight and aggressive game.  ONLY 1500 new cases in Sierra Leone and about a 1000 in Liberia in October.  New cases are holding around 400 to 600 per week.  So, it hasn't gone exponential yet.

And, it has not spread to nearby Lagos Nigeria with its 21 million people.  The math just doesn't work for the humans if Ebola goes exponential in such a large population. 

Did I see there is some (unrelated) Ebola in the Congo?  

Do you think homeless people are like cats - the more you feed them the more will come? So is Fort Lauderdale Justified?

Recently feeding the homeless in Fort Lauderdale made the national news because the police arrested Arnold Abbot, the ninety year old gentleman pictured below, for feeding the homeless.  He faces jail time along with two others.  He runs a nonprofit organization called "love thy neighbor" and he says he has no intention to stop feeding the homeless.

The mayor, Jack Seiler  (jack.seiler@fortlauderdale.gov.), defended the action by the city as being necessary to protect local business that depends on tourists who obviously do not like to encounter a lot of homeless people.  Fort Lauderdale is part of Broward County which has 10,000 homeless people which is probably more than their fair share of the 600,000 homeless in this country estimated by The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development .

I was surprised to find out that 50 cities ban or restrict giving homeless people food either by making it illegal or by such practices as requiring a hard to get permit, etc.  Twenty two (22) states have similar laws on the books making it illegal to feed the homeless.  In some cases charities are prohibited from making food donations because the food may not be nutritious enough.  Really?

What do you think.  What values should guide our actions?  Please give us your opinions below and share (or not if you don't think it is an important question).  If we get a decent response we will publish the results and send them Jack Seiler the mayor of Fort Lauderdale. (You have to scroll down to see all three questions, thank you, Robert).

Can Republicans Learn the "YES" word?... by Robert R. Odle, Ph.D.

The Republicans could actually set themselves up for a return to power in 2016 if they can accomplish just a few things in the next two years.  But, do they know how to stop saying "NO" to everything and actually do something and say "YES".  Three pieces of fruit are ripe for the picking:

Republicans Could Pass Immigration Reform

Assuming Republicans can learn how to say "YES" to some form of amnesty for those immigrants already in the country, they could make big points with the Hispanic population by passing Immigration Reform.  No one in their right mind believes anyone is going to go back to their home country and getting at the back of the line.  Without amnesty, everyone will simply stay here and hideout like they do now. The current system is so broke, Republicans have a golden opportunity if they can say "YES" to amnesty. 

Republicans Could Simplify the Income Tax Disaster and Eliminate the Federal Deficit

Can they take on the job of simplifying income taxes and reducing corporate taxes to make the U.S. more competitive. But, to make up the revenue lost with lower corporate taxes they will have to say "yes" to some form of carbon tax or "yes" to taxing the rich more.  
The one place that neither party can say "NO" to is the military industrial complex. However, since Republicans are so good at saying "NO" perhaps they could reduce the military budget and eliminate the deficit? Unlikely, but hope springs eternal. 

Republicans Could Shore Up Funding of SS and Medicare

To make these two systems viable for the long term Republicans are going to have to "yes" to raising the retirement age and probably "yes" to raising the cap on withholding social security from the higher paid Americans.

Can Republicans Learn to Say "YES"

The Republicans could very easily continue with the momentum of the last six years and continue attacking Obama.  That will lose them any chance at the election in 2016.  To stay a viable party, they must learn how to lead and say "YES".  Can they do it?

A good democratic country needs two good parties (at least), each doing what they are best at .. it is time for the Republicans to step up to the plate and show us what they got.

Do Americans Share the Responsibility for the Missing Students in Mexico by Robert R. Odle, Ph.D.

Protesting Students Missing

Forty three students in Mexico, scholars from rural Mexico, staged a protest against corruption in their county of Guerrero more than a month ago.  They have not been seen since. Their families and the country mourns as we should.  Even more, do we as Americans share part of the responsibility for their deaths. 

Students handed to Drug Cartels by the Police

The tragedy started in Iguala Mexico when students were on their way to protest at a meeting where the Mayor's wife was speaking. They were detained by the police and then turned over to the drug cartels and reportedly burned alive.  That's the rumor, their bodies have not been found. The Mexican Federal government sent the military to secure the town.  The police chief, the mayor and his wife, who has a brother who is a general in the drug cartel, have gone missing, reportedly on the run from the federal police / military.  The governor of Guerrero stepped down after he initially took no action. 

Widespread Student Protests and Mass Graves

Student protests across Mexico are demanding justice. We as Americans should be demanding justice as well and accepting our role in the crime. Like Honduras a few months ago, they should be looking North across the border.

Eleven mass graves have been found, containing 38 sets of human remains, but none of them contained the students. Eleven mass graves, are you kidding me.  That is a story in its own right.  A new mass grave in Cocula, a town 10 miles from where the students were taken into custody by the police is being tested to see if it is filled with the student bodies. About 22,000 people have disappeared since the government started cracking down on the drug cartels in 2006.

Police, Mayor and Drug Cartels - Partners in Crime

The mayor reportedly was paid several hundred thousand dollars each month to look the other way as the drug cartel made opium paste to feed the U.S. heroin market. They had turned to heroin as the pot market in the U.S. declined because of alternate suppliers (legalized states) and more effective policing of the borders and countryside for the relatively bulky, but less-lethal pot shipments. 

Our War on Drugs & Easy Access to Guns in U.S.

How could our War on Drugs (or A War on Black People Who Do Drugs) and our insane gun policies contribute to the students' deaths? Consider our drug and gun culture and imagine the ripple effects in Mexico:

1. First, it is no secret that the U.S. supplies the market for the drugs from Mexico and hence the billions of dollars to fund the militarization of the drug cartels. 
2. Second, you might be surprised that the easiest place for the Drug Cartel to buy weapons is from the U.S. Thank the NRA (Myth#27 Assault Weapons are Different From Machine Guns).
3. Our treatment of a disease (drug addiction is like alcoholism, duh.) as a crime perpetuates the cycle, it helps to create the market.  And those wanting out of the drug culture who are seeking help are reluctant to seek help for fear of being criminalized.  Seventeen states have passed Good Samaritan laws which allows and furnishes first responders with naloxone, a heroine antidote  And most states that have passed the Good Samaritan laws do not prosecute individuals who seek help during an overdose.  It is a small step toward treating addiction as a disease affecting real people who need help. Thirty six states don't furnish first responders with naloxone and instead they may arrest the person if he doesn't die -- and so the disease continues among the survivors.
4. Money is wasted waging a long ineffective war against people with a disease.  Incarcerating young adults, the biggest users,  instead of providing treatment centers and intensive life therapy continues the drug culture.  In prison they get "therapy" from those that not only do drugs but are real criminals doing heavy duty crimes. 
5. We are not being a responsible country by not working with other countries affected by our policies. We should even ask their opinion on what needs to be done and listen.*
6. By concentrating on "illegal drugs" and punishment we miss out on the real drug story in America. A study in 2013 said 4 out of 5 people were addicted to prescription pain killers before turning to heroin. They turn to street drugs including heroin  when they can no longer get their prescription or can no longer afford it.   There were about 17,000 deaths a year from drugs such as morphine and oxycodone in 2010 and in comparison only 3000 from heroin.                                                                                      So why isn't there A War on Doctors That Over Prescribe?  Or, a War on Our Medical System that Acts as if a Pill Can Fix Anything.  Perhaps if we had a culture that had a little compassion, prescription addicts could get help along with the street addicts.

Students Die From Our Inconsistent and Stupid Drug Policy

So, our students in Mexico are a victim not only of the corruption in their own country, but the ineffective and stupid policies in this country (the definition of stupid is to keep doing the same thing in the same situation and expecting a different result ... the drug war is essentially the same for 40 years ... really?).  Until we start addressing drug usage as a disease and listening to the stories behind the addiction, there is no hope for our young people with the disease or the victims in Mexico (and many other countries).  We are at the epicenter of the addiction crisis and the ripples effects millions here and aboard. Have we learned anything after 40 years? 

If we want to be good moral people, good world citizens, we will start seeing drug addicts as our children in need of help and understanding.   






*There was a High Profile Panel in 2011 which included former U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and past Presidents of Mexico, Brazil and Columbia that recommended our government try new ways of legalizing and regulating drugs, especially pot, as a way to deny profits to drug cartels.  Former President of Columbia, President Cesar Gaviria, said "when you have 40 years of a policy that is not bringing results, you have to ask if its time to change it." (Not our government, something doesn't have to work to keep doing it.  Stupidity.) They recommended finding ways to end "the criminalization, marginalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs but do no harm to others."

Are the Republicans or Cubans Right About Ebola? by Robert R. Odle, Ph.D.

How do we measure greatness, goodness, or compassion.  Perhaps we can get some idea of who has these traits in abundance by their actions, by who steps up to the plate when the fellow humans are in dire straits.

Does Donald Trump, Chris Christi and Florida Gov. Rick Scott have the right response to Ebola, or does Cuba?  Of course, we all know that Cuba is sending the most doctors and health care workers to the Ebola infected countries of any country in the world.  They consider it the humane thing to do.  They are also training more health care workers and have a long line of volunteers ready to go to West Africa.  Yea, the same country that we have an embargo against for the last 50 years because they are "evil".  

Trump believes there should be a travel ban, no one should be able to fly from the infected countries into the U.S.  How exactly you stop someone from taking multiple stops before arriving at an obscure U.S. airport and then lying about their travel history, I'm not sure.  Gov. Christi wants all travelers from those areas quarantined for 21 days whether they are showing symptoms or not.  Gov Rick Scott wants patients monitored twice daily for 21 days by his health department and "high risk" patients quarantined.

The first nurse returning from helping Ebola patients that flew into Newark yesterday was put in a tent for 21 days of isolation.  The nurse, Kaci Hickox says she feels like a criminal and a prisoner. Well, she is a prisoner even though she shows no symptoms.  I'm guessing none of the other returning health workers will fly into Newark. Dr. Spencer who returned from the ebola incubator countries to New York last week,  jogged and rode the subway apparently while ill and contagious represents the other extreme in how to deal with those returning from the ebola incubator countries.

So what question are the Cubans asking?  They are asking how do we best help our fellow man. Their focus is beyond their own borders. The Republican governors are asking how do we Americans best protect our asses (and perhaps what is the safest political route to protect their own asses).  

It comes down to the fundamental question, do we want to be a good country, a good citizen in this world, or do we only care about how our actions affect ourselves.  More often these days we do the latter.  However, this view of ourselves as being the only ones that matter in the universe could have some dire consequences with ebola, as discussed previously.

I'm not advocating any particular solution for those medical workers returning from the ebola incubator countries.  But what I am advocating is considering the consequences of our policies on more than just our safety, but on the well being of humanity as a whole.  Governor Scott in Florida seems to be the closest to getting a balanced response although I think there is plenty of room for improvement in his policy.  Trump is an elitist asshole in my opinion. Assuming Trump would risk his health for someone else (unlikely I admit), but if he caught ebola I suspect he would use his money to travel anywhere he wanted to get treatment.  Which is another way of saying Trump represents the view of many Americans, because we have more money we are more valuable as humans. Sadly, many of our policies are developed with that as a core assumption.

How Ebola is Going to Get Your Ass

 A month ago I wrote Ebola, should we be scared?  I was afraid back then that Ebola might come to our country via air travel.  Well, it happened, and our country has developed a fear that Ebola is going to spread across our country starting with a few infected people arriving via planes. Obviously, possible, but cases that arrive this way are unlikely to overwhelm our medical capabilities. I was afraid of this a month ago, but I now realize my fear was focused on the wrong scenario.

 So, let's look at Africa and see how it is most likely to spread.  First, you many not realize that Africa has over 50 cities that have a million or more people.  Let that settle in as you look at some of them on this map:

Now another view of the major metropolitan areas in Africa.  The bigger the circle, the larger the population it represents:

Notice that Liberia, the country with 4000 plus Ebola cases by October is a small dot on this map with regard to population.  To get a flavor of what it is like in Liberia watch this video if you are up for it ... Ambulance Work In Liberia Isa Busy and Lonely Business.  Sierra Leone with 3000+ cases is a little bit bigger dot and Guinea with  1500 plus cases is even a little bigger dot of population in the map above.  Then a little further away, there's the big population center, Lagos in Nigeria.

In July a single person from Liberia infected 20 people via the airport in Lagos.  Nigeria jumped on it with both feet, isolating everyone, closing schools, etc.  Nineteen thousand homes were visited and temperatures taken. They have not had a single case since then, that they know of.  And they spent millions on educating the public. So, they successfully stopped Ebola spreading from ONE person.

 In the Ambulance Worker Video above, you will see angry people near panic and a lot of hopelessness from everyone.  Imagine in December when there are 10,000 new cases a week in our three small incubator countries.  What are they going to do?  Consider what has happened in Syria, where millions have fled across the border into Turkey and surrounding countries because of the threat of ISIS and the Syrian government -- in short, people flee to escape death.  How will those in infected countries respond when they fear death from ebola?

Ebola Refuges

I think the mathematical model for Ebola spreading can be formulated by simply asking what do people do when they are afraid they are going to die:  fight, flight, or freeze.  The eight health workers killed in Guinea over Ebola fears exhibited the first typical reaction, fight.  They blamed the health workers for bringing Ebola into their country, and as irrational as it is, the workers were killed. As the number of cases double every two or three weeks, the next reaction will be flight.  This is not complicated stuff.  Where will they flee is the only question. 

Overland Routes of Escape

The route of escape for most people in our Ebola incubator countries will be into Nigeria.  We are not talking about one person; 'we are talking about hundred of thousands of people, perhaps millions of people fleeing into the most populated city in Africa where 21 million people live.  Then just start connecting the dots as the Ebola spreads city by city toward Egypt, then the Middle East, Turkey, Pakistan,  Europe, across India to China.  

Across the Sea   

The other way to flee these countries is from the many seaports along the African coast.  While the number of refuges leaving by this mode of travel will only represent a few percent of the whole, they in theory can go anywhere.  The most likely place will be to other neighboring seaports such as Morocco to the north or Johannesburg to the South. But, some of them will make it to densely populated areas of South America, or the Caribbeans, or Mexico.  And again, just start connecting the dots from one densely populated city to the next.

  Panic Mode

As Ebola spreads from one country to the next across the globe, the number of cases increasing exponentially, panic will come faster as the fear outruns the reality.  I can imagine closed borders from one country to the next, none of it effective, as countries try to draw lines in the sand against a VIRUS.  And, what are the chances with millions of cases that the Ebola virus will not mutate at least once.  Who knows what that means, but it is probably not good news.

Isolating Ebola Victims

Ebola multiplies exponentially.  The supply of beds and doctors is limited. (See Malthus theory for population growth versus food supply, same mathematics.) What the math tells you is this: if you get behind on the supply of doctors and medical supplies you never catch up.  It seems clear to me that this has already happened. I don't see us starting to ship beds and health workers into Nigeria and other big cities near the incubator states ... if we really wanted to get ahead of the virus. 

We are not going to stop Ebola with the current strategy of isolating those that are sick and following all the people they have come in contact with, the math doesn't work.  In the U.S., the one person that came into U.S. with Ebola was in contact with more than 70 people.  Now imagine tracking 5000 people with the number doubling every two weeks.  Now imagine you're in a country with limited number of phone or modern communications.  I'm sorry, we are kidding ourselves that we are going to stop Ebola based on the method proposed by CDC. I suspect, THEY are afraid to tell us the obvious, we are not stopping the Ebola virus with Plan A.  They built their strategy based on stopping ebola in rural areas of Africa. They are using a model that does not work with Ebola inside of major metropolitan areas.

Plan B Make it to the Moon or Perish: Vaccine for Ebola

The mathematics say to me that the only humane way to stop Ebola is to develop a vaccine and distribute it ahead of the current wave of the Ebola typhoon.  Of course, it is already too late for millions of people that are going to die from Ebola.  But, being selfish, we probably have a year or so before the Ebola typhoon rolls up on our southern border.  That is probably enough time to create and test a virus and gear up production.  But, that is only if we pour a huge amount of money into it -- more or less a blank checkbook by the U.S. , China and European governments to scientists around the world.

In addition, we will have to put non-constructive competition between humans aside and realize it is humanity against a virus.  It sounds a little science fiction doesn't it?  And yet, look at the projections below for Ebola in the incubator countries alone:
  

And yes, that is a million cases by next summer.  And not shown, are 10 million cases by the end of the summer.  Of course, this is the scenario if nothing is done or if the effort is feeble versus the need.  And so far, our words have waxed long, our actions have been small and way behind the curve with regard to need.  These models all assume that Ebola radiates outward from a central core instead of being simultaneously seeded among all of humanity.  When people start fleeing the Ebola epidemic, it is possible the rate will increase - we don't know what fear will do to the rate at which it spreads.

Our Brother's Keeper

We posted a story about being a good country, a good citizen of the world last week.  I had hoped the Ebola epidemic in Africa would bring out the GOOD in us and that we would rise to the occasion with an open checkbook and an open heart.  But, it is not the US dying, and they are black and poor, and backward.  We act as if their lives are not as important as ours.  Instead we say,  let us close our borders and just let them die over there.  Besides being incredibly heartless, it is stupid and ineffective to think so SMALL and PETTY, especially if the model I am proposing is correct.

We have one chance to get this right.  We either think beyond ourselves or we will wake up with the wolf pounding down our door.  (I am going to work on the math and get back to you.)

The Good Country Index

A man named Simon Anholt has put together an index that shows how much good a country does outside of its own borders, a good country index.  I assume the question being asked is "how good a citizen is our country on a world stage?"

How do you see our country.  Do you think we do our share on the world stage? Would it surprise you that we do not do well?  Well, what about all those wars we fight.  Perhaps others do not consider that helping the world.  What about all the military equipment we send all over the world, surely that help is not being ignored by the rest of the world.

Well, it isn't too bad, the U.S. came out 21st in the world.  Obviously, much lower than our potential, but not bad considering much of our effort goes into our military industrial complex.  They rate countries on five different standards.  One of them is International Peace and Security.   Remember, this is not what we do for ourselves in this area, but what we do for others.  Also, it is not our opinion of ourselves, but the world's opinion of us.  We come in a 114th in the world on the International Peace and Security.   There are five subcategories under this:

• Peace Keeping Troops, where we are average.
• Dues in Arrears for Peace Keeping Efforts - where we are above average.
• International Violent Conflict - we get a very low grade on that one
• Arms Exporting - failing grade
• Internet Security - failing grade

Just because we are always in a war and sell and give weapons to everyone else, that doesn't mean we are interested in the peaceful resolution of problems.  I mean someone has to fight the wars and sell the wars, don't they.  As you can see, being a good country turns out to be hard for a country who spends more money on its Industrial Military Complex than most of the countries in the world put together and believes that it is its job to control the world.  I had a mother in law like that once.  That didn't have a happy ending either. 

It is funny that we think we are the greatest country in the world, it is hard to imagine that others don't see us the same way.  My friends in Peru used to tell me, we give you that America knows how to make money and war, but we do not think they know how to live life. My Australian friends when I would start bragging about America would tell me, we don't want to be America, we want to be a kinder America.  

Perhaps if we want to regain the idea of being the best country in the world, we need to start considering how our actions impact the world.  How does our drug and immigration policy impact Latin America?  How does our lack of leadership in global warming impact the world?  How will our lack luster response on the ebola virus impact the world?  How does Guantanamo Bay imprisonment without due representation impact justice in the world?  How does our treatment of the children immigrating from Honduras affect future generations in Honduras?

Or, we can pretend that we are just an island in the world, that we do not live in a globalized world, that we don't need or care about anyone else and that cooperation has no value or virtue. We can continue to look inward and not notice that our actions to others affects not only them but ourselves.  If I was a Jesus people, I would say we are our brother's keepers to all inhabitants of this world.  But, it is easier to keep thinking small.

What kind of country do you want to live in?