Keystone Pipeline Compromise

There is a lot of controversy over it whether or not the Keystone pipeline should be built. Many want to make the key question on building the pipeline this: should we use fossil fuels for our energy source or should we use renewable sources. The pipeline might make a small amount of difference on this question because oil might be slightly cheaper if this pipeline is installed. But the major driver of whether or not we us renewable sources is the price of those renewable sources compared to the global price of fossil fuels. Using renewable Energy will depend on developments in that field and the willingness of our government to subsidize renewable energy sources until their price comes down.  Increased research in renewable technologies could also drive prices lower in the long run. But, our country is doing precious little for the future.

The correct question to ask about the Keystone pipeline is this: is it safer to deliver oil via a pipeline or via rail cars and trucks. Given the fact that trains crash in this country on a fairly frequent basis and that our infrastructure is in bad need of modernization, this question is really very straightforward: the pipeline is much safer than rails and trucks.

The pipeline has become a very political subject. However I think we can get past it being political if we ask the right questions. 

I am an independent strongly leaning toward Barry Sanders, but that does not mean I can't break ranks and have a different opinion.  In fact, on economic issues I agree often with Republicans and I can usually imagine reasonable compromises.  On social and issues of compassion, I'm squarely in the democratic camp.

How about using the pipeline as a bargaining chip to get free public education through college? That's how we got stuff done in America in the good old days like with Regan, Clinton, Johnson,  Eisenhower, etc.  How about agreeing to the pipeline if the bill includes a tax on the oil that would fund college for all our citizens, or provide health care to its citizens, or rebuild our infrastructure ... or  do something we think is important for our country.  

The pipeline is a chip to be used in bargaining for something we progressive, compassionate loving people could use for something our country needs ... 

The Evil Immigrant Story

Once long ago, a leader rose up and told his people that the outsiders (the immigrants) were destroying their country, that these people were inferior and that they were bringing the entire country down.  THEY are not like US, he declared. He united his people and the country rose to new levels of power and dominance in Europe and drove out and killed the immigrants.  But, he was stopped largely by the eight million Russians that did not see the world like he did.

During WWII, we came obsessed and fearful of the danger posed by those that looked like our enemies.  The color of their skin, the slant of their eyes, their dark hair and short stature.  THEY were not like US, we declared.  They should be put in camps  They should be put in camps, the men separated from their wives and child until the war is over.  We acted quickly and saved ourselves from their threat.

Now, a new threat has risen.  They have come here under the pretense of wanting a better life.  But, in reality they have just come here to have their children on our soil so they and their citizen children can tap into our welfare system.  It doesn't matter if they could not afford the price of legal immigration, they should have stayed home.  Their drug wars have nothing to do with us, it's their problem.  THEY are not like US, They are not like the immigrants that have come here before them.   In fact we suspect their governments are sending the worst of the worst to us, like rapists, so they won't have to deal with them. 

And yet and even greater threat has arisen, more evil than the feared Mexican -- the Syrian Refuge.  We had nothing to do with his problems, its not like we messed up the Middle East or contributed to its instability.  But, Carson is prepared to save us from this threat by not letting any Syrian refugees into our country, not even one hungry child is going to darken our borders.

Planned Parenthood and Compassion

8

I believe in birth control.  I believe the state should provide birth control to those too poor to afford it.  To not take any chances, I would make it available to any woman who asked for it no questions asked.  Yes, and I would throw in the recommended doctor visits, etc. to do the job right.  The other choice is to risk a woman having a child or pregnancy she doesn't want and can't afford.  Neither a good outcome, nor a necessary one in our prosperous society.

Based on their website, Planned Parenthood provides services relating to reproduction and sexual health.  Sounds good.  I assume patients on medicaid or medicare can use their services.  Birth control is high on their agenda! Good!

Defunding Planned Parenthood

There is a push on to de-fund planned parenthood because of some videos on line from Center for Medical Progress (CMP) who interviewed Planned Parenthood (PP) management about buying fetal tissue from abortions.  PP does seem to be on the ragged edge of selling fetal tissue in these interviews, although their position is that they are just covering shipping and handling costs.  However, if they are just covering costs, that should just be a number furnished by accountants with minimal wiggle room.  The negotiation did sound like a negotiation over a price, not a cost. 

PP also seemed willing to alter their procedure to minimize damage to the tissue from the fetus.   CMP implies they are doing partial birth abortions, which is illegal, and if true should be prosecuted.  I am not a lawyer or a prosecutor, but if they broke the law then some appropriate prosecutor should charge them.   (I don't understand the rationale for the law that was passed under Bush's Presidency.  But, if it is the law, then we should follow it or change it.)

CMP also interviewed someone that they claimed was an ex-employee of Planned Parenthood.  I have no idea if what she said was true or a lie or if she was really an ex-employee.  In either case, she described a pretty gross procedure to remove the brain tissue of a live fetus.  Again, I think CMP is implying PP broke the law.  Again if the law was broken, it should be prosecuted.  And if true, and legal it is still pretty sickening stuff.  Abortions at best are an ugly business. And, if we must have abortions, maybe there is some room for defining what is allowed in an abortion. 

Quantity of Abortions in the U.S.

There are about a million abortions a year in the U.S. and about two million unwanted pregnancies.  See Facts about Abortion from Guttmacher Institute and Centers for Disease Control.   People on medicaid are about 3.7 times as likely to get an abortion than the rest of the population.  About 57% of their services of PP are paid for by the clients, the balance split pretty evenly between insurance and medicaid. The federal government kicks Iin about $500 million a year.

I looked at the foot print of PP ... it is huge and offers thousands of people services everyday.  It looks like mostly birth control, cancer screening, ultrasounds to check baby health, and similar.  And yes, also Abortions.   

Impact of Defunding PP

When I heard Republicans in Congress are attempting to defund PP it must mean that they want to stop poor people on medicaid from being able to get abortions.  My gut reaction is that this is an alliance between Rich people and those that believe abortions are wrong.  Poor women, and the children born, will be the ones to suffer.  However, I found out that medicaid can only be used in 15 states for abortion.  So, in the other 35 states defunding medicaid would mean that poor people using medicaid for birth control, cancer screening, etc. would be defunded.  So, the biggest effect of defunding PP would be to reduce birth control to poor people which would result in more unwanted children being born and perhaps more future abortions, not less. Ironic!

And yes, the $500 million from the federal government Can not be spent on abortions. So, cutting that money out means more unwanted pregnancies! More unwanted births, probably more people in poverty and on welfare.  Great plan. Before we throw out the bath Water we need a plan b.

The Bigger Picture

Here is the shame I see ... 

1,000,000 abortions means birth control (availability, use, education, or efficacy) failed 1,000,000 times.  We must be able to do better. More morning after pills, or something.  Shouldn't we all be working together to do a better job with birth control? What am I missing? 

So what do I vote?

So, my vote is to let Planned Parenthood keep providing services to the poor, mostly birth control, using medicaid.  And prosecute PP if they broke the law or if they do break the law.  And CMP, if you think PP broke the law, find a prosecutor somewhere, give him your evidence and see where it goes.  I am inclined to believe that CMP is very biased and they have carefully edited what they have to look as bad as possible and they have prompted the ex-employees to exaggerate, but I could be wrong.

It seems the biggest impact of stopping medicaid from funding services by PP would be to reduce poor people's access to birth control in 35 states ... .  I say let's have compassion on these women and let's make sure they get birth control.  

A few positive kernels from the Republican Debate

There are some new commercials showing Regan talking about immigration.  It could best be summarized by the words compassionate, welcoming and practical.  I was a Republican back in those days before I got exposed to life outside the U.S. especially Australia and Denmark.

Today, I was out campaigning for Bernie Sanders.  But, I still think the Republicans as a group offer some good money management skills that the Democrats have yet to demonstrate ... and I might add the Republicans have not demonstrated them since before George Bush was in power. 

First, the Republicans talk about reforming the income tax code and lowering corporate taxes to somewhere between about 12% and 25%.  (I am curious why they have not put something on the table for Obama to pass or reject.  If he passes it, the country wins, if he vetoes it, the Republicans win.)   

Simplifying the tax code is best accomplished by starting over ... but in any case it is a very tough undertaking.   There are so many special interest groups vested in the way the tax code is now, including the American homeowner, that it would take a bipartisan effort of Herculean proportions.  Probably not going to happen.  But, it is still good to hear the Republicans talking about it.

Lowering the corporate tax is the one single thing we could do to create jobs and keep corporations from leaving this country to manufacturer overseas.  Period.  I have even heard Obama say he would like to see the corporate tax at 25%.  We live in a competitive world and believe it or not, we have to compete for corporations and jobs with the rest of the world.  Get too greedy and the golden goose moves away.  That is not to say we shouldn't simplify the code and close loop holes ... yes, they are one in the same.  Complexity breeds loopholes.  I wish an old Republican somewhere would take up this task ...  democrats can't seem to be able to keep social issues and the tax code separate from each other.

Finally, the democrats should be careful not to go after the rich with reckless abandon.  They need to show some respect to the rich. The rich can move away and many do.  So, if we are going to tax them, we need to convince them that it is for their good as well as ours.  An educated work force will make America richer, including the rich.  Convince them with any tax that is proposed that it is going directly to improve our nation, say the availability of college education.  

The rich might even be open to crazy ideas like the government matching funds that corporation or the rich (or us average guys) chose to give to education fields they believe in.  For example, if Intel wanted to give to Berkeley University's computer department some money, let the government match it.  I know, even the Republican's are not going to get this creative.  But, the democrats should not pose the taxes in a spirit of the rich versus poor, but more like Kennedy when he asked what we could do to help our country. Anyway, the Republicans show too much reverence for the rich, the democrats perhaps too little.

In the lower Republican debate there was some talk of raising the minimum wage.  I am not too worried about them getting carried away on this issue ... but good that they at least acknowledged it as an issue. 

Finally, I like one Republican that even Republicans don't like, Rand Paul.  I mostly appreciate his idea that military engagement should only come after Congress declares war. Period.  The President just gets the job done.  Rand Paul was also the most professional on the stage, he discussed issues and he was the candidate everyone turned to information about the law or history.  Of course, loud mouths like Trump who has no practical plan on anything seems to be more in vogue for the Republicans.  Carson seems like a good guy too -- not a leader, but a good guy.  I didn't much care for the witch lady either.

Compassionate Release from Prison

Compassionate release is actually a program in the Federal Prison System and in 36 of the 50 states in the country.  In concept is simple, prisoners that are terminally ill (or in some cases chronically ill) are released from prison before they die so that they can die with family and friends. 

The state benefits because crowded prisons get some relief and the state gets out of some hospice care expenses.  The individual benefits since most prisoners actually do have someone at home that loves and misses them.  

To be considered, someone must petition the warden and/or medical staff in behalf of the prisoner. The decision is ultimately made by the parole board.  To be illegible the prisoner has to be considered not a threat to the community and in some cases states have guidelines on minimum time served and of course some can't leave because of minimum time served rules of their incarceration. In short, because of the law few people are actually illegible.

Who are the most likely candidates for this program.  Those in prison because of possession of an illegal drug but no history of other crimes or violence.  (One wonders why they are in prison in the first place when addiction is a disease, but we will ignore that for now.)  Well, it turns out that only about a thousand prisoners get considered each year and only about 10% of that group gets released.  In short, compassionate release is mostly compassion, not release.

We have a prison system full of an aging population that is on average in much poorer health than the general population.  Most are there from the prison-cures-all disease of the 90's especially with regard to drugs and mandatory minimum sentences. 

Of course, there is a lot of fear from the general population anytime someone is released from prison ... even if that person is going to die soon.  In the decision process, we do not put much value on the life of the prisoner and everyone is afraid of making a mistake in which someone on the outside is hurt or killed by early release even by a dying prisoner.  In my mind, we are disproportionately afraid of these dying prisoners than we are of the gangs that roam our country killing hundreds of people in our major cities every week. Oh yea, I forgot.  These are mostly blacks or hispanics in the slums so they don't count.  The irony of course is that most prisoners would go back to the neighborhoods to die. 

The compassionate release program comes down to a common problem in our country, not all lives are valued equally.  In fact, some lives appear to have little value in our society. 

Should Kim Davis be fired?

If you are hired to put cement bags on a truck and can't do it, then you are replaced/fired.  But what if you are hired to load 25 pound bags of sawdust and then they change your job to loading cement bags?  Then what?

But a better example might be when Rosa Parks refused to sit in the back of the bus and the law was changed saying she didn't have to sit in the back.  What if the bus driver after the law was changed refused to drive the bus if African Americans were allowed to sit in the front half of the bus?  Should the bus driver be fired?

Well, should Kim Davis be fired because she is not doing her job? As I understand she is the county clerk and will not issue wedding license (or let anyone working for her) issue wedding licenses to gay people wanting to be married. It's interesting while she is jail from contempt of court from not issuing licenses to gays, her office is issuing licenses to gays. 

Could a compromise be reached where the judge orders the people working for Davis to continue issuing licenses to gays even when Davis gets out of jail? In short, could someone  take the veto power away from Davis? She could then follow her religion and gays could get their licensees.  Or do both sides just want to make a point and Davis is simply a pawn in the battle?  Usually there is a compassionate solution where each side can follow their conscience -- but, perhaps "being right" is more important than finding a compromise.

Police Houses in the Neighborhood

Why do we have police stations? Because it's comfortable for policemen? Admittedly, we need community jails, courtrooms, and related support services in some centralized location, but I am talking about the policemen.

Where do we need the police? The answer is so obvious it sounds almost ridiculous: in the neighborhood.  Let the city pick out a foreclosed house, have a neighborhood painting party, and like magic the police are where they are needed.  Sure, it is more complicated and there are some security issues, but with low cost internet video cameras, police houses can monitor each other and their houses via their smart phone.  (Don't tell me they have hummers and not smart phones.)

I'm thinking a model station would have about two to three policeman a shift.  Policemen could use Periscope via twitter to talk to their community each morning and then walk among their fellow citizens.  Most work would be on foot in the community via scooter, bike or similar.  Cars would be allocated to roaming police that would move into and out of neighborhoods as requested by their brothers on the ground.

And, of course, it is all about forming relationships with the community. Walk by and tell a kid on the block happy birthday, or attend a funeral of a child shot in the neighborhood.  Act like these people dying in our slums means something to somebody.  Get the parents trust so that when their children are doing something illegal they talk to the policeman, not to get their child arrested, but for guidance on what to do.  And, yes, it would be better if most, or at least some of the policemen, were the same race as the people in the neighborhood. Yea, someday it may not matter, but for now one step at a time.

One step better would be for policemen to live in the neighborhood with their families.  No, its sad, we are not ready for that, but it would be a noble goal ... a Phase 2 of this general idea.  The goal is to have the policemen to be part of the community, to have the relationships in place that people in this neighborhood treat him as a wise and helpful person.

Now, here is the Phase 3... having the teachers of the children of the neighborhood living in the neighborhood, along with their preachers, the owners of the stores, the fast food restaurants, the banks, etc. all living together.  Yea, I know that is foolish we will never be that equal in this country.   (And yes, there are countries where the difference between the top and bottom of the social and economic ladder is much smaller than here, but we don't think that is fair.) 

America Spartan's Last Stand

My first election was Kennedy versus Nixon.   We had debates and ran an election in our high school.   We were afraid of Kennedy because he was a Catholic. Little did we know that Nixon later would resign in infamy.  Hope in America was unbelievable; we believed we could change the world.  Capitalism would make us wealthy, and we would set a shining example of living by principles.  Even in high school, we debated what America should stand for.

Now I look in sadness what America has become.  Yes, we became the great military power, but not much more.  And yes, capitalism has created trillions in wealth all over the globe, much of it in America.  But, the wealth is not distributed by the sweat put in to earn it, but is concentrated instead in the hands of the nobility.  Poverty creeps across the land slowly consuming what's left of our middle class.  And violence is so commonplace that we ignore it.

But, the biggest sadness comes in what has happened to our democracy.  Do school children still debate the issues?  How could they, the candidates don't even present the issues anymore.  Trump is the star student on how to run a campaign: bash everyone even in his one policy statement. But, Trump didn't invent the game, he is just very good at playing the modern version of whack a mole.

We are quickly becoming an oligarchy where votes are bought and sold on a tv reality show called America the Once Beautiful.  

I am wondering.  Can we make one last stand?  Can we rise up as a nation, put aside our petty differences and stand up to the rich?  Or, will we just roll over and let the rich have our country and be content to live as peasants in a land protected by our King's army. 

The rarest of all men has risen among us.  A man that the rich do not even offer to buy.  In fact, if he continues to gather support from the peasants, I would not be surprised if the rich do not go through the show of backing him just to destroy him.

And even more joyous to me is that this independent man wants to pull this country in a more compassionate direction.  In an age of Us and Them, he is only about Us.  He wants to pull all Americans into the Dream with education, healthcare, social and economic equality, and a bigger share of the American Pie.  

This man is not afraid to say to the rich or wealthy corporations, "you need to pull more of the load".  He is labelled a socialist, a word in America we are afraid of.  He does not seek to destroy capitalism but simply enable the weakest among us  to share in the bountiful harvest.  He dares to hope that all citizens will have an education and healthcare despite their status at birth.  Perhaps this economic equality will help us move more toward the social equality that has been so elusive for us. 

In short,  Bernie wants to give us back the American Dream that we debated so many decades ago  in my high school class in El Paso.   Can we as Americans rise up and make one last stand like the Spartans did to save democracy.

Corporations Fleeing From American Greed

We always talk about corporate greed.  But many countries are fleeing the greed of the American people.  

The average corporate tax in Europe is 25%.  In America, with Federal income tax at 35% and the average state income tax at 4%, companies pay 39% corporate tax to be headquartered in America.

U.S. Corporations found a way around this ... it is called inverting.  The buy a foreign firm and then move the headquarters to that country.  Congress in their brilliance has made this harder to do.  But, now something else is happening.

Foreign corporations are buying U.S. Corporations at an accelerating rate.  Over $335 billion worth of U.S. corporations have been sold this year.  How do they do it?  They simply point out to the shareholders all the taxes they will save by being owned by a foreign corporations.

Yea, we can get even tougher on the corporations, but they will simply move everything to overseas with the loss of American jobs.  Yea, sure we can also put a tariff on the goods, but guess who pays the tariff ultimately, the U.S. taxpayer, plus the other country can play the same game with our country exports.   It is a lose, lose game.  We must play the game by the world rules or the world simply discounts America.  We are not King Kong anymore.

We live in an international environment. We need the world, increasingly the world only needs our military might.  It is a role we have chosen, to be the world policeman. But, we can not pay for that military by taxing corporations more than the rest of the world taxes corporations.  Our greed will simply drive corporations from America to a place that treats them better. 

Trump's Heartless Immigration Plan

Trump’s Immigration Plan Robert R. Odle, Ph.D. an aspiring good citizen of the earth

…Where is Trump's Heart? ...

Trump’s immigration plan is both heartless and stupid.  I won't dwell on the stupid parts, like getting Mexico to pay for building a wall that can be easily crossed by ladders, but instead focus on the lack of compassion (also with plenty of stupidity) in his “family plan” for deporting immigrants.

He wants to send 11 (perhaps as many as 20) million illegal immigrants and their children, some citizens, home.   So he plans to round these people and their children, some who have been here for decades, and ship them home.  Trump says screw being a U.S. citizen by laws that have stood for more than a hundred years and guaranteed by the 14th Amendment and court rulings such as United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) … he is in effect proposing to break the law.  But, let’s say he is successful in breaking the law or changing the 14th Amendment (really?)

Imagine the harm done to a 10 year child, who only speaks English, who has been here is whole life being ripped out of his house and dumped with his parents without money or means to make a living in the middle of Mexico.  Where is the compassion in anyone who would do that do a ten year old kid, or his parents for that matter.  Is America becoming so heartless that it will support a person with such a plan?

So where is the compassion in the Trump plan?

Separate but Equal

Separate But Equal Robert R. Odle, Ph.D. an aspiring good citizen of the earth

…separate but not equal....

Perhaps we were wrong. Remember when we decided that separate was inherently not equal.  Well, 40 years later, we are still mostly separate and definitely still not equal with regard to both opportunities and how minorities are treated:

1. Schools are still predominantly white or black or hispanic.
2. Neighborhoods and slums are still dominated by single races.
3. Most social groups seem to naturally segregate by race.
4. Work environments, especially management, is white dominated. Even places like colleges where we would expect the most progress, are still dominated by white professors.  (Am I wrong on any of this, they are just based eyeball observations not data.)

So, if we are still separate and integration is so elusive, it makes sense to me to make sure everything is equal.  Let’s start with the schools:

1. Are the “black: (or hispanic, or native etc.) equalled funded? If not, let’s make sure it happens across states, neighborhoods, etc.
2. Are the teachers in “black schools” paid as much as their counterparts in “white schools”?  If not, let’s make it so.
3. Are the facilities in the “black schools” as aesthetically pleasing and as functional as the schools in the “white” schools. If not, fix it.
4. Are the information systems in the “black schools” as good as their counterparts in the “white schools”.  If not, fix it.

Of course, these are easy concepts, but they are complicated to execute.  But, do we even have the will to set up such goals and pursue them.  One of the biggest obstacle  is the ridiculous way schools are funded primarily from property taxes. It means from the first step we are struggling to equalize the flow of money to schools in poor neighborhoods.  Of course, as stupid as funding schools primarily from property taxes, I don’t see anyone advocating to change this and fund schools out of the general fund.

Have you noticed that most of your social events are with people of your own color.  That’s the way it is in my world.  I don’t really it like it this way, but I am at a loss on how to change it.  We have one African American in our movie group, who I really enjoy, but she is the only person of color in my life on a social, or any other role. I know I need life experiences with other races to really appreciate their view of life and them as fellow travelers on our journey.

I’m not saying give up on integration, I am just saying while we figure out integration (or not), let’s start working on the concept that all students should have an equal opportunity for success starting with kindergarten (if not sooner). Couple that with free college education at the other end and perhaps we can position America for this new automated, computer world that is coming.

is equal good enough for now?

Humans Need Not Apply

Humans Need Not Apply Robert R. Odle, Ph.D. an aspiring good citizen of the earth

…a new book we must read to be fair ....

Humans Need Not Apply: A Guide to Wealth and Work in the Age of Artificial Intelligence Hardcover – August 4, 2015

by Jerry Kaplan  (Author)

Summary of Book: After billions of dollars and fifty years of effort, researchers are finally cracking the code on artificial intelligence. As society stands on the cusp of unprecedented change, Jerry Kaplan unpacks the latest advances in robotics, machine learning, and perception powering systems that rival or exceed human capabilities. Driverless cars, robotic helpers, and intelligent agents that promote our interests have the potential to usher in a new age of affluence and leisure — but as Kaplan warns, the transition may be protracted and brutal unless we address the two great scourges of the modern developed world: volatile labor markets and income inequality. He proposes innovative, free-market adjustments to our economic system and social policies to avoid an extended period of social turmoil. His timely and accessible analysis of the promise and perils of artificial intelligence is a must-read for business leaders and policymakers on both sides of the aisle.

Some Scary Stuff in this New Book

1. The rate of automation is accelerating.  The rate of eliminating jobs and making humans obsolete is accelerating.
2. Wealth inequality for the U.S., already one of the worst in the world (comparable to Russia and India) is going to get much worse very quickly (it is already happening).

If a small percentage of your population working with computers and machines can generate more wealth than we have ever known then how do we answer these questions:

1. How is that great wealth to be distributed?
1. Option 1: The owners of the computers/machines and the programmers (the lucky few) are the only one that gets the wealth.
2. Option 2. The owners of the computers/machines and the programmers get almost all of the wealth and everyone else lives in poverty.
3. Option 3.  The owners of the computer/machines and the programmers get most of the wealth and everyone else gets paid for improving themselves (free education, art, training) and working for the common good (peace corps for america, volunteer work, childcare for students/poor people, etc.)
4. Option 4.  The owners of the computer/machines and the programmers get most of the wealth and everyone else gets a stipend.
2. How does everyone else but the lucky few find meaning/value for their lives?
3. If the lucky few get almost all the wealth, do we house all the rest in prisons or just terminate them?

what value guides your opinion

Useless People

American Capitalism is Maximizing Profits by Destroying Jobs

American Capitalism is Maximizing Profits by Destroying Jobs Robert R. Odle, Ph.D. an aspiring good citizen of the earth

…capitalism is not about creating jobs ....

Capitalism Does Two Things Well

• It creates wealth and,
• It maximizes profits.

The people in a capitalist system can either be long term or short term thinkers.  In America, they are short term thinkers, generally with a long term lookout of one quarter, the current relevant time period in American business.  Some great companies in this country have a long term look out of a year or more.  Serious five year plans are very rare.

The creation of wealth comes primarily by inventing products for consumers that did not exist before.  Some of the creations, like the cell phone, create wealth all over the world because of improved efficiencies, in this case improved flow of information.

Capitalism maximizes profits in the early hours after a creation by mobilizing resources to sell and distribute the new product.  In this growth period, the use of labor is most intense and frequently grows rapidly as a new creation takes off.  The current business cycle of most new products is relatively short, a few years at most, often a few months.

As the product matures, capitalism maximizes profits by reducing costs.  The most common reduction of costs is to reduce people.  This is done by improving efficiency by the use of machines instead of people, working less people harder, and using the computer to identify and eliminate bottlenecks and to use resources more efficiency.  Automation, although the most obvious way capitalism cuts costs by eliminating human jobs, is only the tip of the iceberg in how computers reduce costs by eliminating jobs.

Job Elimination Creates Excess Capacity

As computers and automation reduces costs by eliminating jobs, excess capacity is needed in each company and the system as a whole since all companies are utilizing similar technology to reduce workers. As the number of workers in America decrease, the number of consumers decrease.  As the number of consumers decrease, further reduction of cost via more worker layoffs is warranted to maximize profits.  Repeat that scenario for 40 years and you have America as you see it … with 62 percent of the work force utilized, 40% of the population getting a few percent of the wealth created.

Each Round of Creations produces less Employment

With each round of creations, the number of viable consumers for the new product is reduced from the previous round job eliminations from computers and automation (and outsourcing -- although that is not the current discussion).  And as computers and automation improve, each round of job destruction is worse that the last one -- hence the 40 year decline in the labor participation rate and the growth of poverty in the United States.

In summary, American Capitalism is maximizing profits by reducing costs primarily from eliminating workers via computerization and automation.

This problem will not be fixed by any automatic mechanism in capitalism.  Capitalism as perfected in America creates wealth and distributes that wealth to the super-rich and those that the super-rich need to maintain and increase their wealth.  With the invention of supercomputers and automation the group needed to increase the wealth of each corporation/super-rich decreases in numbers with each cycle.

interested in the solution?

Sandra Bland Meets Brute Force American Justice

Sandra Bland Meets Brute Force American Justice Robert R. Odle, Ph.D. an aspiring good citizen of the earth

  not using a turn signal results in death ...

Woman from Chicago going to Texas to interview for a new job, but doesn’t user her turn signal to switch lanes.  Cop pulls her over and gets nasty with her, she gives him some lip.  She is told to get out of car, she does.  Of course, cop moves her out of the sight of the dash cam.  A citizen comes along and takes a video at the side of the road with two cops on top of her.  They take her to jail, she does not have on her the $500 to make bail.  The bail bondsman said she was afraid.  Two days later she is dead in her cell.   

Guy running the jail has a history of being racist. The guy assigned to investigate the death also has a history of racism.  They claim she asphyxiated herself by hanging herself with a plastic bag and ruled it a suicide.  Really? Maybe, maybe not?

The policeman that behaved badly has been put on desk duty.  Wow, that is quite a punishment for setting in motion someone's death.

Our sorrow, our shame

Two years ago, I would have given the policemen the benefit of the doubt.  Now, I think they are as guilty as O.J. Simpson was … however, in the Simpson case, I agreed with verdict since a racist cop in that case improperly handled the evidence.  But, I still thought he killed his wife.  Now, I feel the same way about these police.  I believe they killed this woman. However, since racist cops are in charge of the evidence I have no confidence we will ever know the truth.  They show newsman through the cell the next day as if it were a shrine and not part of a crime scene.

Our America Knows Nothing But Force

I’m guess a lot of Americans feel the same way I do, whether or not, there is ever enough evidence to convict these policemen.  Like James Gardner that got killed over selling single cigarettes by the police, Sandy loses her life over not using a turn signal. In both cases, I think the public would be better served if the police were inside Dunkin Donuts eating cream puffs instead of bothering these two people.  

How is it that multiple policemen are deployed for such petty crimes when there are thousands of people being murdered every year in this country, 216 in Chicago alone the first half of this year alone.  And our police are forcibly enforcing laws on turn signals and selling single cigarettes.  Really? We should remember these are black people committing these petty crimes - is that why the police are going after them?  And are all the murders ignored because they are mostly black people killing black people?

America Justice Uses Brute Force  

America approaches all of its problems with brute force. The police screaming at her that he is going to light her up (with his taser) is so typical brute force American.  It is the same spirit behind our War on Drugs (War on Black People That Due Drugs), our War on Terrorism (we as Americans are completely innocent)  our undeclared War on Immigrants(Unarmed Illegal Gunned Down Like a Rabid Dog), our War on Poor People (Police Have Nothing More to Do Than Harass Street People; Our Believe in Authority, a prejudice against the small, especially black, man)

Imagine a Kinder America

Imagine a strong but kind policeman handling Sandra.  A policeman that had been trained to recognize triggers in others and himself.  Could a kind officer said “good morning, Miss, I’m not going to give you a ticket but I just want to encourage you to use your turn signal when switching lanes.”  And if she still came back with a hostile comment, he could have responded, “I understand you are upset for being stopped, but I need to do my job and then you can be on your way”.  Perhaps, a big white policeman with training could realize that Sandra might be having some fear reactions dealing with him … perhaps for some very good historical and personal reasons (similar to any person that is put in a corner without options).  

Now, imagine once she is in jail (justifiably angry over being arrested for a turn signal and an inept policeman) , but scared and alone, if someone had shown her some kindness and compassion.  Perhaps, if America had not already judged her to be a bad person that should be punished, we would have someone (a therapist perhaps) come sit with her and ask her how she was doing.  Someone to advise her on her options, to contact her friends and family, and someone to just care about her as a fellow human being.  Isn’t that the kind of America we want to be?

Other blogs with a similar theme:

Australia, a gentler, kinder America;

A Good Country Index)

All Deaths are Not Equal - White Deaths are a big deal, not so much black lives.

How we treat the mentally ill - police are shown beating up a mentally ill person.

Homeless and Compassion - mentally ill people without help roaming our streets

Do Those in Poverty Have a Right to Water -

Behind the 8 Ball in Ferguson