usa-clear.gif (10636 bytes)

Of Concern & Love

iluvamerica.jpg (1526 bytes)

lefthdr.gif (3398 bytes)

& Economics

righthdr.gif (3389 bytes)

soundicon.gif (1101 bytes)  Phil Collins: Don't Get Me Started                      Questions that must be answered               soundicon.gif (1101 bytes)  Yusef Islam: Peace Train

I heard it was you
Talkin' 'bout a world where all is free
It just couldn't be
And only a fool would say that....
soundicon.gif (1101 bytes)  Steely Dan 1972

We could have matching badges...

I remember hearing that song  for the first time and thinking to myself "Whew, I'm not the only one". I mean, I had never admitted that I actually think like that because, you know, when you say things like that, people think you're a fool. :} I don't need Steely Dan to tell me that. I wonder who they were talking about?

Ever since I thought about that - after deciding to write a paper on the theory of taxation and how it applies to our current world, I've been chuckling, knowing I'd tell you a story that - should anyone take what I say seriously on this site, or maybe even in person, and someone like Bill O'Reilly were to interview me, I'm sure they'd call me a socialist.

Crazy me, I look forward to that discussion :}

soundicon.gif (1101 bytes) Pink Floyd - Money

The truth is, I'd have to say I ascribe more to the Mises formula, probably previously Keynes, and I understand the political appeasement of allowing von Hayek and Friedman into the mix, but that was the poison from long ago that's poisoning us now because it's way out of control. It's the theory that uses economic coercion as a norm instead of a punitive or persuasive measure without long term intended oppression or domination.

They call it trickle down. I think of it more like the application of the theory behind Pavlov's dog. 100% carrot and stick. And you thought ur government only used on foreign countries they didn't like.

So here's the story that I hope will cause some spirited discussion.

But you have to promise me something. You have to promise that if you read any further, you'll read all the way to the end or I'm sure you won't understand what I'm going to tell you.

If you aren't going to read it all, I'll see if I can find a link to littlebluedot.gif (881 bytes) another presidential politician's web site that's sure to give you less fact and information than you need to know. :}

I must have been about 11 or so when I was walking through a supermarket, looking around at all the different kinds of foods and products I'd never seen before, and thought to myself, it's a shame things weren't set up in such a way that everybody could have whatever they wanted or needed, and if they didn't have to worry about getting it, then they would only take what they need.

I'd look around and see different prices on similar products, different quality, and wonder why there would be different qualities. As time has gone on, I wonder why it costs more to eat food that is good for you, when we should all be eating it, instead of the common food that is depleted in its nutriitive value because of depleted soils.

For me, it becomes a discussion more like "What is Equality". I'm really clear we don't understand what the concept of equality actually means.

But, I looked around when I was 11, and thought to myself.. after a good deal of thought, and hearing discussions on tv and KGO about the economy and taxes... that I like to have a little spending money, but the truth is that if I was to give 75% per cent of whatever I earned to the government for taxes, that covered everything except my personal luxury items, then that's not really a bad deal. And if you want to consider something really interesting, considering the fact that the United States Government, let alone we, as as citizens, are teetering on bankruptcy, consider the idea that if you only got paid 25% of what you now earn, and everything would be provided, that would make for an interesting economic maneuvre and worth looking at just to see what effect it would have on the value of the dollar in the global economy. (It isn't the right approach, but somehow, I think it would generate some new, useful observations)

Then consider yourself reminded that I'm sharing my thoughts with you, not the conclusions I've come to. Though, I bet the guys at the Fed would read this and say "And this guy thinks he can be president? We can take this guy in ways we could never take his uncle Ulysses." :} But I have a few more surprises for the Federal Reserve Board that we'll get to later.

Having everything free is not going to happen.. at least for another 10 years. :} I love saying things like that because in a conversation for creation, not change, you have the possibility to say what the ideal would be in a perfect world, and then work toward that, instead of working in response to circumstances based on momentary political expediency.

Transformation occurs when discussing the possibility to create. Everything is possible. The question is, what do you choose to create,  build and sustain? America has not had that kind of discussion for decades. In the current political climate, it seems impossible to have that kind of honest discussion.

The perpetuation of stagnant ideas that do not work in a scalable manner and do not reflect the enormity and dynamicism of population, economic and technological trends can not possibly accurately and productively project the requirements of the future in terms of training and empowerment in every domain of management such that the welfare of the citizens is considered as the the priority for such planning, as opposed to the accomodation of corporate product life cycles that benefit only the anti-trust status of large corporations, whether such laws are enforced or not. It perpetuates a fear-based survival mode psychology or mindset of existence that is false, inhumane, destructive and an indicator of lazy, incompetent or unhealthy leadership.

The fact is that the implementation of so-called free-market trading philosophy is the proof that our government is abandoning its responsibilities toward the citizens to promote the general welfare. Further, if you study what is occurring in the military sector, it is clear that our government, Democratic and Republican alike, is aligned on the idea of the use of military force both to perpetuate the U.S. economy while it is used to actualize a goal never endorsed by the American people - global military domination - that is occurring without your knowledge.

The governemt issues reports and passes laws that noone reads. So, how would the public have time ito inform themselves, if the Congress doesn't? That's how a nation of loopholes is created. So much for equal opportunity and the American Dream.

Understand this: your national infrastructure is crumbling because a bunch of people who believe they are superior to you and I are robbing our treasury in a push to gain the upper hand in the markets that would choke any country that will not comply with their demands. And they're using our military, the war on terror, and using constitutionally illegal mercenaries to fight wars of conquest.

We have been in over 230 military conflicts in foreign countries since the United States became the United States. Think about that. While the politicians extoll the true virtues of the American people to win elections, peaceful people in a  peaceful nation, behind our backs they have caused us to be a nation perpetually at war. Andfrequently the aggressor, despite the press reports that are nothing more than cover stories and lies.

This is all part of the real reason why we really do need to take inventory. How can we possibly say that we should or shouldn't reduce or increase taxes when we don't even know what our cash requirements are?

For example, last time I checked, the United States is not a few trillion in debt, we are closer to $300 trillion in long-term debt. Not all of that is financed by the Federal Reserve process. But much of it is unfunded.

Every  American currently owes over $500,000 in taxes for our current debt. How do you plan to pay your share? Which lie about how it will magically get better in 5 years will you choose to believe in lieu of the realities of the truth?

When the government reports our debt to you, they're talking in simplistic terms of common public operations, not the fulfillment of long-term commitments, pensions and health plans.

The 75 year plan must be more like a hedge-fund scheme set up to float a kiting scheme that only benefits the rich. Like being at the top of a pyramid scheme. Now that the Bush/Council on Foreign Relations military agenda is having its intended effect, the Muslim Regime George Bush claimed Iran wanted to establish in the Middle East is actually going to be required to repair the damage we've caused, given that Iran is, in fact, the dominant Arab nation in that region.

Understand what I just said: we have ostensibly caused, through manipulation and dialectic, the exact situation our government wanted to be able to present us with to keep us in terror and perpetual war, with permanent bases in Iraq and other regions in order to coerce the world with oil.

What part of the so-called moral highground does that conduct represent? Not the American values we claim. And certainly not Christian values. Not even Muslim values.

Why? To force the dependence of the citizens on the government of the United States. The OPEC attrition from American petro dollars to Euro dollars will do a great deal of damage. The Iranians have been warning the United States for years that they would do this if we didn't stop harming them economically.

Understand, as always in that region, we begin an aggressive dialectic that actually sets up nations with no hostility toward us to engage in war with us or go to war against other nations we want weakened economically and politically.

Meanwhile, the American people are told the other nations are the aggressor.

Meanwhile, Exxon made nearly 12 billion dollars last quarter. Exxon, GE and Unocal were the benefactors and reason for the Afghanistan War. Exxon,of course, is a Rockefeller property, who funded the Council on Foreign Relations.

Again, that's why we need to take inventory. It's been a long time since we really evaluated our course without the deceptions of politics. And this is no time to rely on the political favorite way of dealing with things - waiting until a disaster happens to fix something, or patch it so that the real solution will have to be confronted by someone else, or the service or infrastructure will simply be forgotten when it goes out of service.

And an ownership society is not the answer.

The truth is, I doubt we need more taxes in order to accomplish about 2-1/2 times more productivity in governement operations, especially when NOT outsourcing services and utilities that are, in fact the responsibility of the government. Organizations like BlackWater are unconstitutional and expensive.

This is where concentric design is concerned. A new concentric design is required because the incremental alteration of bad ideas has now caused everything to be out of balance and dysfunctional.

soundicon.gif (1101 bytes) Paul McCartney  Fine Line

It's obvious there are things that have to be done in order for the  basic function of the government and us, the citizens. There are things that could be done if no one objected. But there are ways, particularly at this juncture, to incorporate the structuring of the next economy not just on "green technology", the boom for which will be great but limited and expensive as the energy companies convert their equipment and assets to servicing that industry, which they also own.. Likely, on our current course, with irrational subsidies from taxpayers for corporations who do not need them. It's technological extortion.

The idea of a green economy is a good one, but far from comprehensive and necessarily satisfying to the mass of workers who will otherwise be unemployed because of economic collapses in other economic segments. Aka, other businesses, particularly luxury items, transportation, and durable goods, the heart of our manufacturing and export strength. Unless you'll be satisfied to accept the job that the Council on Foreign Relations gives you in their "citizens of the government" approach instead of a "government of the people" approach. It's much more like Russian Communism than Democracy or the functioning of a Republic.

You can continue to feel good about things, feel pumped up by hope and misled into bankruptcy by the candidates in your two-party system.

Or you can put trust in someone willing to tell you the truth in order to avoid and minimize the economic disasters purposefully created by our government and its patrons.

And when it's all over and the bridges and roads and buildings have been sold off to foreign countries, you'll breathe a sigh of relief when you receive the notice that says you'll be allowed to continue to live in your own country as long as you obey your employers' rules.

Again, I wish I was not telling you the truth.

If you think the issue of taxation and the economy in this election has to do with rebates, stimulus packages that don't and saving a few dollars on gas, you're going to be very upset when you suddenly find out it's actually about determining the form of government that's being installed in replacement of the U.S. Constitution.

The foreign trade agreements.. Nafta, WTO, GATT, all of them surender the sovereignty of the United States to other nations, and in a big way, corporations. And your opportunity for recourse and claims is practically non-existent.

Let's just say you think it might be okay for THAT to happen. Is it right that it's being done without our permission? I distrust the motives of these people simply because they do not have the integrity or honorable intentions to even inform us of what they're doing. That makes it a conspiracy.  And it's in it's final stage of completion. A stage that can, theoretically, given a miracle, be stopped in this Presidential Election by voting for anyone but the people in the two party system, John McCain and Barack Obama.

And, what they're doing actually is unconstitutional. There is no provision in the constitution that gives leaders the right, power or perrogative to wage expansionist wars. Covert or overt. The amount of money wasted on such unproductive efforts is phenomenal.

The human toll is intolerable, inhumane and perverse. That politicians speak of mass destruction like a joyful video game is unimageinable and morally bankrupt.

And then the only way to end the nightmare begins with appropriately having the Federal Reserve declared unconstitutional, returning the responsibility of printing money to the govenment, and end the oppression by usery of the citizens of this nation.

I have to make this point. People demonize Muslims all the time. But one thing you have to respect about Muslims is that they know their faith,and they live their faith. In their religion, usery is not allowed. In Christianity, usery is not allowed. But we do it.

Why is usery not allowed according to religion? Because if there's anything that has ever contributed to oppression and the downfall of cultures, it's the siphoning off of economic resources by loan sharks, financiers, and their patron politicans winning support in return for favors. It's likely the most consistently recurring event in history.

Then, imagine how much more work could be accomplished, and how much less money would be spent, if the politicians did not have to spend so much money on elections. And that same money, what would it accomplish instead?

You've heard all those things before, and maybe you say "Oh man, not a tree hugger" or something. But, forget your previous decision to give up on these issues -   what about that statement doesn't actually make sense. Other than a possible claim that it's not realistic? Who does it benefit to have you think that way, to have given up on that subject?

All those things said, I think you will agree that the answers to the economy are greater than short term housing bailouts for citizens, which are important, bailouts for corporations that are making profits from their paper losses, all of which look like the government is giving you your money back, when all they're doing is getting good headlines and votes, while running up a deficit that causes more interest debt.

Tax rebates, dividend tax abatement, all those things just generate more national debt. Putting more money back in your pocket is a great idea. Stealing it from your wallet to put it in your hand just tricks you into thinking you have something that doesn't exist.

It's absolutely mandatory that this nation have a leader NOW that is willing to set politics aside and give the American people their money's worth. And I'm going to ask you to take another look at the concept of economics and taxation as if we did not have a standing economy, paradigms and political parties dividing us with half  truths, deceptions, and pretty named programs that are harmful and never get implemented anyway.

A New Economy for a New World

soundicon.gif (1101 bytes) Eddie Money - Walk On Water

In deciding how to annoy everyone in one fell swoop and make my point at the same time, I started thinking of how the Council on Foreign Relations.. or let's say the lineage of people and families that implemented the Council's original ideologies, created and implemented Communism, Socialism, Marxism and Capitalism. Sort of like doing research on cultures, societies and economies in real time.

We won't say, for the sake of argument at least, that there was anything wrong with that.

Then, somewhere along the line, decisions were made (by greedy people) that capitalism could best be utilized to ultimately re-establish an order of the world that recognized the Rights of Kings... human Kings... like, they really believed God gave it to them, and that their religious heritage gave them the right to have it. You could frame it a million ways, but it always basically comes down to that. They think that their money is the proof of their superiority.

I could name someone who is well respected... and is wealthiest thief in the world. You'd call him a pioneer of industry. You'd probably say "I/m not worthy" in his presence. But I've never heard one single good thing about him as a person.

And, they figured out ways to use cultures with these economic foundations and differences in names to cause people of other structures to fear the other, cause wars, generate huge profits, own nations and undermine governments who wouldn't play along.

I bring this up because it becomes an excellent example of what I call the holographic nature of the universe. It's like doing a work and process flow study to see how 1 person would do a job, and then project the human, economic and material resources required to do the same thing a million times based on the model of production requirements for the single unit and individual doing the work.

I'm now going to explain to you why these biases you have against the labels given to methods of managing economies and macro-economics have caused you to choose the one that has been justified to you by appealing to your inherent desire for freedom: capitalism.

Every one of us is a communist, socialist, marxist and capitalist, as well as having been a recipient of entitlements in a welfare state. All before we're 5 years old. After that, it just becomes a habit, and we are told these other ways are bad and evil because the people telling you that benefit from having you think that way.

Please, think about this. You promised to if you read this :}

If you're a child, you're a welfare recipient. Your government - your parents - are providing it. They are communists. They live together, raise a family, train their families in customs and governmental/sociological behavior and economics.

You're a socialist because you pay taxes and supposedly believe in contributing to the common good.

You're a capitalist because, instead of hunting everyday and farming, we earn money and pay people to do all the other stuff.

And a Marxist, because you believe that you, as equal citizens, deserve your share of the pie, or at least the opportunity to have some.

Now, explained in the contexts I've provided, is there anything wrong with considering the economic theories? Would I be wrong to attempt to compute PI if the idea of computing PI was invented by a Russian? Would that make me subversive? Or, would, "Who cares where an idea came from" make sense to you?

It does to me. Our economy is based on the theories and formulas of all of these "economic theories and formulas" simply because they are intuitive to the way we actually conduct our lives. The art of it is, determining which formulas are appropriate to use in what circumstances. There is a man and theory called Mises which does a good job of expressing the ways the theories of these economic systems blended together, always acknowledging  that the system, and the government are the servants of the citizens and the resources belong to no one and everyone equally.

People will begin to realize that my true method of repairing the economy will not be to announce a bunch of new plans that mean nothing. It will be to streamline the parts of the system that would actually work if the people in charge actually wanted to get the job done. The savings would be huge.

Further, without full nationalization, it is imperative that we join the Muslims, and the United Nations, in declaring that things like water and food and shelter are basic God given rights, and should be available to all. Those are the foundations of life. Certainly, there are logistics to work out, but these items should not be areas with the priority of profit over the heath of people, animals and beings. This is an item on the list of how we "Create the Future" that needs to be part of the all inclusive plan.

Keep in mind, some of the things I point out are already being done. That's reclaiming what works. And I'm not trying to promote the idea that Muslims ar good or superior, but I would like to help end the purposefully caused public image and bigotry that if you see a Muslim or a person of Arab descent, your first instinct should be to be afraid.

The bridges, institutions, lotteries and such are the property of the citizens of America. Our country and our infrastructure is not for sale. I see nowhere in our Constitution or in any documentation that gives our government the right to sell the United States to other individuals and corporations.

I understand the concept of an ownership society. Again, it is a good concept to be incorporated into the master plan appropriately. But my country is not for sale.

soundicon.gif (1101 bytes) Jonathan Edwards - Sunshine (Dedicated to George HW Bush & the Rockefellers)

Any infrastructure that has been sold, public institutions mortgaged or lottery winnings assigned to loans of the state must be immediately returned to the control and ownership of us, the citizens, in the care of our government. If the government does not honor this, then I say they are breaching their oaths of office to serve the citizens. Corporations, nations or individuals refusing to cooperate with this reclamation will be subject to seizure and/or public domain actions.

Oil companies will no longer be subsidized in any way, and they must fully acknowledge that the oil anywhere is the property of the nation state in which it is located. While they are welcome to be competitive bidders for service contracts, the fact that oil has been embedded as the stabilizing influence on our economies, the economies and citizens it serves are more important than their profits and the control the oil gives them over world events.

That ends now. I have no problem with them making a profit for their work. I'm not calling for nationalization. But, I assure you, given my position, I will seek counsel to install legislation or use executive orders to seize the oil of this nation, it's production facilities and the operating assets and equipment of these companies should there be the slightest hint of retaliation for this policy. Then, they can negotiate with us, the citizens, owners of this nation, for the right to work for us again if they will obey our rules for a change. If they give us reason to, maybe we'll even trust them again.

And we will take immediate steps to halt and reverse the negative "faux" Global Warming effects of terraforming via weather manipulation and wars by means of HAARP and other devices. This will then include preventing the excavation of oil in the Arctic and Antarctic regions, as made accesible by these weather manipulation schemes until at least such time that the natural weather and nature of this planet has had time to show us what pattern and path it is taking to heal itself.

This is a serious and very real issue.

The Atlantic Ocean is dying due to the disruption of the Trans-Atlantic Conveyor, a natural cooling system under the ocean. The people running the weather modification devices only care about the natural resources they can reap by creating barren ground.

What's going on in the polar melting is not natural, and it is not caused by greenhouse gases.

By the way, the carbon credits proposals are a farce as well.

This will save us a great deal in many domains in terms of disaster relief, lives, the environment, business damage, insurance costs...

See... we keep approaching everything in a compartmentalized way without examining the rippling effects that each has on the one... notice that way "the one" really is always important to consider. By not acknowledging the rippling effects, that compartmentalization allows for the sales - capitalism - and consumerism that causes us to buy things we don't need. And wouldn't if we were told we didn't need to. Or because it was the thing to do.

Did you know that those Compact Flourescent Flight Bulbs - to save you money and the environment - are not good for you?

And then there will be another huge return/surplus in funds. Personal funds too. And those stimulus packages. Remember, one way or another you pay for them. If we apply windfall profit taxes without taking additional measures, how long do you think the oil companies will take to charge us at the pump for the difference?

But the idea looks good, doesn't it? No wonder the politicians... I mean the Council on Foreign Relations...  wants you to hate Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. He refuses to let the oil companies and the United States run his country. It really is that simple. And he understands that the job of a government is to serve the interests of its citizens first. Like Fidel Castro, the people manipulating us wouldn't want us to get any of those bad kinds of ideas, like questioning the totalitarian authority of a government and its money changers. And, oh by the way, he actually was elected fair and square. You know, that Democracy thing you've heard of. Apparently, that hasn't happened in the United States for decades. Maybe we ought to try it.

Once again, I almost apologize for my cynicism.. or is that truthfulness? I know it's unusual, but if you keep me around for a while, you'll get used to it again.

Think about it. When emergencies happen, doesn't it make you feel better to know what is actually going on, even if there's nothing you can do about it? And wouldn't it bother you to find out you could have done something about a problem if someone had told you before it damaged your life, family or community?

The Federal Reserve as we know it ends. It's an unconstitutional granting of congressional authority, and is causing the very problems that the founders envisioned when they assigned the printing of money to Congress. It's that simple. I defy anyone to justify the debt incurred via this non-governmental organization. And, if you want to be religious about it, it's not a Christian thing to do. Not a Muslim thing to do... bankrupting people slowly behind their banks doesn't seem ethical to me.

I know it's not as simple as that, and yet, it is.

Zillions of dollars saved.

Next, we'll force corporations to expose advanced technology patents without violating intellectual property rights so as to make God's ideas available to everyone when God gives them to us, and not when it's profitable. Things like, the cure for cancer, solar and gamma energy, brushless motors and much, much more. And even the medical miracles of good old psychotronics. You have no idea the medical benefits available from the technology they use to torture people. So, now we're reducing electrical/power costs, medical costs and... drug addiction, crime, chronic pain, obsessive compulsive behavior, depression... And they don't want you to know, because then you'd believe how it could be used to torture people.

Barter taxation will be absolved. Herbs will be encouraged, citizens will be educated on their use, millions and billions in synthetic pharmaceuticals that can be patented are no longer needed. Think of it: free herbs from the garden when you occasionally need stress relief, or hundreds of dollarsofmonth and possible lifetime addiction and causation of other neurological disorders from unnecessary medication. Which would you prefer?

Are the choices really that hard? Ginkco improves the memory. Marijuana relieves some symptoms of Alzheimers (wait I thought marijuana causes people to forget things...). Why are they illegal?

Soil replenishment will increase crops and reduce the harmful effects of fertilization. Actually recycling garbage wastes (that we are often required to separate for garbage companies that never get recycled) will be used and applied toward building materials and the many other uses it can be used for. Let's have no more dead zones in the ocean because of rain run off from our rivers.

Nuclear energy as a utility will be unnecessary because of the implementation of natural energy sources. They are not alternative . The ones we don't consider alternative are simply the ones the profiteers selected to make money from.The supposedly new alternatives have been with us since before the 60's ( the same time period we built air/space craft far superior to the Space Shuttles we now use, which were built later... another example of why we need to ask questions like, why weren't we told? The answers are fascinating, sometimes startling,  sometimes diabolical, and often a sci-fi fan's fantasy of what heaven offers. Actually, that last part is true :} Cool stuff.

I was always thankful as a child that, as they told us,our space and R&D programs brought us the miracles of state of the art technology. I was thankful because of one of those marvelous things they actually did provide us with:  Tang. I loved it. And velcro. You know, the really high tech stuff they tell us about.

Sure they gave us much more. Including space based psychotronics. Scratch, save a ton, no need for all those GPS satellites, let alone surveillance satellites.

Gee, folks, we're going to be in the surplus column here real soon.

Oh yeah, and in the meantime, if we're nice to Mexico, they'll sell us their oil and as a bonus, their economy will grow and the result would be fewer illegal immigrants. And then, if people decide we want to open our borders more, it would be to travel to share and discover each others's lands and cultures in partnership instead of on the basis and timing of when it would be best to exploit someone else's natural resources and desperate population.

And, I have to be honest. I've never understood that we object so much to the environmental damage done by  oil drilling in our own environs, but get really angry at other countries for not wanting to destroy their countries to supply us oil at cheaper than reasonable prices for this finite resource. And you have to understand, just because I believe in taking responsible care of the"property" doesn't mean I'm an environmentalist.

If my mother told me to clean up my bedroom, and I did it, would you label me a compulsive neat freak, if it was politically convenient and expedient? Or would you say I did the right thing?

When Richard Nixon was being impeached, I asked more than one politician to go on record (as a reporter) as to whether they would tell people to focus their concern on Nixon or indict the entire party? They, these Democrats, knew what I was asking, and that the answer I wanted to broadcast would make them say "the right thing". Me, I wanted to force them to set a good example for Democracy in a politically turbulent time. And they knew I would criticize them (rip them to shreds, actually) if they didn't tell people to do the right thing. Facts and truth have a way of ripping common, ordinary politicians to shreds like that. And the problem was, I had that politician on record within 24 hours giving opposite opinions on the matter.

That reasoning also means it is the responsibility of a business to include the complete cleanup, or green operation, of their business. You chose to go into business. It's not like we don't want you. But stop coming to my pool and expecting me to spend money because you're too self-centered to get out of the pool to go to the bathroom. I know that business leaders know exactly what I'm telling them. If I need to tell them what it means, I predict they won't be in business long. Particularly because if an individual citizen did some of the things they did, we'd be arrested for destruction of private property, poisoning and killing people and animals, etc, etc etc.

Forget all the spin and positioning. Can we talk about what's actually going on, instead of wasting time on lies that only benefit special interests?

By the way, I'm okay with free trade. But for me, what seems appropriate is something like "finish your dinner, and you can have dessert". That's how capitalism should work. That should answer some philosophical questions.

Sort of sounds like the movie "Dave", doesn't it? I'd consider that a good thing.

Most people think that people who take a different approach to things are risky. I don't. It's like asking a child a complex question, and they just blurt out something that isn't quite the answer but actually gives you the clue to the primary simplistic distinction that provides an adjustment in the trajectory of the timeline in chaos theory that allows the complex situation to evolve and resolve itself naturally, sort of organically. A little nudge here and there. Losing a little weight. Adding muscle where needed for what we need to do. And so on.

Imagine the rippling effects envisioned if John Kennedy understood that by teaching our childern good, healthy physical habits when young, particularly in an age of cultures transitioning from rural to more urban environs because of industry and population trends, that it would translate into healthier, more satisying lives, the handing down of these good habits to future generations and ever healthier, more abundant lives and societies.

When John Kennedy took office, he was part of the club. And then one day, he saw the light. The real of this thing we call Camelot now. Between you and me, I'll assert that he, like many of our leaders quietly claim, got a little visit one day from a guy named God... because when JFK changed his mind and took another course, it was what God had in mind. And then he was killed.

When I talked to a couple of people when thinking about "running" in 2004, the first thing they said after learning what I wanted to speak about, the truth, they told me I'd better get a bullet proof vest.

Isn't it interesting that we live in a culture where there is an acknowledged ever-present threat that if you speak out against the government you'll just get killed? Think about it. Does that actually fit with your definition of what freedom in America means? And, if it doesn't, why do you tolerate it? What is stopping you from doing something about it? Politically generated fear. If they do something different, they might make it worse.... how could they make it worse?

I probably shouldn't, but I'll mention that if anyone thinks this is bluster, I'll only say that I've already given word to appropriate intel people that if it takes living in a bunker to make sure these changes get implemented, then make sure that is a possibility. I don't mean to be histrionic, but you should be able to understand the implications of what I am proposing. I do. Sure, it was the psyops guys, but who do you think they are?

soundicon.gif (1101 bytes) Three Dog Night - Sure As I'm Sittin' Here

You may think I said all those things to complain about corporations and such. I actually didn't. I wanted to exemplify the simple common sense ways to balance a budget and generate fact and foundation from whence to proceed on the building of the future created by the conversation centered around what we want our lives, families, communities, states, nations and worlds to look like.

Not what we're offered by people and corporations committed to saving our money for themselves.

And how can you make matters worse when you create an atmosphere for a real conversation - not tolerating spin and political slogans - and conduct that conversation that unifies and generates concensus? What politician in America does that? Please also see littlebluedot.gif (881 bytes) The First 100 Days for my plans and ideas about how to actually do that.

You may think that all sounds new agey and cosmic and all that and communicate it in terms like that... but the fact is, all you'd do is prove that there's a reason you want to diminish the truth and importance of what I'm saying in order to distract us from your ulterior motives... and then I'd ask you to disclose which conspiracy you're apparently involved in that would make you want to hide any truth... and if you're not in such a thing, maybe then we can agree to have an intellectually honest conversation.

It becomes as simple as this. If you decided you wanted to run your life without debt, and you made money, ok money, but you had to budget your purchases instead of being able to purchase anything whenever you want so long as you were willing to pay outrageous interest for it... if you had to choose between the luxury (yes, luxury) of paying someone to mow your lawn or keeping your house, what would choose?

But, if doing so for a few years now meant having a comfortable retirement soon or in 20 to 50 years, wouldn't it be worth it?

I don't believe it's legitimate to raise the retirement age so that politicians don't have to admit they've been incompetent in relation to their oaths, promises and publicly stated standards regarding the management of your money - as if I was only referring to Social Security. It's bad enough they have you believing that the purpose of life is to work and make money, have kids and die in wars.

Joseph Campbell writes that most people live the last 1/3 of their lives waiting to die. Not just waiting, hoping to die. Not suicidally. But hoping that they will be relieved of the suffering of their lives. Believing that leaving this world would be better than remaining. Being relieved of the anxiety of what their lives would be like when they are no longer able, willing, or caring enough anymore to work. To be useful human beings in a world designed to exploit the creativity and exhuberence of youth.

In a world designed by God to be joyful from the first day to the last. If you believe in and understand just a little about God, then you know that is true. There is no suffering in His image. It certainly occurs. It wasn't God's idea. The phrase "no pain no gain"...  who convinced you to believe that? What do you tolerate because you believe that?

I hope you find it interesting that a person who really believes in separation of church and state would cite God in an economic essay. The reason: if you understand what God had in mind, and you think he's pretty good at designing things, then maybe you'll understand and accept that using His paradigm as a model for government - the objective administration and the facilitation of the empowerment of the citizens - heavy emphasis on administration, with emphasis on citizens who get satisfaction from service, and discouragement of celebrity politicians in lieu of legitimate public discourse that is actually considered.

And a governement and media that provides us more than a puppet show of our elected officials and CFR trusted and promoted public spokespeople and social leaders saying what they're told to say to distract us  from what's really happening in government and industry.

With all of these things in mind, I am the first to admit that I am disappointed that I can't give you specific plans and numbers. I assert that anyone who says they do will later be proven wrong simply because they never pass laws like they promise because they think of how it should be, talk about it, and then find out that the people they go along with won't really allow it, but it sounded so good, and they wanted to win the election, so they went out and said it was great anyway.

Sure they can pass a flurry of laws to make it look like "see, we did this stuff fast", but it's always stop gap measures... nothing ever compreshensive.

Here's the fun part about solving the "social issues" that noone wants to pay taxes to pay for.

I know I could make one phone call and set off a chain of events that would prepare the United States ngo's to handle these issues of homelessness, poverty, hunger, child care and so much more ... so that when we got the budget reports in and evaluated where we stood... we could say "go", and have more than the 1 national summit on prescient issues, empower people and ngo's to actually resolve these issues in ways that are proven to work... all without passing a law or the need of the approval of Congress. Sooner or later, I assume they would want to be involved in all this, and would join us.

I don't mean to seem precocious or smug, but when I started the non profit I started in 2001 or so (which, by the way, for the record, I am no longer part of for legal reasons having to do with fear of retribution for my comments on this web site on the part of the board members - and it's okay) the entire idea was actually based on the premise that I saw how the New World Order was being implemented, and that it relied on citizen dependence upon the government.

So, frankly, I designed a master plan for a union that generated the closest thing to a government within a government as I could without breaking the law,  for the purpose of giving participants the freedom that the NWO plan required that citizens be stripped of. Namely, community oriented development not requiring government approval, mass generation of locally, privately owned credit unions, promotion of and packaging of "green" product lines, home made and organic and natural product production and distribution...

And I have to admit, I always forget that they actually wouldn't like that, even though I would have taken Universal Health Care, Alternative medicine and energy, and all that kind of stuff they want to make headlines with and not actually do..  I actually thought they might see the value of my services in light of their disdain for having to waste their time on the issues of the ordinary people while trying to engineer their global military and economic conquests.

I'm not joking. I actually proposed it to them like that. :}I don't think George liked the idea (although he did invoke the Taft-Hartley act when I told him to).

Another almost apology for the cynicism. But at least it's good to have remembered that these attacks on me are not just because they don't like me :} It's because, in retrospect, I realize that's the same way organizations like the Black Panthers, Hamas and other terrorist organizations started. Innocently, passionately finding a way to tend to the needs of citizens who are ignored by their government. In this case, almost all of us.

And, what I had in mind was much more like a combination of trade unions, health care plans, banking and a publishing company... after writing that, I'm beginning to see more and more why the corporations and government don't want you to vote for me. :}

The problem they have with me is that when I recognized their immediate Psyops on me, I decided to do this all myself and not let others get involved so other people wouldn't get hurt. They had no group to infiltrate, militarize and set up for a crime in order to disrupt it. So they decided to use military weapons and incapacitate me instead. Still didn't shut me up. Came close.

The reports I get say that the government would save in excess of $5 million per year, if not 50, if they just stopped harassing me. I'm serious. If they stopped harassing the names of the people I have in my email file who are being harassed, we'd likely save $5 billion or more per year.

You tell me if that much money is worth spending on people like me who keep talking about this thing called the Constitution and stuff like the truth and facts and treason. Who benefits by keeping people like me quiet?

Now we're talking reducing the budgets of the military and Homeland Security. Why? Because, as the Rand Corporation (who I always thought about working for, but I didn't have a college degree) recently agreed with me (what I've been saying since September 11, 2001, or shortly thereafter) is that the use of the term "War on Terror" is counter productive, and that terrorism should be treated more as a law enforcement issue.

Why? Here's why I've been saying that for years.

The words War On Terror as a national policy and global declaration is, unto itself, terrorism... it is psychological warfare.

I'm not defending Iran when I say this. But if the superpower of the world declared you a terrorist state and part of an axis of evil, and waged war against one of the nations in that axis, as the leader of Iran, you would have to bulk up your military power to defend your nation. It's your job. 

So they do that. Even though they weren't harming us, and we provoked them. But now that they ARE building advanced technology systems, maybe weapons, maybe not, the Bush Administration and some news people would have you believe that we need to prove our righteous role of vanquishing the bad guys, who we just happened to set up to look bad so our guys could get away with lying and take us to war in order to control the world's oil.

How many millions have we spent engineering that? And the covert world war we are waging in over 130 countries? What do we gain by causing hostility all over the world?

All the while, that $500,000 per person tax liability grows.

soundicon.gif (1101 bytes) Shaggy - Hope

Think I have an unusual or risky approach to economics and taxation? What do you call what's been going on for the last 100 years? And look at who the advisors are in the two-party candidates lists of advisors.

It's the same old people who have lead us to this moment. The Bushes and the Clintons... all they have is new figureheads in Obama and McCain. Everything else is the same. Even the basis for their war policies is the same. The bogus war on terror to cover the military domination of oil that we don't and shouldn't really need.

Greed destroys Democracy many ways. So do egos out of control. And I'm not talking about mine.

Think of all this. Think about it some more. And when you tell people about this site, tell them about what I say, and that I may be crazy, but like other people say about him, he's the most rational insane person you ever met. And he likes to have fun. And he likes flowers.

And he has this idea about global peace and abundance for all.... 

And then ask yourself if all this is crazy, or just a possibility you gave up believing could ever possibly happen, so you stopped thinking about it and called it silly to save yourself from ever revisiting the pain you feel when you wonder why it all has to be so complicated and hard...

And why, as James Campbell says, people spend the last 1/3 of their lives waiting to die, to be relieved of the suffering some liar told them was simply a normal part of life.

And if only a fool would say that, then I'm glad to call myself a fool. Proud of it. I'll wear it like a badge.

We could have matching badges.


Please also visit:


(C) Charles Rehn Jr IV  2002-2009 All Rights Reserved

1966-2009  Charles Rehn Jr IV  & The Kingdom of God Communications, Inc ™    All Rights Reserved.


Creating the Future...

kite_lg_clr.gif (8058 bytes)



humbirat.gif (15553 bytes)