I can cite numerous reasons and excuses why I took up smoking at age 30, but I wouldn't advise anyone else to do likewise. Because of it, I payed attention to the arguments when the states sued the tobacco companies several years ago. I thought then and still think now that the courts should not have awarded the states a dime.
Everybody dies whether or not he/she smokes. The terminal diseases of non-smokers are essentially as expensive as those of smokers. Therefore, smoking doesn't significantly increase a person's draw on the government's health-care purse. Smoking shortens life expectancy by a few years, so the duration of the smoker's draw on the health-care purse is shorter than that of the non-smoker. The large taxes on tobacco pay for much of the state's health-care expense drawn by smokers, so the state probably comes out better with smokers than with non-smokers.
And the federal government makes out like a bandit, with smokers paying high taxes on tobacco and paying into social security for years and then dying prematurely thereby relieving social security of several payout years.
Perhaps the tobacco companies should sue the state and federal governments to recover some of the extra revenues and expense savings incident to smoking.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
US-Cuban relations
It seems that our policies toward Cuba have been short-sighted almost from the time Castro took power. For decades we encouraged Cuban dissidents to escape and take refuge in the US. One result was the takeover of southern Florida by a large population of angry foreigners with policy agendas of their own and with enough clout to tie the hands of our government in its relations with Cuba. Various embargoes made life difficult for the people of Cuba and prevented US businesses from operating in and trading with Cuba. This exclusion probably prolonged the Communist regime or prevented or delayed its mollification. It advantaged businesses from all not-US countries vis-a-vis US companies. Then there were the unethical attempts to assassinate Castro or overthrow the Cuban government by paramilitary action. The missile crisis came after several of our offenses against the Cuban government. Those missiles were forced (by Nikita Kruschev) on Castro against his wishes. When the Cubans shot down a small US aircraft dropping propaganda leaflets over Cuba, we should have just shut up instead of posturing self-righteously. In any case, normalization of relations with Cuba should have begun at least three decades ago and been completed by now. Why not?
Monday, February 26, 2007
Guantanamo Detainees
* Our invasion and occupation of Iraq have produced and trained at least one hundred enemy combatants willing to sacrifice themselves in the killing of Americans for every enemy combatant we have killed or captured in Afghanistan and Iraq. The neocon doctrine of improving world order and our safety by projecting US military power abroad predictably had negative efficiency.
* Considering the frequency and brutality of inter-Muslim killings and the ease with which people can depart utterly from civilized ways in a hateful environment, there is little doubt that Americans and allies here and in various parts of the world will be killed by terrorists we have cultivated.
* The prisoners in Guantanamo are no longer well connected to movements in their home countries, so their possible intelligence value is minuscule and their threat in aggregate is small compared to that of the many thousands of enemy combatants we have cultivated. Therefore, our danger would not increase measurably were we to repatriate those prisoners immediately, except those we are prepared to indite and prosecute immediately. In most cases, it would be the just thing to do. It is impossible to imprison even a modest fraction of those now willing to do us harm. Better to make friends wherever possible - friends to help contain, discover and control those bent on violence.
* Considering the frequency and brutality of inter-Muslim killings and the ease with which people can depart utterly from civilized ways in a hateful environment, there is little doubt that Americans and allies here and in various parts of the world will be killed by terrorists we have cultivated.
* The prisoners in Guantanamo are no longer well connected to movements in their home countries, so their possible intelligence value is minuscule and their threat in aggregate is small compared to that of the many thousands of enemy combatants we have cultivated. Therefore, our danger would not increase measurably were we to repatriate those prisoners immediately, except those we are prepared to indite and prosecute immediately. In most cases, it would be the just thing to do. It is impossible to imprison even a modest fraction of those now willing to do us harm. Better to make friends wherever possible - friends to help contain, discover and control those bent on violence.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Human condition
The world is so full of a number of things, I'm sure we should all be as happy as kings.
Man does not live by bread alone.
Better a man unsatisfied than a pig satisfied.
* These quotes (Stevenson, Jesus, Mill) address an important aspect of the human condition - a yearning for meaning and significance in ones own existence, which is rarely satisfied. We, like other animals, are restless, unsatisfied with the normal comforts and pleasures that we try to achieve. We seek occupation, prestige, community, intimacy, justification, righteousness, distraction, wisdom, wealth, power. We seek, sometimes obsessively, but are rarely satisfied!
* Philosophers and religion founders attempt to address this matter.
* These thoughts came to mind yesterday, when I received an invitation to join the American Humanist Association. The accompanying opinion survey was largely agreeable to me; and, next December, I will probably send $35 to join, unless it seems less valuable than some other uses of the money. It is unlikely that humanism can be a large movement, because it is based on evidence and reason and lacks compelling myths. Average people aren't likely to be passionate about evidence and reason, gather for sermons about evidence and reason, write and sing hymns to evidence and reason, fight for evidence and reason. I would like to be proven wrong, as civilization is in desperate need of more allegiance to evidence and reason.
* Could the Abrahamic religions undergo transformations toward humanism, refining their ethical principles and discarding their tribalism and magical ideation? Only if they learn to view their scriptures in perspective. Humanists are prepared to accept our limited significance and meaning, while working for a happier, more peaceful civilization and a sustainable earth. I wonder what Moses, Jesus and Mohammad would say on these matters and on their respective traditions if they came back today.
Man does not live by bread alone.
Better a man unsatisfied than a pig satisfied.
* These quotes (Stevenson, Jesus, Mill) address an important aspect of the human condition - a yearning for meaning and significance in ones own existence, which is rarely satisfied. We, like other animals, are restless, unsatisfied with the normal comforts and pleasures that we try to achieve. We seek occupation, prestige, community, intimacy, justification, righteousness, distraction, wisdom, wealth, power. We seek, sometimes obsessively, but are rarely satisfied!
* Philosophers and religion founders attempt to address this matter.
* These thoughts came to mind yesterday, when I received an invitation to join the American Humanist Association. The accompanying opinion survey was largely agreeable to me; and, next December, I will probably send $35 to join, unless it seems less valuable than some other uses of the money. It is unlikely that humanism can be a large movement, because it is based on evidence and reason and lacks compelling myths. Average people aren't likely to be passionate about evidence and reason, gather for sermons about evidence and reason, write and sing hymns to evidence and reason, fight for evidence and reason. I would like to be proven wrong, as civilization is in desperate need of more allegiance to evidence and reason.
* Could the Abrahamic religions undergo transformations toward humanism, refining their ethical principles and discarding their tribalism and magical ideation? Only if they learn to view their scriptures in perspective. Humanists are prepared to accept our limited significance and meaning, while working for a happier, more peaceful civilization and a sustainable earth. I wonder what Moses, Jesus and Mohammad would say on these matters and on their respective traditions if they came back today.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Traditions under threat
> Observing social/religious/political/economic/military turmoil occasionally everywhere in the world and today in too many locations, I can't be optimistic about the prospect of widespread and enduring peace, justice and happiness. Add to that the deterioration of the earth's natural support systems (water, energy, soil, sea life, climate) as never before in history, and the prospect becomes bleaker.
> Every society has organizational, governmental and judicial traditions, these along with wealth and power hierarchies, religious influences, educational institutions, economic possibilities and degrees of regulation and freedom. These characteristics in the US, UK and Europe are reasonably satisfactory for the moment. But all of us eurotypes had cataclysmic episodes in our past and there is no guarantee that our futures will be satisfactory. In fact, many trends are toward less satisfaction. Job security and family stability are declining. Senses of crowding, competition and invisibility are rising. Senses of community and significance are declining. The popular culture grows ever cruder and uglier. Substance abuse and associated crimes are too prevalent. Conditions for ethnic strife loom in every eurotype country. The deterioration of natural support systems will accelerate as developing populations increase in number and/or prosperity.
> I wonder what traditions and other characteristics will crumble under the weight of crises or will be altered to stave off crises.
> Every society has organizational, governmental and judicial traditions, these along with wealth and power hierarchies, religious influences, educational institutions, economic possibilities and degrees of regulation and freedom. These characteristics in the US, UK and Europe are reasonably satisfactory for the moment. But all of us eurotypes had cataclysmic episodes in our past and there is no guarantee that our futures will be satisfactory. In fact, many trends are toward less satisfaction. Job security and family stability are declining. Senses of crowding, competition and invisibility are rising. Senses of community and significance are declining. The popular culture grows ever cruder and uglier. Substance abuse and associated crimes are too prevalent. Conditions for ethnic strife loom in every eurotype country. The deterioration of natural support systems will accelerate as developing populations increase in number and/or prosperity.
> I wonder what traditions and other characteristics will crumble under the weight of crises or will be altered to stave off crises.
Friday, February 16, 2007
Anthrax subsidy
Why does our federal government subsidize anthrax? Isn't anthrax a bad thing? We shouldn't support anthrax, we should make war on it. I don't want my tax dollars used to subsidize anthrax.
(Whisper, whisper.....) Ooooh, It's Amtrak, not anthrax. That's different. Never mind.
(Whisper, whisper.....) Ooooh, It's Amtrak, not anthrax. That's different. Never mind.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Systematic solutions
When something goes wrong, I begin thinking of how it could have been avoided systematically. What, in your experience, needs systematic avoidance?
1. Complete and secure separation of airline pilots from passengers, as recommended by Israeli consultants - would have prevented 9/11.
2. An alarm in small-child school buses to alert anyone inside and outside the bus if not turned off at the inside-rear by the ignition key within two minutes of turning off the motor - would have prevented numerous heat-exhaustion deaths of children.
3. Stinky paint balls for riot control - would have prevented the second Intifada, etc.
4. Sticky Lo-Jack, a radio-transmitting projectile with mushy/sticky nose to mark a fleeing car so it can be followed at a great distance - would prevent most hot-pursuit accidents.
5. Universal labeling of ammunition projectiles and casings per box thereof (two-dimensional binary code) registered to buyer or assignee - would allow quick forensic back-tracking of such objects at crime scenes and battle sites, and would allow monitoring of inappropriate actions by our client Iraqi police/military personnel.
6. Quick-deploying parachutes and under-carriage air bags for helicopters - would prevent many crash-related casualties.
7. GPS transmitters or transponders in equipment of soldiers', contractors and indigenous police (shoe, gun, vehicle) - would help respond to emergencies and track perpetrators.
9. Binocular video GPS tracker of distant light/heat events - would allow instant and precise retaliation to missile or artillery attacks rather than delayed, scattered and excessive response.
1. Complete and secure separation of airline pilots from passengers, as recommended by Israeli consultants - would have prevented 9/11.
2. An alarm in small-child school buses to alert anyone inside and outside the bus if not turned off at the inside-rear by the ignition key within two minutes of turning off the motor - would have prevented numerous heat-exhaustion deaths of children.
3. Stinky paint balls for riot control - would have prevented the second Intifada, etc.
4. Sticky Lo-Jack, a radio-transmitting projectile with mushy/sticky nose to mark a fleeing car so it can be followed at a great distance - would prevent most hot-pursuit accidents.
5. Universal labeling of ammunition projectiles and casings per box thereof (two-dimensional binary code) registered to buyer or assignee - would allow quick forensic back-tracking of such objects at crime scenes and battle sites, and would allow monitoring of inappropriate actions by our client Iraqi police/military personnel.
6. Quick-deploying parachutes and under-carriage air bags for helicopters - would prevent many crash-related casualties.
7. GPS transmitters or transponders in equipment of soldiers', contractors and indigenous police (shoe, gun, vehicle) - would help respond to emergencies and track perpetrators.
9. Binocular video GPS tracker of distant light/heat events - would allow instant and precise retaliation to missile or artillery attacks rather than delayed, scattered and excessive response.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Oil/Population Ratio
The US with 5% of the world's population consumes 25% of the world's oil production. Consider the implications.
We use petroleum as transportation and heating fuels and for lubricating everything. Every industry, including agriculture, is oil intensive. No fuel comes close to petroleum for convenience as a transportation fuel. Our lives will be much less comfortable, convenient, efficient, equitable, flexible, affordable and safe when oil becomes far more costly. Distant bedroom subdivisions will be almost worthless. Our economy will be much less productive and supportive. Imagine our important life-style and economic options taken away owing to limited and very expensive oil. Which options would you gladly forgo?
Our economic/educational/political system calls for ever increasing population, mainly as immigrants, so our own internal dynamics require an increase of oil consumption or a diminution of conveniences on average.
If for simplicity, we assume that oil and population are zero-sum quantities, one might estimate life-style convenience as the ratio of % oil consumption to % population, 25%/5% = 5. This approximation is justified by the small and diminishing oil-production flexibility. The convenience ratio for all other nations on average is 75%/95% = 0.8. Thus, our life-style is about 6 times as oil intensive and convenient as that of the rest of the world, on average.
Large segments of non-US populations are more robust than the US, and are catching up in productivity and income. In fact, we are indebted to them by trillions. Leaders of those robust nations continue lending to us to keep their populations employed and peaceful. When those populations demand happier life styles, they will have the money for the implied increase of oil consumption.
But, their life styles will improve very little as ours diminish dramatically. For example, a halving of our oil consumption to 12% of production would be very painful (a ratio of 2.5), but the corresponding increase in their consumption to 88% (a ratio of 0.9) will be modest indeed. That is, a more equitable distribution of oil consumption will be very disruptive to us but minor help to them. The envy, demands, expectations, resentments and entitlement habits will result in deterioration of international relations worse than we have experienced since the second world war. And we will be the weaker of the competitors.
This simple dynamic has been obvious for decades, but no US administration has addressed it competently.
Finally, this will happen as world population increases from 6 billion to 9 billion, so the average convenience ratio for the world will decline about 30% unless oil production increases. It's a question of how fast we are able to destroy the climate. All these problems could be avoided peacefully by a worldwide embrace of family planning.
We use petroleum as transportation and heating fuels and for lubricating everything. Every industry, including agriculture, is oil intensive. No fuel comes close to petroleum for convenience as a transportation fuel. Our lives will be much less comfortable, convenient, efficient, equitable, flexible, affordable and safe when oil becomes far more costly. Distant bedroom subdivisions will be almost worthless. Our economy will be much less productive and supportive. Imagine our important life-style and economic options taken away owing to limited and very expensive oil. Which options would you gladly forgo?
Our economic/educational/political system calls for ever increasing population, mainly as immigrants, so our own internal dynamics require an increase of oil consumption or a diminution of conveniences on average.
If for simplicity, we assume that oil and population are zero-sum quantities, one might estimate life-style convenience as the ratio of % oil consumption to % population, 25%/5% = 5. This approximation is justified by the small and diminishing oil-production flexibility. The convenience ratio for all other nations on average is 75%/95% = 0.8. Thus, our life-style is about 6 times as oil intensive and convenient as that of the rest of the world, on average.
Large segments of non-US populations are more robust than the US, and are catching up in productivity and income. In fact, we are indebted to them by trillions. Leaders of those robust nations continue lending to us to keep their populations employed and peaceful. When those populations demand happier life styles, they will have the money for the implied increase of oil consumption.
But, their life styles will improve very little as ours diminish dramatically. For example, a halving of our oil consumption to 12% of production would be very painful (a ratio of 2.5), but the corresponding increase in their consumption to 88% (a ratio of 0.9) will be modest indeed. That is, a more equitable distribution of oil consumption will be very disruptive to us but minor help to them. The envy, demands, expectations, resentments and entitlement habits will result in deterioration of international relations worse than we have experienced since the second world war. And we will be the weaker of the competitors.
This simple dynamic has been obvious for decades, but no US administration has addressed it competently.
Finally, this will happen as world population increases from 6 billion to 9 billion, so the average convenience ratio for the world will decline about 30% unless oil production increases. It's a question of how fast we are able to destroy the climate. All these problems could be avoided peacefully by a worldwide embrace of family planning.
Friday, February 9, 2007
US-Iranian Relations
* How would US-Iranian relations be judged by an objective observer who wishes Americans and Iranians well? Such an observer might say that those relations have deteriorated owing to short-sighted or incompatible economic goals, foreign-policy decisions influenced by the cold war and Israel, power struggles within each country, ethnic/cultural/religious tribalism, conventional international protocols, specific historical events and a whole lot of ignorance and self-righteousness.
* Perhaps a Truth and Reconciliation Conference would be a useful way to restore happier, more peaceful relations. The conference would enable each side to understand the dynamics of the other, to examine sources of resentment, explore areas of common interest, etc. It would provide an opportunity for each side to apologize for unjustified or excessive offenses and possibly to exchange some forgiveness.
* The US could explain and apologize for stirring up riots to overturn the democratic election of a constitutional nationalist prime minister in 1953. We could apologize for embracing the Shah, despite his irresponsible, corrupt and tyrannical ways, in order to exploit Iranian oil. Iran could explain and apologize for supporting a spontaneous invasion of our embassy by exuberant youths and the holding of hostages therein. We could explain and apologize for failing to restrain Israel's settlement expansions into Palestinian territory. Iran could explain and apologize for supporting Hezbollah in its actions against Israel, against the Lebanese government and against our former base in Lebanon. We could explain and apologize for our attitudes, positions and actions during the Iran/Iraq war. We could apologize for invading and occupying Iraq, thereby loosing a civil war in Iran's neighbor, in general for a distorted concept of US interests.
* It seems likely that Iranians would not have developed their stifling theocracy had we stayed out of their politics during the cold war. In any case, hateful rhetoric should be less attractive after a Truth and Reconciliation Conference.
* I want my country to deserve a reputation for reason and justice and believe that most Iranians want the same for their country. We are on the verge of dealing peacefully with Iran's nuclear program or failing to do that with disastrous results for generations.
* Perhaps a Truth and Reconciliation Conference would be a useful way to restore happier, more peaceful relations. The conference would enable each side to understand the dynamics of the other, to examine sources of resentment, explore areas of common interest, etc. It would provide an opportunity for each side to apologize for unjustified or excessive offenses and possibly to exchange some forgiveness.
* The US could explain and apologize for stirring up riots to overturn the democratic election of a constitutional nationalist prime minister in 1953. We could apologize for embracing the Shah, despite his irresponsible, corrupt and tyrannical ways, in order to exploit Iranian oil. Iran could explain and apologize for supporting a spontaneous invasion of our embassy by exuberant youths and the holding of hostages therein. We could explain and apologize for failing to restrain Israel's settlement expansions into Palestinian territory. Iran could explain and apologize for supporting Hezbollah in its actions against Israel, against the Lebanese government and against our former base in Lebanon. We could explain and apologize for our attitudes, positions and actions during the Iran/Iraq war. We could apologize for invading and occupying Iraq, thereby loosing a civil war in Iran's neighbor, in general for a distorted concept of US interests.
* It seems likely that Iranians would not have developed their stifling theocracy had we stayed out of their politics during the cold war. In any case, hateful rhetoric should be less attractive after a Truth and Reconciliation Conference.
* I want my country to deserve a reputation for reason and justice and believe that most Iranians want the same for their country. We are on the verge of dealing peacefully with Iran's nuclear program or failing to do that with disastrous results for generations.
Monday, February 5, 2007
Fiscal Policy
> I have opposed almost every initiative of the Bush administration, especially tax, energy and family-planning policies and the Iraq war. Bush's fiscal policy is an exaggeration of Reaganism which was already excessive. It seems to be influenced by Grover Norquist, who wishes to bankrupt the federal government.
> Bush's first presidential campaign was full of deceptions, none more irritating to me than the proposed tax cuts (income and estate) fortified by the phrase, "it's your money". Better would have been to leave both taxes alone and hope that budget surpluses would endure for a few years to reduce the national debt, knowing that considerable borrowing was in our future as social security revenues fall below payouts. The surpluses were unlikely to endure for long, since much of it was due to capital gains incident to sale of NASDAQ stocks. One should not forget the social effect of the tax cuts to widen the wealth gap, further calcifying the plutocracy.
> The national debt has multiplied several fold, owing to Reaganism and its exaggeration by the Bush administration. Service of that debt is now a large fraction of the federal budget, so the debt is self augmenting. Our federal government is living on payday loans.
> When the predictable budget deficits occurred, the "it's your money" justification proved patently false, so Bush claimed that the tax cuts were legitimized as economic stimulus. Tax cuts to the rich are the most inefficient, even stupidest conceivable, means of stimulating the economy.
> In any case, supporting our economy with debt that will pass to the next generation and the next, is unethical. Our generation has no right to create debt to be serviced by future generations.
> One must consider whether the earth's support systems (waterways, aquifers, oceans, atmosphere, farmland, energy sources) can tolerate our economy and the rising economies in Asia, Africa and Latin America. We need to think about how to live as happily as possible with sustainable economic activity. I predict that we won't make the needed adjustments until a crisis is upon us. The needed adjustments are: more regulation, fairer distribution of employment and compensation, incentives and coercion for citizens to accomplish necessary tasks, effort to encourage family planning worldwide, a swing of the pendulum away from Reagan/Bush toward socialism. If that sounds bad, then contribute to the conversation.
> Bush's first presidential campaign was full of deceptions, none more irritating to me than the proposed tax cuts (income and estate) fortified by the phrase, "it's your money". Better would have been to leave both taxes alone and hope that budget surpluses would endure for a few years to reduce the national debt, knowing that considerable borrowing was in our future as social security revenues fall below payouts. The surpluses were unlikely to endure for long, since much of it was due to capital gains incident to sale of NASDAQ stocks. One should not forget the social effect of the tax cuts to widen the wealth gap, further calcifying the plutocracy.
> The national debt has multiplied several fold, owing to Reaganism and its exaggeration by the Bush administration. Service of that debt is now a large fraction of the federal budget, so the debt is self augmenting. Our federal government is living on payday loans.
> When the predictable budget deficits occurred, the "it's your money" justification proved patently false, so Bush claimed that the tax cuts were legitimized as economic stimulus. Tax cuts to the rich are the most inefficient, even stupidest conceivable, means of stimulating the economy.
> In any case, supporting our economy with debt that will pass to the next generation and the next, is unethical. Our generation has no right to create debt to be serviced by future generations.
> One must consider whether the earth's support systems (waterways, aquifers, oceans, atmosphere, farmland, energy sources) can tolerate our economy and the rising economies in Asia, Africa and Latin America. We need to think about how to live as happily as possible with sustainable economic activity. I predict that we won't make the needed adjustments until a crisis is upon us. The needed adjustments are: more regulation, fairer distribution of employment and compensation, incentives and coercion for citizens to accomplish necessary tasks, effort to encourage family planning worldwide, a swing of the pendulum away from Reagan/Bush toward socialism. If that sounds bad, then contribute to the conversation.
Saturday, February 3, 2007
She told us so
The national conversation lost a beloved voice this week - Molly Ivins. She was among the most insightful, prescient, ethical and interesting columnists ever to grace the nation's journal pages, and funny too. There can be no other like her.
To restore balance on our opinion pages, it would be wise to reject columns from self-righteous, war-mongering, ultramontanian, ethnoreligiously fanatical bullies like Cal Thomas, at least the ones utterly replete with deception.
To restore balance on our opinion pages, it would be wise to reject columns from self-righteous, war-mongering, ultramontanian, ethnoreligiously fanatical bullies like Cal Thomas, at least the ones utterly replete with deception.
Reptile Dysfunction
What's all this talk I hear about reptile dysfunction. I can't turn on my TV without hearing some geezer telling me not to be embarrassed about reptile dysfunction. Bob Dole, don't you have something more important to do than promote a remedy for reptile dysfunction. Reptiles have prospered on earth longer than people, and they will endure after we are gone, so a little reptile dysfunction isn't our problem. Get over it!!!
(Whisper, whisper.....) Ooooh, erectile dysfunction. It was erectile dysfunction, not reptile dysfunction. That's different. Never mind.
At 72 years, I can still hear tones and vowels about as well as ever, but many consonants escape me, along with occasional syllables, often with interesting and comical results.
(Whisper, whisper.....) Ooooh, erectile dysfunction. It was erectile dysfunction, not reptile dysfunction. That's different. Never mind.
At 72 years, I can still hear tones and vowels about as well as ever, but many consonants escape me, along with occasional syllables, often with interesting and comical results.
Improbable Earth
We live on an extremely improbable planet. No other planet in our solar system has the potential for sustaining life. None has water, supportive atmosphere, habitable temperatures, crust and other conditions in combination that might give rise even to primitive life. We have them all and more; a life-friendly habitat giving rise to life's masterpiece, mind.
Given the rarity of life-supportive planets, it is worth considering the wonderful, improbable combination of circumstances that surround us. That can be done by imagining our planet lacking those circumstances one at a time.
Imagine where we would be and how we would live: if trees had not evolved in the plant kingdom, if iron and other metals had not accumulated in convenient deposits, if carbon fuels had not accumulated in deposits, if the majority of microbes were pathogenic rather than innocuous or beneficial, if any element of the periodic table were far less abundant on earth or totally lacking or were much harder to get, if key elements lacked their properties, eg if calcium, carbonate and phosphate did not make such wonderful solids, if earth's surface weren't protected from the sun's particle wind by a magnetic field. It is extremely improbable that earth has every good thing that could possibly be.
These things and mind should evoke awe in everyone who considers them. Could that awe be the basis of a modern religion? Could mankind embrace earth and mind as objects of devotion, inspiration, care, wonder, responsibility, passion, stewardship, sacrifice, contentment, music, satisfaction, support, development? What form would such a religion take? Who would be its prophets? Would such a religion be something like a study of ethics, leading to active concern for our co-inhabitants and future inhabitants of the earth regardless of tribe? I question whether the Abrahamic religions can evolve to be good stewards of earth and mind? They are all replete with tribalism, which limits application of the golden rule in all dimensions.
Given the rarity of life-supportive planets, it is worth considering the wonderful, improbable combination of circumstances that surround us. That can be done by imagining our planet lacking those circumstances one at a time.
Imagine where we would be and how we would live: if trees had not evolved in the plant kingdom, if iron and other metals had not accumulated in convenient deposits, if carbon fuels had not accumulated in deposits, if the majority of microbes were pathogenic rather than innocuous or beneficial, if any element of the periodic table were far less abundant on earth or totally lacking or were much harder to get, if key elements lacked their properties, eg if calcium, carbonate and phosphate did not make such wonderful solids, if earth's surface weren't protected from the sun's particle wind by a magnetic field. It is extremely improbable that earth has every good thing that could possibly be.
These things and mind should evoke awe in everyone who considers them. Could that awe be the basis of a modern religion? Could mankind embrace earth and mind as objects of devotion, inspiration, care, wonder, responsibility, passion, stewardship, sacrifice, contentment, music, satisfaction, support, development? What form would such a religion take? Who would be its prophets? Would such a religion be something like a study of ethics, leading to active concern for our co-inhabitants and future inhabitants of the earth regardless of tribe? I question whether the Abrahamic religions can evolve to be good stewards of earth and mind? They are all replete with tribalism, which limits application of the golden rule in all dimensions.
Friday, February 2, 2007
Iraq Peace
* Make no mistake, the invasion of Iraq was a crime compounded by irresponsible occupation, resulting in loosing of man's worst tribal instincts. How can this crime be mitigated? I propose: A) an improved Iraqi police force and B) a means of influencing Iraqi behavior generally.
* * A) Prior to the ethnic cleansing and civil war, it might have been possible to assemble an Iraq police force from buddy units consisting of one each of a Shiite, a Sunni and a Kurd, each squad consisting of several such buddy units. The squads would take responsibility for protecting Iraq's public assets first and private assets second. Members of this force would be very well paid. Much of the mischief (especially police misbehavior) that has happened could be thus avoided. It may not be too late for this plan.
* US forces should have taken charge of leading such squads in protection of oil assets and utility infrastructure all of which should be nationalized.
* Responsible performance by the police can be encouraged, almost assured, by three technologies.
1) Each policeman will be issued firearms whose barrel signatures are on record and will forfeit other firearms and ammunition in his home or possession.
2) The ammunition issued to each policeman will be uniquely labeled. (There are several patents for uniquely labeling ammunition projectiles and casings, but none has been adopted.)
3) Each rifle (automatic or otherwise) will be equipped with an inaccessible GPS transmitter that is energized and activated by recoil and/or gas pressure to transmit for several minutes or more.
* * B) Every adult Iraq citizen living in Iraq would be given a one-time dispensation of 1000 stock shares of a utilities fund and of an oil-assets fund, these shares being administered in a special way. Specifically, they cannot be sold or otherwise transferred during an owner's life but will be inherited equally by a surviving spouse and next-generation descendants. That way every citizen in Iraq will have a stake in the success of its services and its revenue production. Also, this administration of stock would be an incentive for responsible family planning, since very small families can concentrate the shares and large families will dilute the shares. This plan could be refined to deal with implied inequities. A final benefit if the stock plan would be almost automatic, updated census/contact records.
* * A) Prior to the ethnic cleansing and civil war, it might have been possible to assemble an Iraq police force from buddy units consisting of one each of a Shiite, a Sunni and a Kurd, each squad consisting of several such buddy units. The squads would take responsibility for protecting Iraq's public assets first and private assets second. Members of this force would be very well paid. Much of the mischief (especially police misbehavior) that has happened could be thus avoided. It may not be too late for this plan.
* US forces should have taken charge of leading such squads in protection of oil assets and utility infrastructure all of which should be nationalized.
* Responsible performance by the police can be encouraged, almost assured, by three technologies.
1) Each policeman will be issued firearms whose barrel signatures are on record and will forfeit other firearms and ammunition in his home or possession.
2) The ammunition issued to each policeman will be uniquely labeled. (There are several patents for uniquely labeling ammunition projectiles and casings, but none has been adopted.)
3) Each rifle (automatic or otherwise) will be equipped with an inaccessible GPS transmitter that is energized and activated by recoil and/or gas pressure to transmit for several minutes or more.
* * B) Every adult Iraq citizen living in Iraq would be given a one-time dispensation of 1000 stock shares of a utilities fund and of an oil-assets fund, these shares being administered in a special way. Specifically, they cannot be sold or otherwise transferred during an owner's life but will be inherited equally by a surviving spouse and next-generation descendants. That way every citizen in Iraq will have a stake in the success of its services and its revenue production. Also, this administration of stock would be an incentive for responsible family planning, since very small families can concentrate the shares and large families will dilute the shares. This plan could be refined to deal with implied inequities. A final benefit if the stock plan would be almost automatic, updated census/contact records.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)