A table of contents will be forthcoming.   As I mentioned on the home page I am digging up material to add to this page while working on new material.  

Proportionist vs Extremist
To be extreme for justice in a world that is extremely unjust, is not be an extremist, because the extreme is in proportion to the extreme.

The Florida Horror December, 2018

I finished a season of interstate moving with a few thousand dollars in my pocket and set a course for Fort Myers, FL. I intended to polish and complete writing projects I’d been aching to write throughout my moving season. In December, Florida was one of the few places where I could avoid the cold of the winters months. I had enough padding where I could focus and write for about a month before I would need to pick up a job to meet my expenses.

Interstate moving afforded me little to no time to write. In fact there were periods when the demanding schedule didn’t afford me time to sleep. In June of 2018 in a little less than 4 days (94 hours) I worked 88 hours sleeping only 6 hours.

We woke up at about 8am, preceded by a day that included loading nearly a full 26ft box truck in Olathe, KS, delivering to northern Arkansas in the rain, with only one helper, and then driving to West Des Moines to position ourselves for the three jobs scheduled for that day. The first job was small but included multiple flights of stairs and a long carry in an apartment building. We finished the job in West Des Moines by about 1pm. Knowing we had three jobs that day, I tried to schedule the customer for 8am but she wasn’t ready until the previously established 10am start time.

The second job was in Ames which was about 45 minutes away and we stopped for lunch. This put us at the second job by about 2:30. The woman was elderly and so for ethical reasons, I went through the paperwork and the revised estimate required by her additional items with her son over the phone. We didn’t begin processes of packing, disassembly, wrapping, inventory, and loading until about 330. We finished loading by about 6pm.

The last job, was in Cedar Rapids, at least two and a half hours away. According to the items identified by the owner to the sales person, it was supposed to be about 800 cubic feet, but when we arrived at nearly 9pm, the actual cubic footage was closer to 1500 cubic feet, and we only had about 1200 cubic feet left on the truck.

There are a variety of factors that increase the difficulty of a move. Some which includes where the truck can be in relation to where the items are to be loaded from and stairs which was a factor in the first move of the day. Thankfully, on this last job we were able to back the truck into the driveway of the single family home. Unfortunately, he had many furniture items that had to be carefully wrapped, including glass, as well as other items such as beds and desks that all required disassembly. Usually you would start a job like this one at 8am and finish at 6pm with two experienced people. And while I have a great deal of pride in my helper at that time, Jackie Brown, a 56 year old man who was in great shape for his age, he didn’t know how to wrap, even if he did possess the mental and physical toughness to endure and persevere through this grueling schedule.

At about 5:00am, having finished two jobs with still an hour to an hour and a half on this job, he was spread out on the customers porch stairs smoking a cigarette, proudly proclaiming, “I didn’t quit on you O”. And I was impressed that a man his age, visibly worn down, continued to put 1 foot in front of the other and move items onto the truck.

We left the customers house at around 630am. I had a job scheduled that day in Minneapolis for between noon and 2pm. There was also another job scheduled for that evening in Junction City I wasn’t too concerned with because it was impossible to complete the job in Minneapolis, unload in Olathe, and make to the Junction City job.  I thought I would get a room by 7am, sleep until 11, and reschedule the Minneapolis pick up for later in the afternoon. Unfortunately, the hotels in the area had no vacancy. I decided at 7am to go straight from Cedar Rapids to the Minneapolis job and then sleep when we finished.

Added to the exhausting difficulty of these circumstances was the fact that it was as hot and humid that day in June in Minneapolis as it has ever been anywhere at anytime, and the hyperbole is actually mild here. To either my amusement and embarrassment, depending on a vantage of recollection verses the span of time when the event took place, Jack bought a pair of jeans at Walmart and proceeded to cut them into some of the shortest shorts known to man, complete with exposed pockets. I still can’t figure out how at least one ball didn’t crown the corner of those make shift shorts like a baby’s head at birth.

There was a storage in Minneapolis and we unloaded enough of the job we picked up in Cedar Rapids to have room for the Minneapolis job. We were going to load the Minneapolis job and then go back to the storage and switch the Cedar Rapids job for the Minneapolis job at the Minneapolis storage. The woman’s job in Minneapolis wasn’t too big, but there were some stairs, it was brutally hot, and we had been up for 28 hours, loading a full truck at three different locations, partially unloading at a fourth location, and I did all the driving, so I was working the entire time, and jack was working nearly the whole time and got very little meaningful sleep in the small break he had from Cedar Rapids to Minneapolis in the cramped and rough riding truck. There was a point where I began cutting corners, and he was better than me in that respect. We almost bumped heads because at one point I wanted him to do something that could have compromised one of the woman’s items. He said “I don’t want to break the lady’s stuff.” I was a little perturbed by the response, initially thinking I’m the one that’s paying you, but knowing he was right in the sense that it wasn’t her fault that we were 28 hours into our work day and I wouldn’t want my items to risk damage for as much money as these people pay for these moves.

I don’t remember our exact start time but I do know we arrived at our hotel at 2:30pm. But there was an issue with the credit card because it was a business credit card that was not in my name. The hotel clerk refused to accept it and he wouldn’t allow me to pay cash. I was more than a little bit upset by this, childishly brandishing 5 to 6 thousand dollars in hundreds to show him we had money and were not trying to defraud him. He wasn’t going to rent us a room, it was merely an attempt to vent my dissatisfaction and stir up jealousy.

I found another hotel, I don’t remember the time of our arrival. What I did remember is I had to do laundry, and didn’t get to sleep until after 6pm.

I set the alarm for 2am. We were up 46 hours, and then we got 6 hours sleep. Jack probably got less because he was awake when I went to sleep. That early morning we went to the storage to unload the Minneapolis job in Minneapolis and retrieve the portion of the Cedar Rapids job we unloaded to create room for the Minneapolis job. At the storage in Olathe we had 24 hour access, and I had no reason to believe that the Minneapolis storage was any different. However, when we arrived near 3am, I entered the gate code, which in turn denied me access. There was a sign I hadn’t noticed when we unloaded that identified the hours of operation beginning at 6 or 6:30am. I didn’t have time to wait until then so we left that portion of the job and headed to Olathe. As unideal as it was to split the job over 400 miles apart, a job that was going to Texas, it was worse to compromise the schedule, reduce the volume of jobs for the period, and possibly lose jobs to cancellation.

I don’t remember what time we made it Olathe, but at Olathe we unloaded the Minneapolis job to make room for the Junction City job. We picked up the Junction City job and Jack expressed a need to take a break. Which was understandable given how hard we were working, and Jack didn’t begin with me when I began this story, but participated in 4 other jobs with me, including a direct delivery. I do remember the time when I found help and arrived at the storage to unload which was about 10:30pm.

We unloaded the Junction City job, the partial job from Cedar Rapids, and the West Des Moines jobs, leaving the job on the truck we picked up in Ames to deliver in St. Louis. I received a call from the owner of the company who told me there was a job we needed to do but he could only do the job that morning between 6 and 7am. In the box truck, from Olathe to St. Louis is roughly 5 and a half hours, due in part to the topography consisting of hilly portions across I-70 between Kansas City and St. Louis, and the box truck having a max speed of 65mph along flat portions. It was around midnight by the time Bobby Jackson, my new helper and myself finished unloading the jobs and restacking the Ames pick up. Which meant having been up now nearly 24 hours waking up at 2am, working 46 hours before that with only 6 hours sleep, driving from Minneapolis to Olathe, unloading, driving from Olathe to Junction City, driving back to Olathe, finding help, and unloading, I would now be driving to St. Louis, picking up a job, delivering another at multiple locations, and having a third job to pick up after the delivery.

The drive to St. Louis was as difficult a drive as I can remember. The only supplement I used during these periods was phenibut which didn’t contribute much to alertness but did enhance my mood, and energy drinks. Of course there are physical limitations where caffeine ceases to have much of an effect.

There are periods where you nod and may veer a second alerted either by the feeling of the drift or the safety perforations on the concrete. If this occurs once an hour I feel safe driving a few more hours. Stopping throwing some water on my face and you’re able to maintain what I consider to be a safe driving habit. There are times when its scary, not because of what’s happening but due to momentary apparitions that occur as you struggle to keep your eyes open but can’t. It’s like fog or shadows that make it seem as if something is there when it isn’t or that the road is different than it is. On this drive to St. Louis I was nodding at 10 to 15 minute intervals and didn’t feel safe so I applied a different tactic. For the last leg, before the sun came up I’d stop at the truck stop. The truck automatically shut off after being parked and idling for 5 to 10 minutes. I would pull off, close my eyes and then wake up when truck shut off. The technique was to drive a half hour, take a 5 to 10 minute nap and repeat the cycle. When the sun came up I was rejuvenated and we made it to the customer somewhere within the 6 to 7am window.

This was the longest carry and the most stairs I dealt with moving. 75 to 100 yards from where the truck could be to his apartment building. Multiple flights of stairs, then an elevator and a long hallway. For someone who has been exposed repetitiously to difficult circumstances, you rarely lament, although the climax of the horror that will unfold I am lamenting due to the severity, but in this situation, as in many others like it, you recognize the hilarity. I don’t remember when we finished, I just remember thinking there were few starts that could have been worse as I began the first job of the day 27 hours into the shift.

I don’t remember when we finished the pick up, but we did have to unload part of the job before we did the delivery to reach the delivery. Even stacked in an L, it still forced us to restack the job after we finished the delivery.

The delivery was anything but smooth. The elderly lady whose items I picked up from in Ames was being assisted by her granddaughter, and her granddaughter’s overbearing style concerning item placement brought her to tears, which bothered me. And believe it or not, I was tired.

The job was set to be delivered to three different locations. The elderly woman’s assisted living center, a storage, and a few items to the granddaughters. We finished the delivery at the assisted living unit and the storage was only a few minutes away. We arrived at the storage, but the customer and her granddaughter were not there, only the granddaughters husband. They said they wanted to rent a smaller storage because they had less items going to the storage than they anticipated that could be accommodated by a smaller unit. The management of the storage facility was out of the office, set to return about a half hour from when we arrived according to the sign. It’s my belief that they decided to do something else and left the husband there with us since no one would be there to rent them a storage for another half hour anyway.

The problem was I was not willing to wait for them to rent another storage. I told him first day of delivery means you have a place for us to deliver the items. I told him I will deliver the items to the unit they have, and then I am going to the final address. I told him I will wait 15 minutes at the final address and if no one arrives Ill unload the last few items in the yard if need be. The situation escalated, and other than the circumstances, I was the main catalyst for that escalation initially.

We unloaded the items into the large storage. The wife still wasn’t back. We went to leave the storage and the husband would not enter the gate code for us to leave. The frustration was verbally apparent in tone and word choice.

They called the police and learned it wasn’t a crime to be impolite especially when someone is being held against their will. She had us unload the last few items that were going to her address into the storage, and the police made her sign the acknowledgement of delivery and the inventory sheet.

The final customer of the day was scheduled from between I think 2 to 4 and was unable to begin earlier. We had lunch from about 1:15 to 1:45 and started the final job, which was medium sized, had interior stairs, tight angles, and a decent amount of wrapping. All in all, we arrived at the hotel at about 8pm.

This was most eventful stretch and stands out to me which is why I can still recall the period with good detail. Few days are less than 14 hours working which means you may have an hour here or there at the hotel some days and get 8 hours sleep, but most days are 16 hours between driving, loading, and unloading. For weeks at a time. This is to say, I didn’t have time to write, and even if I did have time to write or promote, the mind is not a switch where one can turn from the mode of interstate moving and enter the mode of research, concern, and writing.

Towards the end, when I began to have access to broker boards, it seemed like the owner was trying to get me to quit. I would put together a first week schedule and he would tell me we couldn’t get the jobs from the brokers. Or after I would spend a few hours making a schedule from the boards, he would say I have this job and this job over here, and we can load (delivery) it for there. Then he would have me deliver jobs where we made very little money or where we lost money.

I told him we should try a new approach as things were slowing down. I scheduled two jobs in the Kansas City area, and a third in Wyoming that was a week away from the last KC area job. Instead of doing those pick ups, then waiting to find something in between or just waiting to do the Wyoming, he had me load up the truck with jobs and drive to the east coast. Then pick up jobs from other companies and charge carrier fees which did not cover the costs of truck rental, fuel and labor.

To put it into perspective, the last trip I took we worked for three weeks. We did only 3 pick ups. The 3 picks ups had a profit of about 8000 dollars. When I finished the trip, the profit was 5000. Interestingly enough, the close from the last pick up I did, which I made a direct delivery, was about 5000. Meaning, had I not made that pick up, I would have worked 3 weeks and made no money as my pay changed from a small percentage of the close to good share of the profit.

With what I saved I had about 6 thousand dollars that depleted quickly because there was a gap in between job deliveries he got us involved in. Where a customer wasn’t ready for delivery on a job we picked up from a company, and a job he had me load where the woman wasn’t ready for delivery. This put me in a limbo of sorts where I couldn’t establish myself anywhere until these jobs were done. I was living largely out of hotels which is expensive. Renting was impossible for me anyway because although I had money, I have poor credit, no proof of income, and I didn’t want to commit to a long term lease.

I decide I am done. I’m going to move to take some time to do what I want to do with the little bit of money I have left, a few thousand dollars and go to Florida. Ill write on the beach rent a room from someone or maybe luck into a seasonal efficiency, maybe attend some discussion groups, and Ill pick up work a few weeks down the road to maintain myself. My goal is to polish existing material and to finish and publish new projects. Begin to seriously promote, sell material, and eventually start a non-profit for the promotion of my ideas, and finally, a second non-profit to lobby for passage of legislative outlines. I’m excited to free again for the first time in over year.

I am driving on I75 south on my way to Ft. Myers, FL. Ft. Myers was the only time I left Wisconsin prior to going to Los Angeles in 2014 when I began to see more of the country on a drifter sort of basis. I was 19 and my dad wanted to go base jumping with a guy on an antenna where there was an elevator, which I suppose is quite a luxury given the fact that if you want to jump off an antenna, in most cases, you have to climb it. I remembered the white sand beaches and experiencing summer warmth in December. I prefer the more arid climate of the west coast to the humidity, but I didn’t want to go back to California so my first destination was Ft. Myers. I would write, I seen they had hotel rooms at weekly rates, and maybe I would stay there, or maybe I would go to Tampa or Miami.

According to the tow report, I was pulled over at I75 south at 309, which I presume is the nearest exit or possibly an intersecting highway. What I do know, is it wasn’t far from the Sumter County Jail, less than a 15 minute ride in squad car.

I seen two SUV patrol cars parking in the center divider facing the direction to go southbound. Shortly after I drove by them, the one was in the center lane as I was in the right lane, but behind me. I changed lanes putting the patrol vehicle directly behind me to clear the right lane for a motorist who was pulled to the side of the road with his or her hazards. Then I reentered the right lane after clearing the portion of the lane where the motorist was located.

Not long after, the SUV patrol car entered the right lane and put his lights on probably in concealed excitement of my Colorado license plate. I pulled to the side of the road and began to prepare my materials to proceed with the traffic stop. I retrieved my license but did not go to the glove box for my registration and insurance because I did not want to create any stress for the officer if he seen me reaching in my glove box.

I rolled down the driver’s side window and then noticed he was approaching from the passenger side, so I rolled down the passenger window. He asked me to roll up my drivers side window so we could hear each other and so I obliged him. He told me he pulled me over because I wasn’t wearing my seat belt. I had my license in hand and told him my registration and insurance was in the glove box. After handing it to him he told me to exit the vehicle and follow him to the front of his patrol vehicle. Something that was strange to me because usually, a stop for seat belt would consist of him running my license and my tags, and barring any issues with either my person or the vehicle, deciding if he wants to issue a citation for not wearing the seat belt. In person after the search and in the report, he cites that I seemed nervous because I had my license ready for him although I don’t see how the act of me having my license ready is anything other than understanding what a simple traffic stop consists of. I don’t think I have ever been pulled over by law enforcement and they didn’t ask to see my license.

He asks where I’m from and where I’m going. I explain to him that I finished an interstate moving season, wanted to get away from cold and take some time to write. Mind you, I have a few pieces of jewelry, two rings one sterling silver with a few diamonds retail value about $300, another ring white gold, two rows of fine diamonds on both sides of 5 onyx stones, retail probably in the neighborhood 500 to 700 that I paid 350 for. I also have a watch which black reflective metal $100 new pawn, and a sterling silver rope chain and pendant that retailed for $200. Nothing extravagant but the pieces look nice in the sunlight. I have $1212 in cash, debit card, business credit card, as well as my business cards. These are details I mention because he says “interstate moving huh, I think I might be in the wrong profession”? To which I thought he wasn’t, because I doubt he could work half as hard as I worked for the little I had to show for it.

What’s interesting, is the other Florida highway patrol was present with him almost immediately after I was pulled over. The video would attest to the fact that I wasn’t out of the vehicle more than a minute two at most before he had the dog walking around my car. Which is to presume that this stop and the way it was being conducted had much less to do with my seatbelt and having my license ready as it did with my Colorado license plate.

The dog hit on my car which was no surprise to me but I wasn’t particularly worried about it because I had 4 small gummy edibles, 2 to 3 grams of marijuana, and pipe for smoking marijuana. He handcuffed me and put me in the back seat. He didn’t ask what I had in the car, had he, I would have told him. I presumed on a ticket at worse a misdemeanor possession that would in all likelihood be amended to a ticket. I wasn’t being difficult, or uncooperative, nor did I have an amount that should meet the criteria of any significant offense.

He reads me my rights, I acknowledge them and I am willing to talk to him. I tell him what I have I purchased few weeks back, as many as maybe 4. It was less than half a pack of edibles, when he asked how many I believe I said 5 which speaks to the infrequency with which I partake. When I bought the marijuana from the dispensary in Denver, it was a total of 4 grams and maybe half remained.

Probably adding fuel to his fire, as something clearly was adding fuel based on how chose to pursue charges unrelated to my conduct, was the fact I had postal money orders in my car and receipts in my wallet that didn’t reflect my money, but were in many cases, sent electronically to the company to deposit.

After he read me my rights I was pretty sure I was going to be charged with a misdemeanor possession. Later he told me, he was charging me with a felony for the concentrates. He referred to the edibles as concentrates, attempting to justify a concentrate distinction by saying the form of THC used in the edibles is a concentrate, and the concentrate is automatically a felony. The problem is concentrate has to be a term relative to the natural form. Based on the description of the weight he reported the 4 gummy edibles weighed 38 grams which gives us a unit weight of 9.5 grams. The THC content per unit is 10mg, which gives a per gram concentration of .95 milligrams of THC. Comparatively, the THC concentration of the Critical Mass marijuana that was also found is 27%. Which means the per gram concentration is 27mgs per gram. Later I learned the concentration had nothing to with the controlled substance felony I was being charged with, but that the weight of something more than 27x less potent per unit is of the same severity as marijuana by weight.

When he brought up the felony I asked why he was doing this and reminded him that I have been cooperative. It seemed so excessive and malicious to do what he was doing with me. This is relevant for what provoked a comment from me later. I asked didn’t he have any discretion he could exercise? He said he had discretion over misdemeanors but not felonies. Which seems like bullshit.

They towed my vehicle, and then he drove me to the Sumter County Jail. The first comment he omitted from his report where I said this is what happens when you have an incentivized criminal justice system. He said it’s not incentivized. I said yes it is, when your promotion depends on you getting arrests and finding charges that lead to convictions that is an incentivized system. You have an incentive to proactively look for crime not be responsive to it in the public interest. I’m not sure if I went on with district attorneys needing convictions to become judges and judges needing strict sentences to maintain their positions but I definitely reminded him that his detective, DEA, FBI ambitions, etc relied on his ability to find crime.

Near the sally port of the county jail he said, I’m charging you with felony possession of the concentrates, misdemeanor possession of the marijuana, 3 counts of paraphanelia, for the pipe, the container the pipe was in, the container the marijuana was in, and a felony count for your car as a container. Oh and I’m giving you a warning for the seatbelt, as if to add insult to the injury. Of course what set me off was when he told me before we left the scene, that he had discretion over misdemeanors.

I was in such deep disgust that a person like this could even exist. I said I bet you sleep good at night too, knowing you just fucked my life up over some bullshit. I said this is why people shoot you mother fuckers. If you wondered why, you don’t need to wonder, shit like this. And you deserve it. That made it into the report. While probably not a very popular position with the likes of the people who will read the report, a sentiment that hasn’t lost even a mg of sincerity. How many lives has this duo ruined? And as I would learn by speaking with inmates and deputies at the county jail, these malicious practices and applications in Sumter and alleged in Lake county is not something exclusive to this officer.

After I made the comment, he elected to have the deputy at the county jail remove me from the car and retrieve his handcuffs. I wasn’t loud or angery in the delivery, but cold and firm with undertones of frustration. I had no intention of doing anything to him physically, but he is deserving.

The deputies at the county jail were not the subject of any hostility from me, and the light manner of the deputy booking helped ease the blow of despondency. My property was inventoried and I was placed in a holding cell waiting to be processed.

I was breathing and pacing in a space that is too small to be paced in trying to come to terms with this grave injustice that had befallen me. What did I do? Who did I harm? Who could I have potentially harmed by possessing what I possessed? Why would someone do this to another person? To intentionally and purposefully destroy someone’s life? 2 felony charges, and 4 misdemeanors, for the possession of less than 3 grams of marijuana and less than 8 dollars worth of edibles? Such unprovoked evil for what? It goes beyond the career motivation, to some deeper level of sociopathic sadism that is beyond the comprehension of one not affected by the same mental illness.

I paced and relaxed and waited for the next piece of information which would be my bond amount. After about 6 hours, after shift change, I was told my bond amount was $9000. This was my first experience dealing with charges in the bond environment, but I did hear that you only needed to pay 10% so the 9000 was really only $900 I would have to pay. Although this was much more than I could afford, at least it was doable. Until I found out that I needed a bondsman who would be willing to bond me out.

The first person I contacted wanted collateral but the only collateral I had was my car. He wouldn’t accept my car because it wasn’t registered in Florida. He told me to go to intake court and call him back. I am writhing in this acknowledgement, that I have done nothing that has caused anyone harm. Even the flimsy criminal associative argument that people of limited critical thinking skills are taught to regurgitate does not apply since all the items were purchased legally where they were purchased.

The following day, I go to the bond hearing and my bond is reduced from a total of 9000 to 2200. However, it doesn’t significantly affect my balance to be paid because there is 100 minimum to be paid to the bail bonds person per charge, so it is reduced from 900 to 600 but more important than my out of pocket cost is the reduced risk for a bail bonds person to accept my bond. I called the bondsperson I talked to the day before feeling confident that he would bond me out since his primary objection or hesitation was the overall amount of the bond. He was still hesitant and told me he had to wait for the system to update and to call him back later. A few hours passed I called and he stopped accepting my calls.

There was an inmate in the pod I went to who had a bonds woman he recommended. I gave her a call and began to explain my situation and she said what’s your name. I provided her my name and she said I can get you out, the fee is $600 and $2200 cash collateral. She said with a Colorado address that’s what I can do. I was shocked by her audacity that if I were in a position to pay $2200 I would just bond myself out, why would I pay her $600 on top of the full value of the bond? She stuck to it, saying because if your even 1 minute late they’re going to take your money and throw you in jail… and I stopped it right there having heard enough of this ridiculousness, the presumed ending that if I wanted to be grossly neglectful of my court commitment, she could help me retain my bond through such neglect.

I was gripped by reoccurring cycles of surreal anguish. Sighs and disbelief. Because I was from out of state intent on being a seasonal transplant, no bond person would bond me out. The frustration of having the money any other person in my position would need to bond out, but being unable to. I wasn’t going to get out. One day I’m driving in a car, and the next, I’m in jail with 2 felonies and 4 misdemeanors, likely to receive somewhere in the neighborhood of a 2 to 5 year sentence or more because of my mouth, for possessing less than 3 grams of marijuana, a pipe used for marijuana, and 4 edible gummies possessing the equivalent potency of 1.5 grams of marijuana. Marijuana a benign substance that does not create behavior within its users that is adverse to public safety.

You can’t escape the question of why? Why did this man want to do this to me? Was it the appearance of wealth and freedom I had, even though I possessed very little? Did he see the word revolutionist on my business card and did this stir up some zeal within him to feel justified in harming me in the interest of preserving his myth? Did I look like a criminal to him, and so even though the potential punishment didn’t fit the crime he felt I was deserving? I know what it wasn’t. It wasn’t based off of my attitude which was friendly, up front, and compliant.

It is difficult to escape the narrative, driving on my way to work on material in a new area in good spirits, pulled over, arrested, vehicle seized, along with years of accumulated documents, research materials, written work, clothes, shoes, hats, all meaningful possessions, and then released maybe 3 years later, with nothing but the cash I went in with and the clothes on my back.

Like a man buried in an avalanche who can hear the rustle of busy hands digging him out I find motivation. The acceptance of my call from a woman who was a lover, always a friend, and there for me with the uncompromising support and care of a mother. I was able to discuss my situation with her and she was going to call bondsman and do what she could do on her end. It was a boost I needed for the first segment through this labyrinth of hell, getting out. I provided her the number of the bonds man who stopped accepting my phone calls. She only told me after I bonded out, but the first bondsman she called told her that no bond person would take on my bond because the way the charges looked and because I was out of state.

In the processing room there is a wall full of bail bonds men. Probably 200 numbers, but when you go to the intake dorm these numbers are absent. I noticed there was a few pages on top of the wall by the phones. And these pages contained the numbers of bail bonds men. I called a few numbers but they did not accept the calls. Finally a woman answered and I did hope it was not the same lady I talked to the other day. She asked if I had someone who would sign me out. I told her if she could sign via fax I could. She got the paperwork together, Holly filled it out and signed it and sent it back. I filled out the property release form to give her the money and I was fortunate enough to make bond.

After paying the bond, the impound fee was almost $500 to get my car out. I am down to about $700. I need to find work quickly, but I also need to find help to retain council and fight this legal battle. Even beyond the significance of my own situation, is the situation of many others who are the victims of a senseless campaign to prosecute and destroy people who have neither caused nor intended any harm against the community by possessing marijuana or its derivative products. A lieutenant who was processing my release told me about a young woman who had what he referred to as a strip of edibles, who was being held on a $50,000 bond. He seen my paper work and commented that the judge must not have liked me, but I felt it was the FHP not the judge who was the offending party, to which he replied yeah they’re always fucking up the paperwork.

The truth is for all that is said about what law enforcement and the judicial system can and can’t do the reality is, they can do whatever they want to do to you. And yes if you fight it, which requires resources eventually you can win, but the damage incurred in the fight will be done regardless of whether you eventually win.

The first charge of Marijuana possession is a misdemeanor, possession under 20 grams is a maximum penalty of up to 1 year in jail or probation, $1000 fine, and 1 year revocation of the driver’s license.

The second charge for possessing 4 10mg marijuana edibles is possession of a controlled substance. A felony carrying a maximum sentence of 5 years in prison or probation and a $5000 fine.

There are 3 counts of paraphernalia, for the pipe, the container the pipe was in, and the container the marijuana was in. Each carrying a maximum sentence of 1 year in jail or probation and $1000 fine.

The last charge is keeping a public nuisance structure for drug activity, or as it is listed on the Sumter County list of charges: Drug House. Having less than 3 grams of marijuana and 4 10mg gummy edibles constitutes a drug house. A felony with a maximum penalty of 5 years in prison or probation and a $5000.

In all, I am facing 14 years incarcerated, $14,000 in fines, the loss of my license, and all the disadvantages that accompany drug convictions. For less than 3 grams of marijuana, a pipe, and 4 THC edibles, benign substances, with no adverse consequences to the public. Who have I harmed or who could I have harmed through this possession?

Self evident it is that liberty is true and liberty is ideal. Defined as the scope or capacity to do as one pleases, liberty is true, because all the results we see in this world are the consequence of the free will of human beings, other creatures on this planet, and the interaction of the host bodies in our solar system.

Liberty is ideal because everyone wants to do what they want to do. In order for everyone to do what they want to do it requires the respect of boundaries and opportunity. Any creature with opportunity to acquire the abilities and resources to do what they want to do can do so unless they are imposed upon by another creature.

The only evil is imposition unless such imposition is to prevent imposition. Of course the denial of opportunity to acquire resources or abilities by a system is an imposition by the collective on the disadvantaged, which is somewhat unrelated to this story, but is worth mentioning because the seemingly complimentary aspect of liberty being opportunity, is actually only a boundary.

Again imposition is the only evil, and for those of religious convictions who would say what god said, but cannot see the nature of the creator in everything in the creation, are quoting the deities of mans imagination devised for the ungodly purpose of unjustifiable imposition. If the reason for inclusion must be specified, something must be driving the ignorance that led to this terrible imposition on me. What sane people, would criminalize a substance to the extent that this substance has been criminalized that poses no threat to the public? What person could feel good about profiling my Colorado license plate, finding a small amount of this benign substance, and then burden me with as many charges as they could find even the most flimsy legal justification for?

I don’t ask my creator for help because unlike the gods of men, who are like genies who grant them wishes, provide them justice for those who they cannot get justice against, and grant eternal peace to them and damnation to their enemies, the creator does not impose or aid as such imposition or aid in the interest of an advantage or disadvantage violates the nature of the creator, and the liberty with which he caused his creation to exist in. No help or harm has come to me by the creator, only by man. In this, I ask if you are of the means, please contribute to my legal defense fund.

In the report you’ll notice the officer does not list the weight of the marijuana flower without the packaging.  The packaging is the plastic container used by Diego Pellcier, a dispensary in Denver to sell one gram of flower.  When I purchased the flower probably over a month ago, it was supposed to be an 1/8th, but there was only 4 grams left of the strain so she gave me 4 1 gram containers, and I consollidated them into one container.  In about a months time I smoked probably about half of the 4 grams.  This is something I mention so the reader can understand the discrepancy between the report that asserts 13 grams with packaging and I maintain that it was less than 3 grams.  Those plastic containers weigh somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 grams.  Not significant to the charge in that any amount under 20 grams is a misdomeanor in the state of Florida.

Email Exchange Concerning Charges

I posted an ad on CL explaining my situation looking for a person who had a low cost weekly room rental.  The following is an email exchange between myself and a person who felt I was deserving of this situation.  His messages are in italics, mine are bold.

Florida would have probably been more welcoming if you weren’t breaking the law… Just saying. Why would you come down to SWFL with the cost of living so high and not have a job?

Because I had money before I was treated like a drug trafficker for a small amount of a benign substance that does not create behavior within its consumers that is adverse to the general public, nor is it a nuisance to the public through the possession of it.  At least I see the first example of the ignorance that allows such senseless draconian laws to exist.  

Ignorance? No, ignorance is knowing there is a law in place and yet you break the law… then complain about it. I don’t agree with all the laws out there, but if I don’t want a chance at paying the consequences, I don’t break them. Seems simple. No?

Except that the consequence should be in proportion to the infraction, or should every infraction carry the possability of a 15 year sentence?  Should you be facing 15 years for speeding?  That is about the equivalent to what has been done to me, except for that speeding poses a greater risk to public safety than does the possession of a few grams of marijuana, which poses no threat to the public.  You can’t possibly be that stupid where you can’t recognize a disproportionate consequences compared to the offense?  Furthermore, laws are in place to represent the interest of the public, where people agree to laws because they are freer with laws than they are without them.  And these marijuana laws, and many others do not represent the interest of the general population, but are the results paid for by industries and agencies who profit from making. Criminals out of people who are not harming anyone.

Consequences should be proportional to the infraction? Well, sure. But isn’t that a very subjective thing? What one person might think is proportional, another might not. But again, you knew what you were doing was against the law. You took a chance and now have to be a man and own up the charges, not feel like you were done dirty. If you want to carry marijuana around, there are a few states that allow that currently. Why not move there?

Proportions can be more or less quantified through the measure of liberty so it is not purely subjective.  Liberty defined as the scope or capacity to do as one pleases.  Liberty is true and ideal.  True in the sense that all the results on this planet proceed from the choices of the creatures on this planet, along with the interaction of the host bodies in the sun, the earth, and other material in the solar system.  Liberty is ideal because what is it that everyone wants?  Everyone wants to do what they want to do.  Which requires what?  Respect of boundaries.  Any creature possessing both the means and the ability is free to do as they please so long as they are not imposed upon by another creature or a systemic circumstance which speaks to the aforementioned in the individual acquisition of means and ability, or money and development.  Where a system that leaves disadvantaged people trapped is the collective imposition on the disadvantaged as there is contributions, benefits, or indifference by the advantaged or comfort classes.  This is some what off topic but something I mention in establishing objective good, which is plainly, respect of reasonable boundaries, making the only objective evil imposition.  To establish proportion is to establish the amount of imposition of the offense compared to the imposition of the punishment.  In my case, there is no imposition, therefore any punishment is an injustice and disproportionate objectivly speaking. And of course to go one further, because the nature of existence is liberty, and liberty is true and ideal, the nature of the creator must be liberty as the creation is a reflection of the workmanship of the creator.  And in this, there is no forgiveness required because all people have freely chosen liberty or freely chosen tyranny in the sum of their intents, actions, purposes, and understanding, and should get the subject of their desires upon transition.  The distinction between liberty and tyranny is liberty is the exercise liberty to the point where all can free and tyranny is the exercise of liberty to the point of imposition where liberty does not exist in a mult-being existence, only varying degrees of tyranny.  So for your harrassment, I provide you the indisputable truth about life, which is the foundation of my decisions reasoning, and ambition.  As far as my choice to ride with a substance which mind you, was purchased legally, I did so under the same presumption as one may drive with a headlight out, in that the infraction was minor, and should be considered minor in a state that recognizes the medicial properties of the substance by legalizing the substance for medical use.  While working as a partner for an interstate moving company, havin left Colorado only a week or so prior my helpers had a bag that contained more than 10x what I possessed in flower, edibles, as well as concentrated oil and wax which is over 90% THC the active chemical in marijuanna.  They were written citations in Kentucky.  Not only should I feel like the victim, facing 14 years incarceration for what is less than what some people use in a day, I have been victimized from the most objective point of reasoning, and there is no reason I should have thought that the act of possessing the small amount that I possessed would have yield such a malicious application of the law.  In addition to what I have mentioned, my lisence plate (Colorado) was profiled and contibuted to how the stop was conducted, which according to the 10th circuit court of appeals is a violation of my 4th amendment rights.  What you need to do is be a man and admit your position that implies I am deserving of these circumstances is incorrect, as well as biased, stemming from the belief that you will not be in possesion of marijuanna and so the severity of the possible penalty is of no concern to you even if the application of the law is destroying peoples lives.  People who have done nothing to you or the general public.

Wow… like wow. So what you’re saying is that in order for there to be liberties, there shouldn’t be laws telling people what they can or can not do? Well maybe you go somewhere that your values and liberties align with? It’s pretty simple. Did you break the law? Yes. Did you know you were breaking the law? Yes. Did you get caught breaking the law? Yes. So what’s the problem? You’re upset that you were punished for breaking the law? Yes.

That isn’t what im saying you dull minded piece of shit tyrant.  As I said previously which you failed to acknowledge, is that people agree to laws because they are freer with them than without them, but most laws are not the product of a social contract between people but of plutocracy with entrenched agency interests that benefit from laws that serve no purpose for the public. Im not surprised that you are not possessed of the comprehension skills to digest what I wrote. You acknowledge that the punishment should be proportional to the offense but then abandon that position once you are shown to be wrong in the subjective nature proportionality. 

dull minded piece of shit tyrant” – yes, and one would wonder why I don’t feel sorry you’re in this position.

And I’m not abandoning any position. As I stated before, the punishment to the crime is a very subjective argument. A lot of people don’t like the seat belt laws, some people love it and hence two very punishments would be assessed by both sides. Lets take that very minuscule crime (in my eyes) to something a lot worse.. murder. Some people think they should be executed for committing such an act, some people feel they should be released and have a second chance. Point is, punishments are subjective. But fact still remains that you knew what you were doing was illegal and you could be punished for it. You made that choice. Well, good luck finding a place here with felonies so recent.Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

You failed to comprehend anything I wrote.  It is a matter of imposition, and you cannot explain how 14 years is a proportionate punishment for the  possession of a benign substance.No one loves seatbelt laws, and seatbelt laws are merely an excuse for the state to interfer in the lives of the population.In the case of murder while some are for capital punishment and some are against, even those who are against are for life in prison, both are proportional for the crime of murder.  Even my insults are justfied in truth.  You have demonstrated the inability to comprehend which means you are dull minded.  You are for people being imposed upon who have not imposed on anyone meaning you are a tyrant.  And anyone who is a tyrant is a piece of shit based on the fact that they are for the imposition on those who have not imposed, therfore tyrants have negative value in the eyes of people who want to be free which is everyone.  Points proven.  Grow up and develop, which you are incapable of because you lack the courage to admit you are wrong. And I have places to stay.

Okay bud. Glad to see you’re right and everyone else is wrong. I guess I’m the stupid one here for following the laws set forth in the country in which I live, my apologies for that.lmao

500 years ago people thought the earth was flat, thought the earth was the center of the universe, thought the sun revolved around the earth, thought witches float, and the history of the populous being possessed of a great deal of erroneous conclussions, many persisting in the modern day. The point being that popular opinion does not make something true which seems to be the last refuge of your willed stupidity.  People are exposed to all the same information and without a desire to be true and objective they become like dogs who perform for treats and avoid behavior to avoid punishment.  You’re a good dog but a shitty human being.  The difference between what I am saying and what you and people like you believe is what I am saying is true founded on truth that is self evident and cannot be disputed, and your thoughts and perspectives are the product of social conditioning and impressions received through the mediums of mass information dissemination.

Let me blow your mind here:I believe marijuana should be legalized ….. recreational and medically. But it’s not in all states yet. And until it is, it’s against the law to be in possession of it. I accept that fact and thus won’t possess it until it becomes legal. You thought you were ahead of the curve apparently and broke the law. It’s pretty simple. Do I agree with the penalty of it? That doesn’t matter, the penalty is there and until it’s removed, you have to obey by it.

You are in support of disproportionate consequences for a law that by your own admission doesn’t serve the interest of the people who are to be governed by it.You are for the malicious application of the law because you don’t put yourself in a position to be the subject of that malice.  The point of contention is that you feel that anyone who breaks any law, regardless of what that law is, is deserving of whatever punishment is attached to that law regardless of whether or not the law is representative of the public interest, or if that law imposes on someone who has not imposed.  It doesn’t matter if you’re for doing away with the law when you place a greater amount of priority on law than you do liberty or justice.  Nothing I said is any less applicable to you simply because you’re not for the law itself.  There are a countless number of acts perpetrated by those who direct the laws that are unjust, whereby advantaged parties take advantage of disadvantaged parties and that are imposing.  And a countless number of acts that are unimposing that have been made illegal without the consent of those who are to be governed by those laws.  Bear in mind this country of whom you are so proud to call yours would not exist if the population consisted of dog minded people like yourself, as the wealth that created this county wouldn’t have rebelled against a foreign tyranny to create their own tyranny in respect for the law.  Another lecture altogether that would elude your ability to comprehend.  Or 50 years ago you would say that those protesting for civil rights were deserving of jail, beatings, fire hoses, and dog bites because they were breaking the law?


If I had no hands, I could still count the number of people I trust on my fingers.

Vietnam Veterans

In case my following statements are misunderstood I would like to state I do not hate veterans, but I also do not support the troops. Many people join the military because it seems like the best opportunity available, and or they’ve been duped into believing the United States stands for the ideals it professes.

Two days consecutively I heard people thank Vietnam vets for their service. What service are you thanking them for?
In the case of Vietnam, you are thanking them for attempting to deny a sovereign nation its right to self-determination, (1) the death of 2.5 million Vietnamese, (2) 600,000 Cambodians, (3) tens of thousands in Laos, (4) about 60,000 US servicemen, (5) the defoliation and toxification of enormous regions of a country, as well as another country which is filled with unexploded munitions that are killing people to this very day. (6) You are thanking people for a service of murder in tyranny.

(1): After the Vietnamese defeated the French occupiers a conference was held in Geneva, Switzerland, where the country was temporarily divided, but scheduled to reunited through an election. ( Ngo Diem who came to power through a fraudulent election in the south where he received more votes than there were voters, succeeding the former puppet emperor of the French, refused to be bound by the election for unification. (The Columbia Guide to the Vietnam War, by David L Anderson, pg 32) He was supported by the United States, “Eisenhower acknowledged that, had elections been held as scheduled in Vietnam in 1956, “Ho Chi Minh would have won 80% of the vote”” (The Causes of the Vietnam War, by Andrew J Rotter. While not completely relevant to this note establishing that the US was denying a sovereign nation its right to self-determination, because of articles I have seen fabricating a version of events where the north invaded the south, it is important to understand that resistance began in the south by the south. Additionally, this resistance was not communist but nationalist, and only after the resistance was already underway did the north Vietnamese become involved.

(2): I am unable to locate the original source for 2.5 million, it was an MIT study guide that may be somewhere on my laptop but I have been unable to relocate it through google searches. In lieu of the original source, the MIT news source I am citing puts the total at 3 million. In the academic community, among serious scholars I don’t think there is much contention over it being a fact that 2 million to 3 million Vietnamese died as a result of the Vietnam war. MIT News “Vietnam War Remembered 30 Years Later”, Sarah H Wright, 4/28/2005. “ending a 17-year war that claimed 3 million Vietnamese and 58,000 American lives.”

(3): Third World Traveler, “President Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger, and the Bombing of Cambodia”. Excerpted from the book Lying for Empire: How to Commit War Crimes with a Straight Face” by David Model, Common Courage Press 2005. Pg140 “In 1969, President Richard Nixon and his National Security Advisor, Henry A. Kissinger, unleashed B-52 carpet bombing for over fourteen months against a people who still tilled the soil with water buffalo. The 3,500 bombing sorties resulted in 600,000 deaths. The American bombing of Cambodia was a closely guarded secret primarily because the U.S. was not at war with Cambodia.”. This illegal bombing campaign also paved the way for the rise of Pol Pot which resulted in the deaths of over a million more Cambodians. (

(4): Hmong, the Vietnam War, Laos and Thailand, 2008, Jeffry Hays “Hmong civilians, who numbered about 300,000 before the war, perished by the tens of thousands.’ I fished this source which happens to be in line with the statistics (20 to 30 thousand) I’ve read through reliable sources that I’ve since forgotten.

(5): See footnote 2. In addition to the nearly 60,000 US soldiers killed in their service to the interests of wealth and industry, 100,000 Vietnam veterans have committed suicide. In this, we could say, the true US cost of the Vietnam invasion is 158,000, as stated in the cited source. ( “100,000 Vietnam Vet Suicides to Date”, To put this in perspective, 2.5 million served, which means 1 in 25 Vietnam vets has committed suicide.

(6): Legacies of War, “Secret War in Laos”, “From 1964 to 1973, the U.S. dropped more than two million tons of ordnance on Laos during 580,000 bombing missions—equal to a planeload of bombs every 8 minutes, 24-hours a day, for 9 years – making Laos the most heavily bombed country per capita in history. Over 20,000 people have been killed or injured by UXO in Laos since the bombing ceased” The New Yorker, “The Vietnam War is Still Killing People”, by George Black 5/20/2016, “Since the end of the war, in 1975, more than forty thousand Vietnamese have been killed by U.X.O”

Iran Nuclear Agreement Commentary

Written after 2015 Iran Nuclear Agreement under the Obama Adminstration, which Trump recently discontinued.

The Iran nuclear deal, while unfairly overbearing, does guarantee that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, and allows for the relaxation of the sanctions which should allow normal economic development to resume. Before commenting on the deal itself, the first thing that stuck me from the Democracy Now transcript I read, was a statement by President Obama where he cites 99 percent of the world community, and the majority of nuclear experts look at this thing and they say, “This will prevent
Iran from getting a nuclear bomb…”.(1) It is a clear example of how selective the US is in accrediting the opinion of the world community and unbiased experts, as for nearly 4 decades, 99 percent, sometimes more, sometimes slightly less of the world community has supported an Israeli withdraw from the West Bank, ending the siege in Gaza, an end to settlements in the West Bank, and a sovereign Palestinian State, but he isn’t interested in acknowledging that 99 percent of the world community.(2)

(1): Full Text: Obama’s News Conference on the Iran Nuclear Deal, Washington Post, by W.P. Staff, 7/15/201

(2): Traditional Voting Pattern Reflected in General Assembly’s of Drafts on the Question of Palestine, Broader Middle East Issues, United Nations, 70th session, 63rd and 64th meeting (AM&PM), 11/24/2015 “ the Assembly took up a draft resolution on Peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine (A/70/L.13), adopting it by a recorded vote of 155 in favour to 7against (Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 7abstentions (Australia, Cameroon, Honduras, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, South Sudan, Tonga).” Included in the resoution was “a permanent two-State solution”,
and this has been the pattern of international voting in the UN general assembly for decades. The entire world for a two state settlement in the June 1967 border, an end to Israeli occupation of the west bank, and an end to the blockade of Gaza. Nearly
every year the General Assembly votes, and every year the vote is the same, but the US protects Israel through the security council.

The sanctions illegitimately imposed on Iran, and actually produced the opposite effect as the often do. Under the new agreement, Iran has agreed to enrich below 5 percent. To make a nuclear bomb, it requires uranium enriched above 90 percent. While it is accurate that 5% enrichment is
about 2/3rds of the way to 90% enrichment, enriching to weapons grade levels requires special facilities. A Congressional Research Paper written by Non-Proliferation Analyst Paul Kerr reads “Iranian efforts to produce fissile material for nuclear weapons by using its known nuclear facilities would almost certainly be detected by the IAEA. There is no public official evidence that Tehran has covert facilities capable of producing fissile material.”(3) In other words, three years into the sanctions, and various accusations by the US officials and US media, the US knew Iran did not posess the means to produce the material required for a nuclear weapons program.

(3): Iran’s Nuclear Program: Status, Congressional Research Service, by Paul Kerr, September 18th 2009.

Before sanctions, Iran was enriching below 5 percent; after sanctions, Iran enriched to 20 percent. The expansion of Iran’s nuclear program after sanctions is most likely motivated by a need to create a bargaining position. If as is their right under the NPT to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, and the west, led by the United States, decides to punish Iran for doing so,
attempting to deny Iran access to peaceful nuclear technology, then how else can you negotiate except through expansion?

If I have a dollar and you say I cannot have money, if I acquire 4 dollars then perhaps we can compromise and I can keep my dollar. We should also take into consideration that at no time has Iran been been found to be formally non-compliant with the NPT. Expand in the interest of bargaining to maintain what you had originally, a peaceful
nuclear program.

“If you look at the principles agreed July 14th, 2015, you would see this is
exactly the same principles we proposed EU3…But Europeans, they could not make a deal… because the U.S. position was zero enrichment.”(4)

(4): Former Iranian Ambassador Historic Nuclear Deal Has Prevented Another War in the Middle East, Democracy Now, 4/3/2015,

The idea of Iran developing nuclear weapons was never anything more than a pretext in order to limit Iranian development, for the purpose of limiting Iranian influence in the region. Although given the hostility that Iran has faced from the United States and US regional allies (like Saudia
Arabia and Israel), excepting only the period where Iran was governed by the US installed dictator the Shah Reza, it would be in the interest of Iran to pursue a nuclear weapons program, for the purposes of deterrence. Especially given the threats from the US, and their propensity to
make good on threats to nations in that region.

Israel, who is not a signer of the NPT, but illegally possesses nuclear weapons, and unlike Iran, engages in regular acts of aggression and blatantly ignores international law, is unencumbered by IAEA inspectors. One is protected by the United States (Israel) through the security council, and the other (Iran) is independent, and therefore adversarial to the United States. One is allowed to possess illegal nuclear weapons, while the other is punished for exercising it’s right to nuclear energy.


I was watching CSPAN which featured a Senate Committee asking questions of Department of Homeland Security members, and possibly members from another agency. Questions ranged from securing the border without a 24 million dollar per mile wall, to cyber security, as well as the department raising concerns about their inability to track the controller of drones.

None of the questions relate to why there are security concerns to begin with, or what motivates potential security threats, which is relevant as public policy makers should craft policy that minimizes security threats.

Maybe at that level, it is a foregone conclusion that the policies of the US; a by wealth for wealth government is going to engage in policy that compromises the security of the people of the United States, and so the causes of security threats, need not be inquired. Invading countries, orchestrating and supporting coups, sanctions through the UN, targeted killing and airstrikes which tend to kill more civilians, women and children, than they do people who are targeted; and otherwise engaging in a strategy that grants US corporations access to nations for foreign investment or geostrategic purposes related to the previous portion of this sentence.

On the domestic side of threats, inopportunity and income and wealth inequality, in a system where representation in government, is equal to an interest’s resources, tend to produce dissatisfaction among the struggling masses, and some will become a security threat because of it. This dissatisfaction is not limited to domestic terrorism only, but other security issues like mass shootings and other indiscriminate acts of violence.
The reality is, US policy is almost, if not completely responsible for its security risks, therefore, the causes cannot be brought up and the strategy is merely to contain the effects of US perpetrated injustice.

Manchester Bombing

I was driving to work when I heard from a friend about the Manchester bombing. Although I have been distant from research, studies, and current events since I have been in Wisconsin, I usually read headlines and a few articles during the week on Democracy Now as to not completely fall out of touch with current events and the genre of information important to me. My first thoughts were of the 22 dead and how it faired compared to the near daily reports of civilians including children who die because of US led coalition air strikes in Muslim nations, dwarfed only by cumulative casualties from invasions, sanctions, and US backed regimes that have carried out atrocities throughout the preceding decades.

Dan Bilefsky and Rick Gladstone of the New York Times wrote “It grabbed the adult world’s attention in ways that some indiscriminate attacks do not.” (1) No doubt because western media and western governments alike concentrate on atrocities committed by others, while omitting and justifying their own, and the indoctrination of xenophobia and racism in western populations cause a great deal of empathy to be felt for white American and European victims. Whereas the deaths they are responsible for around the world are hardly reported.

Western lives matter, these are the children who shouldn’t be killed, who are important enough for their pictures to be seen, and the people who plan and execute these attacks are evil, as the headlines read: The Sun “Pure Evil”, or the Daily Express “Evil Beyond Belief”, and The Daily Mirror “Pictures of Innocence Killed by Evil”. (2) The author of the 2015 book “The ISIS Apocalypse: The History, Strategy and Doomsday Vision of the Islamic State,” told the NYT: “the thing with ISIS is, it doesn’t worry about offending mass public opinion.” The United States and the UK are also not worried about offending mass public opinion with their terror, because their crimes are concealed from their public, and those that are reported receive only the most minimal attention, and are reported through a lens that distorts reality and implies an end that justifies the means.

According to this standard, “Pure Evil”, “Evil Beyond Belief”, and “Evil”, is when someone causes the death of 22 people, using a bomb, for the purpose of making a political statement or to achieve a political goal. At least that is the criteria one could infer from the facts of the event and the labels applied to it.

It is important to remember, since this attack occurred in the UK, that in terms of foreign policy the UK and US are nearly identical, and the UK has supported and participated in coalition bombing in the middle east. In fact the Royal Air Force has participated in more bombings in Iraq and Syria than any other country in the world excepting only the USAF. As of May 2016 “20 months, during which time it has carried out more than 800 air strikes. This includes 760 in Iraq and 43 in Syria, defense secretary Michael Fallon said on 24 May.” (3)

It was reported on May 17th, a US-led coalition airstrike in Mosul killed a family of 8 in their home, but maybe we cannot call the US or UK evil because they only killed 8 innocent people and not 22. (4)

On May 16th, Airwar’s reported “up to 100 civilian casualties…killed by US-led coalition airstrikes in Iraq’s Anbar province… Residents say the airstrikes continued for four hours and hit an internet hall, multiple homes, a stadium, and a cemetery”, during a funeral. Nearly 5x the Manchester bombing death rate, method was a bomb, and even one of the targets was the same setting, as a stadium was one of the targets. But in the western world, these “indiscriminate attacks failed to grab the adult populations attention.” No pictures of the youngest victim being paraded across newspapers, magazines, and the internet. No “Evil Beyond Belief”, no commentary from world leaders current or former, just dead civilians, men, woman, and children, murdered by a coalition of states who have an interest in the area the victims were born in.

When the west engages in campaigns of terrorism the pretext is they are fighting terrorism and therefore they are good. The innocent people they kill are sacrificed to serve the greater good. The terrorists they are fighting are portrayed as being irrational, killing in the name of religion, and evil.
The contradiction becomes quite apparent when we take an objective look at history. The west has only recently become an enemy of Islam, which is not due to zealotry, but due to US imposition in middle east affairs, in denial of Palestinian’s right to self-determination and support for the perpetrators (Israel) of evil against them, in the sanctions against Iraq throughout the 90s, support for murderous terror campaigns against the Lebanese (5), support for dictators like Mubarak (6) and then Sisi in Egypt with egregious human rights records, and numerous other examples that created enemies in the pre-9/11 era and paved the way for the 9/11 retaliation.

In the post 9/11 world, where nearly the entire region has been destabilized through the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, which led to the deaths of 1.3 million people in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan (7), the attempted coup in 2006 in Gaza, the continued siege of Gaza and the ongoing denial of Palestinian statehood, sale of arms to Saudi Arabia and support for the blockade and destruction of Yemen, where children are dying in mass due not only to the hell raining down from US manufactured arms with the support of the west, but also famine and the worst outbreak of cholera in history. Airstrikes taking place on a near daily basis that are responsible for the deaths of innocent people. (written 2017)

100s of thousands of people dead, millions of refugees, resulting from western interference in Syria, in addition to ongoing coalition airstrikes, like those that took place only a few weeks before the Manchester blowback: “US airstrikes killed 30 people, including more than a dozen children in Syria’s eastern province of Deir ez-Zor Monday. This comes after US airstrikes on May 11th reportedly killed at least a dozen civilians including eight children, north of the Syrian city of Raqqa. Two days earlier, airstrikes on two villages around Raqqa reportedly killed 19 civilians including at least 5 children”. (8)

I am not for the death of innocent people, especially not women and children, and given the demographics of the fans, the bulk of the victims in Manchester were women. I am also less moved than most people because I understand it is an effect of a cause created by western governments, in the interest of wealth and industry.

I recognize that if there was more interest and more concern from the people who live in countries like the US and UK, the policy that breeds retaliatory terrorism would not be tolerated. I understand when people’s husbands, wives, sons, daughters, sisters, brothers, fathers, and mothers; are bombed, shot, starved, tortured, without medicine, denied their right to self-determination and liberty, that some of these people are going to pursue a path of retribution in violence.

I’m not saying the perpetrator of the act is free from responsibility. But much of the responsibility for the bombing in Manchester rests not only with the individual, but with every individual in the UK as well as the US, as they are responsible for the actions their elected representatives carry out in their name. (9) Western acts of terror, cause people like Salmon Albedi to bomb an Ariana Grande concert. If you’re drinking the Kool-Aid, the US is a republic, liberty and justice for all, good intentions in terms foreign policy, you are responsible.

Is it unjust to commit injustice against the unjust? How is it, when the unjust retribution is an effect of the initially perpetrated injustice? Therefore the originator of the injustice is responsible for the injustice dealt back to him or her. The same as one cannot blame the ball for hitting his face after he has thrown it into the wall. Or one standing next to the thrower who supports the person who throws the ball cannot blame the ball when they are hit.

If you remove western imposition from Muslim countries, there is no bombing of the Ariana Grande concert.

(1): New York Times 5/23/17 “Insidious Twist on Terror Attack Victims: Teens and Young Girls with Mothers in Tow”, Dan Bilefsky and Rick Gladstone
(2): The cited article displays the headlines and covers of various British newspapers and magazines. The youngest victim is on the cover of nearly each one. The Guardian 5/24/2017 “How the British Press Reacted to the Manchester Bombing”
(3): Global Flight 5/23/2016 UK Airstrike Data Shows Scale of UK Involvement in Iraq and Syria, Beth Stevenson
(4): Democracy Now, 5/17/2017, Family of 8 Killed in US-Led Coalition Airstrike on Mosul,
(5): The Washington Report, “An Updated List of Veto’s Cast by the United States to Shield Israel from Criticism from the UN Security Council.” 1/10/2017, by Donald Neff. The cited source contains a short list of veto’s cast by the US to protect Israel from the international community. In addition to these vetoes, the United States is the main obstacle of the two-state solution.
(6): Salon, “How Did the US Get in Bed With Mubarak” 1/29/2011, by Justin Elliot. , Huff Post, “US Continues to Back Egyptian Dictator in Face of Pro-Democracy Uprising”, by Stephen Zunes. First citation provides a brief explanation establishing the origins of the relationship whereas the second establishes sources for history of human rights violations.
(7): See footnote 1 under “Life in the Belly of the Beast is = to Poverty’s Bottomless Pit”
(8): Democracy Now, 5/16/2017 “US Airstrikes Killed 30 People, Including a Dozen Children, In Syria.”
(9): see Responsibility footnote 6 for source. Since the US position, at least among military strategists authorized by your elected representatives, is the people are responsible for the actions of their leaders, it must apply to the people of the US as well. As the Pentagon strategist who said of the Iraqi people “The definition of innocents gets to be a little bit unclear…They do live there, and ultimately people have some control over what goes on in their country.” If this were a statement made by ISIS it would be radical, extreme, and ignoring what little control the people of the US and UK have over the decisions of their government. Yet when it is made by a US official, most people probably do not have an issue with it. And if they take no issue when it is applied against others, how can they take an issue when others apply it against them?

Vietnam Veterans, 2017

The following is excerpted from Orion: A Year in the Life of a Revolutionist

In case my following statements are misunderstood I would like to state I do not hate veterans, but I also do not support the troops. Many people join the military because it seems like the best opportunity for them, and or they’ve been duped into believing the United States stands for the ideals it professes.

Two days consecutively I heard people thank Vietnam vets for their service.  What service are you thanking them for?

In the case of Vietnam, you are thanking them for attempting to deny a sovereign nation its right to self-determination, (1) the death of 2.5 million Vietnamese, (2) 600,000 Cambodians, (3) tens of thousands in Laos, (4) about 60,000 US servicemen, (5) the defoliation and toxification of enormous regions of a country, as well as another country which is filled with unexploded munitions that are killing people to this very day. (6) You are thanking people for a service in murder and tyranny.

(1): After the Vietnamese defeated the French occupiers a conference was held in Geneva, Switzerland, where the country was temporarily divided, but scheduled to reunited through an election.  ( Ngo Diem who came to power through a fraudulent election in the south where he received more votes than there were voters, succeeding the former puppet emperor of the French, refused to be bound by the election for unification. (The Columbia Guide to the Vietnam War, by David L Anderson, pg 32)  He was supported by the United States, “Eisenhower acknowledged that, had elections been held as scheduled in Vietnam in 1956, “Ho Chi Minh would have won 80% of the vote”” (The Causes of the Vietnam War, by Andrew J Rotter.  While not completely relevant to this note establishing that the US was denying a sovereign nation its right to self-determination, because of articles I have seen fabricating a version of events where the north invaded the south, it is important to understand that resistance began in the south by the south.  Additionally, this resistance was not communist but nationalist, and only after the resistance was already underway did the north Vietnamese become involved.

(2): I am unable to locate the original source for 2.5 million, it was an MIT study guide that may be somewhere on my laptop but I have been unable to relocate it through google searches.  In lieu of the original source, the MIT news source I am citing puts the total at 3 million.  In the academic community, among serious scholars I don’t think there is much contention over it being a fact that 2 million to 3 million Vietnamese died as a result of the Vietnam war.  MIT News “Vietnam War Remembered 30 Years Later”, Sarah H Wright, 4/28/2005.  “ending a 17-year war that claimed 3 million Vietnamese and 58,000 American lives.”

(3): Third World Traveler, “President Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger, and the Bombing of Cambodia”. Excerpted from the book Lying for Empire: How to Commit War Crimes with a Straight Face” by David Model, Common Courage Press 2005. Pg140 “In 1969, President Richard Nixon and his National Security Advisor, Henry A. Kissinger, unleashed B-52 carpet bombing for over fourteen months against a people who still tilled the soil with water buffalo. The 3,500 bombing sorties resulted in 600,000 deaths. The American bombing of Cambodia was a closely guarded secret primarily because the U.S. was not at war with Cambodia.”.  This illegal bombing campaign also paved the way for the rise of Pol Pot which resulted in the deaths of over a million more Cambodians. (

(4): Hmong, the Vietnam War, Laos and Thailand, 2008, Jeffry Hays “Hmong civilians, who numbered about 300,000 before the war, perished by the tens of thousands.’ I fished this source which happens to be in line with the statistics (20 to 30 thousand) I’ve read through reliable sources that I’ve since forgotten.

(5): See footnote 2.  In addition to the nearly 60,000 US soldiers killed in their service to the interests of wealth and industry, 100,000 Vietnam veterans have committed suicide.  In this, we could say, the true US cost of the Vietnam invasion is 158,000, as stated in the cited source. ( “100,000 Vietnam Vet Suicides to Date”,  To put this in perspective, 2.5 million served, which means 1 in 25 Vietnam vets has committed suicide.

(6): Legacies of War, “Secret War in Laos”,   “From 1964 to 1973, the U.S. dropped more than two million tons of ordnance on Laos during 580,000 bombing missions—equal to a planeload of bombs every 8 minutes, 24-hours a day, for 9 years – making Laos the most heavily bombed country per capita in history.  Over 20,000 people have been killed or injured by UXO in Laos since the bombing ceased”  The New Yorker, “The Vietnam War is Still Killing People”, by George Black 5/20/2016, “Since the end of the war, in 1975, more than forty thousand Vietnamese have been killed by U.X.O

Excerpts From Original CEP Outline , 2015

The following is excerpted from the Outlook section of the original CEP outline in Economic Despotism: Addressing the Symptoms and Correcting Systemic Flaws in the Interest of Liberty for All.  The outline itself will not appear on the website primarily because of the scantiness of it, whereas The Way: Centers for Economic Planning in the first 20 pages featured on this site is more illustrative.  Still, some of the contents may contribute to people’s understanding of the CEP, which is why these excerpts have been taken.

CEP will spread out into nearly every sector of the economy gobbling up market share, but the goal isn’t the monopolization of the market through CEP, but a balance between what is owned purely by individuals, and what is owned collectively and managed democratically.  The idea is to give people a choice, to purchase from themselves where opportunities can be created to do so.  Those who decide production reap the benefits of the economy, and those who reap the benefits of the economy control opportunity and wield power.

In the longer term, there is a private incentive that could be achieved as well.  The end of taxation altogether.  It is possible to imagine that over time if a significant amount of the market were owned collectively through Centers for Economic Planning, the profits held in common by people through these centers would be able to cover expenses that are presently paid through taxes.

CEP businesses over time may have the effect of increasing wages and benefits throughout the state.  If individuals have the option to work for CEP owned companies, with better wages and benefits than their privately-owned counterparts, over time this could increase competition for labor, and privately owned companies will be forced to offer more competitive salaries to maintain their work force.  This is an effect that wouldn’t be immediate, but the potential over the long run does exist.

Another long-term benefit could include a shorter work week for more or equal pay.  Since the objective of the CEP is to maximize the satisfaction of its owner, the people of the county in which it exists, as the success of a business grows, it isn’t necessary for the success to be had purely in terms of profit and wages.  While each asset owned by the CEP would likely have employee incentives sewed into its business plan, one of those incentives could be to use profits to maintain adequate wages for the current employees, while hiring new employees to shorten the work week.  We could reasonably expect over time, for employees to work 20 hours for a typical 40 hour a week salary.

The CEP should not be viewed as a threat to local businesses, on the contrary, it should be viewed almost as a safety net as well as a stimulant; as the CEP in general will raise the standard of living of the whole community, increasing household purchasing power allows residents to use more of the products and services that small businesses offer.

One small vendor I remember from a visit to Portland was selling grilled cheese on 10th avenue. If the need for grilled cheese is being satisfied by the Grilled Cheese Grill on 10th, then there is no reason for the CEP to invest in grilled cheese production and distribution; and thus, no need for the grilled cheese stand to be threatened by the public preference.  However, if the owner of the grilled cheese stand had a quality product but low volume due to ineffective marketing causing the stand to be unprofitable, maybe the CEP would purchase the stand.  This would allow the former owner to continue working at what he was passionate about while collecting a salary that he didn’t have when the operation was bleeding, and allow what would have otherwise been a failed venture, to thrive through awareness and sampling through the public preference. Replace grilled cheese stand with whatever business you own, and I presume with very few exceptions that the statements above still holds true.  (I’m not implying the Grilled Cheese Grill wasn’t thriving, I was only using it as an example)

Another incentive small businesses have in the creation of CEP is the benefit of having a collective agency to influence regulations.  Since big business is the greatest driving force for legislation, many regulations are constructed to create an advantage for big corporations who have the resources to navigate these regulations, while small and medium size businesses are harmed through them.  Small businesses could network across county lines and create initiatives to level the playing field in areas where these issues exist.  CEP is the small business man’s big lobby.

We should also remember that CEP are not limited by the borders of their county or even the borders of the state.  Although the public preference (incentive of buying from oneself) is lost in acquiring out of state assets, should opportunity exist there is nothing to prevent a county CEP from doing so.  Furthermore, CEPs are not limited by national borders, and if opportunity should exist outside of national borders, those options can be explored as well, but not for the purpose of selfish exploitation, but for the purpose of uplifting the people of countries that have been the subject of such exploitation by the private corporate tyrannies based in the United States.  Of course, before we pursue a path of international economic crusade, pursuant to just cooperation, we need to ensure profitability locally.

The possibilities are exciting to me.  For example “Haiti unanimously passed a law sharply raising its minimum wage to 61 cents an hour” from 24 cents an hour.  Contractors for companies like Levies Strauss, and Hanes brought their grievance to the Obama administration who applied pressure which resulted in a 7cent minimum wage increase only.  There are about 25,000 textile workers in Hati, meaning across the sector as a whole the cost would only be 12.5 million dollars per year.  Consider if Levis had to bear the weight of the whole increase, the raise represents about 5% of their 211 million dollars in profit.  If a CEP was involved in textiles and used Haitian contractors, since the interest is to maintain profits not maximize profits, there would be no conflict between profits and paying wages enough for workers to live on.  It would change the market dynamic over time, after all, if you could sew for Levies and make 31 cents an hour or sew for a CEP company, and make substantially more, where are going to work?  As the CEP companies grow it would force other companies to increase wages or eventually be out of a workforce. (1)

(1):  A Pulled Scoop Shows U.S. Fought to Keep Haitian Wages Down.  Columbia Journalism Review, by Ryan Chittum 6:3:2013

The following are excerpts from the book I rescended from distribution Economic Despotism. Although Centers for Economic Planning have evolved far beyond the vison in 2015 when these chapters were written, these short explanations may provide the reader with additional insight that has not been reproduced in recent publications concerning Centers for Economic Planning.

Chapter: 7 PECA to CEPBUPA: Distinguishing Centers for Economic Planning from County Government: Why the Public Enterprise Corporation Act Became the Centers for Economic Planning and Bottom Up Prosperity Act

This article was featured in Economic Despotism: Addressing the Symptoms and Correcting Systemic Flaws in the Interest of Liberty for All.  While the Centers for Economic Planning outline has been modified for implementation at the city level, when this article was written, the idea was for Centers for Economic Planning to be statewide legislation and CEP to be created in each county.  Something I mention because the article is filled with the referring to CEPs per county and this is an abandoned direction.

(I wrote this article after considering a comment from Paul, the organizer for Political Talk in the San Fernando Valley discussion group. He said PECA sounded like a county government.)

In calling these democratically operated economic institutions, county corporations, some said I am trying to create another county government, as county government is a county corporation. Of course, the aim is different as the county government taxes and spends to provide services, legislates, and operates through a representative democratic process; whereas a CEP aims to grow a temporary sales tax through economic planning and investment, with the liberty to provide supplemental services, or solve any issue requiring money, as people see fit. As in “built in the image of a corporation for the purpose of exercising the rights of a collective person”.  A center for economic planning is essentially a for profit corporation that isn’t traded, where the shareholders consist of the residents of the county as opposed to people with money buying in and selling out.

The CEP, while operating through a representative democratic process also contains provisions for direct democracy and much more public oversight. Even so, if we call them Public Enterprise Corporations, detractors will call them governments, call for less government not more government, and over all say two county governments is twice the burden; even though in doing so, they are not acknowledging how the characteristics and mission of the CEP is in stark contrast to that of county government.

There is a very pronounced distinction between achieving economic democratization through collectively owned democratically controlled corporations, and municipal government itself. Often when a subject appears quite obvious to me, I over look how it could be misunderstood by others, and so these few paragraphs are intended to highlight the contrast.

Some may think Centers for Economic Planning are an attempt to recreate government, but as I have stated on previous occasions, CEP operating through both representative and direct democratic mechanisms, are intended to allow those without wealth, to participate in decisions regarding production; providing all people with a stake in the prosperity of the economy, as well as the means to influence candidate choices and policy through money, the same way private interests do presently.

The county and city governments to some extent operate in a manner that is similar to how a CEP would operate, with less popular input and oversight. The greatest difference is local government is charged with legislating, passing ordinances, or fine tuning a social contract within a limited jurisdiction, and the CEP shifts the balance of power, by shifting the balance of ownership, which consequently shifts the balance of wealth.

The county and city governments are charged with managing public assets, collecting taxes to maintain infrastructure, and provide services, as well as contract private entities to provide services. Some of the services provided by the city and county have the potential for profit, but the government does not set out to acquire businesses for the purpose of achieving profit for the people. It taxes, spends, and rarely, if ever, does it grow the tax money through investment in business.

The CEP does not legislate. The CEP while chartered to operate democratically, with more significant contributions from the public, and more oversight than the municipal governments, is concerned with taking a small tax principle and growing it through economic planning.  Eventually the profits from the CEP owned businesses, can be used any way the people decide, including direct payments to the public.

Economic planning in the beginning emphasizes growth of the principle, followed by planning industry to meet the specific needs of the people in the cities and counties they are headquartered in.

Including meeting ecological challenges that grow progressively worse due to carbon emissions resulting from burning fossil fuels. The CEP also creates collective ownership that leads to collective benefits, as those who own nothing are at the mercy of the merciless, who decide what you will produce, what benefits you will get, and what you will be paid for the job you are working. A popular argument from the right is, if these people are so dissatisfied with their wages why don’t they go get another job? A CEP sets out to ensure this option is available, and this is in part the cause for the suppression of the idea.

The municipal governments and even the state and federal government look at an issue like job creation and say: we need to lower taxes so those with money will invest. This is really just an excuse to lower taxes for those who they owe favors to, since anytime one of these firms can make a profit in the US, they are going to do so regardless of what the tax rate is. The CEP says our people need jobs, what other need do we have that we can invest in to provide jobs, meet a need, and make a mild profit in an effort to grow the collective wealth of our people? And before we decide to make that decision let us bring our idea before the people, and see if they agree, or already have a better idea to accomplish these ends!

The people say we don’t earn enough to live on. The government says we’ll talk about a minimum wage increase, even though the people who are not earning enough, earn well above the minimum wage and it still is not enough. The private firm they work for tells them if they form a union they will be out of a job, or to go and find another job, since as a human labor commodity, they are little more to the owners than an item on an expense report. The CEP doesn’t seek to maximize profit by minimizing wages, because the employees of those companies, are also the owners of those companies, and they exercise authority over the parent corporation itself.

The people say we recognize the need to transition to renewable energy. The governments say we will offer those with money, your money, to build wind and solar infrastructure. Then those with the money will sell the energy from the infrastructure, which only exists because it was primarily funded by the people, to the people. The Center for Economic Planning says we will build the infrastructure and use the profits to subsidize the cost to the needy, and contract to build more elsewhere, so the people who pay for the infrastructure will own the infrastructure, and collectively the investment of the people of this county will grow to meet our needs, and increase the liberty of all by increasing the means of all.

In short, government exists largely to facilitate wealth to power.  The CEP exists in order to facilitate the people to power, by creating owners out of the people, that will provide them with wealth; and through this wealth, they will have the means to make the important decisions that affect their lives, and the lives of their progeny.

Chapter 8: California Public Conquest

This article was written when I had an acute interest in California as the birth place of Centers for Economic Planning.  This article was written in speculation of how power may have shifted as a result.

I was talking to my friend Holly from Wisconsin, and she asked me a question which I have answered on many occasions, but upon her prompting, it caused me to consider just how significant CEPBUPA would be if implemented in California.

She asked why California?

I came to California because it seemed to be more progressive, and there seemed to be more people who recognized the short comings of the current political and economic system than other places in the country. While this proved to be false in many respects, I returned to California because it is the most populous state, and learned later it is the 6th largest economy in the world., which is relevant for one who is pursuing a national economic revolution with international implications. (1)

(1): Its Official California Grows to 6th Largest Economy in the World. San Francisco Chronicle, 7/8/2016, Jessica Floum.

The root of all evil is great economic inequality, and the deception that allows a system that produces such economic inequality to thrive.  CEPBUPA accepts that the order of power begins with economic power, in that economic power controls all other aspects of power, informational, legislative, and coercive.  What CEPBUPA aims to accomplish beyond a democratic means to plan production, is to create collective ownership within the existing state sponsored capitalist system, which will lead to collective wealth that can be locally and democratically directed to control other levers of power.  It is like a back door in an economically despotic system to achieve democracy.

The CEPs will not only plan new production, but also acquire existing businesses.  Locally, CEPs have the market advantage of the public preference, and what we are doing is creating collective prosperity at the local level.  All the people in any community where a CEP exists will have a stake in the local economy.  As the businesses of the CEP grow and prosper the people through their CEP will be able to branch out and acquire businesses and undertake new ventures outside of their county, as well as outside of the state, and in time, outside of the country.

In a short period of time, perhaps in as few as 5 years, each CEP in each county will possess a formidable amount of resources from the profitable businesses it will own.  I would imagine that other states would adopt similar legislation.  This is the ideal course, as then all the people in the United States would have the means to democratically control their own destiny, but if they did not, the people of California through their CEPs would be able to exercise power equal to or greater than any single industry in the United States.  This may be closer to reality around the 10-year mark, but the point is, through the assets held by the CEPs, the people of California will be able to exercise their wealth to power, the same way private interests do presently.  If other states refused to adopt CEPBUPA like legislation, the most powerful economic interest in the country, and over time in the world, would be the people of California through their Centers for Economic Planning, and the networking of these CEPs to achieve common goals.

To recap:

1: Money controls all power

2: Money is accumulated primarily through ownership

3: Centers for Economic Planning create owners from among all the people, where presently a very small percentage of the population own significantly.

4: Centers for Economic Planning operate through representation and direct democracy, but are separate from the government, chartered as a corporation for the sake of exercising the rights of a collective person.

4: Local assets ensure profitability by allowing local consumers to purchase goods and services from themselves.

5: Over time, the businesses that the CEP will acquire, will create wealth that can be used to democratically wield power.

6: Other states should adopt similar legislation which will shift the balance of power across the country, and consequently across the world;  from a small minority who possess wealth, to the great majority who will possess wealth through their CEP, which will also benefit people individually, and directly.

7: If the rest of the states fail or hesitate to follow the CEPBUPA example in California, the people of California through the wealth generated from the businesses owned through their CEPs will become the most dominate interest in the country, and the most dominant interest in the world.

The goal is the mass distribution of power to the people, the optimization of liberty, and realizing the potential of human species.

 2016:  Below is the third chapter from a book I wrote called Economic Despotism.  I removed the book from distribution for a variety of reasons, but there is content of some value that has found its way into this portion of the website.  Economic Despotism was a term used to describe the circulation of the power identified through four categories of power.  I am abandoned the criteria mainly because the frame work complicates rather than simplifies power.  The economic information is dated although still somewhat relevant as the share of wealth for the bottom 80% of the country, financial or otherwise has not and generally does not change much.  Unemployment has been significantly reduced since this was written, but the chapter still provide important information related to understanding unemployment numbers.

Chapter 3: Domestic Symptoms of Economic Despotism

Step one is acknowledging how the system functions and in what hands power lies.  Second, is to evaluate the quality of results, considering the benefits and opportunities this power structure creates for most people.  There are some who may acknowledge the system is economically despotic, but would argue that it produces good results.  A sound argument can be made about many cruel and absurd notion.(Sentence Omitted) (1)  (Portion of Sentence Omitted) …for those confined to box mentality, stuck in ideas of bad and worse, they can convince people that bad is better than worse without considering different to better.  Something I mention as the owners of this country would argue for this system since there are worse examples around the world, even though many of those they point to as worse, are worse as a result of US imposition.

(1): (Footnote Omitted)

Many claim the United States is the best country in the world, richest country in the world, freest nation in the world, land of opportunity and so on and so forth.  We will evaluate those claims, subjective as some of them are, and how they relate to people in this country.  Some of them are meaningless to many, as in there isn’t much freedom being the poorest people in the richest country in the world.  Opportunities, unemployment, wages, and wealth distribution will be discussed in this chapter.


As was explained in the previous section, in a capitalist country, those who possess money decide what is going to be produced.  The term you are probably familiar with is job creators.  If you have money, your job is to create jobs, and if you do not, your job is to work to make those with money, more money.  What else are you going to do?  You may have ideas, dreams, goals, but if you do not have money or credit (which you won’t have unless you have had some money) you are reliant on those with money.  In short, since the bottom 50% of the population “owns nothing at all”, at least half of people have little or no ability to legally create their own opportunities. (2)  The next 30 percent of the population possess very little, only about 4% of financial wealth, which I mention only to express that most people (4 out of 5) are very limited in their means to create their own opportunities to be productive. (3)

(2): Capital: In the 21st Century, 2012, by Thomas Piketty pg 244, “…the bottom 50 percent of the wealth distribution owns nothing at all, or almost nothing (always less than 10 and generally not more than 5 % of total wealth)…” US bottom 50% 5% of total wealth: table 7.2, pp 248,249.  1% of financial wealth.

(3): Bottom 80%: 11% of total wealth, only 5% of financial wealth. Since the bottom 50% have only 1% of financial wealth, then the middle 30% possess 4% of financial wealth.  Source: Wolf E.N (2012) “The Asset Price Meltdown and the Wealth of the Middle Class”.

This isn’t to say that people in the middle to bottom are completely without methods to create opportunity, it depends largely on the risk individuals and groups are willing to take.  Since there are large numbers of people from the bottom with limited outlets for creative and meaningful productivity, many choose to cope with their desperation by using drugs.  An estimated 130 million Americans use mind altering substances. (4)

(4): 70 Million Americans Taking Mind Altering Drugs, 02/09/2014 by David Kupelian : The article cites in addition to the 70 million Americans taking mind altering drugs an additional 60 million people “abuse alcohol”.

People who are satisfied with life do not develop drug dependencies, which isn’t to say that drugs are altogether bad in moderate frequency.  While those who believe, benefit from, or otherwise support the state myth, drug use has to be attributed to individuals, as in there is something wrong with these people who just want to be drug users.  Yet when the reliance on drugs exists among more than half the adult population, it becomes difficult not to acknowledge the fact that it is an effect of American culture.

Since this is a fact, there is a demand for drugs, and while there is always an emphasis on blaming drug dealers for these collective results (rampant drug use), everyone knows you cannot sell a product people do not want to buy, unless you have a good ad campaign which drug dealers do not.  However, for people without legal opportunity to decide what they will produce, distributing drugs is a good opportunity, although not without risks.


Aside from selling drugs, the productive opportunities of people at the bottom typically consist of other forms of criminality, and those who live in a society where opportunity is abundant are not forced into resorting to desperate measures for survival and gain.  There are always exceptions, but bear in mind, opportunity also consists of educational opportunities, as it is through education that individuals discover interests, passions, talents and creative application.  An education does not consist of a class room only, but of a stable household free of economic stress, and an overall environment that understands the value of learning.

The relationship between the environment and development in children is well studied and many of the findings very conclusive.  “Continual emotional distress can create deficits in a child’s intellectual abilities, crippling the capacity to learn”.(5)  According to the American Psychological Association, “Money is the top source of stress…since the APA started conducting its annual survey”.(6)   In reviewing some of the reasons given about children being stressed much of it has to do with their parents, as well as things like image at school, which is something I mention since I referenced money as a top source of stress.  I’m not implying that children are stressed about money, but the causes of children being stressed, relate to their parent’s financial situation, directly and indirectly.  They mention their parents fighting, and one main cause of arguments between partners is money.  Children also mention “stress is when I don’t see my parents because they’re working all the time”, which indirectly relates to money.  Living in a nation with high levels of inequality that is increasingly moving away from balance is not only unequal in terms of liberty, but causes the economically disadvantaged, to become intellectually disadvantaged as well.  I mention this to support the assertion that there are greater advantages that accompany being born into money (upper 20%), than even the money itself.

(5): The Powerful Impacts of Stress. John Hopkins School of Education, by Victoria Tennant  Source: Daniel Goleman, “Emotional Intelligence”, Bantam Books 1997, p.27

(6): This is the Number One Source of Stress in America.  ABC News, by Jeannie Kim and 02/18/2015

Since most people are without money, they must rely on others for opportunities to be productive in society.  For some people, since they lack even an environment to take advantage of sub-par educational opportunities, the choices that exist for these people are: low wage servitude (something we will qualify as we proceed through this chapter) or criminality.  There are always exceptions, and in America it is true that almost anyone can make it; but it is also true that everyone cannot,  as in there simply is not enough opportunities for everyone, and many of the opportunities that do exist are inadequate.


Unemployment numbers are like a holographic picture, where the angle of the tilt determines what an individual sees.  The satisfaction of the image, usually depends on where that individual falls within the picture: as someone who is employed, full-time or part time, someone who is unemployed, or as someone who is counted as not being in the workforce.  The people of the United States remind me of a short summary I read of the people of Carthage “As long as there was plenty of work…the majority of citizens were quite contented, allowed their “betters” to rule them and asked no embarrassing questions.”(8)

(8): Story of Mankind, by Hendrik Van Loon, Chapter on Rome and Carthage. 2009  Gutenberg Ebook

Obama has made claims that his administration has created over 10 million jobs (9), although the article I am citing references the IMF asserting it is only 6 million, the amount of jobs created is only of consequence if we consider the number of jobs lost during that same period and the number of people who need jobs.  In January 2008, pre-recession, there were 153.8 million people employed, and as of January 2016, there is 157.8 million.  Although not the 10 million Obama claims, we would still applaud that the number has grown; seeing there are 4 million more jobs 8 years later.  On the surface we would say that something is better than nothing.

(9) Fact-checking Barack Obama’s Latest Jobs Claim. Politifact By Lauren Carroll, Katie Sanders, Aaron Sharockman on Sunday, November 9th, 2014 at 6:12 p.m.

The first thing to consider is how many of those jobs being created are full time jobs.  Many people in this country know it is difficult enough to raise a family on a full-time job.  If new jobs are created that only offer part time hours, but people require full time hours to meet their needs, then the amount of new jobs that are only part time, are less significant.  In fact, if companies collectively decided they didn’t want to pay workers benefits, 4 million jobs could be created by reducing the number of hours full time employees worked and hiring part time employees.  In this you would achieve a reduction in the unemployment rate without actually creating any new jobs.  This has not happened in the aforementioned magnitude (that is not all new jobs are part time), but it is something to think about when considering the unemployment rate.

In 2008, 26 million people were employed part time.  In 2016, 28.7 million people were working part time.  Meaning of those 4 million jobs created, only 1.3 million were full time jobs, and the bulk of those jobs (2.7million), are part time jobs.

Another aspect of unemployment to consider is new people entering the work force.  In 2008 there were a total of 232.6 million working age Americans, defined as anyone over the age of 16.  In 2016 there are 251.9 million which makes for an increase of 19.3 million more people who are working age and presumably need a job.  This makes the 1.3 million full time jobs, even when combined with the 2.7-million-part time jobs seem rather insignificant; although there are explanations that have the effect of minimizing this fact which we will examine shortly.

The unemployment rate itself since 2008 compared to 2016 is about the same.  The Obama

Administration and presumably democrats, hail this as evidence that the policies of this administration brought the country out of the recession.  Pre-recession, January 2008 the unemployment rate was 4.9% or 7.5 million people out of 153.8 million were unemployed.  January 2016 the unemployment rate is 5% or 7.9 million out of 157.8 million.  Yet as we mentioned in the previous paragraph, the U3 unemployment rate does not distinguish between full time and part time employment, and it may have stoked some people’s curiosity that the unemployment rate is so low, considering there are 19.3 million more working age Americans, and only 4 million more jobs.  This has to do with the work force participation rate.

Workforce participation is the number of people working or receiving unemployment benefits compared to the total number of working aged people.  In 2008 78.7 million people were considered not in the work force.  In 2016, 94.1 million are considered not in the workforce.  There are multiple reasons why someone would be working aged and not in the workforce.  Physical disabilities, retired, and attending school are the most popularly mentioned, but the next explanation accounts for most of the decline in recent years: people who cannot find jobs are considered as having left the work force.  Below is a chart from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that illustrates the trend in workforce participation.

The most popular cover for the decline in workforce participation is the baby boomer generation is beginning to retire, and this is why workforce participation is declining.  Work force participation from 2008 to 2013 cannot be attributed to retirees, since most of the decline in work force participation exist among those who are prime ages to work.

When we compare the decrease in workforce participation, compared to the number of people who are reaching retirement age who may have retired, these people account for a very small portion of that decrease.  The most concrete piece of evidence, that the drop in workforce participation is due to a system that is incapable of producing enough worthwhile jobs, is the age groups where participation is declining:  All working age people except for those ages 60 years and older.

The other scapegoat for people leaving the workforce, or the decline in workforce participation is education; more people going to college or going back to school.  If most of the decline in workforce participation could be attributed to people going back to school, the trend would have discontinued after 4 years, as the people who left the work force, or didn’t enter the work force as they normally would have to attend school, would have graduated and then entered the workforce.  Instead what we see is a steady decline, which implies that many people simply are not counted as being unemployed, because they have been unemployed for such a long period of time they are considered as having left the workforce.

Age Group                         2008 WFPR %           2013 WFPR%   Difference                Population Millions

16-17 27 22 -5
18-19 52 46                -6       Ages 15 to 19 22
20-24 74 71 -3 21.6
25-29 83 80 -3 21.1
30-34 84 82 -2 20
35-39 84.5 82.5 -2 20.2
40-44 85 82 -3 20.9
45-49 84 81 -3 22.7
50-54 80.5 78 -2.5 22.3
55-59 74 72.5 -1.5 20
60-64 50 50 0 16.8
65-69 31 32 1 12.4
70-74 18.5 19 0.5 9.3
75 and Over 18 18 0 19

Highlight signifies decreases in workforce participation for age group.

Highlight signifies increase in workforce participation for age group.

No highlight signifies no change.

Workforce participation stats, BLS,

2013 Population

Unemployment U-3 2008: 4.9% (7.5M), U-3 2016: 5%(7.9m)

Part Time Employment 2008:16.9% (26M), 2016: 18.2% (28.7) +1.3%, (+2.7M)

Work Force Participation Rate: 2008: 66.1%, 2016: 62.4% (-3.7%)

Not In Workforce/Workforce/Working Age Population/

2008 Millions: 78.7/153.8/232.6  2016: 94.1/157.8/251.9

All numbers cited above come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics

For those who are the “job creators”, or of the ranks of those with capital to decide production, a high rate of unemployment, or even a situation where there is not enough jobs for everyone is not a bad thing.  For the majority of people who are not deciders and rely on the opportunities to be had from the job creators, a high rate of unemployment is not a good thing.  When a situation exists where there are more people looking for jobs than jobs are available, some people cannot have jobs.  If there is an abundance of people looking for jobs, and not many job openings, then companies can offer less in wages and benefits because workers are desperate for work.  High unemployment benefits the employer and harms the employee.

Since there are always products that need to be produced, services to be provided, technologies to be developed and brought to the market, people who want to be productive, and overall needs that need to be met; there is no reason for anyone to be in need of a job and not being able to have one.  The only reason this is a reality, is because there are such a limited number of people in this country who possess the resources to decide production.  If every county had a Center for Economic Planning the needs of the community would be assessed, and people would be able to decide economic development to meet those needs through the businesses and industry that would be created and purchased by these centers.  With the stroke of a pen all people become owners, job creators, and no one is left without the capacity to create their own opportunity to participate productively within their community. Any nation that boasts the title the land of opportunity should be a place where most, not a few only, are able to decide what opportunities exist.

Wages and Wealth Distribution

One statistic I find very interesting is the United States, the richest nation in history, when compared to other developed nations has the greatest percentage of low wage workers.  Low wage worker is defined as a person who earns less than 2/3rds of the median personal income, which in the United States is about 19 thousand dollars a year, or about $10 an hour.  We shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that this is the ceiling of what is considered a low wage worker; so as can be seen in the chart below, over 25% of American workers make less than $10 an hour or less than 19 thousand dollars a year. (11)

(11): US Has Highest Share Working In Low Wage Jobs, OECD Says. Huffington Post,  4/16/2012 by Bonnie Kavoussi US Median Personal Income 28,851( Social Security: ).  2/3s of 29k is 19k, divided by 12, divided by 160 hours per month, is about 10 dollars per hour.

The first contention by those who regard this system and nation as though it was divinely ordained, is that the wages paid to American workers relative to other countries are much higher.  In this, what is considered low wage in the United States, is high wage elsewhere.  If we are comparing to developing nations this is true, but actually the United States does not rank number one in terms of median income. It ranks behind Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland.  Since low wage worker is defined as 2/3rds of the median income, and the above mentioned nations have a higher median income; not only do these nations all have less low wage workers than the United States, but their low wage workers have a higher ceiling than the low wage workers in the US.(12)  The argument that the US has the highest rate of low wage workers in the world, because it’s wages are so high that low wages are not really low, is without merit since A: there are countries with higher median income than the United States with a smaller percentage of their population considered low wage workers, and B: the nations the United States is being compared with that are not higher than the United States, are not significantly lower in terms of median income.  If you are fortunate enough to have a job creator, who has created a job to enrich itself from your productive effort, if you are 1 in 4 people, you are earning a low wage, and probably do not need to read this to know that.

(12): Worldwide Median Household Income about 10,000. Gallup, December 16th , 2013 by Glenn Phelps and Steve Crabtree. “Countries ranked by median self-reported per-captia and household income.  Median figures based on responses from at least 2000 responses in each country”.

Another argument, this one came from a comment where this data was featured in a Business Insider article:

Dan Afrasiabi on Sep 23rd at 8:48 said “I’d love to see that graph against a graph of unemployment rates. It’s far better to have a low-paying job that serves as a lower rung on the economic ladder, rather than no job at all.”(13)

(13) “America No. 1 in Low Paying Jobs”, by Andy Kiersz, Business Insider, September 2014.  Cited for source of comment referenced above.

Mr. Afrasiabi is implying the reason the United States leads the developed world in low wage jobs, is in the interest of ensuring all people have an opportunity for a low wage job, as opposed to not having enough jobs.  If this is true we would presume that the United States has the lowest unemployment rate in the developed world, which would compensate for it having the highest rate of low wage workers.  This also reinforces that box we keep coming back to, built on the bad is better than worse framework.  Unfortunately this is not the case, the United States for the year in which this data comes from, is middle of the pack, with 6 of these nations (Denmark, Australia, Germany,New Zealand, Austria, Japan) along with 11 other nations not mentioned in the chart,  ranked ahead of the

United States in employment. (14)

(14):OECD (2016), Unemployment rate (indicator). doi: 10.1787/997c8750-en (Accessed on 20 January 2016) Data taken from 4th Quarter of 2013 since this is the year associated with the data comparing low wage workers.

The simplest and most accurate definition of wealth is the accumulation of surplus income in all its forms, verses debt.  There are two categories of wealth, financial wealth and non-financial wealth.  Financial wealth is what is in your checking, savings, or what you hold in stocks, bonds, or precious metals.  Non-financial wealth is any asset owned that isn’t financial wealth, like your home, car, furniture etc.  The distinction is important as much of the wealth held by the bottom 80% of the country is not financial wealth, most of it is the difference between what their house is worth and how much they still owe on it.

What is held in financial wealth by the bottom 4/5ths of people, which as expressed in the beginning of this chapter only represents 5% of the total held in this country, is typically possessed in savings or investments that are held until the person reaches retirement age.  I mention this, because it is largely unproductive, and compared to what is possessed by the top 20%, 95% of financial wealth and 89% of wealth overall, it is relatively insignificant. (15)  This is something more relevant in other parts of the book since in a nation where money decides politics, even if the bottom 80% pooled their wealth in an effort to influence politics, there is not enough wealth to compete against the interest of the top 20%.  In fact, so unequal is the gulf between what is possessed by a few and what is possessed by the many, that the top 1/10th of 1 percent of families possess as much as the bottom 90%. (16)  So not only are the bottom 80% without the means to compete against the top 20%, but the bottom 90% are not possessed of the means to compete against the top one tenth of one percent!

(15): See footnotes 2 and 3

(16) US wealth inequality – top.01 % worth about as much as bottom 90%. The Guardian 11/13/2014, by Angela Monaghan. 90

While income distribution is important, it is relative, as in those from any lower group would consider that of a higher group to be extravagant.  Yet in many cases those who are in the bottom 80 percent, although there may be dramatic differences in the quality of life, between a household who is in the bottom 20 percent surviving on 11.5k a year or less, and a household in the middle 20 percent, earning up to 51k per year, generally speaking, those in the bottom 80% are working to live. (17)  So limited is the means of many people in this country that “nearly one half of U.S. households would probably be unable to come up with $2,000 in 30 days.”  More telling than half of Americans reporting they would be unable to come up with $2000 in 30 days, is that 6 in 10 Americans report they don’t have $500 in savings, speaking to how little wealth most Americans actually have.(18) Wealth is the accumulation of surplus income, and since most Americans are without surplus income or have very little surplus income, most Americans are without wealth or have very little.

(17): Russel and Sage Foundation: Chart Book of Social Inequality.  Mean Household Income.  Source Data Source: DeNavas-Walt, C., B. Proctor, and J. C. Smith. Sept. 2013. U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports, P60-245, Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2012 [Table A-2].  Top 20%: 182k, Middle Top 20%:82k, Middle 20:51k Lower Middle 20:

29k, Bottom 20: 11.5K

(18): The Wealthy Hand to Mouth Brookings Panel on Economic Activity, March 20-21, 2014  Greg Kaplan, Giovanni L. Violante, Justin Weidner pg32.  Source:  Lusardi, A., D. Schneider, and P. Tufano (2011): \Financially Fragile Households: Evidence and Implications,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 42(1), 83{150.  As I was reviewing this material before posting I seen the $2000 in 30 day reference.  Having used the following reference in Liberty and Tyranny and the survey being fresh in my mind I added this information to this page because it is a better illustrater of the point that most Americans make little more than what they require to pay their bills.  CNN Money: 6 In 10 Americans Don’t have $500 in Their Savings, by Katheryn Vasel 1/12/2017 Source: Bankrate Survey).

How would a Center for Economic Planning change the distribution of wealth?  As was explained previously, owners reap the benefits of economic activity.  If a county has a CEP, every person in the county becomes an owner and is able to direct the profits of the CEP.  The CEP acquires businesses and the people within the county are employed by these businesses, which they are also indirect owners of.  The operation of the CEP is subject to popular oversight, and therefore the main objective of the CEP is not to maximize profits in the interest of unproductive shareholders far removed from the community, but to maximize the satisfaction of the community.  This is the only way it can function since it is a localized democratic institution, concerned with economic planning and collective prosperity.

A CEP purchases or creates businesses in accordance with the public will.  There can be incentives for employees who work in these businesses.  Any dissatisfaction in terms of compensation even between unalike businesses owned by the CEP can be brought to Delegate Liaisons.  A natural local interest would form from those who are employed by CEP businesses, that would function as a labor union without the bureaucracy, and this is a labor union with control over the parent corporation.  Wealth is the accumulation of surplus income, and so more income would ultimately lead to more wealth.  The objective of CEP owned businesses is to maximize public satisfaction while maintaining profitable enterprises, whereas privately owned corporations have a legal commitment to maximize profits for shareholders, which means reducing the cost of operations, and labor is a cost of operations.

Another chapter from the book rescended from distribution Economic Despotism, the chapter named after a Mettalica lyric pertains to global warming.  The base of the article has been with me for close to 5 years although as some of the sources testify to it has been updated over that time.
Chapter 5: The Exit of Humanity

In the next century or so the greatest threat humanity faces is ecological. Systemically the issue concerning global warming is this: if the technology to be implemented in the interest of creating a sustainable environment is not more profitable than the technology it replaces, the new technology will not be developed and implemented on pace with its need. In as much as some technology has been implemented, it is largely the result of the public funding projects that belong to private owners, meaning the future of energy as the future of many other technologies, is paid for by most, but owned by a few. What most fail to realize is time is of great consequence, and behavioral changes alone will not avert the possible catastrophe ahead.

Global warming is the result of human activities, chiefly through Co2 emissions the result of burning fossil fuels. Given the economic power wielded by the corporations who profit from burning fossil fuels, there isn’t likely to be a decrease in carbon being released into the atmosphere. If there is not a decrease in carbon emissions, civilization will face serious challenges in the coming decades, and prolonged indifference threatens the very existence of the species on this planet, in perhaps as quickly as a century. While we are just breaking the 400 parts per million concentration of carbon in the atmosphere, research suggests a new target to prevent severe consequences, the likes of which may be the point of no return is 405ppm.

Most scientists concur that two degrees C of warming above the temperature during pre-industrial time, would “harm all sectors of civilization, food, water, health, land, national security, energy and economic prosperity… New calculations…indicate that if the world continues to burn fossil fuels at the current rate, (the global average temperature) will rise to two degrees Celsius (above pre-industrial temperature) by 2036, crossing a threshold that will harm human civilization.” (1)

(1): Earth Will Cross the Climate Danger Threshold by 2036. Scientific American, 3/18/14, by Michael Mann

If carbon emissions are reduced by 40 to 70% by 2050, the IPCC predicts the concentration of carbon in the atmosphere to reach between 430 to 480ppm. (2) The problem is we are yet to reduce carbon emissions by even 1 percent, much less 40 to 70%, although globally, on an annual basis, we have managed to reduce the increase in carbon emissions, but this remains an increase and not a reduction. (3)

(2): Degree of change: the IPCC’s projections for future temperature rise. Carbon Brief, Robin Webster, 4:15:2014 Graphic derived from IPCC table SPM.1

(3): Trends In Global CO2 Emissions: 2014 Report. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency

This moderate increase of 2% in 2013 compared to 2012 is a continuation of last year’s trend and of the slowdown in annual emissions growth.

Carbon will reach 580 to 720ppm in the atmosphere if countries deliver on their current, voluntary pledges. Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to find a source which examines how many countries are on pace to meet their pledges, only pledges made. Beyond these pledges being nonbinding agreements, it seems exceedingly unrealistic that these pledges will be met since the driving force of national policy in the US, and elsewhere, is economic, and limiting carbon emissions is usually in conflict with short term economic objectives. 720ppm to 1000ppm by the end of the century if we do nothing to reduce emissions, and 1000ppm or greater if we do nothing and they keep going up at the present rate.  These last two scenarios are likely for reasons already mentioned in this paragraph, but if we do nothing, it is reasonable to presume carbon emissions will continue to rise at the present rate.  This is the high but probable path according to the IPCC who is the reserved voice on climate change among credible voices, and if we continue on this trajectory, we are looking at 4 degrees C warming by the end of the century, and as high as 7 degrees C.

James Hanson, former head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and world renowned climate scientist, said “four degrees of warming would be enough to melt all the ice… you would have a tremendously chaotic situation as you moved away from our current climate towards another one. That’s a different planet. You wouldn’t recognize it… We are on the verge of creating climate chaos if we don’t begin to reduce emissions rapidly.” If 4 degrees would lead to a world we wouldn’t recognize what would 7 degrees look like? In Hanson’s 2013 paper he concludes the following “Most remaining fossil fuel carbon is in coal and unconventional oil and gas. Thus, it seems, humanity stands at a fork in the road. As conventional oil and gas are depleted, will we move to carbon-free energy and efficiency – or to unconventional fossil fuels and coal?… It seems implausible that humanity will not alter its energy course as consequences of burning all fossil fuels become clearer. Yet strong evidence about the dangers of human-made climate change have so far had little effect. Whether governments continue to be so foolhardy as to allow or encourage development of all fossil fuels may determine the fate of humanity.” (5)

(5)  James Hanson: Fossil Fuel Addiction Could Trigger Run Away Global Warming. Guardian, 7:10:2013,  by Nafeez Ahmed.  Underline emphasis added. insight/2013/jul/10/james-hansen-fossil-fuels-runaway-global-warming

One may ask, if there is such a consensus on climate change, why is there such a difference between the range of possible outcomes among different scientists and scientific agencies? Jeff Kiehl explains “Computer models successfully capture the short-term effects of increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. But the record from Earth’s geologic past also encompasses longer-term effects, which accounts for the discrepancy in findings. The eventual melting of ice sheets, for example, leads to additional heating because exposed dark surfaces of land or water absorb more heat than ice sheets.

The information in the preceding paragraphs are largely the product of computer modeling. About 35 million years ago, when the concentration of carbon in the atmosphere was about 900 to 1000ppm, the warming effect was 2 to 4x that which is used to measure the shortterm effects in computer modeling, and the earths average temperature was about 88 degrees F (31 degrees C), compared to a pre-industrial global average temperature of 59 degrees (15 degrees C). Added to this, is while the temperature is higher than projected by computer models that are not yet able to incorporate “critical processes”, the sun’s energy output was actually weaker, if only slightly, than it is today. Meaning it is likely that a future where carbon concentrations are similar to periods in earth’s history, would lead to a world warmer than those periods since the sun’s energy output is greater now than during those times. Equal C02 levels, greater solar output, increases the probability of greater temperature as there is more heat to be retained. (6)

(6):  Earth’s hot past could be prologue to future climate change, NCAR/UCAR, Atmostimes, by Jeffry Kiehl, 1:13:2011 future-climate

If we stay on the present course we will likely exhaust and burn every unit of fossil fuel on this planet, leading to Co2 concentrations that could approach 1000ppm as soon as the end of the century, and warming conservatively between about 4 to 5 degrees. The issue is CO2 levels have not risen as rapidly as they are presently being emitted, so it seems safe to presume, even after CO2 levels stabilize, we will likely encounter increased warming beyond that point, comparable to what has been observed in earth’s history under similar conditions or greater. If government remains the facilitator of wealth to power, and wealth derives profit from continuing emissions, then what reason do we have to believe we are not headed towards the ghastliest climate scenario imaginable?

The 10 warmest years in the United States have all occurred since 1997, a reflection of the relentless planetary warming that scientists say is a consequence of human activity and poses profound long-term risks to civilization and nature. (7) We are already in it, at .85 degrees C, and could see an average global temperature increase three times what we have now in as few as 20 years.

(7):  2014 Breaks Heat Record, Challenging Global Warming Skeptics. New York Times,  by Justin Gillis, 1/16/2015 surpassing-2010

While most people in the US are persuaded by the opinion of 97% of scientists who conclude that warming is both occurring, is anthropogenic (manmade), and is a serious threat to humanity, there is manufactured opposition.  It is helpful to know the 97% consensus stems from a study that compares the number of climate related peer reviewed papers written since 1991 (8), and these papers and their critiques all conclude what was mentioned previously.

Nearly all the deniers are funded by industries that profit from carbon emissions like oil companies.  Most are scientists from fields unrelated to climate change or are without legitimate scientific credentials.  Like David Legate who is a geographer, or Anthony Watts, who hosts a widely read and cited denial blog called Watts up with that, who is funded by Exxon, as well as the Koch Brothers Foundation. (9)

(8): Quantifying the Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming in Scientific Literature, John Cook1,2,3, Dana Nuccitelli2,4, Sarah A

Green5, Mark Richardson6, Bärbel Winkler2, Rob Painting2, Robert Way7, Peter Jacobs8 and Andrew Skuce2,9 Published 15 May 2013 •

2013 IOP Publishing Ltd


Climate deniers will also cite credible information out of context.  For example, I recently seen an article that read Irreversible Arctic Ice Loss Seems to be Reversing Itself.  In the summer months ice melts, and ice increases in the winter months.  Due to the increase in the global temperature, typically more ice melts in the summer months than returns in the winter.  Since the global temperature continues to increase, the disappearance of ice is irreversible.  The study cited was produced by the Navy which is a credible source since the Navy needs reliable data on where ice is for their strategic outlook in regard to positioning and navigation, but what the study concludes is: IF we can cool down the planet we can expect ice to return.  Since there is nothing to indicate the planet can be cooled, the disappearance of ice is essentially irreversible.(10)


Another tactic used is cherry picking ranges of time.  In this deniers will claim there has been no warming.  They choose a year that was particularly hot, and then end on a year that is abnormally cool, and claim no warming has occurred during that span of time.  And while the temperature fluctuates annually, the global average is steadily rising over time, as can be observed in the figure above.  If we begin at 1997 until 2009 it appears there is no warming, or if we choose 1997 to 2008, then we can interpret the data to make the claim that cooling has taken place.  I think much of the general population is less in denial and more of anti-alarmist, in that they acknowledge climate change is occurring, and that it is anthropogenic, but view the projections as not being consistent with the observed trend.  In other words, they deny that fundamental changes in how humanity meets its energy needs are necessary.  My response has two parts.

First, we should be mindful of the likely delay between carbon in the atmosphere and the global temperature.  For example, by studying ice cores and the geological record, scientists are able to understand the temperature and atmospheric makeup of the earth from hundreds of thousands, and even millions of years ago.  So, if 800ppm of carbon in the atmosphere corresponds to a certain global temperature, since we are emitting carbon into the atmosphere at an accelerated rate, we could achieve 800ppm and not the same rise in temperature.  What I mean by this, is the global temperature may take time to catch up, and in this, while we are only at 400ppm, we may already be at a place where the corresponding temperature should be higher than what is observed, because the effect of the current levels of C02, has not been fully realized.  Since human’s have loaded the atmosphere with carbon dioxide much faster than at other points in earth’s history, we should expect that it will take some time before the global average, reflects the increased amount of heat retained through radiative forcing.

Secondly, there is the risk reward component of the scenarios.  We should acknowledge the harm associated with climate change even outside of a warming catastrophe.  A study conducted by Mark Jacobson noted “a cause and effect relationship, not just a correlation… for each increase of 1 degree Celsius caused by carbon dioxide, the resulting air pollution would lead to…more deaths and more cases of respiratory illness.” (11)   In this, there is good reason to transition towards renewable energy, even if you’re skeptical of the likely apocalyptic possibilities of indifference to the problem.  The other aspect of ignoring climate change, and the opinion of 97% of climate scientists, is the result may be the fate of the species, at the very minimum the end of human civilization as we know it, and the worst-case scenario is the premature extinction of human life.

(11): Study Links Carbon Dioxide Emissions to Increased Deaths. 1/3/2008, Stanford News, Louis Bergeron.

Interestingly enough, in 1980, the American Petroleum Institute, the members of which have financed much of the climate denial propaganda, commissioned a study to investigate whether or not global warming was occurring, and if so, is it related to burning fossil fuels?  A memo of the meeting discussing the findings, dated March 18th, 1980, concludes “Strong empirical evidence that

[temperature] rise caused by anthropogenic release of CO2, mainly from fossil fuel burning.  Global averaged, 2.5 [degrees] C rise expected by 2038 at a 3% [projected average] growth rate of atmospheric CO2 concentration.  1 [degree] C rise (2005): barely noticeable.  2.5 [degrees] C rise: major economic consequences, strong regional dependence.  5 [degrees] C rise: (2067): global catastrophic effects.” (12)  These were the findings of the API in 1980, which are generally consistent with the evolution of real world data and modern projections.  API members and others involved in the fossil fuel industry finance climate denial propaganda to the tune of 115 million dollars per year and buried their initial research findings for more than 35 years. (13)

(12): Exxon’s Climate Cover Up Just Got Bigger: Docs Suggest All Major Oil Companies Knew About Climate Change Since the 1970s.

Democracy Now, 12/31/2015, Exxon’s Oil Peers Knew About Climate Dangers in the 1970s, Too. Inside Climate News 12/22/2015, by Neela Banerjee, Quotations from API AQ-9 Task Force meeting, dated March 18th 1980 pp 9,10,13

(13): Oil Giants Spend 115 Million a Year to Oppose Climate Policy, Huffington Post, by Casey Williams, 4/11/2016

The Clean Power Plan

We are approaching 1 degree C of warming, and we see as well as feel the effects. In 20 years, we may be at 2.5x this level. Conceivably even worse when we consider policy. In the coming shift from coal to natural gas due to the Clean Power Plan, we should experience probably a bump rather soon.

By increasing the amount of methane in the atmosphere due to increased natural gas extraction and usage, we will be increasing the short term warming that takes place, since methane is much more effective, 25x more, at trapping heat than carbon dioxide. The tradeoff is methane only remains in the atmosphere for 12 years.  But we should get a bump in warming due to this shift.

Yet this bump could contribute to irreversible damage like the melting of glaciers that reflect heat from the sun.  At 1.8 degrees warming we can expect arctic permafrost to melt.  Beneath the permafrost are huge stores of frozen plant and animal material ready to decay, and will be released into the atmosphere as methane and CO2.

We should also remember that burning natural gas as well as the energy used in drilling wells, also contributes to CO2 emissions, but about half as much per unit of energy produced as that of coal. It isn’t a tradeoff between methane and CO2, it is the methane and less CO2 than coal, but still CO2.  Add to this the fact that with the burning of coal, there is also aerosols that are released that produce a cooling effect by reflecting sunlight back out to space.  The Clean Power Plan is a perfect policy to accelerate global warming in the short term that will limit humanity’s ability to address the long term warming that is already assured due to the present concentration of CO2, and that which is expected to be added.  It is like cutting off your leg because your foot is bleeding.  You stop your foot from bleeding by removing the leg, but in the short term, you are worse off bleeding out faster through the amputation, when you still had time to treat the foot.

The China Argument

Another argument used to slow the implementation of regulations and renewable energy initiatives is that developing countries like China and India have growing emission rates, which nullify the significance of action taken by the United States.  The United States still has higher emissions (5490MMT) overall than any country in the world with the exception of China (8715MMT), but the United States is a country of about 310 million people, while China’s population is 1.3 billion people, so you could justify China’s emissions being about 4 times that of the US based on population, and yet China’s emissions are less than double. In per capita terms US emissions (17.6MTPP) are nearly 3 times China’s, (6.5MTPP) and nearly 13x that of India (1.45MTPP).  While China is about 19% of the world’s population it is responsible for about 27% of world carbon emissions, while the United States is only 4.3% of the world’s population and is responsible for 17% of global carbon emissions domestically. (12)

(12):  Abreviations: MMT: Million Metric Tons, MTPP: Metric Tons Per Person.  Department of Energy, Energy Information Agency, 2011 Emissions Ranking by Country (2011 most recent year available) Union of Concerned Scientists Website

These numbers as telling as they are, do not tell the whole story, and this is where the “its not our fault” argument really begins to fall apart.  The emission rankings above reflect emissions taking place inside the borders of a country.  Many corporations in the US and Western Europe, manufacture goods abroad to take advantage of desperate labor, lower taxes, less regulations, and then sell the finished product in the United States and Europe.  Since it is the demand, that causes the production, that causes the emissions, then the country where the production takes place shouldn’t be solely accountable for those emissions, but also the countries where the demand is, and whose corporations absorb the bulk of the profit associated with the production.  In other words, if US corporations produce a product in another country, or demand in the US causes a product to be made, the US is responsible for the emissions associated with that product since without the demand, those emissions would not exist.

Since 2001 over 42,000 factories in the United States closed down for good. (13)  This has an effect of lowering carbon emissions.  While large corporations haven’t stopped expanding, they are primarily expanding overseas.  The Wall Street Journal reported, of the 300,000 jobs created by 35 US based multinational corporations, only about 100,000 of them were in the United States. (14)  In the de-industrialization of the United States, the nation reaps the press of reducing carbon emissions even as it is still responsible for elevated emissions in other countries.

(13): 19 Fact About the Deindustrialization of America that will Make You Weep.  Business Insider, Micheal Snyder, 9/27/2010

(14): US Firms Add Jobs, But Mostly Overseas. Wall Street Journal, 4/27/2012, Scott Thurm

While reducing carbon emissions must be a global effort, the United States must not only be a leader in reducing emissions but in providing a blue print for emissions to be reduced while growing the economy.  As previously expressed and something that will be elaborated on more in the CEPBUPA Outline, is a sharp reduction in carbon emissions and growth of the economy would be achievable through CEPBUPA.  Not the appearance only, by exporting production or trading carbon for other greenhouse gases like methane through the promotion of natural gas, but an actual reduction through strategic and profitable investment in renewable energy.


  • The International Panel on Climate Change models suggest the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere will reach between 720ppm to 1000 ppm if emissions are not reduced.
  • Since the world has failed to achieve a reduction in emissions, and economic power which decides production and government policy is possessed by corporations that profit from emissions, then there is little reason to believe that a reduction will occur.
  • At other periods in earth’s history 1000ppm CO2 concentration corresponded to a global average temperature that was 16 degrees Celsius higher than the pre-industrial global average. The IPCC models expect the global average to rise by between 5 and 7 degrees Celsius by the end of the century with CO2 levels of about 720ppm.
  • 720ppm of CO2 and 5 to 7 degrees C higher than preindustrial average temperature is the trajectory we are on, and this trajectory is not likely to change due to the present hierarchy of power.
  • The American Petroleum Institute study in 1980 predicts 5 degrees C of warming will lead to “Global Catastrophe”.
  • James Hanson describes “A different planet, you wouldn’t recognize it…” and the “fate of humanity” being at stake.
  • Mark Lynas explained that 6 degrees would create “a scenario which is so extreme it’s almost unimaginable. Most of the planetary surface would be functionally uninhabitable”. (15)

(15): On 6 Degrees Climate Change. CNN, 5/22/2015, John D. Sutter

If the Centers for Economic Planning and Bottom Up Prosperity Act was passed in the state of California, the people of California would have the means to plan production in accordance with facilitating the necessary acceleration towards renewable energy.  And as is mentioned in the outline, if California adopts CEPBUPA to introduce economic democratization into the state sponsored market economy, then other states will have to adopt similar legislation, or become subject to the growing influence of the people of California through their CEP. In the absence of CEPBUPA, the premature extinction of human beings on this planet due to climate change, caused by human beings emitting carbon into the atmosphere, is almost assured.