Centers for Economic Planning General Outline
Thomas Ferguson, the foremost authority on investment politics, wrote the following “…political action is far more costly in terms of both time and money than classical democratic theories imagined. As a consequence, popular control of the state depends on the extent to which ordinary citizens can bear those costs. Nothing metaphysical is implied here: to control the state citizens need to be able to share costs and pool resources easily. In practical terms, this requires functioning organizations – unions, neighborhood organizations, cooperatives, etc. – in civil society that represent them without enormous expenditures of time and money. There is one and only one guarantee of this: those organizations have to be controlled by and financially dependent on them.” (4)
4: Thomas Ferguson, Paul Jorgensen, and Lie Chen, January 2018 “Industrial Structure and Party Competition in the Age of Hunger Games: Donald Trump and the 2016 Election”, pp 22, and 23. Source : Golden Rule: The Investment Theory Of Party Competition And The Logic Of Money-Driven Political Systems, Chicago, University of Chicago Press
A Center for Economic Planning creates ownership on a progressively major scale from among those who own little or nothing. This provides a majority of the population the resources to compete in politics and have their interests represented in government even if those interests are opposed to the interest of industry and wealth. A Center for Economic Planning is an “organization…that represents them (populous) without enormous expenditures of time and money. (which is)…controlled by and financially dependent on them”.
Poor Lives Matter: The Criteria for Deadly Force and Enforcement Act
The first issue with regulating the use of deadly force is the arbitrary nature with which deadly force can be justified. An officer can be justified not based on what was taking place, but what the officer thought could take place based on the circumstances. It is completely arbitrary. To remedy this issue, we establish a concrete criterion, where a suspect must be an immediate threat, and we define that threat as a situation where there is no step for an officer to intervene before a subject can create a lethal result.
The Homeless Liberation Initiative
San Francisco spends over 165 million dollars on homelessness per year,(1) and all it has to show for it in terms of results is an increase in the homeless population of 259 people, from 2013 to 2015. (2) Supervisor Scott Wiener (2016), while acknowledging “the county’s failure to provide adequate housing/shelter and assistance for those who want help,” finds the visibility of homelessness “unacceptable”, and cites public health and safety in this statement. Homelessness is unacceptable, and current programs are ineffective as demonstrated by the results. HLI aims to reduce the homeless population by 70% by providing the homeless with the means for opportunity. HLI will also eliminate the visibility of homelessness in San Francisco while reducing the county budget by over $100 million per year or more.
(1): 1: San Francisco Annual Expenditures on Homelessness http://sfist.com/2015/03/09/clearing_sfs_homeless_encampments_b.php $165.7 million: The amount of money SF spends on homelessness per year
(2): KQED “S.F. Supervisor Scott Wiener: Homeless Tent Camps ‘Need to Go Away’” 1/25/2016 by Ted Goldberg, http://ww2.kqed.org/news/2016/01/25/s-f-supervisor-scott-wiener-city-needs-fast-response-to-homeless-tent-camps
The Florida Ordeal
I was gripped by reoccurring cycles of surreal anguish. Sighs and disbelief. Because I was in another state intent on being a seasonal transplant, no bond person would bond me out. It was immensely frustrating to have the money any other person in my position would need to bond out, but being unable to do so. 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, possibly about 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, property, or liberty.
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
The Just Law Amendment
The public has very little input and oversight over the laws they are to be governed by. For this reason, jury nullification is an important part of ensuring the morality of law, where all laws are subject to samples of popular oversight to ensure the laws represent the will and the interest of the people, so law doesn’t remain the instrument of powerful minority interests to impose on the rest of the population. There is no difference between a king decreeing a law that is adverse to the interests of most people, and a group who has an interest in people being incarcerated, business or federal agency, who lobbies, promotes, and passes laws that do not serve the interest of the public. Either way, it is subjecting the wills of many to the tyranny of the few, and in both cases, the public has no standing to challenge the fairness of the law outside of constitutional framework. A jury nullification amendment would act as safeguard against unjust laws.
Just Law Amendment Preliminary Text:
Any person accused of a crime has the right to inform a jury of the jury’s power to nullify law on the basis of net liberty.