The following are the summaries of solutions to address issues deemed important to liberty.
1: Low Income Gas Subsidy
Low Income Gas Subsidy is a program that sets a limit on the price paid by the bottom 40 percent of income earners for gas. For example, if the limit is $2 per gallon, a person in the bottom 40% of income earners will be reimbursed for the cost of gas above $2. A qualifying US citizen will send their receipts electronically to an agency within the IRS who will process the reimbursement. Each qualifying person will be subsidized for up to 100 gallons per week. If a qualifying citizen purchases 100 gallons of gas at $3 a gallon the citizen would receive $100 reimbursement.
2: Round Up Gratuity (Featured in American Prosperity Proposals)
Round Up Gratuity is a market based solution to increase the income of people in high transaction industries. Fast food, retail, service stations, among others. The proposal is for companies who are involved in these industries to implement a round up program at check out where the customer can round their purchase up to the nearest or next dollar, and for these funds to be distributed to the employees.
3: Lowest Paid Employee Wage Disclosure Marketing (Featured in American Prosperity Proposals)
This proposal aims to convince private companies to advertise their lowest paid employees wage. Why would a company do this? A consumer can be motivated by social justice values, which is evident by the efforts of companies to attach their brands to other manufactured sources of disadvantage in this country. A company can increase the price of the product to cover costs and advertise the lowest paid employee wage on the package or in another way to persuade the consumer to purchase their product, which will increase their market share and consequently their profits.
If one company does this and has success their competitors and companies in other industries will copy it. Imagine walking into a store and every item you plan on purchasing has an LPE rating. Many brands despite marketed differences are very similar in quality. Through consumer choice companies that do not pay decent wages will be forced out of business through market forces. Increased wages will stimulate the economy and lead to improvement of everyone’s life.
4: Center for Economic Planning (Featured in American Prosperity Proposals)
A Center for Economic Planning is essentially a corporation owned by all the people in the jurisdiction in which it is created, intended to be created in a city, county, or for rural implementation in a group of counties. The general public acts as the shareholders without the buying or selling of shares. They elect the executive management and have direct input into the investment strategy as well as the allocation of profits. A Center for Economic Planning allows all people to participate in decisions of production, creates more opportunities for income, better quality opportunities, and has the potential to put the public in a position to compete against industry in political investment.
Imagine if 10% of everything owned was owned by some city’s CEP? This would provide the public with the means to support candidates who did rely on industry to make them competitive in campaigns. It would allow the public to lobby congress to influence votes for or against items within bills and bills that serve the interests of industry at the exclusion of the public. There has never been a point in this country’s history or probably any other country where those who controlled money did not also control public policy. While a CEP will serve the public’s interest in allowing the public to decide production, and create more and better opportunities for income, the main purpose of a CEP is to create democracy through a system of political investment.
5: Balance Stimulus (Featured in American Prosperity Proposals)
In idea, capitalism allows for all individuals to decide what they want to contribute to the market. In practice, those who have money decide what they want to contribute to the market and those who do not carry forward the ambition of those who have. The theory is that a person begins working for someone else in a field that interests them. They save their money and at some point they can go into business for themself. In practice the amount of money people are paid versus their expenses is usually around a 0 sum gain for the bottom 40% of income earners. Most people who begin poor will remain confined to those circumstances which produces many social ills that impact not only the poor, but nearly all classes of society.
I would like to see the full utilization of American ingenuity and potential. I would like to see people liberated from trapped circumstances. The best way to accomplish this is for the underclasses to receive a lump sum payment in order to free them from their day to day stress, to have the means to finance their ambition, and improve their income.
We can do this a few different ways but the first one I put on paper is an allocation of $30,000 to the bottom 20% of income earners, $20,000 to the next 10% of income earners, $10,000 dollars to the next 20% of income earners. For roughly the cost of 1 covid stimulus, we could transform the opportunities of every disadvantaged person in this country.
It pays for itself first in the reduction of people who receive government benefits. Second, in the ongoing reduction of people dependent on government benefits. Third in increased tax revenue where people who achieve higher incomes pay more taxes. Fourth in the reduction of crime, which includes less money spent on court costs, law enforcement, and incarceration. 5th in the overall growth of the economy from mass investment and consumers empowered through higher incomes. It will also have an impact on revenue and budgets of state and municipal governments through processes described in the American Prosperity Proposals.
Think about how much money we spend each year on servicing the condition of being poor? Every year, closing in on about a century since the great depression the government has spent money to maintain contentment among poor people. Government programs aimed at poor and poverty reduction are good for politicians to pander to their base, but they service the condition without providing any real opportunity for people to lift themselves out of that condition. For every one who is repeatedly celebrated for all to see that anyone can make it, there are thousands if not millions who will not be able to.
If nothing else, the Balance Stimulus takes away the excuse from everyone who says they never had a chance. It won’t work for everyone, but let’s say it works for half of the people in the bottom 50% of income earners. The cost will be more than paid for in those who applied it to achieve a higher income. So why should those who it will work for be deprived of an opportunity to live the American Dream, and why should the rest of the country be deprived of the collective benefits, social budgetary, and otherwise because some will squander their opportunity? It doesn’t make sense not to try it. It doesn’t make sense for industry to disrupt the labor market and allocate public funds to something that benefits the public at the exclusion of an industrial advantage. But for the public, it makes great sense.
6: FCC Media Disclaimer (Featured in Understanding Political Functions Through Recent Political History)
The FCC Media Disclaimer is an effort to inform the public that what they’re seeing is not the truth but a narrative constructed to attract their attention based on true details. The FCC Media Disclaimer would require that the statement below be displayed at the bottom of the screen during any news broadcast. I don’t remember if I included this in Understanding Political Functions Through Recent Political History, or Covid-19 Media Project, but I will say the text below is better than what I included in the previous version.
This broadcast has not been independently verified for factual accuracy and will reflect the bias of the broadcaster in their efforts to attract attention and maximize profit.
7: The Just Law Amendment (Featured in upcoming project)
The Just Law Amendment seeks to create a legal standard around the word liberty and processes for determining net liberty as it relates to criminal statutes. The Just Law Amendment would allow a defendant to make a case to a jury that a law is unjust based on net liberty, where the jury may find him not guilty of the charge on that basis.
We live in a republic where the creation of law is delegated to a small group of citizens elected by the rest, meaning the laws that exist are not a direct reflection of the desire of those who are to be governed by them. Additionally, in this country, before a candidate can be elected by the rest, in most cases the pool of candidates is selected by industry making them even less representative of the public than they would be in a republic that didn’t operate through political investment. In years past we’ve seen organizations like the American Legislative Exchange Council create model bills and lobby for the passage of these bills on the state and federal level on behalf of the private prison industry. We’ve seen the manufacturers of products like interlock systems lobby for legislation to make their products requirements for offenses.
The citizens in this country should be able to appeal to their peers when they believe they’ve been charged with an offense that did not impose on the public, because of how far removed the public will is from many of the laws that are created.
In addition to creating a defense for citizens who are guilty of a charged offense that the public may not believe is an offense, the secondary benefit is research in understanding which laws the public agrees with and which laws the public does not. For example, if in a year’s time 70% of defendants charged with a crime are found not guilty on the basis of net liberty, then it would serve the public’s interest for lawmakers to abolish the law to save resources on the enforcement and prosecution of the law.
8: Renewable Grid Energy Generation (Featured in Understanding Political Functions Through Recent Political History)
The first step to addressing climate change is renewable grid energy, so this is where attention should be focused. I need to qualify this solution by asserting that I am not a supporter of the originator of this idea and have applied some modifications to implimentation to it. Since I’m beginning my website with solutions summaries I don’t want readers to get the wrong idea about me, the content, or the aims of this organization by presuming it is supportive of this person because he had one good ideas. He has made a living on a public salary off of the same social justice rhetoric with no meaningful results for over 3 decades, but his plan to invest 2 trillion dollars to build the renewable energy infrastructure including generation, storage, and transmission to transition the entire grid to renewable energy is a good idea.
I don’t know if the price is correct because during his 2020 campaign I did find other items that over or under estimated the price. Bernie Sanders claimed that for 2 trillion dollars we could transition the entire grid to renewable energy and then place that infrastructure under the authority of the Power Marketing Adminstrations who presently manage the sale of power from other federally owned power generation assets, primarily hydroelectric dams. I believe if the public pays for the infrastructure as it did under Obama in grants, subsides, 0 interest loans, and tax credits, the public should own that infrastructure.
The issue is there is already owners of the current grid which prevents a plan like this from ever comming to fruition. Not to mention, in states like North Carolina who just passed an energy bill, the public will pay for upgrades first through subsides and grants from the state, and then in rate increases. Ownership of these upgrades will remain in private hands despite being partially or in some cases completely paid for by the public. No bill will pass congress that changes how this slow, climate changing policy takes place.
What I propose is a modified Sander’s plan to transition the grid to renewable energy. The power companies are the most knowledgable and capable entities on this planet to manage, maintain, and distribute power. The idea is to build the infrastructure and put it under the authority of the PMAs and sell the power generated to the utility companies who in turn will sell the power to the public. The price the public sells the power to the utilities will reflect the cost of maintainence, expansion to meet increased demand, and the subsidization of power to low income people.
The benefit to the power companies is a much less volitle cost of production, where presently, weather, cost of fuel, among other things impact the power companies cost to generate electricity. A more stable cost on production creates more profit stability.
I’m not optimistic that this can happen, but as far as addressing carbon emissions is concerned this is what we support. Other cap and trade efforts like the Biden adminstration have proposed are ineffective. No efficiency standards or emissions caps will avert warming that will lead to a great change in habitable surface area. This creates an existential threat to the human species in the likely good great conflict caused by the inability to redistribute people from areas that become uninhabitable to areas that remain or become habitable.
The Option attempts to increase the quality of life for Palestinians while serving the interests of the United States and Israel. There will never be a two state settlement because Israel perceives the creation of an unencumbered Palestinian state as a threat, which is more or less a pretext for their desire to annex the entire West Bank, but take your pick as to why it doesn’t serve Israel’s interest. It doesn’t matter because statehood can only be achieved through Israeli consent because they are protected by the United States. Not because the tail wags the dog but because the tail benefits the dog so the dog takes care of it. The creation of a Palestinian state is not in the interest of the United States because it would be a non-subordinate state that if allowed to develop would be a hinderance to US interests abroad. Hold your sign, sing your chant, interlock your arms and block a street off, it doesn’t matter, there will not be a Palestinian state that isn’t restricted or under the authority of Israel.
The Option proposes that the Palestinians sell the West Bank and Gaza to Israel for 120 billion dollars, and distribute that money directly to the population where each person would receive close to $28,000, which includes $28,000 per child for the parents. The average household size in the Palestinian Terretories is 6.4 people, meaning each household would receive $176,000 to relocate to a country of their choosing.
The article is in Understanding Political Functions Through Recent Political History and there is an outline of a program that would be executed by the UN to ensure everyone who wanted to participate could participate and how and when the funds would be dispersed. Israel isn’t going to pay people before they leave because those funds could be used in efforts against Israel. There is a process where a participant expresses desire to participate, chooses a destination, a bank account is created, and that bank account is credited the amount they’re due the day they board their flight. Prior to the program beginning there is a pledge process by nations around the world to accept and fast citizenship for Palestinians who want to participate in this program. It wouldn’t be compulsory, but those who chose to remain would be remaining as citizens of Israel and would not receive any of the money from the sale of the land.
Regardless of what people may think about this, where many will think that it is wrong the Palestinians were forcibly removed from their land. There are people who think the Palestinains have a right to a country, a right of return, a right to a nation within the pre-June 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as their capital, and I agree, that they should have a right to things agreed upon by the international community. But the fact is they don’t. They’re no closer to having a state consisting of the West Bank and Gaza than the Cherokees are to having a state in Georgia.
The Palestinians are the most hopelessly trapped people on this planet. Also one of the most resilient and courageous people on this planet. The Option is my best effort at a solution to a problem where there are no realizable proposed solutions to increase the quality of life and freedom of these people. While not currently a trending topic, this was something I proposed a few years ago that is still worth while.
10: Labor Shortage and Immigration (Summary in Daily Journal Entry 12/31/2021)
There is no labor shortage, there is a job shortage since there are people who want jobs and the job opportunities that exist are unsatisfactory. This doesn’t mean that the products and services produced through these undesirable jobs are not desirable by the public and do serve a the general interests of all people in this country. Serving general interests in the profits generated that are spent and reinvested and in roughly 11 million people being compensated for the labor they’ve performed and spending that money into the economy.
There are also people beyond the borders of this country who would be content with a low paying job that is undesirable to most Americans, that covers expenses but very little beyond this. The idea is to create an agency or use an existing agency within the federal governement that would work with companies to fill positions that either have high turn over rates or that go unfilled. A company can post the job with the agency. The agency in turn will offer work visa to migrants desiring a job that after 5 years of steady employment can be upgraded to citizenship. The agency will also offer a loan to cover housing costs until said immigrant is able to cover their housing expenses. A person participating in the program will be required to maintain employment with no interuptions exceeding 8 weeks.
11: More Solutions
I’ve had solutions to other problems like homelessness as well as a different criteria for the use of deadly force by law enforcement that I have abandoned. I abandoned the solution for homelessness in areas where homelessness is widespread because the problem can be addressed through a balance stimulus. I’ve abandoned the Criteria for Deadly Force and Enforcement because I believe for the most part, the laws governing the use of deadly force are adequate. I say for the most part because I do have a problem with Tennessee v. Garner in some respects but I haven’t taken the time to address it. Someone should have filed a lawsuit quantifying the danger of Covid similar to how I did in the Covid 19 Media Project challenging the assertion that the virus qualifies as a threat to public safety. It’s a little late for that now and I anticipate that pharmaceutical will be further enriched from the forced sale of vaccines on from the remaining half of the country who has not been vaccinated.
I have to promote what I have now before I begin addressing other issues and begin serious work on new material. However, if there are any issues of importance that you feel should be addressed that are not byproducts of issues addressed through these solutions I would love the prompt to look into a new issue and see if there is a practical solution. It can be emailed to me at email@example.com (I use my personal email because my website email is through outlook and I don’t check it regularly) and if like I can post the question and the answer on the questions page.
I’m beginning with these 8. I would like to have more time to research and write but I do not presently have that freedom. I’m presently trying to promote and work to maintain the resources to continue promoting. Book purchases and clothing purchases go a long way in supporting the effort and hopefully positioning me to be more effective in realizing ideas that promote human interests. Book purchases more than clothing purchases. My profit margin on clothing is 40% with the remaining portion absorbed by the manufacturer and the broker, but the clothing purchases contribute to promotion.