E S O L U T I O N
GEORGE W. BRAILSFORD
Library of Congress
George W. Brailsford Catalog Number 97-94537
NO RIGHTS RESERVED
The undersigned is the sole author of this document and the holder of the
copyright. Authorization is given herewith, free of charge, to quote, publish
or use all or any part of same as any individual or organization may see fit.
George W. Brailsford
BREAKING THE NEWS
HEARD THE OLD SAW:
The man went on a business trip. Upon his return a friend picked him up at the airport:
MAN: Well, Joe, how did things go in my absence?
FRIEND: I must tell you that your dog has died.
MAN: Oh, my, how tragic. How did this happen?
FRIEND: He was caught in the barn when it burned.
MAN: The barn has burned?
FRIEND: Yes, it caught from the house.
MAN: Has the house burned too?
FRIEND: Unfortunately, it caught from the candles around your mother's coffin.
MAN: Are you saying my mother is dead?
FRIEND: Yes, she had a heart attack when she learned that your wife had run off with a traveling salesman.
There is irrefutable evidence that, in the long term, this planet cannot support the current rate of population growth, much less the ever accelerating rate. The quality of life will degenerate into squalor and chaos.
Long term is defined as the longest period into the future which can be predicted with reasonable certainty.
This document is an extensive elaboration on the
Malthusian theory with forth-right discussion of the major factors which impinge on
population growth, including:
a. Family Values (Eliminate Welfare)
f. Death Penalty
It is the explicit purpose here to maximize the accumulative algebraic sum of the quality of life of all people and central to that goal is a sustainable world-wide population level, while improving the quality of the genes of those who survive, but never seeking to control any who do not impose upon others.
We all know the instantaneous quality of life we are experiencing at any moment from good to bad. Suppose it were possible to measure in numbers the algebraic sum of the accumulative quality of life of an individual from birth to death. Then add together that number for every person from now into the long term future (say 400 years). The ultimate purpose here is to maximize that number, not just be a good samaritan while still alive to enjoy the esteem of others.
Superseding all else said here, no one should ever be significantly restrained from the conduct of her/his own life style by government or anyone else SO LONG AS SHE/HE DOES NOT IMPOSE ON OTHERS.
Any action to obtain more value of services from government than are paid for by an individual, such as seeking aid for the survival of one's progeny, is imposing on other taxpayers. Survival of the fittest through the natural selection process is the clear purpose here.
The unnecessary loss of each life, whether it occurred in the past, occurs now or in the future, must be accorded commensurate value. This means that those who have such zeal for prolonging every life now should feel responsible for the loss of enormously greater numbers later when this planet is unable to support them. IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THIS, THEN THIS DOCUMENT WILL HAVE LITTLE MEANING FOR YOU. There are those who need to review their sense of proportion.
The purpose here is to seek the WHOLE TRUTH IN THE PROPER PROPORTION. In pursuit of such truth, zero regard is held for any adverse effects such pursuit may have on existing facets of society, such as political, academic, financial, judicial, legal, medical, religious, etc. Such an approach is the ultimate in being non-political.
The basis used is the scientific approach, based on observed phenomena and never on metaphysical, religious or other concepts even though they have been believed by large groups of society for millenniums. Nothing is taken on faith.
Money and equity in financial reward for work is a fundamental here. Real equity in taxation is discussed.
In the interest of brevity, much said here applies principally to the United States. It is meant to apply equally world-wide and can readily be interpreted universally.
None is so naive as to believe that early warning will have any significant effect on population growth in the next few generations, but long before the year 2500, popular demand will change acceptable human conduct. The best way to approach a problem is to begin to define it.
THE FUNDAMENTALS In the Early Decades of This Century:
Most people didn't trouble to lock their doors.
Dope was something read about in history books.
The national debt was under control.
Crime was a fraction of its current rate.
AIDS was non-existent.
Government welfare (correct terminology: charity) was minimal.
The quality and quantity of education was better.
Sexual promiscuity was less - the moral fiber far superior.
Crime is rampant.
Dope is commonplace.
The national debt is $4+ trillion. The United States is the greatest debtor nation on earth.
AIDS is spreading.
Government Welfare and Social Security are out of control.
U.S. education is bankrupt.
To mention moral fiber (despite its enormous toll) is to sound like a preacher.
There is great need for a Code of Conduct (in particular a change in public acceptance and modification to existing laws) for the just and fair inter-relationship between peoples and individuals which would provide for equity and lead to the improvement in the SINEW OF MIND AND BODY OF MANKIND.
With those in public life unable to speak the whole truth and still get re-elected, there is the need for unbiased minds to set down in writing the ultimate bottom line whole truth, in proper proportion, in regard to political, economic and social matters, with total disregard for ANY political consideration or for what enormously powerful interests would be financially or otherwise affected. Obviously, this dooms any early acceptance, but then this document is dedicated to the long term, i.e. when overcrowding on this planet forces acceptance of radical changes in what is considered equitable relationships between peoples.
In a Word:
It is proposed here that government be lean and as mean as necessary now, in order to be able to be kind and gentle later when, with exponential population growth, the volume of stress on humanity is projected, beyond reasonable doubt, to be enormously greater. Keep a firm hold on democracy but PREVENT ANYONE FROM VOTING HERSELF/HIMSELF SOME OF SOMEONE ELSE'S MONEY. Hold firmly to capitalism (socialism doesn't work) while devising means of rewarding those who produce so much by working with driving enthusiasm, and also reward risk capital which produces jobs, but drastically narrow the financial gap between disproportionately paid investors and executives vs. conscientious labor. Terminate those who don't produce. Eliminate social programs. Make parents TOTALLY responsible for their progeny. Stop illegal immigration. Mandate that the courts provide PROMPT and commensurate justice while being mindful of the cost of operating the courts.
The limitation of over-population will be opposed with passionate zeal, but when this planet can no longer support an adequate quality of life, such limitation will be absolutely unavoidable. The remote hope here is to help plant the seed that will achieve somewhat earlier acceptance of the harsh realities of the long term future, and thereby reducing the suffering during that cold, cruel, unforgiving period.
On Being Practical:
It is difficult to be brief and yet not sound dogmatic. The necessity to be practical is recognized. There will be unavoidable expenses for the taxpayer during the coming population reduction period but, later on, expenses will be a fraction of the current costs for the irresponsible, illegal and criminal elements. The abiding fear is that lawmakers will subvert this need for practicality to their own political advantage.
The Good Samaritan:
Compassionate conduct between people is encouraged here just as strongly as in any religion, so long as that does not add to greater long term suffering. The difference is that few religions consider the harsh realities of the not too distant future.
The Joy of Living:
The thoughts expressed here deal with the ADVERSITIES of world problems. Don't let this lead to the impression that the great joy of living is not recognized.
"Unto Thine Own Self Be True":
The thought here is that we are all wiser to face the harsh realities of life up front as we each observe the scene for ourselves. Don't go into denial. Don't lean on a religious crutch. Because millions have held some concept for millenniums does not make it true-other millions have held a different concept for time immemorial. Decide for yourself.
Method of Presentation:
Unlike the usual prose, the following chapter of this document is written in numbered paragraphs (or sections) each stating a position, point of view or a facet of the concluding concept, each a FACTOR impinging on the overall concept but not necessarily related to each other. The reader is urged to challenge every one. Numerous pertinent factors likely have been inadvertently omitted.
WHICH IMPINGE UPON A CONCLUDING CONCEPT
The following poem was written by Robinson Jeffers. It is very very poor poetry but its clear message has an overwhelming need to be said. Remember, because something is said in verse does not make it true. It also does not make it untrue.
UNNAMED poem by Robinson Jeffers
I am old and in the ordinary course of nature shall die soon, but the human race is not old
But rather childish, it is an infant and acts like one
And now it has captured the keys of the kingdoms of unearthly violence.
Will it use them? It loves destruction you know.
And the earth is too small to feed us, we must have room.
It seems expedient that not as of old one man but many nations and races die for the people.
Have you noticed meanwhile the population explosion
Of man on earth, the torrents of new born babies, the bursting schools?
Astonishing. It saps man's dignity.
We used to be individuals, not populations.
Perhaps we are now preparing for THE GREAT SLAUGHTER. No reason to be alarmed: Stone-Dead is dead.
Breeding like rabbits we hasten to meet the day.
2. Survival of the Fittest
Mankind (animals too) got where life is today by "survival of the fittest", both mentally and physically.
3. Long Term
Our thinking should not be based on the short term (i.e. maybe the next Presidential election) but rather on the long term (i.e. the longest period into the future which it is possible to predict with reasonable certainty).
Politicos, Academics, Think Tanks, et al, all too often have their minds fixated on that which will optimize the short term quality of life (or their own personal gain) rather than the accumulative algebraic sum of the quality of life projected to numerous future generations.
4. Death in Perspective
A congressman, with tears in his eyes, recently gave an impassioned speech about the termination of the life of a deformed child, in the birthing process, to save the mother's life. His grim description was accurate but so far out of proportion that it shows his lack of grasp of history, much less any understanding of the outlook for the future. CONSIDER:
a. The French Revolution was bloody but the number of people killed was small
b. Half a million died in Rwanda
c. Hitler killed six million Jews
d. Twenty million soviets died in World War II
e. The world population is about 5.5 billion. If the average life span is 50 years (it is less considering those who die in infancy) then 100 million die each year.
f. When this planet can no longer support an adequate quality of life, the above figures will be dwarfed. Death should be seen in a realistic perspective.
5. Unnecessary Deaths
The term "unnecessary deaths" (or unnecessary loss of quality of life) as used herein refers to lives lost due to more births than this planet can reasonably support. This is principally due to the offsprings of parents who cannot pay all associated costs AND raise their progeny so that they do not impose on others.
6. Value of Life Same in the Past, Present or Future
Each "unnecessary death" should be considered of equal value whether it occurred in the past, occurs now or in the future. This is AN EXTREMELY FUNDAMENTAL STATEMENT because few of those now living give thought to the consequences of their actions on future generations.
DON'T COUNT YOURSELF A HUMANITARIAN IF YOUR REAL PURPOSE IS TO IMPROVE THE LOT OF OTHERS ONLY WHILE YOU ARE HERE TO OBSERVE THE HAPPY RESULTS, IF A GREATER LOSS WILL RESULT IN THE MORE POPULOUS FUTURE.
7. Sense of Proportion
A black man in Philadelphia got together eleven (11) black boys who were headed for drugs and crime. In five years he got them interested in basketball and learning and imbued them with the zeal for a productive life. We all applaud him. How many children are born every hour who fall into drugs and crime? Review your sense of proportion. It may change your concept of how "far gone" our problem is and modify your willingness to take measures currently thought to be too harsh.
8. Population Growth
The story goes: There were two small villages in a third world country about 20 miles apart. No one in either village had ever been to the other and accordingly did not know what went on there. But each village had a satellite antenna and all knew what went on in Dallas.
Almost all countries are overpopulating. With improved communication third world countries will wish to enjoy the QUALITY OF LIFE of developed Nations. This is their right. Families in third world countries have a history of having about a dozen children each. This circumstance is projected to limit food supply, cause further depletion of the planet's natural resources, add to pollution, increase crowded living conditions and push the animal world out of its limited natural habitat. Such happening is sure to come and sure, beyond a reasonable doubt, to cause the SLAUGHTER that Robinson Jeffers spoke of.
Consider that housing developments are ever encroaching, Brazilian forests are being cut away, American and Russian oil spills have despoiled large areas and farm land is eroding.
In a typical example, repeated many thousands of times over many centuries, a husband and wife started a family in 1900. At the family reunion in 1950, forty were present and at the 1995 reunion 200 were present. Their family is their pride and joy and a central theme to their joy of living. How do you think they are going to react when told that continued family growth is impossible? China, looking to the future, began attempts at population control decades ago.
It is true that technological advances will delay population growth, food production per acre will increase (likely with the use of hydroponics), minerals will be mined from the ocean floors, higher rise housing with improved transportation will mitigate crowding, and waste disposal means can be improved. However, the sum of all possible technological advances has no hope of equaling the rate of exponential population growth.
Thomas Malthus' Theory said, in its simplest terms, that world population would increase until controlled by war, famine, and pestilence. This is going to happen. No amount of persuasion or world conferences will have any measurable effect. PEOPLE ARE GOING TO PROCREATE IF THEY CAN.
A common mathematical tool to prove or disprove a theory is to prepare a calculation which makes the answer obvious. If the current rate of acceleration of population growth were theoretically possible, by the year 2,500 each person on earth would occupy 46 square feet of the entire land area of the world. This 46 square feet must include room for farms, factories, roads, etc. Currently it is over 30,000 square feet ---- and crowded. The impossibility is obvious. It is not too difficult to visualize the year 2,500. Consider five sequential lifetimes of Rose Kennedy. Life as we know it can continue only a fraction of that, 500 years.
Population growth is inevitable and its adverse effects are also inevitable. The quality of life will decline. Currently there is negligible popular support for serious control, but when living conditions become intolerable there will be a powerful REVULSION against uncontrolled procreation. Taxpayers will have long since given up supporting the lives of other's children. Those who overpopulate will become PARIAHS. With improved criminology and an entirely different judicial system those convicted of capital crimes will be quickly executed. This will be a cold, harsh, cruel, unforgiving period, caused by those who over populate. Population will decrease by conflict, starvation, pollution caused disease and by elimination of those who impose on others.
The children of parents who over populate are innocent. Unfortunately, however, it is the children who will reproduce more and more and more. These parents and children have rights. Never impose upon them. NEVER SEEK TO CONTROL THEIR PROCREATION BY LAW. However, never support them either in order to prevent the suffering and death of greater numbers in the long term. The natural selection process is the answer.
Ideally, the world population would stabilize at a level which would optimize the quality of life not maximize the number of people. Currently the world population is about 5.5 billion. One demographer believes this planet can support only two billion on a continuing basis.
Survival of the fittest is a harsh and inefficient process but it works to improve the sinew of the specie. Socialism leads to lower quality genes. One can cite innumerable examples, but that of the caribou and wolves in northern Canada is a good one. The two species lived together in cruel harmony for millenniums with the smart and strong surviving and reproducing and the less smart and weak being killed off or dying of hunger. Then hunters came and shot the biggest and best caribou. The herds declined to near extinction. Eventually laws were passed to prohibit the hunting. Now the herds are rapidly growing strong again.
Survival is the most powerful instinct of the human animal. The second most powerful is reproduction. Most people will go into denial, even in the face of mathematical proof, if confronted with the assertion that the long term survival of their progeny is limited.
It has been said:
Powerful social forces work against serious public consideration of over population. Religion for one. For another, overpopulation implies the need for population limitations. And that raises the impossible question: For whom?
This is not an impossible question. The answer is "survival of the fittest," which is how mankind progressed in the last 10,000 plus years. Hopefully those who cannot cope will be culled out, leaving a preponderance of the best and brightest.
To those who might think that some of these concepts are too harsh: Do you know a kinder and gentler way over the long term?
A woman bought a refrigerator with a guarantee at Sears. She called for repair. The man asked for her phone number. Two seconds (literally) after she gave that number the man had a complete history of her purchase on a screen in front of him---her name, brand, dates, guarantee, etc. He promptly sent a repair man.
It is impractical to seal our borders against illegal (don't say undocumented) immigration. Every nation on earth which over-populates suffers a lower quality of life. Look at Africa, India and China. The United States is already heavily over-populated. If employment in this country, with two exceptions listed below, were limited to CITIZENS and if the government developed a computerized record (Sears can) of every citizen, adequate to identify, but not give more, personal information---say name(s), SS Number, birth date, height, signature and picture then the employer could get a FAX (takes only minutes) and deny (under penalty for violation) employment to any non-citizen. This would reduce the influx of those who feel so free to procreate (but without the ability to provide) for violating our immigration laws. Other countries should do the same.
There are two exceptions:
First: There are the "Green Card" Holders (farm labor): These are hard working, low paid people doing stoop labor who move north across our country each year as crops ripen. They deserve better pay and housing (trailers) at consumer expense because they earn it. They should all go home when their "Green Card" time runs out and any woman that becomes pregnant should go home immediately.
Second: Exceptional talent: The President should be empowered and encouraged to invite, and offer citizenship to, those in many fields of endeavor, who have exceptional qualifications. There are many from whom we can learn, but the number in this category is a negligible addition to population.
The nations south of the U.S. Border (Puerto Rico and Cuba too) have a culture that results in ever expanding populations. The average wage there is a fraction of that in countries that don't share that culture. The result is rampant suffering.
Increasingly over many decades they have violated U.S. immigration laws. This process is so extensive that some states are now approaching 50% Latin populations. Calculations project that they will control the government in several southwestern states in only decades, and all of the west in the 22nd century.
These people bring their culture with them. The west even now is being flooded with them. Quality of life will fall to that now experienced by Mexico.
In order to avoid grinding poverty, such immigrees will be swimming the Mississippi River instead of the Rio Grand.
It is becoming imperative to institute a program of identifying each illegal immigrant that is caught with an indelible, but not harmful, mark under the right arm pit and promptly send her/him home. On second offense have them work a year without pay and send them home. On third offense promptly execute them.
11. Conflict Between Diverse Cultures
It has been observed that countries of the world which are populated with peoples of diverse cultures (i.e. different languages, religions, races, etc.) tend to experience more conflict. Fortunately some nations live happily without one culture significantly impinging on another. Where there is conflict, if it were possible to relocate cultures by physical relocation of peoples but with true equity in the division of the available land and resources to within fixed boundaries with each to establish its own government, then such conflict could be minimized.
Generally, each citizen should be free to travel to other countries as paying guests but not free to earn her/his living there.
12. Nations That Over Populate
Some cultures and/or countries tend to over populate. This is their own right but they should not export their people to other lands. When their squalor overwhelms them, they will depopulate themselves.
Any institution (especially one that is not democratic) which opposes contraception is evil. Unwanted births result in deprivation, squalor, hunger and death. Teachings which result in such tragedy are, by definition, evil.
14. Abortion and Euthanasia
When Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence he referred to "Inalienable Rights" of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The right to control ones own body seems an obvious corollary. Nothing could be more personal. No one else has a right to an opinion about another's body. Every person has the right to terminate their own life and every woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy until she experiences the first labor pain.
The burden and pain of whatever action is taken or not taken must be borne by the one concerned. What mental process of any outsider could possibly lead to a rational belief that she/he has a right to enter in and upon such actions by another? That mental process is most often associated with one religion or another. Do these people give no thought to the effects of long term population growth? Where is their sense of proportion? Don't they know that many millions of people, especially women and children, in third world countries, live NEGATIVE qualities of life? Promote the use of the French Abortion Pill, RU 486.
ANY WELFARE PROPOSAL WHICH DOES NOT CONTROL BIRTHS WILL INEVITABLY LEAD TO LONG TERM FAILURE.
Any individual or group (like a stalker or anti-abortionist) who, by any action, makes another fearful for her/his life or safety is inflicting serious mental anguish and they should be dealt with accordingly.
Socialism has proven to be unworkable. Look at the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe (the best example is East Germany), South America and others.
Suppose that Lennin, when he won the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, had been a dedicated capitalist and a bitter anti-socialist (no "New Deal" or "Great Society" programs like in the United States) and suppose that his successors had been the same: with Russia's large store of natural resources, what would be the quality of life there today?
17. Examples of Costs
a. Schools: $5,000 per year per child (California).
b. Prison: $30,000 per year per prisoner.
c. Hospital: The exorbitant amount of $26,000 for 10 days in an example where the hospital provided zero improvement to the patient. The rest of us have to deliver a product to get paid.
d. Birth of a Child: To provide a better perspective on costs, there is the need to research the TOTAL cost to raise a child from the day of birth until her/his eighteenth birthday when raised at the lowest level above the poverty line. This would place the responsibility of parents in better perspective.
e. Lawyer Fees: $100 to $1,000 per hour. Army Private risking his life in battle $10 per hour.
18. Maximum Privacy
The ACLU's opinion not withstanding, we did, long ago, procreate ourselves out of the luxury of maximum privacy, which we all hold dear.
19. Scope of Government
Government is necessary. Without it there would be chaos. Militia organizations that resent government should realize this. Government costs money. Minimize the Government's scope. Transfer out all functions which could logically be performed by private enterprises (which operate more efficiently). However, take full recognition that certain functions which cost tax money must be performed by government, like military, police, foreign policy and unfortunately, certain regulatory agencies necessary to prevent abuse of the public. It will be difficult to optimize the scope of regulatory agencies which would minimize intrusion into people's lives while vigorously controlling abuse. Have government run by lean and hard nosed business men and women who know the value of a dollar and who weed out the inefficient and promote the producer. DEVELOP AND ENFORCE COMPUTERIZED ACCOUNTING METHODS WHICH MINIMIZE FRAUD AT ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT.
In short, minimize the Government's intrusion into peoples lives. Use the government to vigorously prevent the actions of one from being detrimental to another even though it be necessary to keep limited computerized records (i.e. give up maximum privacy in order to control abuse). MAKE THE GOVERNMENT FEARFUL OF THE PEOPLE, NEVER PEOPLE FEARFUL OF THE GOVERNMENT, EXCEPT FOR THOSE WHO IMPOSE ON OTHERS. Seeking more from government than is paid for is imposing.
20. The Political World
Because of lack of popular concern for the long term good, those in political life cannot be forthright about known but unpopular truths and still remain in office. They avoid such issues as social security, the implications of the interest on the national debt, abortion, and total responsibility of parents, to name a few examples. There are other unproven but potentially catastrophic concerns which are longer term, as: the ozone layer, increased emission of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere causing temperature rise and thus melting the ice cap with the resulting rise of ocean levels, the exhaustion of the crude oil supply and deforestation until there is not enough plant life to convert carbon dioxide back into oxygen , to name just a few.
THE WORLD WIDE POLITICAL COMMUNITY WILL NOT, BECAUSE IT CANNOT, MAKE HARSH DECISIONS WITHOUT PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE. HOWEVER, WHEN OVERCROWDING ON THIS PLANET LOWERS THE QUALITY OF LIFE SUFFICIENTLY THE POPULACE WILL NOT ONLY ACCEPT BUT DEMAND CONTROLS ON HUMAN CONDUCT WHICH ARE CURRENTLY NOT ACCEPTABLE EVEN FOR DISCUSSION.
We in America say we have a democracy. We do get an honest vote to select between the nominees of the political parties. However the procedure for selecting the nominees is a farce. Unreasonable control is exerted by special interest money and also by those already in Government.
Keep in mind that it is rare that a voter has the good fortune to find a candidate who shares the voter's views on all issues. With this in mind, consider: The practical goal is to elect a candidate who shares the voter's important views.
Change the nominating procedure as follows:
a. First have each candidate for nomination for each party write down and publish her/his position/philosophy on each significant issue.
b. Then each candidate for nomination would publicize her/his views nation-wide, without government support, but with funds limited to small amounts from individuals, not corporations, and without large personal expenditures.
c. The candidates for nomination for each party would then seek signatures supporting her/his candidacy.
d. The half-dozen who receive the most signatures regardless of party would then become eligible for reasonable taxpayer funds to support a nation-wide campaign, but only four months before the primary election.
e. The TV and radio media would be required, as a condition of broadcast permit, to provide free, adequate and equal coverage to each candidate. The printed news media would be excluded from any convention unless they provided the same.
f. Hold a nation-wide primary election with one delegate to be selected from each congressional district for each party. Each candidate to be a delegate must publish her/his position/philosophy on the issues and also state which candidate for nomination she/he favors.
g. Hold party conventions with only the delegates elected by the people present. This might exclude a sitting President. The delegates would then select leaders to conduct the convention. The media and all others would be seated where they could see and hear but not be heard. The convention would be conducted in the manner of a large board meeting with no hoopla, no cheering, no bands and no balloons.
h. The delegates representing all significant diverse views would speak. Then the party candidates for nomination would speak. All speeches would be from sound-proof booths to exclude interruption by applause. The speech time would be fixed and shut off electronically when the time ran out. Speeches would be broadcast nation-wide.
i. The paragraph above says each delegate should speak and she/he should. However, speaking ability is not the quality being sought, especially in a presidential election. It would be better to have the delegate select half a dozen others who share her/his views on a particular issue then, with all on stage, the delegate would lead a presentation of issues with each of the others defining the delegate's position on an issue on which she/he is more expert. The idea is to select a leader, not a speaker.
j. Each speaker should be presenting philosophy on issues, not detailed specifics.
k. The delegates would then vote to elect a nominee. Repeated votes might be necessary until one nominee receives a majority. In the event of an impass, the delegates might select an outsider, but only after her/his position/philosophy is established in writing.
l. A nation-wide election would then be held to choose between the party nominees. If none receive a majority another election would be required to choose between the top two.
Cynicism in America is pervasive. The Congressman who accepts any favor from a special interest much less a party on a yacht, adds to that cynicism. This type of thing is the foundation for misguided militias. Of course, the Congressman needs the special interest money to support his campaign. Stop that practice but provide appropriate taxpayer funds to viable candidates to present their views on the issues.
No one is entitled to anything for which she/he does not pay.
23. Ph.D. Thesis
The Congress has mortgaged the future of the younger generation by incurring a horrendous national debt. Wouldn't a thousand students seeking subjects for their Ph.D. theses care to choose one of the many facets of the effects of long term population growth on political, social and economic matters?
The courts have ruled (and this concept agrees) that a man and a woman in the privacy of their bedroom, who are both adult and consenting, have the RIGHT to do whatever they like. What they do most often is to conceive a child. It follows, as night follows day, that with that right goes RESPONSIBILITY, in particular all costs - Yogi Berra might say "all means all." Of equal importance, it is also their responsibility to provide the love and training necessary to assure that their progeny does not impose unlawfully upon others.
A 19 year-old unmarried lady had two children and was pregnant with the third. She was asked why she got pregnant again. She said because she would get more welfare. Her prolific parents and grandparents had lived on welfare.
A certain blue collar worker with a wife and one child makes $35,000 per year with overtime (before taxes). He is an honest and caring man. It will cost $15,000 per year, later, for the lady's three children for school alone. What is your opinion about how this honest caring man SHOULD feel about how the government allocates money?
When a man and woman conceive a child the burden they assume is enormous, especially now that this planet is over-populated. THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL OF THE WORLD'S PROBLEMS BEGIN WITH THE CONCEPTION AND BIRTH OF A CHILD BY IRRESPONSIBLE PARENTS.
It is not the purpose here to have the government seek to control procreation, but instead hold the parents TOTALLY responsible, including when the parents and children live in squalor and die of starvation. In time the message of parental responsibility will begin to penetrate.
Most parents hold the well being of their children as the central theme of their existence. They would unhesitatingly give their lives for their children. This document has nothing but praise for that instinct. When the harsh reality of over-population becomes undeniable a gigantic conflict will occur. Even those who are least willing to recognize the impending time bomb should not blame the messenger.
The joy of sex is a marvelous gift to mankind which should be enjoyed to the fullest by wife and husband. A child or two can enrich their lives. However, if a child is brought into this world, the TOTAL responsibility is theirs.
25. "Do Gooders"
Being a good Samaritan to others is a noble cause. But GREED often motivates many who wish to enjoy that warm feeling that comes from being known as leader among a group who support "generosity." It is almost universally true that those who are "fiscally liberal" choose to ignore: 1) that it is usually not their personal money that is given but rather the taxpayer's, and 2) if such action results in population growth - like 5 in the first generation, 25 in the next and 125 in the next, bitter pain and suffering result but the greedy ones rarely take responsibility for such tragedy. Many Mexican children try to eat out of the garbage dump.
The good Samaritan is the kind of cultured human being the world sorely needs, but never when her/his kind act results in increased population.
If the "do gooders", a.k.a. "The Anointed Ones", really believe their cause is unselfish, one line could be added to the tax form (e.g. 1040) where they could donate any amount of their personal money to the government for social programs. Of course ALL costs including the salary of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, if any, would have to be paid from those donations, if that much was collected.
26. Real Fairness in Taxation
Two centuries ago, Professor Alexander Fraser Tyler wrote:
"A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose financial policy, always to be followed by a Dictatorship."
When the founding fathers were formulating the Constitution, there was brief discussion about who should vote. It was quickly decided that this was a matter for each individual state. Every one of the thirteen original colonies already had laws restricting voting to land holders. At that time there were no income taxes or sales taxes. The principal source of revenue was property taxes. The idea was to have those who pay the bill control the expenditures. The framers of the constitution understood Tyler's statement. However, there is another way:
The life's blood of almost every congressman (state and local too) is the privilege of allocating money from the GENERAL FUND. They are not likely to vote to give up this privilege. However, when the slaughter (Jeffer's word) becomes great enough such action might be forced.
Visualize a constitutional amendment which would eliminate the GENERAL FUND from Federal, State and Local governments (this is not to say your taxes would be higher or lower) and substitute a number of SPECIFIC FUNDS which would be non-transferable from one to another and which would be formulated in such a manner as to, within practical bounds, provide services to each taxpayer commensurate with the amount of tax paid in. The amendment would be unequivocal in that there should be essentially no money (there are a few exceptions of insignificant dollar value) in government except that it be spent on the payer. Penalties would be established for any lawmaker who would seek to provide any services to one group (such as those who have more votes) at the expense of others.
In short, the only genuinely fair taxation provides that every one pays for what she/he gets from government or does without. If some say this will result in burning, looting and murder, that is BLACKMAIL and should be legally opposed in the same manner that ranchers opposed horse thieves in the eighteen hundreds.
Examples of SPECIFIC FUNDS are:
a. Gasoline Tax: Spent on roads, highways, bridges, etc.-only what the car uses.
b. Social Security: Each individual receives only those amounts which she/he paid in, plus interest earned minus cost of operating the system. Payments are lowered until the system always operates in the black. SS taxes paid in by the younger generation are invested and never used to supplement payments to the older generation.
c. Schools: The local school board establishes the cost per child every September first. Each parent (who thought he and she were big enough to conceive this child) pays the fee or the child shall not go to school. There is to be zero money from the government for education at any level (first grade to Ph.D.).
d. Medical: Each should pay her/his own way. Hospitals would soon find it unprofitable to own the latest enormously expensive equipment which, for hundreds of thousands of dollars, can save one life.
e. National Defense, Police & Fire Protection: The need for these services is proportional to the wealth being protected. Collect taxes in proportion, not to income, but total value of wealth owned. This has the purpose not to "stick the rich" but to "pay for what you get."
f. Poll Taxes: With all TV and radio time paid for by the broadcasters as a fee for their right to a license, the cost of political campaigns would be significantly reduced. A well informed electorate is vital. Voters should pay all associated costs.
g. Other Specific Funds: It will take the minds of many, working with driving enthusiasm, to formulate a tax structure that is practical and equitable.
If a taxpayer cheerfully paid in full all tax amounts equivalent to the services provided to her/him by the government but resolutely refused to pay any significant additional amounts which were spent on others and she/he defended her/his property, the government would eventually enter in and upon such property and by force of arms confiscate her/his assets. The absolutely true, honest and mathematically correct definition of such action by the government is ARMED ROBBERY.
The Government should have independent auditors who evaluate every agency for value received vs. cost on a regular basis. Each function which receives money gets audited. Stop funding those that outgrow their usefulness. Increase funding where profitable. HONOR ALL FINANCIAL AND MORAL AGREEMENTS. BALANCE THE BUDGET and start to pay off the national debt. Raise or lower taxes on those who receive the services to accomplish this.
We in the United States should lower our standard of living until we can compete in the world market. We should allow a free flow of products to and from other countries but not their people.
Congress and all departments of government should be legally bound to operate under the same rules and regulations as are required of businesses. Pay congressmen/women a high salary. Their responsibilities are high. However, tax them the same as everyone else. Limit their pensions to the average that business pays. Include all (all means absolutely all) perks in the taxable income of both those in business and government. Make gifts to congressmen, even a free lunch, illegal.
Civil service should be eliminated. All government employees should be required to compete in the market place for their jobs. Make them subject to termination, the same as in private industry.
Eliminate excessive pensions or perks which business executives give themselves. Make pensions transferable from one business to another and between business and government.
Those who use credit cards should pay all associated costs (i.e. operating costs, fraud, fees paid by businesses, etc.). Those who pay cash should pay the base price only and not pay for other's credit.
Have you noticed how each facet of society can find reasons that it deserves more of the pie? WISH FOR MONEY, POWER AND ESTEEMED POSITION SUPERSEDES REASON. This applies especially to both those who manipulate to receive UNEARNED COMPENSATION (like buyout artists) and to those who want OTHERS TO PAY for what they get (like welfare).
The latter is easier to control: Stop government social programs. Let all pay their own way or do without. Religious institutions should not be exempt from taxation.
The former is more difficult to control while holding firmly to capitalism. A definitive solution is not proposed here; however, some of the basics for equitable compensation can be cited:
a. Pay commensurate with the value of services or products delivered.
b. Devise means of controlling or eliminating the income of those who manipulate financial markets without adding value.
c. Many executives establish their own compensation rates. Drastically reduce this pay. No executive is indispensable. Executives enjoy the exercise of authority, which constitutes part of their renumeration.
d. Reducing the pay of executives will not increase the pay of conscientious labor significantly but it will improve fairness.
e. Pay for risk capital. It produces jobs.
f. Competition usually controls the income of business owners. Keep the free market open.
29. Employer Civil Rights
The law needs to be modified to recognize the civil rights of all employers. Employers should have the same civil rights as the individual. No restriction should be placed on whom the employer can employ or terminate provided full compliance with the terms of the employment agreement are met. Such restriction would be a violation of the employer's civil rights. The terms of a contract (usually verbal) between employee and employer are not within the purview of the government. The employer should be taxed for only those services the government renders. The Congress seems to treat the employer as the enemy and fails to recognize that every time another burden is placed on the employer, the price of the product rightly goes up so it is the consumer who pays the bill. Remember, it is the employer who provides the jobs.
The overriding concern of almost all employers is the financial success of their company. Very few are racists or anti-feminists and most have little interest in minority issues. Absent governmental interference, she/he will freely employ whomever will maximize company profits over the long term. Are feminists or minorities opposed to a level playing field?
Every individual of whatever race, creed, color, gender, etc. has the inalienable right to equal treatment under the law. None has the right to superior treatment. Abolish all anti-discrimination laws. There is no reason that every institution and individual cannot be free to make their own decisions except that it is overriding that they never impose upon the rights of any individual.
Equal under the law does not say that all individuals are equal. Some are female others male, some are smart, others ignorant, some strong others weak, etc. The absence of a talent in one individual is never the responsibility of others (parents excepted).
30. Employer Liability
Reduce the employer's liability to those actions which the employer overtly commits. The employer is not the policeman. If illegal action, like sexual harassment, takes place on employer property, prosecute the perpetrator, not the employer. Hold the employer responsible for such actions only to the extent applicable to any other individual.
If the government approves the sale of a drug or other product, the manufacturer should no longer be subject for liability responsibility.
31. Liability Insurance
Some doctors pay more than $100,000 per year for liability insurance. Such insurance is crippling many businesses and destroying jobs. Reduce liability to overt premeditated actions. Lawyers, who like to sue deep pockets, are getting rich. Taxpayers pay to operate the courts. All costs are currently passed on to the public. Make the loser pay court costs. Control lawyer's fees.
Which of these is the more appropriate phrase?
a. The sinew of mind and body of mankind.
b. The average quality of genes in the human race.
c. The human gene pool.
The terminology is probably unimportant.
For ages animals have been bred to achieve desired traits in their succeeding progeny. Socialistic practices which support people weak in mind and body (who subsequently reproduce) lowers the average quality of the gene pool of mankind.
Recently several former Presidents and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff had a meeting in Philadelphia to praise and support such social practices. These men are political types whose sole interest is acceptance by current generations. Can't they think long term?
34. Motivation of Intellectuals in the Media
( Panel Discussion Groups, Talk Show Hosts, Columnists, Think Tanks, et al fill the media. They all know that little will change in the political, economic and social world without PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE and they want to achieve this in the short term. They know that the populace wants more value from the government than it pays for and also wants to elect a congress and see results in two years. It takes time to effect fundamental change in government. It took Japan decades to recover from WW II. It will take Russia decades to convert to capitalism and achieve acceptable quality of life. China is making slow but some progress.
These thinkers know that if they advocate realistic but unpopular (i.e. long-term) ideas, they will lose their own personal acceptance, which is anathema to them. Who among the media, especially the intellectual discussion groups, says:
a. No one has any entitlement except that for which she/he pays.
b. Parents are responsible for the conduct and all costs of their progeny.
c. Government should impose those public sacrifices necessary to begin paying off the national debt. The interest on that debt is devastating.
d. The Congress committed a sin when it began to use monies paid in by the current generation to raise the payments to older retirees.
e. No one should be allowed to vote herself/himself some of someone else's money.
What a tragedy that those with the intellect to view the long term picture are so motivated by the wish for current public acceptance that they close their eyes to the enormously greater long term good. Maybe this thought is wrong. Could it be that all of these erudite people have an IQ of less than 90?
35. Practical Long Term Way to Inform
Maybe the section immediately above is too harsh in its criticism of those who understand the reality of the population time bomb and who wish to begin, however tenuously, to inform the current and the next several generations with the purpose to mitigate the suffering when this planet can no longer support its inhabitants.
What would be the merit for anyone, even a writer in an intellectual journal, to take a forthright stand on these matters? She/he would promptly lose credibility. The general populace has little interest in the long term future and even less interest in bad news about such. Most are concerned with how they will feed their brood and any suggestion that the future bodes ill for their progeny will be met with angry, even violent, opposition.
There are a hundred facets to the subject discussed herein. Suppose a dozen brave men and women, with a zeal for presenting the whole truth, even though it be unpopular, got together to begin an oblique dialog between a dozen different intellectual journals or other media, on just one facet of this subject.
One would write an innocuous article, on one of many controversial topics, presenting pros and cons but never endorsing a position or quoting a source, another would refer to the article and present a different point of view. Others would follow until a dialog was established. Other facets of the broad subject could be pursued in the same way.
The real purpose here would be to use the same method as the Mark Antony speech, "Friends, Romans, Countrymen, lend me your ears.......".
This procedure is apt to take generations with grand daughters/sons picking up the torch, however acceptance will be ever increasing as this planet becomes more and more crowded.
There are numerous organizations dedicated to improving the future of mankind. These fall into a variety of categories, including:
Think Tanks Population Growth
World Affairs Family Responsibility
The Future Environmental
There is common thread in the purpose of these organizations. Usually the work done by one is supportive of others.
Fundamental solutions cannot be implemented until accepted by the general populace. Ever accelerating population growth impinges so heavily on all of the areas of concern listed above that acceptance will not be achieved until over-population lowers the quality of life to the point that radical changes in both law and acceptable human conduct are forced by popular demand. The earlier those basic changes occur then that much sooner the disaster of the population time bomb can begin to improve. The question is how to generate the earliest public acceptance.
This document takes the direct approach which suggests ways and means which are totally unacceptable to current generations. It is perceived that this forthrightness is the shorter road to real success, however, others might present the whole truth in a more persuasive manner.
The male bear often kills his own cubs. Unfortunately mother bears, who weigh about half as much as the male, have been known to die defending their cubs. In child custody cases judges consistently give a higher percentage of custody to the mother than the father. The female of most mammal species have a greater inborn instinct to care for the young than does the male.
Women consistently vote for fiscally liberal causes which favor their young more than do men. Women support a sound fiscal policy in government somewhat less than do men.
37. A Trivia Question
About the year 2200 some quiz show will ask the question: "Who was elected President of the United States in the year 2000?" Few will know the answer.
But suppose that this hypothetical question was asked: "Assume that in the year 2000, by some magic, family responsibility had been made total, contraception encouraged, abortion on request promptly paid for by the taxpayer (then the cost collected by force from the father), illegal immigration rigidly enforced and criminals promptly executed for serious crimes, then and in that case what would be quality of life today?" The audience would explode with answers to the effect that the accumulative good for mankind would have been incalculable.
38. The Media
There is a big difference between truth and whole truth. The media should present the whole truth in its proper proportion.
The CEO of each media organization must have the bottom line as her/his principal purpose. Those who work for the CEO (all, including reporters) must appeal to the majority of the populace in order to maximize the sale of advertising and please the boss.
There are many examples of disproportionate reporting such as fiscal responsibility in Government (most people want something for nothing from government), family responsibility, population growth, etc. It is true that these unpopular subjects are often covered but on page 5 or otherwise de-emphasized.
The media conducts itself as if it has special rights. It is not elected. No reporter has any right to impose on anyone to get her/his news which she/he wishes to get free but sell for a high advertising fee. Fear of the media by those who happen to be newsworthy, has become pervasive.
The right of free speech is constitutional. However, if the media, in exercising that right, causes loss or mental anguish to anyone then they are responsible to compensate for all such damage. Criminal penalties should be imposed for invading an individual's privacy.
The existence of tenure in the academic community is in direct conflict with the fundamentals of capitalism. If the professor is competent, she/he doesn't need tenure. If incompetent others are paying for services not delivered. The rest of us can be fired any day.
40. Berkeley in the Sixties
This phrase is meant to refer to the entire youth movement occurring mostly in the 1960's and centered in universities throughout the United States. Largely it constituted demonstrations and "sit-ins" on university property, opposing policies which they perceived to be wrong. This movement elicits the following comments:
Why did college kids (Freshman through Ph.D) think they had better judgment than their elders?
Where was their appreciation to taxpayers for the cost of a large measure of their education?
This movement was a major factor in the decline of public morality, like drugs and free (for whom?) sex. It was a precursor to Woodstock.
The academic community has enormous responsibility because its duty is to help mold the minds of the next generation. In the last 4 or 5 decades the Academics have experienced abject failure. Because of their ultra liberal views they have utterly failed at instilling responsibility, especially fiscal responsibility.
The chancellor of the California University system is paid more than the Governor. Why did he not have the good sense to immediately expel every student who "sat-in" at the University executive offices?
The rioters at Kent State illegally held their protest rally on public property. It became so dangerous that the governor had to bring out the National Guard which costs taxpayer money. All have a right to protest if they don't impose on others. Place the blame for these deaths where it belongs, not on the national guard.
The leaders of the nation's universities lost control with catastrophic results for a whole generation. Expelling every student who "sat-in" on University property would be negligible by comparison.
The entire academic community needs to become fiscally conservative.
Another failure of the academic executives: How could they possibly allow boys and girls to share the same dormitory? Consider a virtuous girl who lives in the room next to a handsome football star for four years. In a weak moment she loses her virginity. Too much temptation was forced upon her.
Promote the study of criminology at taxpayer expense. Support universities that issue Ph.D.'s to those brilliant enough to master all facets such as criminal psychology, cost effective methods, legal aspects and others. Perhaps the most important: Develop detection methods which the courts will accept such as recorded voice prints, DNA, long distance photography, hidden VCRs and others. Increase support for Interpol. Extend the development of world wide computerized records which can instantaneously recall many types of information. Such methods would aid the courts in quick and certain acquittal or conviction. Yes, this would reduce our personal privacy but what better method can you suggest?
Introduce a new concept in the court system. Develop an extensive staff of highly trained criminologists who operate under the jurisdiction of the courts and are dedicated to professional objectivity. Assign one or more to each important criminal court case. Have them assemble all possible information on both sides of the case and begin each trial with a thorough and complete presentation of facts about both sides of the case but without drawing any conclusions. These criminologists would be free of the jurisdiction of the police or any other governmental agency.
Such a system would cost money but it would drastically reduce expensive lawyer's time and reduce the expense of both prosecution and defense in assembling pertinent case history.
42. The Courts
Hold firmly to government divided into three independent branches: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial.
The principal purpose of the criminal judicial system, operating under the constitution and laws passed by the Legislative, is to deter crime. It has failed. Radical modification of the entire court system is needed. Eliminate the Jury system because it is too expensive, too slow and juries are dividing on racial lines. Substitute three judge panels who, unlike juries, can decide for themselves what evidence is pertinent.
MAKE THE COURTS COST CONSCIOUS. Praise the police officers who shoot a fleeing suspect in the back. Hold that one's money is much more important than a robber's life.
Reduce the appeals process to a rare happening. Carry out sentences including executions within weeks. However the courts must always have the authority to delay and review those rare cases where there is real doubt.
Nearly all sentences should equal or exceed the loss (including mental anguish) suffered by the victim. Mandate the death penalty for essentially all murderers, rapists, arsonists, looters, drug users and dealers, major swindlers, serious stalkers, three time felons, and those who commit incest. Mental incompetence or youth is no exception. However, in the case of a truly battered wife who kills her husband the judge should fine her $1, then give her the dollar to pay the fine and invite her to lunch.
Society can't afford $30,000 per year per inmate to incarcerate and, regardless, long term life in prison is no life at all. The cost of an execution, excluding the cost of appeals, is negligible by comparison. It is not because society is angry with the criminal. Maybe she/he had a harsh unloved childhood. The purpose is to inexpensively remove them. Some seem to think that the execution of one criminal should deter others. Why? It does deter the one who is executed. A judge who can't stand the heat should get out of the kitchen, although it is recognized that judges do have truly difficult jobs.
No one should EVER be subjected to "cruel and unusual punishment." Judges who ever ruled that the death penalty constituted such were out of touch with reality. Don't they know that the framers of the constitution, while still in high office, condoned executions? The fundamental thinking of the judiciary should be based on, not just what the crime level has become, but rather the conditions that ever accelerating population growth will impose.
The courts don't make laws but only interpret the constitution and existing law. Since the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution, society has undergone radical change. Such changes are going to increase at an ever accelerating rate. Maybe the courts should be authorized to interpret the Constitution (which has served us so well), not literally, but as the courts believe the Founding Fathers would have written if faced with current social problems.
Lethal injection seems to be the most humane method of execution currently available.
If there are those who think that "caning" in Singapore is too harsh maybe they would like to express their reasons to the authorities there just as soon as the United states crime level is substantially less than theirs. Currently the crime level in the United States is about ten times higher.
The civil courts should institute the use of qualified ARBITERS for all cases but with the right for the loser to be heard by a three judge panel. However, if the loser elects to be heard by the judges, the first evidence presented would be the written opinion of the Arbiter, and the loser as determined by the judges, would pay all court costs.
Japan has approximately 10% as many lawyers as the United States. American court methods require excessive use of lawyer's time. Lawyer's hourly rates are grossly out of proportion to other disciplines and to their contribution to society. The percentage of lawyers in public office is many times the percentage in the overall population. This disproportion has translated into favoritism for their discipline in the form of too many lawyers with expensive houses, fancy cars, etc. The courts have handed down rulings that promote proportionate representation in public office by diverse groups. Would the Supreme Court care to rule that representation by lawyers in public office (especially the Supreme Court) be proportionate to the percentage of lawyers in the country? A medical doctor recently commented reasonably that he wouldn't mind so much having the attorney dominated congress establish how to fix the medical industry if he could establish how to fix the legal industry.
43. Drugs, a Sting Operation
Illegal drug use is not a victimless crime. Our streets are unsafe. A drug dealer frequently makes thousands of dollars per day. A police officer risks her/his life for a living wage. Dope has become pervasive in society. Masses of teenagers think its use normal. Crime syndicates promote its use with franchises in small towns. Addiction ruins millions of lives of the users plus the impact on parents and society, which suffer from the crimes committed to support the habit. The United states is the biggest user of narcotics. The problem is growing rapidly. Normal police procedures have failed.
Masses of cash are being funneled out of the country into the hands of criminals. The American drug habit unfairly supports crime in other countries like Columbia.
This document is dedicated to solving problems, not standing by, wringing one's hands and saying, "Oh, my, my."
It is proposed that the government conduct a LEGALIZED sting operation a thousand times greater than any before. At taxpayers expense, employ undercover agents throughout the country to infiltrate the drug community for, say, six to nine months. Provide these agents with higher quality drugs and sell them to illegal drug users at reduced prices. Secure a large percentage of the market. Poison additional drugs with poisons which always kill if ingested but are slow to take effect, say 3,4 or 5 weeks. There are such drugs. The Russians used one once in London to kill a defector.
At a fixed date, begin nationwide to sell only the poisoned drugs. Also, when illegal drug plants (like marijuana) are found growing don't destroy them but fertilize them with systemic poison. It would be preferable to destroy the dealers but that has proven impossible. The purpose here is to kill off the users. It might even persuade a few who are not killed into stopping this illegal practice.
There have been hundreds of religions, big and small, over the last three millenniums, most believing theirs is the one and only. Many religions, or parts thereof, have been forces for good to teach the young to live moral and productive lives. Many have had the purpose to control in order to invest their leaders with power and prestige. Abuse within and conflict between religions has cost countless lives like pagan rituals, the Spanish Inquisition, Hindu and Jew vs. Muslin and Northern Ireland. The list would fill a book. KEEP GOVERNMENT SECULAR. Any value of religion in the classroom is negligible compared to the potential for conflict (look at history) that is apt to result. There is plenty of time outside the classroom for each to practice her/his own particular religion.
Leaders of multi-million dollar religious empires who promote their particular religion in the political process risk fomenting religious strife. Keep religion out of politics. Let all practice their own particular religion so long as they do not significantly impose on others. Respect the rights of all religions, Agnostics, the non-religious and Atheists.
The goal is to improve the quality of life and minimize one imposing upon another. Although many diverse religions, that worship a variety of deities, do contribute to this goal, A DEITY OR DEITIES ARE NOT NECESSARY to teach moral values. Confucianism is a code of conduct and has no Deity.
Some religious adherents to the religion in which they were raised are so narrow-minded that they refuse to consider the merits of other religions. Some Christians, for example, hold the Bible to be infallible. They should read the prologue to a book written by Burton L. Mack entitled "Who Wrote The New Testament." The same thought applies to the Jews and the Old Testament, and also the Moslems and their Koran. However, as people become more educated, this bias will decline.
45. The Environment
Numerous concerned organizations are involved in a noble effort to slow the continuing deterioration of world environment and loss of living species. Consider how hopeless this effort will become when the human population doubles and then triples. Would it not be more realistic to attack the root cause and reduce human population to a level which this planet can support on a continuing basis?
This very large island, owned by Denmark, is misnamed. It is mountainous and frozen solid. It is uninhabited except for a few people who live on the southern coast.
Atomic waste, irradiated medical waste, chemical weapons, poisonous wastes, etc. are expensive to dispose of. Safe atomic power plants do not pollute and could be a boon to a cleaner environment, however, disposal of spent fuel may curtail their use.
Nuclear waste located high in the mountains of central Greenland would, being frozen, not seep into the sea, would harm no one and could be expected to remain frozen for many milleniums while radiation decays.
This is only an idea that has not been researched but the need is going to grow in the coming generations. If Denmark would agree for a reasonable fee, and if a REALISTIC feasibility study should indicate that it would be possible to drill tunnels for railroads through this frozen rock and ice, the world nuclear community could share the cost and thereby mitigate a major environmental problem.
47. Which Would You Prefer?
A group of Arabs were chasing two black men in West Africa in 1700. One of the men got away but the other was caught. The Arabs sold the one they caught to the captain of a Yankee clipper ship out of Boston. The captain took the captive to New Orleans and sold him into slavery.
Question: Would you rather be the descendant in the late 20th century of the one who was caught or the one who got away?
This world is changing rapidly. There is the need to estimate when, or over what period of time, public acceptance of fundamental modification to political, social and economic mores will occur. Such estimates should be based not on the current rate of change, but rather, an ever accelerating rate of change. It is not just population growth that is ever accelerating but also technology and rate of public acceptance of change.
49. Time Frame
When will the population growth lower the quality of life until there is popular demand for the type of controls discussed above? What FORM and over what period of TIME will the metamorphosis take place?
These are questions beyond the scope of anyone to answer accurately. However it is possible to bracket some earlier and later limits.
As regard to FORM, increasing conflict with much greater loss of life (Rwanda's and Bosnia's half million, so far is peanuts) is certain. Ever more restrictive laws will become readily acceptable. Anti-abortionists will become laughing stock.
As regard to TIME FRAME, serious movement in this direction is likely to begin in the next few generations. Technology cannot hope to materially extend the calculation of 46 square feet per person in 500 years. Accordingly, major movement toward quality rather than quantity of life will occur long before the year 2500.
50. Foot Notes
It would be desirable to support concepts expressed here with quotations from literature. However this subject concerning bad news about the future does not appeal to the public. Accordingly writers don't write and publishers don't publish.
There is substantial statistical information and a few quotables like Thomas Malthus and Robinson Jeffers, however the reason quotations are not given here is because they don't exist.
Brevity in writing is important. Research resources are limited. The reader should challenge every fundamental idea expressed here but not nit-pick that which is essentially correct.
52. Legally and Morally Correct
No idea expressed in this document is meant to be accomplished illegally but rather it can be expected that, in time, such concepts will be demanded by the populace and laws will be changed to accord.
This is a moral document with the purpose of improving the quality of life of mankind ALBEIT in the long term and with measures currently thought to be too harsh.
A. The development that mankind has brought to this planet in the last 10,000 plus years is a wonderful, fantastic achievement. It has reduced the burden on the backs of mankind and minimized the tedium of boring repetitious work. The current population of the world could never have been reached without this scientific achievement.
B. The option exists for people to enjoy growing happiness, higher quality of life and zest for the future, but this goal is threatened by the exponential growth in population, depletion of natural resources, including farm land, and increase in pollution.
C. Human nature will not change. People will procreate if they can but it is a mathematical fact that this planet cannot support the current ever accelerating rate of growth. Crowding will result in conflict, reduced natural resources will cause hunger and pollution will spread disease. The populace will demand radical change in what is considered acceptable human conduct. Mass depopulation will occur. Albeit painful, this is THE SOLUTION.
D. Powerful self-interest groups, including the natural human instincts of parents, will oppose such change until the quality of life falls so low that actions previously thought to be too harsh to discuss will be forced by popular demand.
E. The only questions are:
(1) What form will this metamorphosis take?
(2) When and over what period will it occur?
(3) What will be the cost in human suffering?
(4) Will the average of those who survive have IMPROVED SINEW OF MIND AND BODY?
F. The form of this change is difficult to forecast. It will start slowly but become devastating.
G. The SOONER recognition is taken that this planet is finite and that radical change in human conduct is mandatory, then that much earlier the quality of life can begin to improve.
H. How do you "BREAK THE NEWS?" How do you promote the earliest, possible acceptance? Over the coming generations, thousands of inquiring minds could research hundreds of facets of this overall subject including study of secondary and tertiary effects. They could initiate a world-wide dialog. Such studies could lead to earlier recognition and thus reduce the human suffering during this harsh, cruel unforgiving period.
I. Hopefully, those with the intellect to understand the nature of coming events will be forewarned so that their progency will constitute a higher percentage of survivors.
J. Many organizations now dedicated to this vital subject too often seek acceptance in the current generations. Good! But futile. They are less than forthright in advocating those harsh actions, unacceptable to the current populace, which promote decreased population, such as: Parental responsibility (no welfare), abortion, immigration and death penalty.
K. Think long term, recognize the greater loss when world population, now about 5.5 billion, reaches 10 billion, then 15 billion and tries to reach 20 billion; with this planet decreasingly able to support quality of life.
This document has elected to take the more direct but unpopular approach. Possibly others could, in the coming generations, present the case in a more persuasive manner.
This document is NO JEREMIAD. It has the explicit HUMANITARIAN PURPOSE of acheiving earlier recognition of the population time bomb, which earlier recognition could, at the expense of millions of "unnecessary deaths," save billions of "unnecessary deaths" long before the year 2500.