1

A Rose by Any Other Name…

Is a Thorny Issue

Or

What’s Going On In Our

World Today?

Michael K. Martin, Ph.D

and

B.E. Martin, Ed.D.

July 4, 2011

2

Acknowledgements

The writers would like to take a moment to thank all of the people who

contributed to our little quest. What started out to be a short article that did

little but outline some of our interests in science with what is going on in our

world almost seemed to take on a life of its own. It grew into what you see

today. Our sequestering, arguing, cussing, and discussing have taught us much.

The piles of articles and books should be evidence enough to convince our wives

that we were working on what gave us a sense of purpose. Thanks to them for

their patience and understanding. A particular thanks to Dr. Michio Kaku, whose

new book, Physics of the Future, set in motion what you see today. His

unbelievable capabilities will be remembered in history. You are encouraged to

read some of his works. We hope you enjoy what we’ve done as much as we

enjoyed doing it.

3

A Rose by Any Other Name…Is a Thorny Issue

Table of Contents

I. Introduction................................................................................3

II. Entropy………………………………………………………………….......…..6

III. The Rise of Causality……………………………………………….....…..13

IV. Civilization – A Historical Perspective…………………….....……16

V. The Rise and Fall of Smaller Civilizations……………………......22

VI. Civilization Today……………………………………………………….....27

VII. Global Extinction Events………………………………………….....….32

VIII. The Future for Civilization………………………………………….....43

IX. Being Politically Correct and Its Aftermath………………….....52

X. The Greed-Based Society……………………………………………....…58

XI. The Distribution of Wealth in America…………………………....66

XII. America’s Crumbling Infrastructure……………………………....80

XIII. America’s Welfare State………………………………………………..119

XIV. The World and Peak Oil………………………………………………...126

XV. Global Warming……………………………………………………………137

XVI. The War on Drugs…………………………………………………………145

XVII. The War on Terror or America’s Warfare State………………154

XVIII. The American Economy.........................................................169

XIX. Summary, Conclusions, and Recapitulations………………….176

4

A Rose by any Other Name…

Is a Thorny Issue

Introduction

Empires of the future will be empires of the mind. – Winston Churchill

This whole business for us arose from the reading of Dr. Michio Kaku’s (herein after called Kaku)

new book Physics of the Future: How Science Will Shape Human Destiny and Our Daily Lives

by the Year 2100. The sheer fascination of what science and technology holds in store for the

planet is nothing short of mind-boggling.

From his youth, Kaku was struck by Albert Einstein’s quest for a Theory of Everything and has

dedicated his life in its pursuit. As a result of his contribution to science, he is now considered

one of the world’s leading experts in the field of theoretical physics. But, this book is not about

his exploits alone. He has interviewed over 300 of the planet’s top experts in science and

technology to envision what the world might look like in the year 2100. Being driven by a

passion to understand, and prompted by the enormous and prophetic works of predecessors

such as Leonardo da Vinci and Jules Verne, Kaku pauses along the way to reflect on how past

prognostications have actually altered the course of history and how those predictions have

had both positive and negative impacts on our lives today. He is also acutely aware of the

tenuousness of such things. While these musings are founded in the science of today, the

extreme inter-weavings of society can change the trajectory of the best of shooters and they

will sometimes miss the target entirely. So, while Kaku remains optimistic about the future of

humanity, he is also aware that there are myriad obstacles facing the world today – things that

cannot or will not be ameliorated by science alone. It is his optimism, tempered with his own

concerns, which have prompted this paper. We must wonder whether the human species will

survive to realize its potential. Wars, conflicts, rumors of wars, economic collapses,

governmental problems, joblessness, and an enormous volume of other problems that face

humanity all over the world, serves to make us pause and ponder whether any of this “good

seed” will ever bear fruit.

5

So, this thesis is meant to be a brief exploration of the if/then, why/wherefore, and so/thereby.

It is an attempt to explore, in one place, all of the good/bad attempts of humanity to survive

against the overwhelming odds against it. With each new insight always comes a multitude of

questions. Most of those answers, unfortunately, must be left to the future and are thus

beyond the scope of the observations covered here.

Without spending copious space recounting the entire book in the introduction, it is instructive

to peruse the Table of Contents and attempt to incorporate specifics throughout the

development of this paper.

1. Future of the Computer: Mind over Matter

2. Future of AI: Rise of the Machines

3. Future of Medicine: Perfection and Beyond

4. Nanotechnology: Everything from Nothing

5. Future of Energy: Energy from the Stars

6. Future of Space Travel: To the Stars

7. Future of Wealth: Winners and Losers

8. Future of Humanity: Planetary Civilization

9. A Day in the Life in 2100 (Kaku. 2010)

Merely scanning the Table of Contents in Kaku’s book, and remembering what one read in

yesterday’s newspaper or heard on a newscast it is apparent that the contentions were sure to

come from reading his book, published in 2010, are already in question in 2011.

We have made a conscious effort to give proper credit where credit is due. But, much of the

opinions we present are the product of many years of living and many sources have been lost

to time. The preponderance of the information we present has been gleaned from the

Internet, and may not have been properly referenced, but the sources of the articles we

researched are contained in them. They are referenced in at the end of our work. Regardless,

any omission is purely by accident and a product of old age. So, in advance, our apologies if

6

anyone feels slighted through our inadvertent omission. Thanks to everyone who contributed

to this paper and, if read, please feel free to make corrections, comments, and include

observations. There is nothing new contained herein. We acknowledge that the sheer volume

of information available makes a comprehensive evaluation of the topics next to impossible.

However, the topics we chose may seem arbitrary to some. Libraries could easily be filled by

only one of the topics mentioned. It is also imperative to acknowledge that some of the

information to be found on the internet is questionable on one side and downright false on the

other. We have given a sincere effort to filter out those who are obviously on the fringe of

truth and to give only information that is easily verifiable through other means. There is some

likelihood that we have failed along the way. If so, then apologies are proffered at the outset.

Our entire intention has been, and remains, to help bring attention to what we feel are the

most serious problems facing civilization and the planet today. Things continue to change at

such a dizzying pace that some of which is truth today will be entirely false tomorrow. This

cannot be avoided. So – given these realities, and for what it’s worth – here goes!

7

Entropy

Rob Peter to Pay Paul – English Proverb

Whether contemplating the cosmos, trying to understand the planet, or studying the

development of civilization and the growth of societies, one must first understand the law of

Conversation of Energy, the Laws of Thermodynamics and a phenomenon called Entropy.

The Law of Conservation of Energy is considered an empirical law of physics. Scientifically

stated, it means that the total amount of energy in an isolated system remains constant over

time (conserved over time). It also brings into play the notion that energy can neither be

created nor destroyed, but that it can be transformed from one state of energy to another –

some forms are usable and some forms are not. One must wonder then – if the transformation

brings in energy that cannot be used to sustain the system then where does the energy needed

come from? More on this conundrum will appear in a later section.

In its simplest form, the First Law of Thermodynamics says that there is a finite amount of

energy in the universe. It also says that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only

transformed, i.e. changed from one form to another. This grows from the principle of

conservation of energy. Put another way, the change in the internal energy of a system is equal

to the amount of heat supplied to the system minus the amount of work performed by the

system upon its surroundings. (Wikipedia) The problem arises when we consider heat. It

ultimately becomes unusable energy to the system.

Subsequent to the First Law, the Second Law of Thermodynamics grew out of the realization

that heat becomes an unusable form of energy. The Second Law says that through

conservation of energy the system will equilibrate to the point that, without the infusion of new

useable energy, no further work can be done. Indeed, this realization says it all when

considering the fate of the universe and everything in it.

8

The Third Law of Thermodynamics essentially deals with a phenomenon called “absolute zero.”

In science this refers to the lowest possible temperature – one at which all molecular and

atomic movement ceases. This Law is the least talked about of the three and, for purposes of

this paper, contains little relevance except that it further confirms that each of these laws

relate entropy of matter to its absolute temperature. Hence, the term Entropy is a

fundamental component of all the laws of thermodynamics.

Entropy, by definition, is a thermodynamic property that can be used to determine the energy

NOT available for useful work in a thermodynamic process. (Wikipedia) It reduces the state of

order of the system. It always ends in a state of Chaos and that is not useful for any system.

Fortunately, there is no dearth of research on the Laws of Thermodynamics, the processes

involved in Entropy, or the ultimate consequences of Chaos. It quickly becomes evident that

the concepts involved in each can be applied to nearly any type of system, whether physical,

chemical, sociological, psychological, statistical, and open or closed systems. The list could

certainly be expanded. They also are compatible with macro- or micro- systems, and they are

found to be interdisciplinary as well. In other words, these laws and the terminologies applied

to them are cogent to everything going on in the universe and to the world both in antiquity

and to the state of current affairs. For anyone interested in tomorrow, at least a bit more than

a cursory understanding of these laws of nature is crucial.

Conservation of Energy (Wikipedia)

Einstein’s Theory of Relativity (soon to be named Law of Relativity) postulates that mass is

really a form of energy. He further showed that the distinction of matter particles in the form

of atoms and energy particles in the form of protons are nearly inseparable. In fact, one can

transform into the other. In this instance there is no loss, nor does it affect the total amount of

energy in the system. So What? In fact, this notion has far-reaching consequences for the

system we call civilization. In elementary terms, it means that perpetual motion machines can

only work if they deliver no energy to the surroundings. A bit of thought means they are

impossible. No matter how elegant the machine it will always produce friction - to turn gears,

9

move levers, etc. In the process of movement heat is generated that is moved into the system

and that heat becomes unusable energy to perform additional work. Therefore, without the

input of new mass/energy, the process will run down and ultimately cease. The system dies.

Likewise, a civilization without the input of new mass/energy (food, materials, dwellings,

factories, jobs, etc.) will die – just as the transition of birth, rise, decline, and death of

civilizations show.

This phenomenon was known by ancient philosophers by observing the motion of the

pendulum. By 1843, with the invention of the “Joule Apparatus”, James Joule showed that a

descending weight on a string caused a paddle to rotate in water. He found that the

gravitational potential energy lost by the weight in descending was EQUAL to the thermal

energy (heat) gained by the water through friction. Interestingly, in 1844, William Grove

postulated a relationship between mechanics, heat, light, electricity, and magnetism by treating

them all as manifestations of a single force that has become known as energy in modern times.

(Wikipedia)

First Law of Thermodynamics

Working with the findings discovered through work on the conservation of energy the First Law

of Thermodynamics was developed. Again, in its simplest form, this law means that energy can

be neither created nor destroyed. It quickly becomes obvious that the power generated by

coal-fired, hydro-electric, atomic-, solar, etc. power plants all produce their energy through the

law of the conservation of energy. All they’re really doing is simply changing one form of

energy into another that is easier for society (the system) to use. They have not created energy

from nothing. This also provides the insight that the energy of the universe is a constant – it

can’t be added to, only changed from one form to another. The same holds true for planet

Earth. There exists a very finite amount of energy available and as it is changed from a form

that is useful to do work into a form that is not it reduces the amount of potential work that can

be done, thereby leaving less for use at a later time. This should be disturbing even to the most

casual reader.

10

The example of the pendulum has already been used. To elaborate a bit further, in a real life

scenario there is friction that will cause the pendulum to gradually slow down until it comes to

rest. That is unless additional energy is provided to assist (spring, battery, etc.). In other words,

the pendulum dies. In this scenario the pendulum serves as the system and everything else as

the surroundings. The friction causes a small but steady transfer of heat energy to flow from

the system to the surroundings (the air, bearings on which the pendulum swings, etc.) The first

law states that the pendulum must either slow down its swing or decrease the arc of its swing,

or both, to compensate for the energy lost as heat. Eventually the system shuts down as the

pendulum stops its swing. To prevent, or at least delay, the shutdown requires the owner to

rewind, replace the battery, or otherwise replenish the power lost. It’s easy now to understand

how this business of energy is important to systems and how the use of the energy is critical to

the longevity of the system. Of course, that system can just as easily be civilization and, just as

disturbing, we come to realize the fact that it just can’t last forever.

Second Law of Thermodynamics

While the Second Law of Thermodynamics is arguably the most important for the breadth and

scope of this article, it turns out to be the easiest to explain. In a nutshell, this law says that the

quality of matter/energy deteriorates over time. Why? Simply put, inevitably useable energy is

used for productivity, growth, and repair. These processes convert useable energy into

unusable energy, i.e., useable energy becomes irretrievably lost to a form of energy that cannot

be used for productivity, growth, and repair (allaboutscience.org). Therefore, just as the First

Law of Thermodynamics can be termed the Law of Conservation of Energy, this law is often

called the Law of Increased Entropy, and we will explore Entropy in more detail later. For now,

Entropy can be defined as a gauge of randomness or chaos within the system. Hopefully, the

reader is already contemplating the consequences of entropy to current events.

Third Law of Thermodynamics

As mentioned earlier, the Third Law is no less important than the others, but is less important

to the purposes of this paper than the First and Second. But, it is still important to understand

11

what it really means. As indicated earlier, the Third Law deals primarily with the movement of

particles and the effects of cold on those movements. Strictly speaking, this law relates entropy

(randomness) of matter to its absolute temperature. In science, Absolute Zero Kelvin is

reached at -273.15 degrees Celsius, or -459.7 degrees Fahrenheit. However, due to the Second

Law, by definition, it also means that no natural particle can have a temperature of absolute

zero because heat can never move from a colder body to a warmer one. It also means that it

will have to eventually draw energy from another nearby system, meaning, by definition, it can

never reach absolute zero. Since the systems we are dealing with in discussions on civilization

could not exist at the temperatures dealt with in the Third Law, there is little need to expand

further. What is important to understand is that it, along with the others, is absolute in our

universe. They are Laws, not Theories. Our universe could not exist without the order

expressed in these laws and therefore, civilization, i.e. people, could not exist. Indeed, it is

critical for us to have a clear understanding of the laws directing our lives.

Entropy

At last, we come to the personally most interesting part of the introduction to the laws

directing the cosmos. Actually, Entropy is nothing more than a word encompassing all that has

already been covered to this point. By definition, Entropy means a thermodynamic property

that can be used to determine the energy NOT available for useful work in a thermodynamic

process, such as in energy conversion devices, engines, or machines (Wikipedia). Yes – that

statement sounds pretty boring in and of itself, but that realization has an enormous impact on

and within the systems (societies) of today. If that definition sounds familiar it’s because it

arises out of the Second Law of Thermodynamics that states that the entropy of a closed

system always increases or remains constant. It never decreases within a particular system! It

also means that chaos will always become the norm as time passes. People are reminded every

day that they live in a global economy. Therefore, the system is now the entire planet.

As the concept and definition of entropy grew it became clear that it was a statistical concept

when applied to the kinds of systems humans are familiar with. In other words, it measures

observable macroscopic properties within statistical terminology. Therefore, entropy is usually

12

combined within probability parameters – such things as temperature, pressure and volume,

etc. are approached from probabilities within a timeframe that “mixedupness” will occur.

It is not a theory. It is a law that there is a finite amount of energy in the universe. It’s a sure

thing that it cannot be created nor destroyed, merely changed in form. It is now an accepted

fact that the amount of entropy in the universe is increasing at an accelerating pace.

Unfortunately, it also means that at some time in the future the total of the energy will become

less and less useful for running the mechanisms of the universe in general and civilization(s) in

particular, until there remains no energy at all to do work. Not an optimistic outlook for sure.

Whether the universe ends up in a big crunch or a big freeze, the outcome is exactly the same –

the end. We’ll deal more with how all this affects organisms as our study continues.

For better or worse, the concept of entropy has entered nearly every domain of science.

However, for purposes of this paper, and considering the macroscopic ramifications of entropy,

it has entered sociology. In this context it is metaphorically used as a synonym for chaos,

disorder or dissipation of energy rather than as a direct measure of thermodynamic or

information entropy. Given this metaphor, terminology such as Corporate Entropy, Economic

Entropy, Entropology, Psychological Entropy, and Social Entropy have been added to the

lexicon.

In their greatly abbreviated forms Corporate Entropy deals with waste in terms of red tape,

business team inefficiencies, etc. Economic Entropy is a somewhat quantitative measure of the

irrevocable dissipation and degradation of natural resources resulting from economic activity.

Entropology, of course, deals with the study of entropy. Society must have that. Then

Psychological Entropy deals with how energy is used in the psyche. Finally, Social Entropy

delves into energy in the social system structure and social equilibrium (never mind that this is

impossible). (Wikipedia)

13

We found an interesting observation within the limitations of Social Entropy. By definition

entropy tells us that highly ordered systems are improbable and that increasing order has

decreasing probability. It also states that to increase or maintain order in a system requires the

input of new energy. This is important today. Society has managed to provide new input of

energy through increasingly complex energy inputs. For instance, it would appear that

industrialized societies are more complex than the sum of their parts. This is because of such

things as the Internet, Communications Systems, Building Structures, Financial Systems,

Weapons Systems, and yes – Government. As long as the systems can outpace the ravages of

entropy (chaos) by increasing complexity and order, the probability that it will spontaneously

begin the slide into disorder becomes increasingly less likely (www.pyropath.com). As this

treatise develops please pay particular attention to this term “spontaneous.” It means that the

decline may be precipitous as opposed to gradual as with the growth of the system (society).

This whole business of Entropy is certainly enlightening, if not terrifying. It is enlightening

because it “tells it like it is” while providing a paradigm for delaying the inevitable. Kaku

reminds us of what separates humanity from all other species and machines – “common

sense.” Common sense, appropriately applied, can organize the system so it can prosper

through the proper application of energy infusion. Unfortunately, there is little optimism,

through observation, that the masses are “chewing the cud” on entropy. It would appear that

today civilizations are following the same exact paths of their predecessors. While ignorance is

bliss, it is devastating for civilization(s), as we will discover.

It is incumbent for human survival to remember that entropy (including all the new monikers

humans have devised to explain it) NEVER decreases without the input of new useable energy.

While entropy will ultimately win sometime in the future, every man, woman, and child on the

planet should be doing everything in their power to find ways to delay or mitigate its effects.

Literally, in the entire history of Planet Earth, today – our survival depends on it.

14

The Rise of Causality

A little too late is much too late. German Proverb

What in the world is Causality? Causality is Determinism. Ah! – The specificity of the English

language. Causality, or Determinism, is what makes the world go around. What? OK - All this

is very simple - For every Cause there is an Effect or many Effects. Causality is the relationship

between two events: one which is the cause, and the other which is the effect of the previous

event. As per Aristotle’s classification, causality is of two types – Accidental Causality and

Essential Causality. The concept of accidental causality is easy to understand in that the cause

precedes the effect. In Essential Causality, however, the cause and the effect could be

observed in a single event. (Wikipedia) The former constitutes the focus of this paper.

Specifically, it is the generation and determination of one thing by another thing. It is an active

phenomenon that defines who we are. It brings thought into reality. One caveat – after this

does not always mean because of that.

Causality is universal. No matter what we say or do, no matter how large or how small, there

will always a consequence. And, while it may seem obvious, it always takes place in time. This

is important because of Einstein’s Relativity and the concept of Spacetime. Through

undulations, peaks and valleys, a warping, time becomes a flexible membrane concept in which

the cause and the effect can occupy the same place at the same time. One can precede the

other. So the concept of Causality is not as clear-cut as we would like. Neither are the results.

But, for purposes of this paper it is enough to understand only what it says. For Every Cause

There Is An Effect or Effects.

A perfect example is what has become known as The Butterfly Effect. It developed out of

Chaos Theory, and represents the “sensitive dependence on initial conditions.” (Wikipedia)

That means that no matter how small the change in a nonlinear system a very large result can

be caused at a later point in time. The Butterfly Effect results from the work of Edward Lorenz,

a meteorologist who popularized the term. It will become very important during the discussion

of Thermodynamics and Entropy. The example often given is that the fluttering of a butterfly

15

wing in Mexico could change air currents just enough to ultimately cause a hurricane in the

Atlantic Ocean. It sounds impossible and probably is very remote. However, meteorologists

agree that very minor fluctuations in air currents can have devastating effects given the

tremendous complexity and interactions of the myriad variables associated with weather

patterns. The Domino Effect is probably a more mundane analogy of this phenomenon.

One final thought on Causality is important in understanding how the universe and our planet

function. Everyone has seen elaborate displays of dominos arranged on a large flat surface. For

effect, they are rarely arranged in a neat straight line. They turn, branch apart, meet at various

points, split and turn directions. The more elaborate the display – the more dramatic the show.

The touch of one simple domino starts a huge chain reaction that begins slowly and accelerates

into a blur of action running completely through the display.

The entire universe is inter-connected, quite similar to the domino display. Each cause

undoubtedly has multiple effects beyond what most could even imagine. Each effect has

multiple causes. This is a complex place, indeed. It becomes increasingly incumbent on us to

remember this simple fact that has such far-reaching consequences. This is Determinism in the

form humanity needs to understand. No – it’s not as simple as understanding cause and effect.

One may not even know the cause and certainly cannot know all the effects. To repeat – the

universe is a complex place. Determinism is not the same thing as Pre-Determinism.

Remember, this is the English language. Pre-Determinism postulates that everything that has

or will happen in the universe, for all time, has already been determined. All the possible

causes are irrelevant because all the possible effects have been set. Without too much

trepidation about reprisals from zealots, we contend this concept makes for a pretty boring

world. Everyone takes some pride in having an epiphany that can lead to a solution of some

problem plaguing Mother Earth and her inhabitants. That is part of the human psyche – the

need to nurture and the need for nurturing. What’s the use in striving for anything if the effort

makes no difference in the ultimate outcome? But, this is not a philosophical treatise and this

business is best left to others and to another time and place. With some fear of being

redundant, people MUST grab a hold on this concept of cause and effect. It is found every day

16

in the media and affects everything we do. Too often there are unintended and unbelievably

devastating consequences lurking in the effects arising out of seemingly innocuous causes.

We’ll breeze through a few very well known examples later with the hope they become fodder

for exploring others that, in the quest for stimulating better ways of life, that might have had

diametrically opposite outcomes.

17

Civilization – A Historical Perspective

Historical knowledge is indispensible for those who want to build a better world. Ludwig von

Mises

A Tree Falls the Way it Leans. Bulgarian Proverb

Every Failure Teaches a Man Something, to wit, That He Will Probably Fail Again. H.L

Mencken

The term Civilization has been used in a number of contexts to explain the people, land,

culture, and organization of an identifiable group. However, the most widely used definition

refers to “human cultures, which are complex in terms of technology, science, and division of

labor.” (Wikipedia) These cultures are usually associated with an urban environment. The term

itself is generally used to differentiate that group from barbaric or primitive peoples. The level

of or sophistication of a civilization is often determined on the basis of its progress toward a

number of quantifiable characteristics such as agriculture, trade, workforce, urbanization and

other types of subsistence. In addition, settlement patterns, forms of government, social

stratification, economic systems, literacy, and other cultural traits differentiate a civilization

from what are considered less sophisticated societies. (Wikipedia)

The word “civilization” comes from the Latin civilis, meaning civil, civis, meaning citizen, and

civitas, meaning city or city-state. (Wikipedia) The implication here is that a civilization is

somehow more mature (civilized) and less rude and more refined (civil) than its counterparts.

Also, due to its level of sophistication, it is regarded as being more “dynamic” than an

uncivilized (barbaric) group of humans. Where did this thing called civilization come from

anyway and what causes them to congregate where they do?

Any knowledge of archaeology reveals that civilizations generally arise and prosper in and

around areas of fertile land that can support a growing population and where any excess goods

are relatively easy to transport, i.e., support commerce. This is precisely why most great cities

and the preponderance of population center on coastlines and along major river systems. All of

this makes civilization seem like a dramatic improvement over the clan-based hunters and

18

gatherers that had prospered for thousands of years through hundreds of generations. We

must ask if these clans really were less civilized or less wise than their counterparts to follow.

Most of us would probably say they were. But, the more research we do the less validity such a

contention has.

This notion brings another consideration to bear. Knowing the fate of past civilizations and the

probable fate of those who are alive today, does this supposed state of maturity really seem

very wise? Does being socially driven equate with what is known about human nature?

Writers such as Rousseau, Herder, and Nietzsche don’t seem to think so. If civilization is really

such a great thing, then why has the planet been forever plagued by war, pestilence, disease,

starvation, and greed since humans arrived on the scene? Why has the division of labor, a

hallmark of civilization, resulted in a class system that rewards wealth and detests poverty at

the expense of human dignity? Has the term “civilization” become a synonym of one of the

seven deadly sins – “greed?” Author Derrick Jensen argues that modern civilization is

intrinsically directed towards the domination of the environment and humanity itself in a

harmful and destructive fashion. (Jensen, 2006) We will explore this concept in more detail

later.

But, this does not mean that the whole of civilization is a bad thing. There are some truly good

things that have arisen for the world to enjoy. The invention of writing, the scientific method,

and the growing understanding of the physical laws of nature are arguably responsible for the

global civilization today. But, technological prowess comes with its own set of problems. Along

with the benefits comes awesome responsibility. The willingness of the human species to

embrace the former and ignore the latter has alone brought down the vast majority of

civilizations. It is generally agreed that all past civilizations went through exactly the same

cycles of “birth, life, decline, and death.” (Spengler) The only quantifiable variable is how long it

took them to pass through each element. More specifically, how long did it take to pass from

peak, through terminal decline, and to death?

19

Graphs copied from the internet.

A few more words regarding the passage from one element to the next are necessary. For

students of statistics it might be instructive to view the life cycle of a civilization in terms of a

Bell Curve structured on a time scale. Statistically, to represent a normal bell curve, it should

resemble a bell with most of the area centered around the middle, as seen on the far left figure

above. In fact, in the normal curve, approximately 68% of a time scale should be within plus or

minus one Standard Deviation (SD) from the arithmetic mean (center of the curve). Along the

path of civilizations the “mean” should rest somewhere between life and decline. This is an

interesting concept for sure. For purpose of reflection, what would the curve tell us if most of

the SD was found on the left side of the normal middle? One would say it was (skewed) to the

right (pointed like a skewer). Of course, if most of the SD was located at the right of the normal

curve, it would represent a skew to the left. With a right skew the civilization would pass

through birth and life relatively quickly, ride a slow descent into chaos, and finally pass away.

The opposite would be experienced with a skew to the left so growth and life would take much

longer and decline and death would occur relatively quickly. See figures representing this

skewness in the center and far right figures above. We aren’t too sure that either of these

scenarios is preferable to the other and would really rather not place any bets on the normal

curve either. The best scenario, the one usually ignored by all known civilizations, would be to

develop a process to mitigate entropy by finding a method to infuse more energy into the

system. It would seem that current civilizations are failing miserably in this respect as well,

thereby virtually ensuring an unpleasant end, full of misery and despair. As always, time will

tell, but the scientific community is largely unoptimistic.

Of course, it is understood by now that entropy is the culprit in the fall of a civilization. But,

the more contemporary force is because of “the failure of a creative minority, through moral or

20

religious decline, to meet some important challenge, rather than from the universal laws of

thermodynamics.” (Wikipedia) In fact, it would be relatively easy to argue that the prevailing

attitude among all technological societies today is something called immediate gratification. I

want more and more for less and less effort until I ultimately decide that I want everything

for nothing. Whether we believe statements such as this are folly or as a representation of

human nature, the world needs to understand that this philosophy represents entropy in its

finest form. Truer words were never spoken than Be careful what you wish for – you just

might get it. As this treatise develops, hopefully we will have made it easier to draw parallels

between the examples given and the behaviors seen elsewhere in the underdeveloped and

developed world today. Keep in mind the prognostication of political scientist Samuel

Huntington on the development of the 21st Century – The defining characteristic will be a clash

of civilizations. (Huntington) Surely, what is sowed today will be reaped tomorrow, but instead

of affecting one small area, it will impact the entire planet.

But, even with the apparent advantages of these areas, a civilization will proceed on its

predesigned path until it reaches a point where the population grows faster than the

availability of resources. (Havron) Historically, a good society soon realized that trade with

neighboring societies could offset the reduction in local resources and commerce developed.

However, even with enhanced business practices and elaborate transportation systems,

essential resources began to diminish and a point was reached where supply could not meet

demand and the society began to decay and ultimately collapse. This scenario repeats itself

throughout history and is paramount in the rise and fall of all great and not so great

civilizations. One central theme continues to dominate – when population density exceeds the

carrying capacity of occupied land, societal collapse always occurs. Keep this theme in mind

during our review of past civilizations.

Most people are aware of how major civilizations met their demise. Even in elementary school

it is taught to eager minds how Egypt, Rome, Greece, and a few others, grew into great

empires, spanning most of the known world, only to collapse under their own weight. A few

21

particulars may have differed, and even today there are points of discussion by archaeologists

and practitioners of the social sciences, but the end result was always the same.

As a quick aside, there is rather new evidence regarding the fall of Rome. It is true that its

demise was primarily due to military defeat. However, it seems that the reason for defeat may

have been due to lead poisoning. Archaeologists think that gluttony for wine and spicy foods,

and a deterioration of moral structure, led to heavy drinking. To enhance the taste of wine

Rome added a substance called must (sometimes called sappa) that was essentially nothing

more than grape juice cooked down to a syrupy consistency. It was also added to most kinds of

food. The problem is that grape juice is acidic and the pots used for making must were made

out of lead. The acid was leached lead out of the pots by the acid in the grapes that was then

consumed by the Romans in great quantities. Current estimates are that the typical Roman

drank between ½ to 1 ½ gallons of wine a day, in all social classes. This quantity, along with the

food consumed, added up to a tremendous amount of lead intake. Lead causes mental disease,

organ disease, sterility, and a whole host of other problems. Therefore, even though Rome was

defeated militarily, the loss might have been attributed to lead poisoning.

We need to get back to the task at hand. A short walk around in history reveals many other

lesser-known civilizations that followed and suffered ultimate demise by following the same

path of birth, life, decline, and death. In each case, societal collapse led to tremendous human

suffering. In the end, the only difference was quantitative. Still, these events were largely

confined to local areas. Today things are much, much different. News media and

commentaries are replete with examples of the global economy and how it tends to create a

whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. Local events literally impact the world. We

have already found a name for this – the Butterfly Effect. We would like to draw on the

observations of Parker Havron given at a lecture at the UCSD campus entitled The Rise and Fall

of Civilizations, and give him full credit for the historical information to follow and acknowledge

the article written about his lecture on the site biology.ucsd.edu/earthessays/02. While his

solution of the world’s multiple problems would likely receive little public support, his

observations about the civilizations certainly warrant attention. Havron is a noted

22

archaeologist and sociologist and has some interesting insights appropriate to the challenges

we face today. During his lecture he focused on the Polynesian inhabitants of Easter Island, the

Anasazi, a Native-American tribe, and Petra, an ancient city of the Middle East.

23

The Fall of Smaller Civilizations – A Few Examples

Easter Island – One of the most isolated places on Earth

Most people are familiar with Easter Island because of the huge strange-looking figures

scattered around a barren, treeless landscape. For most, however, this is about all that is

known. Lost in time is a dynamic civilization that arose far from any known trade routes.

Easter Island is situated in the South Pacific Ocean nearly 2,300 miles from the coast of Chile.

The Island was discovered in more contemporary times by Dutch explorer Admiral Jakob

Roggeveen on Easter Day, 1722 – hence the name Easter Island. History says that the island’s

inhabitants first arrived in about 400 A.D. What is known is that the inhabitants had the only

written language in Oceania and developed a very sophisticated culture for its time that

included music and the arts. Most noticeable about their arts are the gargantuan volcanic

stone statues called Moai that reach heights of 36 feet and more, and can weigh up to 85 tons

each. There are nearly 900 Moai on the island, many lined up as speechless sentinels; others

either completed or nearly completed lay silently in the quarries from which they came. Their

story is confounding in that they were moved many miles from the quarry by a civilization that

lacked any metal tools or even the wheel. Considering their size and tremendous weight one

must wonder how they did it. As indicated, Easter was found to be devoid of any trees

whatsoever.

Archaeologists believe the Moai served as religious icons for the island inhabitants. By the time

explores arrived on the island all quarrying and cutting had long-since stopped. Here’s the

story. Archaeologists learned that the 500 square mile Easter Island was once covered with

dense Palm forests. In the beginning of the Polynesians cleared some forest for agriculture.

This allowed the population to reach a peak of around 10,000. But, deforestation caused

widespread erosion that decreased soil fertility, thereby reducing crop yield. In a religious

fervor to appease the gods and earn more crops the residents began to cut more trees to move

the Moai around the island. This continued until every last tree had been cut. The ability to

grow crops all but disappeared. Disputes for remaining resources caused massive human pain

24

and suffering. Many of the people were killed or enslaved and others succumbed to

cannibalism, utilized as a drastic means of survival. This resulted in the collapse of their society

due to warring factions in a desperate search for living resources. Clans abandoned their

villages and reverted to cave-dwelling and hunting and gathering. It devolved itself into

oblivion. So, this peace-loving and artistic society all but disappeared. Today it has been

reduced to less than 1 percent of its peak and there remains nothing much larger than a bush

growing on the island. Clearly, Easter Island represents the model of birth, growth, decline, and

death. The reasons may be different, but the end result is always the same.

The Anasazi – One of the Most Advanced Native-American Civilizations in

America

The Anasazi civilization is a well-documented and one that also lost the battle through resource

depletion. When the Spanish reached what is now known as the Southwestern United States

they witnessed the ruins of gargantuan multi-storied pueblos, some five stories high and

containing as many as 650 rooms. This particular one was located in what is now known as

Chaco Canyon National Monument in New Mexico. Without question it was the largest

building ever constructed in America before the Industrial Revolution. The odd thing is that the

people were living out in the middle of the desert by a people the Navajos called the Anasazi.

The word translates as “the ancient ones.”

Archaeologists have been able to neatly reconstruct bits and pieces of Anasazi history. They

found that the pueblos were constructed in approximately 900 A.D. and that the area was lush

woodland with copious numbers of pinion oak, ponderosa pine, and juniper, along with

extensive waterways and adequate groundwater. It sounds like the perfect place to locate a

civilization. However, as it always happens, the Anasazi began to clear the land for agriculture,

building, and fire. Before long, through deforestation, people found the need to travel over 50

miles to secure the wood they needed for fire and building. That resulted in an elaborate road

system. Massive irrigation networks were constructed for additional crops to sustain the

burgeoning population. Land erosion brought on by the clearing of the land prompted even

25

more transportation routes and irrigation technologies. The water resources began to fail. The

area could no longer support the population because it had exceeded the carrying capacity of

the area and massive human suffering resulted. This scenario sounds eerily familiar.

Therefore, the Anasazi people abandoned their homes and left what the Spanish explorers later

discovered . (Note: Deforestation also destroyed the cooling effect produced by the trees.

Meteorologists agree that the cooling at ground level helps to create a current that can

produce rain. Parallels could be drawn between their tragedy and what is happening today in

the Amazon Basin in South America.)

Petra – the Lost City

One additional example of a civilization ravaged by resource devastation is the lost city of

Petra, located in what is now known as Southern Jordan. The word Petra in Greek translates as

large stone. The word Petraglyphs, found throughout the world as evidence of lost

civilizations, comes from that root word.

Today, the ruins lay in an area most would agree is unfit for human habitation. It is a bleak

desolate area with absolutely no creature comforts. However, history shows that the city once

had one of the oldest and most colorful pasts of any civilization in the world – yesterday and

today. It was a flourishing Neolithic Village, consisting primarily of farmers and herdsmen,

dating as far back as 7000 B.C. It later became the capital of the Nebataean Kingdom, home of

the still present Bedouin tribe from North Arabia. Petra grew to be a great center of commerce

that controlled most of the trade among the Orient, Arabia, and Europe. It was no small player

in the wealth of the age. It continued to prosper under the control of Rome and Byzantine rule.

It seemed it would survive forever. Then – it was abandoned and forgotten to history for

thousands of years.

In the beginning Petra was located in a lush, heavily forested region, just like Easter Island and

the Anasazi, with vast areas of oak and pistachio trees. Also, just as its predecessors, the trees

were eventually cut for agriculture and for grazing goats and sheep. The forests were replaced

with shrubs and grasses as late as the time of Roman rule. Through soil erosion and depletion

of crops and grasses the desert encroached and we find the desolation seen today. Even with

26

the installation of elaborate channels, and water storage systems to capture the ever-

decreasing water resources, Petra faded away from its former glory just as did the civilizations

of Easter Island and the Anasazi, and virtually every other culture one would want to explore

from history.

Final Thoughts on Civilization

Regardless of how many civilizations archaeologists study, one central theme continues to

dominate. With the passage of time ALL civilizations, from their birth, continue to grow,

decline, and finally die – WITHOUT EXCEPTION! The growth in population, and all things

associated with that growth, outpaces the ability of the land to recover from what is taken from

it. Humans need to realize just how powerful Mother Nature is. She doesn’t care if humans

occupy the Earth or not. In fact, we are only here by invitation. What she does care about is

the health and vitality of the Planet and will do whatever is necessary to protect that one fact.

There are earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, tornados, hurricanes, winds, heat, cold, and a host of

other tactics that nature will impose to ensure the future of the planet. Mother Nature is the

epitome of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. And, knowing the reality of entropy, she will

do whatever she can to mitigate this empirical law for as long as possible – yes – even if it

means the obliteration of the human race. If humanity is as smart as it believes it is, if it really

believes that one must know and understand history if it is to survive, then it first needs to

understand that civilizations have failed in the past and that they will surely fail again in the

future. One other thing needs to receive special attention. It is known that most of the “great”

civilizations of the past have lasted for about 200 years – America has recently passed that

threshold. Perhaps it’s a fluke, perhaps it’s due to intelligence, or perhaps it’s due to luck. No

one knows for sure. What is known, however, is that none of us are doing enough to help

ensure our longevity. Greed and the eternal quest for immediate gratification are ensuring

that. H.L. Mencken, unfortunately, was correct. There have been many proverbs, poems, and

adages attesting to the innate human propensity to fail. Yes, profound words have been

spoken, but none more truly than man will fail again.

27

A final metaphor is appropriate for the end of this section. It ties together the concepts of

Conservation of Energy, the Laws of Thermodynamics, Entropy, and Civilization. It comes from

Howard Odum’s Net Energy from the Sun in Lyons and is cited in Jeremiah Rifkin’s landmark

text entitled Entropy. It identifies, in four short lines, the ultimate effects of Causality.

1. It would take about 300 trout to feed one man for one year. (not feed well, but keep

alive)

2. These fish would need to eat about 90,000 frogs to survive for one year.

3. These frogs would need to eat 27,000 grasshoppers to survive for one year.

4. These grasshoppers would need to eat 1,000 tons of grass to survive for one year.

We should now multiply this by 6.6 Billion! And then ask the following questions – Does this

figure represent a prudent management of resources? Does anyone really think the planet can

continue to supply enough to maintain the global civilization present today for much longer? If

not - then for how long? What should be changed? Does anyone really care?

28

Civilization Today

Unchecked population growth, dwindling of resources, devastation of land, pollution of

water, serve as a grim reminder of the limitations of technology to circumvent

tragedy. Dr. Kara Cooney, “Out of Egypt”, Discovery Channel

Cramming more and more stuff into less and less space creates a tense environment that can

only lead to disaster. It’s happened over and over and will happen again. Wikipedia

For every society (civilization) that has something there is another that wants it. Inevitably, this

causes political conflict that result in skirmishes and sometimes war. That’s just the way things

work in the world. It’s the way it has always worked. We already recognize this phenomenon

as the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Shakespeare says it another way: Tempt not a

desperate man.

Figures from US Census Bureau and UN Population Fund

Chart made in Open Office Spreadsheet

“500” “1000” “1500” “1700” “1900” “1960” “1987” “1993” “1999” “2006” “2011” “2012” “2022” “2040” “2050”

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

World Population Growth

in Billions

Column B

Year

Po

pu

latio

n

“1900” “1910” “1920” “1930” “1940” “1950 “1960” “1970 “1980” “1990” “2000” “2011”

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

U.S. Population Growth

in Thousands

Column B

Date

Po

pu

latio

n

29

Nina Fedoroff, science and technology advisor to Condoleezza Rice in the last administration,

and now to Hillary Clinton, tells the BBC that humans have exceeded the Earth's Limits of

Sustainability. (Life Science, March 31, 2009)

By definition, a Population is all the organisms that both belong to the same species and live

in the same geographical area. In sociology, population refers to a collection of human beings.

(Wikipedia) Given this definition, how would we answer the following question - What is the

same geographical area occupied by humans today that identifies them as a civilization?

Of course, the answer is the entire planet. No longer do we have the luxury to trade goods

merely across the river, or play sports with neighbors on the other side of the county. Today,

everything happens on a global scale, and the problems or blessings affecting one area affect

everyone else, wherever they may be geographically located (remember the “Butterfly Effect”).

What is the number one phenomenon that has always caused a collapse of civilizations - great

and small? What did Nina Fedoroff mean when she said that the human population had

already exceeded the Earth's Limits of Sustainability? Simple - she was saying that the body-

human had procreated itself beyond the capacity of the planet to recover from the energy the

population has taken from it. We know it happened in the past, but somehow seem to think

that technology; good government; good planning; and good luck are going to keep it from

happening again. Folks - it just ain't so! All these things may postpone collapse for awhile, and

they have. But the fact remains - There is only so much usable energy and when that’s gone

the system will move from a sense of order to one of chaos. It’s inescapable, it’s going to

happen, and ultimately there’s nothing we can about it. The Laws of Thermodynamics and

Entropy prove it. Remember, they these not hypotheses, not theories, not the mental

delusions of some idiot or fringe crackpot. They are fundamental laws of physics. They are

laws of the universe.

As of May 15, 2011, the world population was estimated to be 6.918 billion. (US Census Bureau)

They also noted that it hit 6.5 billion in 2006. On October 12, in 1999 the population was

30

thought to be 6 billion. (UN Population Fund) This date was a mere 12 years after the world

count hit 5 billion in 1987, and 6 years after it hit 5.5 billion in 1993. Take a look at the graphs

at the beginning of this section.

Of course, these figures have a hefty margin of error since it is all but impossible to obtain

accurate figures from the developing world and from those that have attempted to isolate

themselves from the rest of global society. Hefty - yes, Unimportant - no. However we

interpret these figures, it remains simple to see that there are more humans on the planet

today than there were last year. In fact, it looks almost exponential. There can be no dispute

on this one disturbing fact - Earth has just so many and so much resources. The resources that

humans enjoy using at such a dizzying rate today took millions of years to create. When they're

gone - they're gone as far as humanity is concerned!

Thomas L. Freidman, one on our favorite authors and commentators, recently had an article in

the New York Times on June 7, 2011, entitled The Earth is Full. He asks in this article: What

were we thinking? How did we not panic when the evidence was so obvious that we’d

crossed some growth/climate/natural resource/population redlines all at once? His answer

seems so simple – It can only be denial. He was quoting Paul Gilding, the veteran Australian

environmentalist-entrepreneur, who described this moment in a book called The Great

Disruption: Why the Climate Crisis Will Bring On the End of Shopping and the Birth of a New

World. In turn, Gilding quotes the work of the Global Footprint Network, an alliance of

scientists who calculate how many planet Earths we need to sustain our current growth rates.

In the final analysis we learn we are eating into the future such that we now need about 1 ½

planets to sustain ourselves. And, that revelation, by itself, causes quite a problem for us since

we don’t have 1 ½ planets, we only have 1. His, and Gilding’s final observation says in a few

lines what we will learn to be the real problems facing us:

We’re currently caught in two loops: One is that more population growth and more

global warming together are pushing up food prices; rising food process cause political

instability in the Middle East, which leads to higher oil process, which leads to higher

food [prices, which leads to more instability. At the same time, improved productivity

means fewer people are needed in every factory to produce more stuff. So if we want

31

to have more jobs, we need more factories. More factories making more stuff made

more global warming, and that is where the two loops meet.

Working from this premise, we hope to explore the consequences of these loops and make it

clear that our current lifestyles are completely unsustainable. We also hope to show why a

small cadre of myopic conservative writers keeps trying to convince us that we are just crying

wolf.

What has been learned to this point? History has seen civilizations come and go. They have

created cities strategically located. These cities allowed for the diversification of labor into

areas best suited to the needs of its occupants. They have allowed for ever-expanding trade

routes resulting in a mixing of cultures that expanded human understanding through the arts

and sciences. They have been the nexus of scientific inquiry, mathematics, and language that

have allowed the creation of a plethora of “gadgets” that make life ever-more enjoyable and

fruitful. Society has been taught that Cities are great things – that civilization is a great thing.

But, is this really true? Take another look at what Dr. Cooney had to say about it at the very

beginning of this section. Is it possible to find the fulcrum point between all the good things

about civilization and all the bad things? Helmut Werner had a few things to say about

civilization in his book entitled Decline of the West, first published in 1926. Can you see

anything in his writing that sounds familiar today? Unless you live in a cave and have no access

to information, you probably heard or read something just like this already today (maybe in

more vernacular terms).

For every Culture has its own Civilization. In this work, for the first time the two

words, hitherto used to express in an indefinite, more or less ethical, distinction, are

used in a periodic sense, to express a strict and necessary organic succession. The

Civilization is the inevitable destiny of the Culture, and in this principle we obtain the

viewpoint from which the deepest and gravest problems of historical morphology

become capable of solution. Civilizations are the most external and artificial states of

which a species of developed humanity is capable. They are a conclusion, the thing-

become succeeding the thing-becoming, death following life, rigidity following

expansion, intellectual age and the stone-built, petrifying world-city following mother-

earth, and the spiritual childhood of Doric and Gothic. They are an end, irrevocable,

yet by inward necessity reached for again and again.

32

Stressed over and over in this article is the fact that Civilization is a process that follows the

same path of birth, growth, decline, and death. So, by definition, the civilization(s) known

today shall die as well – it’s the inevitable process humanity works hard to deny. While

Civilization is the cause, and death is the effect. Entropy proves that out of order comes chaos.

Werner terms it a Progressive Exhaustion of forms that have become inorganic or dead. That

says a lot about what the machinations of war, economy, legislation, psychology, sociology, and

technology are all really about. His final thought contains a word worthy of note. Remember

this word as you read through the status of civilization today, particularly as it applies to the

United States.

For it will become manifest that, from this moment on, all great conflicts of world-

outlook, of politics, of art, of science, of feeling, will be under the influence of the same

contrary factor. What is the hallmark of a politic of Civilization today, in contrast to a

politic of Culture yesterday? It is, for the Classical rhetoric, and for the Western

journalism, both serving that abstract which represents the power of Civilization –

money.

33

Global Extinction Events

Largely Beyond Human Intervention

It’s not a matter of if, but when. Take your pick of any scientist

End of the World, Doomsday, Ragnarok, Judgment Day, Armageddon, Apocalypse, Yawm al-

Qiyamah, etc. – Any Encyclopedia on The End

To this point, civilization has been pretty well documented and defined for the scope of this

paper. It is clear that no civilization can survive indefinitely. They all have and will continue to

follow a clear path to extinction. Before moving on to specifics regarding the social impacts of

civilization it is instructive to take a look at some of the things that can bring ruin to the world

as we know it, but are largely beyond our control. These are known as species extinction

events that usually don’t take years or centuries to reach manifest destiny. They will normally

occur in an instant, or at least on very human time scales. While the odds of many of these

events are very low, they do exist and will, beyond question, happen someday. Many have

happened before on planet Earth. Fortunately, humanity has escaped their direct devastation -

so far. The question of whether humans will survive to witness them next time is still very

much in question. The reality remains however, these are the types of risks where the outcome

could literally annihilate intelligent (?) life on Earth, or at least compromise its ability to further

reach its potential.

Super-Volcano

Scientists can identify at least seven (7) Super-Volcanoes scattered around the planet. The

most familiar to the United States is located within Yellowstone National Park. Like the

Hawaiian Island chain, the Yellowstone volcano is located over a hot spot – a crack in the crust

that allows magma to collect in a huge caldron of very hot and viscous liquid rock full of toxic

gasses, all under tremendous pressure. When the pressure gets high enough and the collection

large enough, a massive eruption occurs. Current geological evidence suggests that

Yellowstone has erupted three times throughout its history, the last occurring about 640,000

years ago. The data also suggest that it erupts approximately every 600,000 years. That means

34

its due for another eruption right now. It’s also known that it is just as powerful today as it ever

has been. This is bad news for humanity.

If Yellowstone were to erupt today it would eject magma and ash, along with copious amounts

of gasses from its massive caldera that would cover the entire US West of the Mississippi River.

The sheer amount of greenhouse gasses would likely alter the atmosphere to the extent that a

runaway greenhouse effect would result. Millions would perish directly from the eruption, and

possibly billions would die from its after-effects that would likely be significant. It has been

proffered that a Yellowstone eruption would be comparable to exploding the atomic arsenal of

the entire Earth at the same time on the same spot. Knowing that there are sufficient atomic

warheads to obliterate every man, woman, and child, several times over, gives us a fair idea of

just how devastating such an eruption would be for the planet and every living thing on it.

Food supplies would be drastically affected through the destruction of the world’s bread

basket. The commercial infrastructure would be obliterated for most of the country causing

global shortages of critical supplies. The economic effects by themselves would be beyond

comprehension. Global temperatures would drop drastically and likely last for years. The

eruption of any super-volcano on Earth would be nothing short of catastrophic and it just

happens to be a more likely event than most others this article will mention.

One final example of a super-eruption is beyond doubt the grand-daddy of all volcanic

eruptions. Known as the Siberian Mass Eruption, it is estimated to have directly caused the

extinction of over 90% of all species alive at the time. This series of eruptions lasted for over a

million years and occurred between the Permian and Triassic Boundaries around 250 million

years ago. Sometimes called the Great Dying, it covered an area of between 2 and 7 million

square miles, depending on one’s source. One thing is agreed on however – it took the planet

nearly 30 million years to recover from the devastation resulting from this massive event.

(Wikipedia) How long it would take to recover from a super-volcanic eruption is anybody’s

guess, but it wouldn’t be within one human lifetime.

35

Mega-Tsunami

A Mega-Tsunami means a great big tsunami. One could theoretically destroy the entire East

or West Coast of the United States. It is known that a significant percentage of humans live

within a few miles of the coastline of every continent. With high population densities comes

complex and very expensive infrastructure supporting a sizable economy. A Mega-Tsunami

would cause devastation on such a gargantuan scale that millions of people would perish or be

displaced from their homes. Businesses would be obliterated. The costs would be staggering at

a time when civilization could least recover from its effects.

These events can be caused by multiple scenarios. While none would likely destroy all of

humanity, there is no doubt that it would take decades, if ever, to recover. Remember the

recent Tohoku earthquake that caused a relatively small tsunami in Indonesia, but killed over

225,000 people and destroyed hundreds of square miles of land. The loss of life and the cost

economically, while tragic, were miniscule when compared to a mega-tsunami. No doubt – the

world doesn’t want one to happen anytime soon.

Meteorite Impact

The Earth has been impacted by meteorites since its very beginning. In fact, these collisions

have served to make the planet what it is today and has given us a large moon to help control

Earth’s complex weather systems. Even after the 4.5 billion years Earth has been in existence it

is still bombarded every day with millions of small bodies that add several tons of meteoric

debris to the planet. The “shooting stars” that can be seen streaking across the night sky are

nothing more than small bodies that are burned away as they enter the atmosphere. The

problem arises when they are too big to burn up in the atmosphere and hit the surface.

Depending on size, little damage, to species-ending events can happen.

The most recent event known happened at about 7:14 a.m. on June 30, 1908 in a remote

Siberian forest. Known as the Tunguska Event, it is thought to have been caused either by a

meteorite or a comet a few tens of meters in diameter. Scientists agree that it exploded

between 3 and 6 miles above the Earth (still considered an impact), and had an energy output

36

equivalent to 10 to 15 mega-tons of TNT. That would make it nearly 1,000 times more powerful

than the Hiroshima or Nagasaki atomic bombs. The event completely leveled approximately

830 square miles of forest and destroyed an estimated 80 million trees. This was a big

explosion – caused by a relatively small object. The kinetic energy stored in these things is just

immense because of their tremendous speed. Just imagine the consequences if it had been a

few tens of kilometers across. Luckily, it happened in a nearly unpopulated and extremely

remote area and caused few human deaths. However, such an event in a metropolitan area

could have cost millions their lives and billions of dollars (if not trillions) would have been lost.

Certainly NOT something that would be welcomed today in any part of the world.

Approximately 50,000 years ago a meteorite about 160 feet in diameter hit in what is now

Northern Arizona near the town of Winslow travelling at about 29,000 miles per hour. The

event caused a crater about 4,000 feet deep and ¾ of a mile across. This well-preserved crater

is a popular tourist attraction to this day.

The most talked and written about impact happened 65.5 million years ago, just off the Yucatan

coast in Mexico, near the town of Chicxulub. The crater that was formed was named after the

town. Also known as the K-T Event, this Everest-Sized hunk of rock is believed to have played a

significant role in the extinction of the dinosaurs. The crater from this asteroid is measured to

be over 180 km (110 mi.) in diameter. Such an impact today would certainly have a dramatic, if

not fatal, effect on humanity. At that time it is believed that the event caused the extinction of

over 50% of the flora and fauna alive on the planet.

Today, there is a world-wide effort to identify and track these bodies and determine if they

pose a danger for the Earth. Oddly, with the millions of rocks orbiting in the asteroid belt

between Mars and Jupiter, there are only a hand-full of astronomers involved in this task. In

fact, it has been observed that the total number equals about one shift at any McDonald’s

restaurant. And, identifying them is just part of the deal. There is still no consensus on what to

do if they are found to pose a problem, and whose responsibility it is to do it. It seems there

are too many substantially more mundane issues that require the attention of the world’s

governments.

37

Other Cosmic Threats

There are a host of other threats that could or will happen. However, for the purposes of this

paper, the odds are too great or will occur too far in the future to be of much interest to most.

For instance, the Andromeda Galaxy and the Milky Way (Our) Galaxy will collide in about 3

billion years. The Sun will burn through its store of hydrogen in about 5 billion years and grow

into a Red Giant that will likely intersect Earth’s orbit and burn it to a cinder. A massive star

may go Super-Nova and burn away the Earth’s atmosphere in a Gamma-Ray Burst. Lots of

cosmic events could and someday will, wipe the planet clean of every form of life. But, these

are things humanity cannot control anyway. It is unlikely that any civilization, no matter how

advanced, could avert such things. So, there’s effectively no reason to worry about them.

Other Threats to Humanity that CAN be Controlled

However, there are some humanity-ending events that could happen if people continue to act

in the inappropriate ways history has recorded. These are the threats that come from

humanity itself. Some will be briefly discussed here – others in more detail in later sections.

Each of these is explained in detail in Wikipedia (keywords: risks to civilization)

Warfare and Mass Destruction. For decades, there has been a fear of annihilation by Nuclear

War. Today, even after the end of the Cold War and all the Nuclear War Treaties, there remain

sufficient nuclear weapons to destroy humanity several times over. Many will remember the

Doomsday Clock that ticked away for years during the height of this fear. The possibility for

nuclear war certainly exists, but is unlikely to be species-ending today. More likely would be

the use of “dirty” bombs that would cause little structural damage, but would contaminate vast

areas with nuclear fallout, essentially making these areas unfit for use.

Technology continues to progress at an ever-increasing rate as a consequence of Moore’s Law.

This law says that technology will tend to double every 12-18 months – and this has been the

case for over two decades now. Advances in software and hardware should keep this law in

vogue for a couple more. But sooner or later it will break down because of something called

Quantum Mechanics. It seems there is a limit to the size of circuits (about 5 atoms across)

38

before electrons begin to leak out and do strange things. This means we are just about to the

point we can’t make things any smaller without entering the Quantum World – the World of

Uncertainty. Without spending a lot of time on this phenomenon, suffice it to say that

technology has progressed sufficiently to be bumping against this wall today. This is precisely

why so much effort is going into research on quantum computers. The point of this discussion

is that, while there currently is NO Doomsday Machine, one may appear one of these days and

we must wonder if humans have the common sense and wisdom to handle it with care, and,

even more importantly, why one would want to build one in the first place.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Gray Goo. Kaku spends quite a bit of time discussing AI and this

Gray Goo stuff. Following on the work of Isaac Asimov, Kaku cites the distinguishing difference

between the ability of the machine and the common sense of the organism. It is this difference

that ultimately makes the difference. The time is probably not far off when machines really will

be “smarter” than humans. But, “smart” and “wise” are two completely different things.

Hopefully, humans can emerge to be a bit wiser to ensure that this difference remains.

There are a few facts and observations that are appropriate here regarding the development of

the machine. While not necessarily important to the discussion, they are just plain interesting

and do give a glimpse of just how much machines have changed in the past few years. Here

Goes!

Just About Computers

Both writers of this article graduated from the “hallowed halls” (they don’t seem so hallowed

anymore) of academe in the 60’s and 70’s with doctorates in Education, one with an Ed.D., and

the other with a Ph.D. One went the route of the University, the other chose Community

College administration. But one thing was the same – both conducted their dissertation

research on a huge energy-hungry main-frame computer programmed with punch-cards. In

fact, at the time there were a multitude of programs all over the country to teach one how to

become a Punch-Card Specialist – the job for the future. That seemed a bit odd since it took

only about a day to learn enough to punch the cards needed for our respective research. These

were massive machines, filling rooms with racks of blinking, humming what-cha-ma-call-its. It

39

took shifts of technicians to keep things running, and they required massive amounts of air-

conditioning to keep them from literally melting into the floor. These machines represented

humanity’s best effort. And, guess what university professors were teaching about technology

in those days. Speaking from experience – the main topic was primarily what to with all the

leisure time that was going to be generated through all that technology! Yep – what to do –

indeed! Anyway, what about the computer?

Most agree that the first real electronic computer was the ENIAC (Electronic Numerical

Integrator and Computer). It was plugged into electricity in 1943, had 18,000 vacuum tubes

(what is a vacuum tube?), covered 1,500 square feet of floor space, generated enough heat for

several homes during winter, and consumed 160 kW of power. It didn’t do much!

Then, in 1951 the UNIVAC (Universal Automatic Computer) blinked to life. It was considered

the first commercially available computer. They sold about 46 of them. Made in the U.S., it

had 5,200 vacuum tubes, consumed only 125 kW, and cost a bit more than $1 million. It didn’t

do much either.

But, by the late 70’s and early 80’s, the PC (Personal Computer) became fairly common. At that

time they cost about $3 thousand, had no vacuum tubes, and could be positioned on a desktop.

Hence, the term Desktop Computer was added to geek parlance. They didn’t do that much

either – unless one was a proficient programmer.

Assume you went to sleep in the 80’s, played Rip van Winkle for 30 or so years, and awakened

to the world of today. Relating to computing power – what would you find?” There are

Gadgets Galore, each capable of astounding things, cluttering every aspect of daily life. There

are TV’s hanging on the wall that can surf something called the internet – even floating around

in something else called the cloud. Little boxes can immerse us in fantasy with nothing more

than a handheld gadget with a few buttons and toggles. Egad! – What is that thing hanging on

your belt that beeps and rings every little bit? Who are you talking to on that 3”x4” piece of

plastic? Are you watching a movie on it at the same time? The list goes on and on - practically

forever. There are gadgets in your ear, sitting on your lap, carried under your arm, a few still on

desktops, but not as many, there are gadgets everywhere, integrated into the mundane lives of

40

nearly everyone in the developed world. Now – here’s the point. Nearly every one of these

gadgets can easily out compute, out process, and out perform any of the $3 thousand machines

of the 80’s, and way out compute the $1 million machines of the 50’s. In fact, in the 80’s there

were a very few computers around called Supercomputers (they are still around by the way).

These were the crème-de-la-crème. Probably the most recognized name was the Cray Series.

By way of comparison, the Cray 2 was about the size of a bathtub and you probably couldn’t

have afforded one. Unless you were an accomplished programmer in some unfathomable

machine language, you probably couldn’t have used it either. But, they were very fast and did

great things. Here’s the point – the iPad, or nearly any other small tablet of today, and most

smartphones too, can easily out-compute the Cray 2 of the 80’s in nearly every respect. These

are things that are easily held in the hand, don’t generate much heat, and can literally run for

hours off of a small battery that’s included within the gadget. That, in and of itself, is almost

unbelievable. But, they can also do a lot of additional interesting things unheard of in the days

of the Cray 2. Yes – technology has changed a lot since you went to sleep and it’s no surprise

that you are a bit overwhelmed and groggy. Relax – you’ll maybe catch-up only to learn that

during the next 30 years, if humanity lasts that long, technology will change even more and a

whole lot faster. If Moore’s Law survives a decade (evidence is that it will survive at least two),

then the technology of today will double again. That means more gadgets that will do more

things a lot faster, easier, and efficiently than those of today. This is an exciting time. However,

the same question exists – will humanity have the wisdom to handle all this technology without

escalating the slide into civilization’s death? As always – time will tell.

Climate Change and Ecology

There have been a number of Climate Change Models that predict the Earth becoming more

like Venus unless steps are quickly taken to mitigate the effects of Global Warming. These two

last words just may have become the most contentious statement made in the last 100 years.

This is such an important issue that it will appear again later in this article. However, the Earth

has been warming since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, and this rise poses a great

threat to humans in several densely populated areas of the world. Whether this rise is caused

41

by the activity of humans or whether it is nothing more than the normal processes of the Earth

is a point for debate. But it is warming and it is becoming a problem for literally millions and

will have a dramatic effect on the complexion of civilization unless something is done to

mitigate these effects. Any review of current literature will show that an immense population

is concentrated along the biggest rivers in Asia and are dependent upon the glaciers for that

water. Right now, it affects nearly one-half of the planet’s human population. Another

example is the West coast of America that depends on glacier melt from the Rocky Mountains,

Cascade Mountains, and the Sierra Nevada. The California Department of Water Resources

states that if more water supplies are not found by 2020, California will face a water shortage

equal to the total amount consumed today.

From an ecological standpoint, arable land depletion is getting so severe that, if current trends

continue, Africa will only be able to feed about one-quarter of its total population by 2025. Just

ONE global crop failure could collapse the entire ecosystem, due entirely to the present trends

of over-population, and the driven quest for Economic Development. Given the problems of

transportation costs, and shortages nearly everywhere we look, the prospect of “business as

usual” becomes a real problem. Unfortunately, these are the kinds of issues that are easy to

miss among all the other issues facing civilization today. Although this business of ecology and

agriculture will be discussed later in more detail, it is important that we understand the

mechanics of population growth and agriculture. The 20th Century will be remembered for the

rapid increase in the human population, driven almost entirely by medical discoveries and

agricultural productivity. Experts call it The Green Revolution. During the middle thirty years of

the 20th century agriculture enjoyed a 250% increase in growing capacity. It was this single

development that sustained the tremendous increase of humanity on the planet, but it did not,

nor can it sustain this kind of growth forever. Remember – the rapid rise in population always

eventually outpaces the ability of the land to sustain it. When this happens, civilizations begin

their terminal decline. What makes this even more problematic is the fact that there is a direct

relationship between this Green Revolution and the dramatic increase use of Fossil Fuels. Yes –

this enigmatic and finite resource is the lynchpin of the Revolution. It provided the fertilizers,

pesticides, and irrigation needed for the dramatic rise in growing capacity and the

42

transportation infrastructure to deliver it. That adds up to natural gas, oil, and hydrocarbons.

Does that equation sound familiar? It seems almost prophetic to understand how a finite

resource, that seemingly contributes to the current problems in climate and weather, is what

allowed the population to expand so rapidly, that, ultimately, will result in the demise of the

civilization enjoyed today. For now, suffice it to say, this will become the single most important

challenge in the decades to come, whether or not humans are the cause.

Global Pandemic

The issue of some sort of global pandemic catastrophe is not as easy to pin down as some of

the other Can Deal With issues discussed. There is no question, however, that tinkering around

with DNA, and dabbling with the turning on and off of genes, can have severe and probably

unintended consequences. There is also no question that despite the agreements and treaties

a number of countries around the world have stockpiled copious amounts of biological

pathogens and chemical compounds that could be used in some sort of conflict. It is also

known that these conflicts are going to occur with much greater frequency than they have in

the past. History tells us they will. Remember – this is an integral part of what it is to be a

civilization.

Ice Age

Climatologists have identified twelve ice ages for Mother Earth. What this means is that the

climate enjoyed today is not typical for the planet. This is called an Interglacial Period and it

won’t last forever. Should another ice age appear today there would be serious and possibly

fatal consequences for civilization. Vast areas of land in North America, Europe, and Asia would

suddenly become uninhabitable. It’s easy to forget that all of civilization has happened since

the end of the last ice age. It’s also easy to deny just how easy it is to cause another one. This

too will be detailed later in this article. However, it is a geological fact that should the

temperature of the planet rise enough to cause enough of the world’s ice sheets to melt, the

Thermohaline Conveyor System would cease and much of North America, Europe, and parts of

Asia would again be in the grip of an ice age. The sheer impact, both economic, and biological,

would be changed, possibly forever. Folks – this is something civilization doesn’t want to

43

happen, and given what is known about the workings of weather/climate/sea currents, it

doesn’t have to.

Scenario Review

Where does civilization stand right now? This article has either mentioned or implied a number

of things. Some will agree, some won’t, and that’s OK. If reading has engendered some

questions, then the effort has been worth it.

1. Peak Oil – more later. It’s probably already happened!

2. Antibiotic Resistance - Technological tinkering with the components of life is dangerous.

3. Gulf Stream Shutdown - This is the Thermohaline Conveyor. Another Ice Age?.

4. Mutual Assured Destruction – there exists the capacity to destroy all of humanity

several times over.

5. Overpopulation - Another Civil War on a Global Scale?

6. Famine – When will population exceed the ability of the land to sustain it?

7. Experimental Accident – Technology Again – Friend or Foe, or Both?

8. Dysgenics – Dabbling in Genetics can be Bad!

9. Hypercane - Are storms getting stronger and bigger? More later.

10. Economic Collapse – It’s almost happened a number of times. Why?

11. Mass Extinction – It’s only OK if it isn’t humanity’s fault.

12. Overconsumption – Humans want more and more for less and less. Soon they’ll want

everything for nothing.

13. Colony Collapse Disorder – Anarchy is always the consequence. (List found on

Wikipedia)

44

The Future for Civilization

From the Perspective of Many

We have reviewed a mountain of articles, books, charts, and looked at conclusion after

conclusion from experts in all kinds of disciplines in an attempt to conceptualize a future for

civilization, knowing in advance where it’s going, regardless. A repeat of science’s favorite

quote is appropriate – It’s Not a Question of If, But When. For us, at least, we found no better

conceptualization than that of Derrick Jenson in his epic work Endgame. Here is the

bibliographical information and we highly suggest that everyone who is interested in our future

to read it. It’s well worth it!

Endgame, by Derrick Jensen. Published by Seven Stories Press, 2006, 2 volumes, 931pgs. ISBN

1-58322-730-X and 1-58322-724-5.

There are literally hundreds of references to Endgame on the internet. We happen to be

particularly fond of the one proffered by Wikipedia. (keyword Endgame) Derrick Jensen argues

for what many others have found over the years – civilization, by its very design and

philosophy is unsustainable. However, Jensen deviates from his predecessors by telling us

what to do about it. Given what we’ve learned so far about the birth, life, decline, and death of

civilizations so far, the solution is fairly obvious. Civilizations die when the population outgrows

the ability of the land to sustain it. That’s the law of thermodynamics; therefore entropy is the

inevitable outcome. In Volume 1, The Problem of Civilization, he contends that we must

immediately, through a well thought-out plan, destroy civilization. In Volume 2, Resistance,

Jensen talks about the challenges and physical tasks associated with this dismantling. It’s

probably not too surprising that this landmark work has caused a bit of consternation out-and-

about. However, we have found it to be extremely logical in its approach. Obviously we are

not alone. Jensen was named “Person of the Year” by Press Action for publishing Endgame,

which they called “the most important book of the decade.” By its nature, Endgame is

primarily written for those of us who already know the troubles facing civilization in general,

and the one we live in specifically. It probably isn’t for those who are convinced that things are

great, that good ‘ol Uncle Sam is going to take care of us regardless of the messes we get

45

ourselves into. You probably know people just like this. They find it comfortable to think that if

they hear something long enough and often enough then it must be true. Hogwash! In fact,

therein is one of the main reasons civilizations are so unsustainable. We’ll explore this

phenomenon in much more detail later. It is definitely NOT written for those who don’t want

to be bothered with the facts because their minds are already made up. Endgame is a must

read for anyone who is acutely aware of the innate problems of civilization, are fed-up with all

the “feel good” nonsense being spoon-fed to all of us, and who genuinely want to become part

of the solution by getting as far away from the cause as possible.

As mentioned, Endgame is predicated on the belief that civilization, any civilization, is by its

very nature unsustainable. The very things that allow it to spring into life are the very things

that will cause it to die. Yes – this is a circular argument, but it is one that can be found in every

single civilization of the past and one that can be seen developing in any civilization existing

today. Just look around, listen to the news, surf the internet, talk to your neighbors. What do

you see, hear, and talk about? It’s about the economy, work, taxes, wars and conflicts, laws,

the military, the government, and a host of other things that are inherently associated with

civilization and not very many of them are feel-good kinds of things. OK – there is some

pleasant talk about how many neat technological gadgets are available, but, in the end, it’s all

about problems, problems, and problems. Very few conversations can last over a few minutes

without mentioning problems. They are very easy to identify, but seemingly impossible to

solve. Jensen doesn’t believe that for a second! Endgame is structured around 20 premises.

They don’t follow a nice linear path; rather appear as needed to stress solutions.

For example, (taken directly from Wikipedia review):

Because civilization is not sustainable (Premise 1), and because civilization will not

undergo a voluntary transformation (Premise 6), activists should change the ways they

think about and work toward social change. Because every living thing is inextricably

dependent upon the rest of the natural world for survival, sustaining the natural world

is good. Because civilization depends on widespread violence (Premise 3), all civilized

people (even dogmatic pacifists) are complicit in violence simply by their own

participation in the industrial economy. Because civilization is not sustainable

(Premise 1), and sustaining the natural world is good, an act is good insofar as it

46

decreases the ability of civilization to do violence. Because global economy is killing

the planet before our eyes (Premise 1), and because it is not redeemable (Premise 6), it

is wrong to think that personal lifestyle changes we make within the current system

can save the planet. While we are not responsible for existing in the current system

because we did not create it, we are responsible for doing our part to destroy the

system, as this is the only way to stop the destruction of the planet.

Both volumes progress with this kind of thinking. The more interaction among the 20 premises,

the easier it becomes to see and understand the problems and solutions. Volume 2 does spend

considerable time recalling conversations among and between professionals in a number of

disciplines to add credence to Jensen’s arguments. A good example can be found in his visit

with a cadre of computer hackers about the dependence of our industrial civilization upon

unsecured computer systems. We know there are umpteen proprietary programs purporting

to eliminate security problems – viruses, spy-bots, worms, spyware, etc. Somehow, though,

there always seems to be a hole somewhere that a hacker can exploit to wreck havoc with our

systems and to literally steal us blind (oops! Not politically correct). So, don’t think for a minute

that the Red Button is secure from those who don’t have our best interest in mind.

There are a few more notable and philosophical observations available in the Wikipedia Review

that warrants a mention. These quotes happen to appear in Volume 2. Again, we quote

directly:

There are a number of arguments in favor of pacifism that Jensen finds invalid. Love leads to

pacifism. You can’t use the master’s tools to dismantle the master’s house. It’s far easier to

make war than to make peace. We must visualize world peace. To even talk about winning

and losing (much less to talk about violence, much, much less to actually do it) perpetuates

the destructive dominator mindset that is killing the planet. If we just visualize peace hard

enough, we may find it, because, as Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller tells us, ‘Peace is

rarely denied to the peaceful’. Ends never justify means, which leads to Erasmus saying, and

pacifists quoting, ‘The most disadvantageous peace is better than the most just war.’ Gandhi

gives us some absolutism, as well as absolution for our inability to stop oppressors, when he

says, ‘Humankind has to get out of violence only through nonviolence. Hatred can be

overcome only by love.’ Gandhi again, with more magical thinking, ‘When I despair, I

remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have

been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible but in the end, they always

47

fail – Think of it, ALWAYS.’ Violence begets violence. Gandhi again, ‘We must be the change

we wish to see.’ If you use violence against exploiters, you become like they are. Related to

that is the notion that violence destroys your soul. If violence is used, the mass media will

distort our message. Every act of violence sets back the movement ten years. If we commit

an act of violence, the state will come down hard on us. Because the state has more capacity

to inflict violence than we do, we can never win using that tactic, and so must never use it.

And finally, violence never accomplishes anything.

Wow! How many times have we heard one or more of these statements? Most of us, whether

verbally or not, probably believe that truth exists in every one of them, simply because we’ve

heard or read them so often. And, we agree, in utopia, this is fodder for an ideal life. There

remains one problem though – we don’t live in a utopian society. There is too little love and

too much hate, too little peace and too much war. The list goes on and on, and the real truth

remains – the path we walk is unsustainable and we are destined to fail. We have and will

continue to delay the inevitable through diplomacy and technological advancement for a while.

But, the path leads to nowhere and we’re running faster and faster toward it. There remains

one absolute in the mess we find ourselves in – Diplomacy Won’t Work! The time for talking is

over. The philosophy of the 60’s was mainly if it feels good – do it! (replaced with “yes we can”

today), but it didn’t work then and still won’t work now. It’s time to put action to work rather

than our mouths. An Ass loves to hear itself bray. This old adage seems to be about all we

can do anymore. Is this what we’ve become, Asses braying to the world? It’s time for America

to become Proactive rather than Reactive. It’s time for America to get out of the business of

trying to make the rest of the world just like us. This kind of stupidity has led our country to the

brink of bankruptcy and war over and over again. It has cost the lives of thousands and

thousands of the country’s youth, has alienated the rest of the world, has ruined our reputation

across the entire planet, and has allowed the cancer of decay to overtake our entire

infrastructure, and caused the dollar to lose its value. We tout that we have the greatest

military in the world, and we spend literally trillions of dollars on esoteric weapons systems to

prove it, and we can’t even win a skirmish against a bunch of rag-tags out in the middle of the

desert somewhere, wielding weapons that were considered old 30 years ago. Just in case you

don’t know (and contrary to what the government will tell) we haven’t won anything since

WWII! Given where we are today militarily, we must wonder if it all was worth it. Not that

48

anyone cares, but both writers are veterans who, together, served in WWII, Korea, and

Vietnam. We think it’s time to start making the government work for us again, and not for

some tin-badge dictator running amok in who knows where, and certainly not for some fat-cat

whose interest runs no deeper than where his or her next little green piece of paper is going to

come from. It’s time to put compromise and rationalization in the trash where it belongs. And,

it’s time to give us back our Constitution and Bill of Rights. We know there is a rumor floating

around about a recent and former President calling them nothing more than a “g-damned piece

of paper.” For the record - We don’t believe that! But we are also aware that they, over time,

have become treated as such. We love our country and have done our duty for it, just like the

millions before us. We can think of no place better to live on the planet. But we are also

becoming more and more disillusioned and distressed over what’s going on today. More on

these last few sentences a bit later.

Finally, and we know you’ve had a hard time waiting, we present the list of 20 Premises

outlined in Derrick Jensen’s book Endgame. These too are outlined in Wikipedia.

Premise One: Civilization is not and can never be sustainable. This is especially true for

industrial civilization.

Premise Two: Unless destroyed, a traditional community will not voluntarily divest the

resources that have allowed their rise. They also will not allow their land to be damaged

through extraction of other resources. So, it remains, when all things are considered, this all

happens during times of community decline. It sounds exactly like what is happening today

doesn’t it. Remember – we call it Entropy.

Premise Three: Our present industrial civilization would collapse very quickly without the

rapid intervention of violence. Violence is a very effective and legitimized form of population

control. Surely you knew that.

Premise Four: Civilization is based on a clearly defined and widely accepted hierarchy.

Violence by those higher in rank to those of lower rank is almost always invisible. Even when

it is noticed, there are always numerous ways to rationalize why it was needed. When that

same violence happens the other way around, society is shocked and horrified. Just think

about the last newscast you’ve seen.

49

Premise Five: The property of those higher on the hierarchy is more valuable than the lives of

those below. We don’t think we’ve thought of it just this way before, but there definitely is

truth here. Yes – it has become perfectly acceptable for the elite to increase their holdings –

make more money – by destroying the lives of those below. Today we call it production.

However, in the same scenario turned around, we call it justice. Forget about that old adage

about being careful to those you walk over on the way up because you’re going to meet them

again on the way down. Those issues have long-since been legislated away.

Premise Six: Our civilization is not redeemable. That means it is not about to voluntarily

return to a sane and self-sustainable standard of living. Business as usual can only mean that

humanity will continue to degrade the planet, in human and nonhuman ways, by taking energy

away faster than the planet can replenish, until it ultimately collapses. We must never lose

sight of the fact that we shall soon, if we haven’t already, reach a point of no return – a point

where no attempt at mitigation will do any good. That is a scary thought, indeed.

Premise Seven: The longer we wait and/or the longer we delay the inevitable, the greater

the catastrophe will be, and the worse it will be for our progeny. One must wonder if it is truly

moral to subject our future family to such agony and such bleak prospects.

Premise Eight: The needs of the natural world are more important than the needs of the

economic system. Now this is a profound statement and one we seem to have absolutely

backwards. In terms of the natural state of things, we are subjected to endless diatribe about

how we can’t afford it, and that we “can’t get blood out of a turnip.” In reality, what we can’t

do is continue to plunder our precious resources for the sake of the economy. For, what is

wealth without a place to enjoy it?

Premise Nine: Although there will clearly, some day, be far fewer humans than there are at

the present, there are many ways this reduction in population could occur (or be achieved,

depending on the passivity or activity with which we choose to approach this transformation).

The argument is made that, through default, violence will likely be the mechanism by which

population growth is slowed or stopped altogether. But, one thing is for sure: If we do not

approach this issue actively, if we do not talk about our predicament and what we are going

to do about it, the violence will almost undoubtedly be far more severe and the privation

more extreme. That means that the days have passed where we can tiptoe around the issue in

the name of diplomacy. We can scarcely afford to side-step the issue altogether through tactics

that shift the real issues to the sideline in hopes of making it go away. Just listen to any

newscast, read any newspaper. Inevitably, what we see are new committees, even entire

federal departments, being formed to study this and that. New laws and mandates are placed

on record to do who knows what. Hardly ever do we hear a politician speak to the real and

critical issues that underpin the very foundation of our civilization – our society. We daily find

50

ourselves mired in the age-old and circular track of “never do today what you can put off until

tomorrow.” “Let’s just pass a new law, or add another level of supervision and everything

will be OK.” Sadly, we will wake up one day and find that tomorrow has come and gone and

any hopes of the American Dream have long-since vanished. The rich will wonder what

happened and the poor will wonder why they let it happen. There are still a few around that

remember the Great Depression and the desperations and horrors of those years. Today the

evidence is overwhelming; we’re in trouble from every direction. Yes, the Great Depression

was just that. Here’s a revelation to sleep on tonight – Folks, you ain’t seen nothin yet!

Premise Ten: The culture as a whole and most of its members are insane. The culture is

driven by a death urge, an urge to destroy life. Only a fool could miss what our culture is today

– A Big Pile of Greed! We’re sure a dairy farmer would call it something else.

Premise Eleven: From the beginning, this culture – civilization – has been a culture of

occupation.

Premise Twelve: There are no rich people in the world, and there are no poor people. There

are just people. The rich may have lots of pieces of green paper that many think are actually

worth something – or their presumed riches may be even more abstract such as numbers on a

hard drives at some bank – and the poor may not. These rich claim they own land, and the

poor are often denied the right to make that same claim. A primary purpose of the police is

to enforce the delusions of those with lots of pieces of green paper. Those without the green

paper generally buy into these delusions almost as quickly and completely as those with.

These delusions carry with them extreme consequences in the real world. How true! Has

anyone reading this ever realized that we don’t ever actually own anything? Try not paying

your property taxes and find out if you can stay in the house you worked so hard to pay for. Let

the economy collapse and find out if those little green pieces of paper are worth anything.

When the banks finally realize that they are NOT too big to fail, wait and see if those hard drives

give you anything back that you can spend, assuming there is anything to buy. Personally, we

don’t find a lot of optimism here.

Premise Thirteen: Those in power rule by force, and the sooner we break ourselves of

illusions to the contrary, the sooner we can at least begin to make reasonable decisions about

whether, when, and how we are going to resist. We’ll visit this again when we talk about the

distribution of wealth.

Premise Fourteen: From birth on – and probably from conception, but I’m not sure how I’d

make the case – we are individually and collectively acculturated to hate life, hate the natural

world, hate the wild, hate wild animals, hate women, hate children, hate our bodies, hate and

fear our emotions, hate ourselves. If we did not hate the world, we could not allow it to be

51

destroyed before our eyes. If we did not hate ourselves, we could not allow our homes – and

our bodies – to be poisoned. Truism: It’s hard to learn how to love when you’re swimming in

an ocean of hate.

Premise Fifteen: Love does not imply pacifism.

Premise Sixteen: The material world is primary. We really need to start thinking about how

far-reaching this statement is. While we, through faith or whatever you choose to call it, know

that whatever it is that makes us who we are, we are constrained by the reality that real world

actions cause real world consequences. We have already learned that for every cause there are

effect(s). We should have also learned that we can’t count on something ethereal to get us out

of the mess we’ve gotten ourselves into. Yes – the Earth is our primary focus because it is

where we are right now. Regardless of whether or not we believe in the afterlife, we occupy

this planet right now. It’s the only place we have to occupy. Knowing that why do we seem so

intent on destroying it? Why do we so persistently try to ignore the fact that this is not all an

illusion? It’s pathetic!

Premise Seventeen: It is a mistake (or more likely, denial) to base our decisions on whether

actions arising from these will or won’t frighten fence-sitters, or the mass of Americans. –

even Dash–Americans.

Premise Eighteen: Our current sense of self is no more sustainable than our current use of

energy or technology.

Premise Nineteen: The culture’s problem lies above all in the belief that controlling and

abusing the natural world is justifiable. We should never be astonished with all the

rationalizations going on around us every day. After all – we are all responsible for it because

we haven’t done anything to prevent it.

Premise Twenty: Within this culture, economics – not community well-being, not morals, not

ethics, not justice, not life itself – drives social decisions. Well – if none of these things, the

very things our founding fathers espoused so fervently, don’t define our culture, then what

does? We already know the answer, even though we sincerely try to deny and suppress it –

Greed! Indeed, it is sad to reflect on the fact, that if there is a history to read about at some

point in the unidentifiable future, it will say that our lives and civilizations were built on greed.

Therefore, Jensen came up with a few modifications of Premise Twenty.

Modification of Premise Twenty: Social decisions are determined primarily (and often

exclusively) on the basis of whether these decisions will increase the monetary

fortunes of the decision-makers and those they serve.

52

Re-Modification of Premise Twenty: Social decisions are determined primarily (and

often exclusively) on the basis of whether these decisions will increase the power of

the decision-makers and those they serve.

Re-Re-Modification of Premise Twenty: Social decisions are founded primarily (and

often exclusively) on the almost entirely unexamined belief that the decision-makers

and those they serve are entitled to magnify their power and/or financial fortunes at

the expense of those below.

Re-Re-Re-Modification of Premise Twenty: If you dig to the heart of it – if there were

any heart left – you would find that social decisions are determined primarily on the

basis of how well these decisions serve the ends of controlling or destroying wild

nature.

If we follow this train of thought to its logical conclusion we will find that the decision-makers

will do so for their exclusive benefit and to the exclusion of everything and everyone else.

Remember the old saying about absolute power corrupting absolutely? We find it interesting,

but not surprising, that our leadership, in their infinite wisdom, have excluded themselves from

any financial burdens that face the rest of us. Surely we all remember the “too big to fail”

business. The banks and mortgage lenders not only ended up getting bailed out for their

crooked business practices, but have continued to profit from them – by simply transferring all

the risk to the tax-paying part of the population who had nothing to do with it, and by giving

themselves huge bonuses for being clever enough to do so. Not a single one of these financial

elite characters was ever prosecuted for anything. What have we done about it? Nothing!

What could we have done? Nothing! We’d say this was a pretty good deal – for them.

However, make no mistake here - we would have been prosecuted to the fullest extent of the

law. They, as a part of the financial elite, and because a large percentage of the decision-

makers are part of the financial elite as well, the ‘ol you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours

kicked in. Heck of a deal. The financial elite, along with the decision-makers, by being nearly

the same, have developed a mass and motion of their own. Remember the old analogy of the

irresistible force meeting the immovable object? While this may remain a paradox in physics,

it certainly is not a paradox when applied to the government and to the rich. Together they

control such a huge amount of momentum and such a huge mass that virtually nothing can

intervene. Nearly Nothing!

53

Being Politically Correct and Its Aftermath

Some of us remember it well, though we are getting a bit long-in-the-tooth. It was somewhere

in the 60’s and 70’s and, all of a sudden, there was social unrest everywhere. Not that this, in

and of itself, is a new thing. But there was something different about it this time. Suddenly,

everyone was mad at everything and everyone. Yeah – there were nagging problems that had

been around for awhile, it seemed the federal government was absolutely intent on getting its

fingers into everyone’s personal lives, the Vietnam War was going full tilt and, to put it mildly,

people didn’t like it. One of us remembers that the national topic for forensic debate teams

was whether or not the federal government should become involved in education. Today, we

know all too well what the answer should have been, but wasn’t.

Then, out of the blue, there was a new mantra for everyone to hide their sensibilities behind –

make love, not war. Suddenly, masses were seen jumping around on invisible trampolines,

with faces painted in day-glow pastels, and clothing that looked like they came from a dye

factory running on stupid. There was even something on the radio called music. Timothy Leary

became the new guru, so, in addition to having sex on any available patch of grass, we were

supposed to turn on, tune in, and drop out. Unfortunately, it was very clear that there was no

hint as to what we were to turn on, what we were supposed to listen to when we tuned in, and

what we were supposed to drop out of. Hurray! – Good ‘ol Uncle Sam came to the rescue. He

suddenly realized that it was his responsibility to define all this for us. We were supposed to

turn on the government so it could plunder our civil rights, tune in to the gobble-de-gook

leaking out of the hallowed halls of Congress, and drop out of anything that resembled what it

was to be an American with common sense. Here it came, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the

notion that all of our problems were due to our NOT being Politically Correct.

Now, don’t hang us just yet. We acknowledge that discrimination existed (and still does by the

way) as one of humanity’s greatest shortcomings (being stupid is the other). The issue is not

that we didn’t need to change the country’s attitudes. The issue is that the Constitution and

the Bill of Rights already gave us the formula for it. Herein lies the problem, and it has grown

into a monster. In typical governmental knee-jerk, all of a sudden we had a whole new level of

54

government created to enforce what had already been legislated, with the mandate to create a

whole new set of laws so that they could enforce the ones we already had. It wasn’t the

existing laws that needed fixing; it was our individual attitudes toward them that did. And,

unless you haven’t figured it out yet, you cannot legislate morality – no matter how hard you

try. You can certainly pass new laws that will ultimately chisel away at your own civil rights

(and our government is very good at passing laws, and our civil rights have been chipped away

at), but that does absolutely nothing to change personal morality. Here’s the biggy - From its

very beginning, America has endeavored to create a classless society. While we agree in the

concept of the Civil Rights Act, we do not agree with its outcome. With a stroke of a pen, all of

a sudden we had created a multi-leveled and societal dividing, and ultimately crushing, class

system in America that would shame the most feudal systems of the past. It has cost of all

dearly. Yes – even those it was created to protect. We shall see why.

The other issue just happens to be closely related to the first. Now everyone had an issue of

some sort or another. It seems we had a tremendous problem with the English Language.

Then, all of a sudden, politics, ideas, policies, and behavior came into question. Of course, then

we had to address the fact that social, institutional, occupational, gender, racial, cultural, sexual

orientation, religious beliefs, disability, and age-related contexts had to be addressed. Egad! –

The country was literally falling apart around us because of all its earth-shattering

shortcomings. But the government knew the answer – We had to become Politically Correct!

Almost immediately we had a whole new shelf full of laws for the law library. Believe it or not,

we’re still reeling from the after-effects of this effort. All of a sudden it became a cardinal sin to

even speak. It became virtually impossible to get out of bed in the morning without having

already committing a crime of some sort. There was no way to anticipate whose toes you

might step on simply because you chose the “wrong” word. Best to just keep your mouth shut,

keep in doors, and become a hermit. There were nonsensical terms like shim for she/him that

replaced something else. All of a sudden there weren’t any more chairmen; they were

chairpeople, no more firemen, no more trash collectors, no more disabled people, no more

dumb people, no deaf, blind, crippled, or homosexual people. The list grew and grew and

grew… ad infinitum. There isn’t even a BC or AD anymore, and even the gender of God came

55

into question. We certainly had to get this fixed right away. Obviously there weren’t and still

aren’t any more important issues for our government to concern itself with than whether or

not same-sex marriages will be permitted. Wait a minute – we thought we had read

somewhere that, no matter how hard you try, you can’t legislate morality, let alone define what

morality is for everybody. Folks – these kinds of issues aren’t any of the government’s business.

They may rest with the clergy, the psychologists, and the sociologists, but they certainly don’t

need the attention of our Federal Government! The founding fathers had figured this out way

before the original Constitutional Convention. Whose fault is all this silliness? You already

know – It’s Ours! History will show us to be incredibly dumb. Yes, we know that is a politically

incorrect use of terms. So be it! Our dumbness has cost our nation beyond calculation. Not

only in little green pieces of paper, but in our social, psychological, legal, governmental, and

personal make-up as well. We have become hated and laughed at by the rest of the world –

our brothers and sisters! Truly the ridiculous has decayed into the sublime. Through what may

have been originally good intentions grew a monster too big and too dangerous to capture. In

this context – It Is Too Big To Fail!

Just a couple more observation and we promise to move on. We simply must address this issue

of long-term cost a bit further. Just how expensive has it been – really?

It has been observed over and over again that any attempt to pay for past mistakes is simply

too costly and too counterproductive. Remember all the Affirmative Action hoopla? In the

end, all we accomplished was to create a whole new generation of victims that cross every

boundary we hold dear and that were enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the

Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. In this domain the means never justify the ends. There is

only one real answer and only one action that must to be taken. It’s really simple if we would

just do it. That one is to live up to the ideals already outlined for us.

Historically, political correctness meant acting and speaking in a considerate manner with our

brethren. Of course, this has been adulterated beyond recognition and the term itself has

become largely pejorative. We are on a dangerous path today. In a country that celebrates

diversity and culturism at the expense of democracy is doomed to fail. Of course, fail we will.

56

But better we fail because of thermodynamics and entropy. To fail because we forgot what it

was to be an American is painfully unacceptable. We had better decide quickly for time is

short.

We would like to end this section by sharing a speech by former Colorado Governor Dick

Lamm, given at a conference to laud a new book by Professor Victor Hansen on over-

population and over-immigration in California. His book was titled Mexifornia. After Professor

Hansen’s presentation, former Governor Lamm approached the podium and gave a

presentation on how to destroy America. We’re told you could have heard a pin drop. Lamm

outlined eight things we must do if we really want to destroy the United States. He said;

If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let’s destroy it.

It’s not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arthur

Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that ‘An Autopsy of

history would show that all great nations commit suicide.’ Here’s how they do it –

Turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bi-cultural, or multi-cultural country.

History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two

or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be

bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual.

In case you haven’t figured it out yet – he’s talking about being politically correct. When was

the last time you opened a box with some gizmo in it that didn’t have an instruction manual

with fewer than three languages? To continue:

The historical scholar Seymour Lipset put it this way: ‘The histories of bilingual and bi-

cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy.’

Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon, all face crises of national existence in which

minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have

divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques,

Bretons, and Corsicans.

Invent ‘multiculturism’ and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would

make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. I would maintain that there are

no cultural differences. I would make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic

dropout rates are due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other

explanation is out of bounds.

57

We could make the United States an ‘Hispanic Quebec’ without much effort. The key

is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic

Monthly recently: ‘The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural

experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without

the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically and what it meant to be an

American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together. I would

encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the

melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that

we have various cultural subgroups living in America reinforcing their differences

rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities.

Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I

would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to

our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from

high school.

My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to

give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would

establish the cult of “Victimology.” I would get all minorities to think their lack of

success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all

minority failure on the majority population.

My sixth point in the plan for America’s downfall would include dual citizenship and

promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress

differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engages in

hating each other – that is, when they are not killing each other.

A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People

undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks.

The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common

language and literature; and they worshipped the same gods. All Greece took part in

the Olympic Games. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty. Yet all these

bonds were not strong enough to overcome two factors: local patriotism and

geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions. Greece fell E. Pluribus Unum

– From many, one. In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the pluribus

instead of the unum we can balkanize America as surely as Kosovo.

Next to last, I would place all subjects off limits – make it taboo to talk about anything

against the cult of ‘diversity.’ I would find a word similar to ‘heretic’ in the 16th

58

century – that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like ‘racist’ or

‘xenophobe’ halt discussion and debate.

Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multi-

culturism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of ‘Victimology,’ I would

next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra:

That because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good. I

would make every individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact

of millions of them.

Lastly, I would censor Victor Hansen Davis’s book Mexifornia. His book is dangerous.

It exposes the plan to destroy America. If you feel America deserves to be destroyed,

don’t read that book. (this speech appears in numerous sites on the internet. This copy

happens to come from www.strangecosmos.com)

We are told that Lamm received no applause. There was apparently nothing but a solemn

quiet. The conclusion was that everyone in that auditorium understood what he had just said.

They understood just how methodically and quietly, how darkly yet pervasive, the movement

was. They saw just how dangerous the path was and where it led. They knew where the path

of Political Correctness led and what the real cost would be. This was hyperbole to the

extreme. The question is whether or not we understand what the bathos will be. We are not

optimistic.

From here we want to take a look behind the scenes in an attempt to understand the

motivation behind the direction society has chosen. Somewhere in this fog hides the concept

of Greed.

59

The Greed-Based Society

Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where

thieves break through and steal. No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the

one and love the other; or else he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot

serve both God and Mammon. Matthew 6: 19-24.

Corporation, n., An ingenious device for obtaining profit without individual responsibility. Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American columnist and writer of horror stories, as quoted in The

Devil’s Dictionary, 1906

Cheshire Puss, asked Alice. Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here? That depends a good deal on where you want to go, said the Cat. I don’t much care where, said Alice. Then it doesn’t matter which way you go, said the Cat. Lewis Carroll, 1832-1898.

English writer and mathematician, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, 1965.

Although gold dust is precious, when it gets in your eyes it obstructs your vision. His-Tang Tsang, 735-814. Renowned Zen Master.

Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Oscar Wilde, 1854-1900. Anglo-Irish dramatist and poet.

I think you’ll find, when death takes its toll, all the money you made will never buy back your soul. – Bob Dylan

Nearly 2,500 years ago, a Chinese philosopher named Lao Tzu stated: There is no calamity

greater than lavish desires, no greater guilt than discontentment, and no greater disaster

than greed. (newint.org)

There is, in our minds, no truer words ever spoken. And, since we believe it so fervently, we

also contend that we have thus created quite a mess for ourselves. In one way or another

(cause and effect) every ill deed ever committed, manifests itself through greed or one of the

other six deadly sins. It has become so integral to the American society and culture that we

literally can’t see one without the other. Is this really true? What does greed mean? Is there

any way out of this mess? As we explore these questions, we ask you to think back over the

past 30 years or so and try to recall some of the times you, at the time, thought things were

pretty bad. What was the stock market doing? How were the interest rates? What was the

inflation rate? Was the federal government imposing itself into your daily lives? People acted

60

pretty narcissistic even then, and corporations and banks were pulling some pretty nasty stunts

as well. Many will remember those days and can remember how they, and the government,

reacted to them. While maybe not quite as bad, the 90’s saw some of the same exact things

going on. The only real difference was the masses almost entirely ignored them, and the

government certainly did. Why? - Because, out of the blue and very suddenly greed was being

viewed as a very good thing for the economy. Just Imagine! Greed is a good thing.

Economists, Corporate CEO’s, Colleges and Universities, Business Schools and Business Think-

Tanks, Students writing Dissertations, The Fed, and even the President of the United States,

were all espousing the virtues of greed!

Greed is defined as an excessive desire to possess wealth or goods with the intention to keep it

for one’s own self. Greed is known as one of the 7 Deadly Sins in the Bible and a host of other

theological texts, and was more recently familiarized in Dante’s Divine Comedy. (Wikipedia,

keyword greed) Greed is included along with Lechery/Lust, Gluttony, Acedia/Discouragement,

Wrath, Envy, and Pride. Depending on the list some of the words may change due to

translation, but the meanings haven’t changed at all. One other revelation – contrary what

some theologians might tell you, they mean exactly the same thing today as they did when they

were written. For sure, we can identify each of these Deadly Sins everywhere. It permeates

our daily lives, those of our friends and neighbors, and the actions of our elected leaders, local,

state, and federal. When we said the country finds itself in a mess, we meant exactly that. We

have already spent considerable time and space learning about the inevitable path all

civilizations take. Even before greed was factored into the equation, we had already learned

that civilizations are inherently destined to decline and die. Now, to include greed and the

other deadly sins to the list, there is no choice but to determine that they can only serve to

increase the speed of our demise – to literally enhance entropy. We still endeavor to maintain

a tad of optimism about the future, but unless a miracle happens, it’s certainly getting a lot

harder to maintain.

Humans, particularly in the United States, have been conditioned to believe in a consumer

culture. We subconsciously look at ourselves as restless, dissatisfied, and consumer-driven toys

61

to be played with by the rich- and governmental-elite. You may take exception to that picture,

but it should come as no surprise since most of us have whole-heartedly bought into the greed-

is-good mentality. Can anyone out there really give credible debate against the fact that we

have become a flock of sheep being driven from meadow to meadow at the whim of corporate

and governmental greed? Can anyone really deny that we have forsaken the very cornerstones

of what made America great; that we have traded the values that defined America for the sake

of greed? While greed may indeed promote motivation, is that worth our moral character? Is

it worth the destruction of our planet? Are material things really worth all that? We don’t

think so. We remember a recent episode of CSI: Miami, where a corporate big-wig billionaire

committed murder to further stock his larder of little green pieces of paper. The question was

asked: “You have enough money to last anyone several lifetimes. Why did you commit

murder?” His reply: “Believe me, it’s never enough.” Now, in all honestly, doesn’t that sound

a bit too familiar today?

Greed has been promoted to the point that it’s almost sanctified. It has developed a thirst that

cannot be quenched, and a hunger that cannot be fed. Remember the days when you could

almost watch a TV program without being interrupted every five minutes with a commercial

break that lasted five minutes. Remember when you never had to endure “this is a paid

program offered to you by….”? Remember when you didn’t have to get out of bed, or leave the

throne to answer the phone before you could find out what a good deal a telemarketer had for

you? (don’t think for a minute that a don’t call list will help) Remember when you didn’t have

to pay $160/month for the privilege? If you can, then you know that something is different.

Where did the guarantee of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness go? It went to big

business so they could enjoy the profit that you used to call civil rights. Where did the

expectation of privacy in your own home go? When was the last time you felt safe from the

prying eyes of marketers, the police, from the government, when you walked down the street?

How long has it been now since you could get out of bed without having broken yet another

restrictive law designed for the expressed purpose of generating revenue? Greed is literally

making us prisoners by just being alive. Oops! – That’s not entirely true – it actually costs us a

pretty good chunk of change even to die.

62

Why does greed work so well in the world today? Let’s narrow that a bit a just talk about the

US. It seems that any of the deadly sins perform much better when the people that suffer most

from them are at a very low level of wisdom, awareness, and understanding. It works even

better if they are highly undereducated. As revealed earlier, both writers come from academia.

From personal experience, we are acutely aware of the shockingly high number of high school

graduates that came through our doors that could not fill out the application form for

admission. We can tell you documented stories of the number of entering students that

required massive amounts of remediation before they could even enter into college-level work

– and even that has had to be dumbed-down in recent years. Politically correct or not, the sad

facts remain – students emerging from the educational system(s) today in America are ill-

prepared for the challenges facing them. We guess what we’re saying is that, just maybe; we

have totally committed ourselves to greed by allowing ourselves to become a society with low

levels of wisdom, awareness, and understanding. Just maybe the dumbing-down is a valuable

strategy used to pave the way, unimpeded, for an ever-more efficient greed-based economy.

There is quite a precedent behind this kind of economy. In fact, most of us have fallen into the

trap at one time or another. One of the most obvious is the phenomenon of the cell phone.

How in the world did we function at all without a cell phone stuck to our cheek? How did we

ever get any grocery shopping done without consulting with someone at the other end of the

ether? For that matter, how did we ever drive to the store in the first place? But, that’s not the

end of it. Now we have to replace that cell phone every year (sometimes more often than that)

to take advantage of all the new features available on the new model. For sure, we need all the

computing of last year’s super computer in our hands, dictating each and everything we do!

The same applies to computers themselves. Then even they aren’t suitable for all we need to

do. We absolutely have to have the latest iteration of the tablet computer. Then we can be

driven to replace it every few months as well. The same scenario can be applied to any gadget

you choose. After all, what’s more important than keeping up with the Jones? We just won’t

be in the loop without the latest and the best. For Pete’s Sake, some kid in China sold a kidney

so he could buy the latest version of the IPad! Yes – we have bought into the disposable

society. We know, because someone told us that it’s good for the economy, and, therefore,

63

good for us. Never mind those few pesky problems of pollution, habitat destruction, species

extinction, and that silly thing we hear about every day called Global Warming. No doubt that

will emerge as the single greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people. We know it

because Rush told us so! It’s just how nature works. BS! We know it sounds like a broken

record, but it’s as true today as it’s ever been – we have been so conditioned by hearing this

kind of drivel for so long that many of us, to our ultimate peril, have started to believe it. As

long as we continue to infuse our youth with the belief that more is better, that the best people

are the ones with the most stuff, that those with the most are the real heroes, and that

consumption is good, the faster we will see our society fade into oblivion. Kids don’t play

outside anymore. They sit around playing video games, texting on their cell phones, and eat.

Just take a look at the obesity rates for our youth today. It should be declared a national

disaster instead of evidence for the health of the greed-based society.

We’ll take another peek at this issue when we explore the Distribution of Wealth in America.

But now, we need to see if we can get a grip on what’s happened to our workforce. There’s no

question that the unemployment problem is way past desperate. People have simply given up

on the American Dream. Not only that, but those affected the most have been the first to

realize that this has become a global issue. A perfect example has been the creation of the

World Trade Organization. It’s primary and sole purpose is to eliminate all impediments to

the proliferation of transnational corporate activity (newint.org). We’ve said it before and will

say it again; this greed thing has grown into a monster. In fact, it is so prevalent and is so

important to the health of the economy, that it is now being legislated by our own government.

To hell with the American people and the pain and suffering being piled on their shoulders over

the misdeeds of the rich-elite – the economy (hence the greed) is all important. Again, just

think of the too big to fail fiasco – an action that will haunt our country for generations to come

(if it lasts that long). And all the while, somewhere in nearly every speech given by any

legislator of your choice, you’ll hear the term God Bless America (the rest of us can’t talk

publicly about God, but our government can). Why would God (any one you choose) bless the

corporate bottom line over human rights, the sovereignty of the States, and the health of the

planet? Why would God bless a government that passes legislation that virtually eliminated

64

every American’s constitutional right in the name of National Security? Why would God bless a

mantra of greed as a servant of the common good? It has entirely worked its way into the

political philosophy of our country and has developed a kinetic energy that is probably too

forceful to stop.

What about this issue of jobs? The fact is that no matter what we do now there will be no jobs

created through which a worker can provide for their family (barely themselves) today. That

used to be called Upward Mobility. It was way before the collapse Socialism, way before the

time of the high-speed Internet, before our government became known as a part of the Rich-

Elite. This was before there was anything remotely resembling a cap on non-performance-

based pay caps. No one had imagined that corporate America would be able to take the rungs

out of the ladder of success for the individual. Those were the times when an education,

ambition, and hard work could spell success in the job market. But all of that is gone now. All

of those jobs have been out-sourced in the name of corporate greed. All that’s left are Non-

Tradable Domestic Service Jobs. These are the minimum wage jobs that don’t provide

anywhere near something called a livable income. Not to sound demeaning, but these are our

waitress support staff, bartenders, government workers, hospital orderlies, barbers, and retail

clerks. These are the Hands-On kinds of jobs that cannot be sold as exported. Nearly

everything else is gone. Big-Business figured out that this was a way to greatly increase their

bottom lines, to boost shareholder returns, and executive bonuses – by shipping the high-cost

jobs overseas where labor costs were cheaper.

As you would expect, we were sold a bill of goods by Corporate America (and our very own

government as well) by giving us assurances that this was a good thing. We were assured that

if we out-sourced all those dirty manufacturing jobs overseas that the void would be replaced

with nice clean technical jobs that required university degrees that paid more, therefore

enhancing our economy and making things much better for us all. Have you heard that before?

When was the last time promises such as this ever became reality? We were told that America

would again be at the forefront of research and development, design, engineering, financing,

and marketing, and other places, like China, would perform all that nasty stuff required to make

65

what we invented. This was the promise of value-added that would keep us running on high

octane.

Of course, from the outset, this made absolutely no sense. It certainly didn’t take long for the

greedy to figure out that if out-sourcing the dirty things because of lower wages, then shipping

out the rest of the technical job market would be cheaper too. And that’s exactly what

happened. (counterpunch.org) After-all, nothing, absolutely nothing is more important than

the bottom-line in a greed-based economy (now a global thing) – even if it brings the American

economy to its knees. Example after example can easily be found to corroborate the fact that

Corporate America is hard at work shipping technical and design jobs to wherever the

manufacturing part of their operations happen to be located. After all – it’s cheaper! We are

essentially left with a job market that no longer makes things. We no longer have anything to

export. What that leaves us with is an economy that can only buy things by sending what little

wealth is left to other parts of the world. Yes – that’s the reality of why people can’t find jobs

anymore. In fact, it’s rare to find a medium- to large-sized company that is NOT engaged in off-

shoring in one way or another. It’s also easy to confirm that product development, that

phenomenon that was to be our savior in the new-age, is the 2nd largest business function that

is off-shored. counterpunch.org) Oh the bed we have made to sleep in! We have lost what

once defined what America stood for – wealth and prosperity for the masses.

One last issue that we will return to in a later section is the fact that our Dollar is on the brink of

losing its status as the world’s reserve currency. Standard & Poor is considering down-grading

our credit rating from AAA to AA. It doesn’t take a big-wig economist to figure out what effect

either event would have on our standing with the rest of the world – they already know that

our trade deficit, all arising out of our out-sourcing mania, is completely and unswervingly

unsustainable. Just think back to what we’ve learned about Entropy, Thermodynamics, Cause

and Effect, and Civilization. Do you really think we can survive for long? What’s going to

happen to the lifestyle we’ve become accustomed to? Is this the legacy we want to leave to

our future? We don’t think so – but what can we do about it? Will raising taxes on

corporations accomplish anything? Has it ever? We already know that taxing corporations

66

accomplish nothing. Those costs are simply passed along to the consumer, who is already

taxed to the limit. For sure, what we need is a more complex tax code. After all, it’s only about

17,000 pages long already. We’ll talk about the IRS in a later section. What is important to

remember for now is that our workforce is now transformed. What remains is a market for

service-workers that is characteristic of the markets we sent ours to so ours could be better.

Sounds silly, but we bought it again. We think there is something innate in our mentality that

prevents us from learning from our mistakes. There must be because no one in their right mind

would voluntarily let what has happened happen. (Some of these ideas come from an article

written by Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during the Reagan

Administration, was an Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal, and contributed to the

National Review. He is also a coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.)

67

The Distribution of Wealth in America

A hungry man is an angry man. English Proverb

A little too late, is much too late. German Proverb

As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly. Proverbs 26:11

We have learned that a great portion of what it is that defines America as one of the greatest

countries on Earth is now being out-sourced to elsewhere in the world – wherever the cheapest

labor can be found – without much regard for quality – without much forethought on long-term

effects. Indeed, this I want it now mentality has taken precedence over reason. Now we learn

that what little is left is concentrated in the hands of the elite-few who control the

preponderance of the wealth in our country. These are the ones who actually run the country.

To make it even worse than that, these are the ones we also elect to run the country. By proxy,

to look at one is to know the other. In fact, an article in Vanity Fair Magazine entitled “Of the

1%, by the 1%, for the 1%” teaches us that the top 1% of people in the United States take nearly

a quarter of the nation’s income. The article also teaches us that in terms of wealth instead of

income, the top 1% control nearly 40%. For comparison, it wasn’t very long ago that these

figures were 12% and 33% respectively. If the trend continues for the next twenty-five years it

will be 37% and 73%. Again, this is simply unsustainable. The main reason – while the top 1%

may have the best houses, educations, and lifestyles, their fate is inextricably linked to how the

other 99% live. (Vanity Fair, by Joseph E. Stiglitz) Right now the bottom 99% is not doing very

well. This means, of course, that the top 1% will soon start feel the effects of their folly. As the

German Proverb implies, it may already too late for any of us to recover.

We have all become aware of what’s going on in other parts of the world. There are examples

after examples of populations rebelling against oppressive regimes. They have reached the

breaking point and have had enough of the rich few leading them around like so much bovine

being led to slaughter and are willing to risk their lives to gain back some of their basic dignities.

These are riots, anarchies against corruption. This is the epitome of people who have had

enough. History is replete with stories just like this and the outcome is always the same - lots

68

of deaths as people try to regain their dignity in the face of overwhelming odds. The tragedy,

as if any death is really justifiable, is that they are not caused by some far-off enemy. They are

at the hands of their own neighbors. It’s the people against the government and the

government against the people. We can think of no greater sin – and it’s all being caused by

greed! No – please know that we are NOT advocating rebellion against our own. To the

contrary – we think there is an easier and a lot more rational approach than killing each other.

However, we do want to accentuate that everyone has a breaking point. There is a line, drawn

in the sand, that some are simply unwilling to cross. We fear that there is a growing sentiment

among the lower 99% that things aren’t as they should be. Even with the knowledge that the

inevitable is going to eventually bring this all to an end, there remains a contingent that really

wants to delay it for as long as possible. We willingly acknowledge that we are a part of this

group. Sadly, we see in our societal structure one bearing too many similarities to the ones we

once derided. The inequalities we once fought against have become integral to our society

today.

New and just as ineffective jargon has been invented to try and justify the direction of our

society, particularly in the realm of economics. As you would expect, they have long been held

onto dearly by the wealthy. Even in the face of immense embarrassment in the days and now

years after the near-meltdown of the economy, the bastions of greed have held strong and

earned for themselves huge bonuses for their efforts. What a reward for failure. This was

taking place at a time when those responsible for keeping the economy alive, by comparison,

have received a pittance. How else could our country justify paying sports heroes millions upon

millions for playing games, on top of countless other millions for endorsements, at a time when

we are unwilling to pay Ph.D. scientists a decent wage for finding a cures for a devastating

disease? Personally, this entire picture makes us sick. Where has our morality gone? Where

resides our sanity? It certainly doesn’t take a Mensa member to realize that this is an

unsustainable position to find ourselves in.

Too, the old argument that it doesn’t matter how the pie is divided, only the size of the pie,

simply won’t fit in the oven. We have to cut the pie someday. People will not tolerate not

69

doing so forever. When they wake up each morning to find themselves hungrier than they

were the day before, they start to lose hope and will ultimately react through desperation. No

– we need to cook it today and cut it today. We need to cut the pieces into more equitable

slices, because the yeast is likely to fall tomorrow or we may burn it beyond recognition. With

falling yeast comes a smaller pie. The issue of shrinking opportunity is upon us right now.

Compounding this issue is the special treatment perceived for corporate America through a

plethora of tax incentives. Piled this on top of the fact that nearly half of those who file federal

income tax forms end up paying no federal income taxes, and the reality doesn’t take long to

set in. How in the world can corporations and the government continue to take from the poor

and give to the rich? Teachers taught us the exact opposite when we were in school. We are

concerned that society is today standing on that line in the sand. We are afraid that we won’t

be able to pay the utilities to keep the oven hot so we can cook the pie.

The metaphors can go on and on, but the truth remains – we can’t! It is a scientific fact that

nature hates a vacuum. She will do whatever is necessary to regain equilibrium. Of course, as

it applies to social systems, it means that the American economy cannot continue suck all the

wealth out of the top of the economic tornado without something coming in from the bottom

to feed the current. Here we must remember the Second Law of Thermodynamics and the fatal

consequences of Entropy. Mother Nature will invoke entropy if that is the only way to regain

equilibrium – the circle must be completed!

With all limits on campaign spending gone, and with nearly every member of Congress being

among the top 1%, by receiving money from the 1%’s not in the government, and with most

members of the Executive Branch of government being members of the 1% club, one simply

has to wonder how seriously our leaders and law-makers identify with us lowly members of the

bottom 99%. We think this is a valid observation. One thing is for certain, this group doesn’t

listen to their constituencies anymore. Since they own all the toys, they can take them home

anytime they get tired of playing with us. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be anything we

can do about it. But guaranteed, when we go the way of the dinosaurs, they will surely follow.

Take just one example from the pile of problems we now face – transportation costs - and try to

70

imagine what will happen to the 1%ers when the rest of us can’t afford to go to work anymore -

that is if we have a job to go to. While our measly 15% of the wealth isn’t much, it is about the

only thing holding entropy at bay – at least for now. When that’s gone – it’s gone! What will

happen to all that wealth when there remains no place to spend it? Let’s try to make sense of

all this.

As a preface to all of this, we acknowledge that endless tables and numbers, and exotic charts

full of nifty colors and their own set of numbers, can be a mind-numbing exercise. We will try

to limit that experience as much as possible and try to show just enough of such things to allow

you to draw some of your own conclusions. Also, we have elected to provide only the source(s)

we used to either show the numbers and/or make the charts. If you find the need to look up

the actual compilers of the data, they can easily be found by looking them up from the

references given in the articles we used. We sincerely think is the most logical tack to help ease

the tediousness of data presentation. Here goes!

Graph 1

Survey of Consumer Finances, Federal Reserve Board, 2004

010203040

% of Total Wealth, 2004

% of Total Wealth

71

Graph 2

Survey of Consumer Finances, Federal Reserve Board

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1993 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004

Top 20% 81.3 83.5 83.8 83.9 83.4 84.4 84.7

4th 20% 12.6 12.3 11.5 11.4 11 11.3 11.3

3rd 20% 5.2 4.8 4.4 4.5 4.5 3.9 3.8

Bottom 40% 0.9 -0.7 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l

Wealth Distribution per Household, 1983-2004

72

Graph 3

Survey of Consumer Finances, Federal Reserve Board, 2004

Graph 4

Graph from Data Quoted in http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Top 5% Top 20% 4th 20% 3rd 20% Bottom 40%

Wealth 58.9 84.7 11.3 3.8 0.2

Income 21.8 50.1 23.2 14.7 12.1

Axi

s Ti

tle

% of Total Wealth/Income, 2004

0102030405060

1983 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007

Top 1% 33.8 37.4 37.2 38.5 38.1 33.4 34.3 34.6

Next 19% 47.5 46.2 46.6 45.4 45.3 51 50.3 50.5

Bottom 80% 18.7 16.5 16.2 16.1 16.6 15.6 15.3 15

Pe

rce

nt

Net Worth in US1983-2007

73

Graph 5

Graph from Data Quoted in http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica

Graph 6

Graph from Data Quoted in http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1983 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007

Top 1% 42.9 46.9 45.6 47.2 47.3 39.7 42.2 42.7

Next 19% 48.4 45.6 46.7 45.9 43.6 51.5 50.3 50.3

Bottom 80% 8.7 6.6 7.7 7 9.1 8.7 7.5 7

Pe

rce

nt

Wealth in US, 1983-2007

0102030405060

Top 1% Next 19% Bottom 80%

2001 33.5 55.8 10.7

2004 36.7 53.9 9.4

2007 38.3 52.8 8.9

Pe

rce

nt

Stock Ownership, 2001-2007

74

Graph 7

Graph from Data Quoted in http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica

Total assets = the sum of (1) the gross value of owner-occupied housing, (2) other real estate owned, (3)

cash and demand deposits, (4) time and savings deposits, certificates of deposit, and money market

accounts, (5) government bonds, corporate bonds, foreign bonds, and other financial securities, (6) the

cash surrender value of life insurance, (7) the cash surrender value of pension plans, (8) corporate stock

and mutual funds, (9) net equity in unincorporated businesses, and (10) equity in trust funds.

Total liabilities = the sum of (1) mortgage debt, (2) consumer debt, including auto loans, and (3) other

debt.

Graphs 1-3 are fairly self-explanatory in terms of showing income and wealth distribution

among various societal groups and over time. Question – what is the difference in Wealth and

Income? For the vast majority of us the distinction is largely irrelevant (the vernacular is “check

to paycheck,” or “hand to mouth.” There is little or no ability to think about the differences.

However, for those gifted few that hold the preponderance of our nation’s wealth, the

difference is striking and deserves a short explanation.

The Income/Wealth Puzzle

By taking a look at Graphs 4-7 it is pretty easy to realize that a great deal of our National Wealth

is concentrated in a very few hands. In the end that only leaves about 15% of the total wealth

to be distributed to 80% of the population in the United States. Taking care not to stereotype,

0

20

40

60

80

100

2001 2004 2007

Top 20% 89.3 90.6 91.1

Bottom 80% 10.7 9.4 8.9

Pe

rce

nt

Stock Ownership, 2001-2007

75

that generally means the working-class of people. Now, considering the shape of the job

market, the kinds of jobs available, and the huge unemployment rate, coupled with the

stupendous rise in the cost of goods, a natural conclusion would be that it will be pretty easy

for the upper-crust to take and control that remaining 15%. Viewed from this perspective, it

would seem that we are set to lose it all in the aftermath of a huge sonic boom. In fact, Graph

7 serves as a good indicator that the top 20% are, indeed, taking a bigger and bigger chunk of

that meager 15% every year. Please observe that the amount of Stock Ownership by the top

20% rose every year through 2007, the last year for which numbers exist. Conversely, the

ownership of the bottom 80% went down every year through 2007. So, those few are taking

over more and more as the decision-makers for much of our business cycle. By being the

stockholders they are able to take that control of the corporate decision-makers and turn it into

more profits for themselves – meaning even less for the rest of us. For any reasonable person

this should cause much alarm. We should also be just a little bit angry that we let it happen.

Everywhere we look the same scenario plays out. It simply cannot sustain itself for much

longer. With fear of repeating ourselves too often – for those who endured the years of the

Great Depression, all we can say is You Ain’t Seen Nothin’ Yet! We fear too that nothing short

of another gargantuan collapse, in proportion to the increase in population, is the only way to

force a meaningful change. However, we aren’t completely certain that would even help

postpone the inevitable. It’s more than possible that we have already passed the point of no

return.

As we’ve already established, Wealth is equated with the value of everything we own, minus

everything we owe. Economists tend to complicate it by defining wealth as marketable assets

(real estate, stocks and bonds). Marketable Assets don’t include such mundane things as cars,

household furnishings, etc. because they can’t so easily be converted to cash. Income, on the

other hand, is what people make when they work. If you are so lucky, dividends, interest, and

rents, etc. may fall into the category of income. So, in theory, a person who has a lot of wealth

may or may not have a large income. However, as you probably guessed – they usually do,

indeed. (sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica) You would also probably expect that those who

have much wealth and have large incomes would also proportionally pay more taxes. In fact,

76

there have been a number of population surveys that confirm that contention. However, the

opposite is true. As a percentage of either, the rich-elite pay a much smaller percentage that

the bottom 99%.

Back to this question of who has the money. It is enlightening to learn that the general

population is largely either hugely misinformed or terribly myopic about this issue. To put it

succinctly, Americans tend to vastly overestimate the prosperity of the bottom 80%. It is so

bad, in fact, that we believe the bottom quartile has more money than the median quartile

actually has. (www.good.is/.../americans-are-horribly-misinformed) Do you understand what

this means? There’s absolutely no way we can engage in meaningful debate on issues we

either don’t understand, or have been lied to about. Didn’t they used to call this kind of

structure a Plutocracy?

OK! Now we either understand the nuances involved with Income and Wealth discussions, or

the eye-haze has turned our brains off and we are taking a siesta. When we rustle, a discussion

of these relationships with the concept of Power is important. Here’s why. A study of the

graphs provided will show that the top 1% have 38.3% of all privately held stock, 60.6% of all

financial securities, and 62.4% of all business equity. Stretch that to the top 10% and you

quickly realize that, in combination, they now hold 80%-90% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and

business equity, and over 75% of non-home real estate. Considering that financial wealth is

what controls assets it can easily be concluded that the top 10% now own the United States –

lock, stock, and barrel! We don’t know about you, but this scares us to death. Just look at the

numbers and imagine what they really mean. We have placed our future in the hands of the

elite few who have either forgotten what it is like to worry about securing the basic necessities

of life (a home, food, clothing, medicine), or who never worried about them in the first place,

and who are driven by the principle of greed – at the expense of every one and every place.

These are the people who make the laws governing all of us, but usually not them. They have

put in place a model that promotes self-aggrandizement, security in all matters legal and

financial, and have isolated themselves from the real world, by building one of fantasy for

themselves. Again, this kind of system is unsustainable. It is a house of cards that is sitting

77

directly in the path of a great wind. To just listen to a newscast brings a shiver that cannot be

warmed. We see the exact warnings abroad that we grapple with here. There are uprisings,

demands for change that returns the basic civil liberties that define what it is to be a

democratic society – where everyone can at least sleep with the expectation of waking up in

the morning. People - those days are fading past. We have already lived past our life

expectancy. We have done so with hardly more than a passing regard for our planet or for

those we share it with. All the time the blinders have kept the stare straight ahead, completely

missing the vast majority of the beauty that surrounds us. What a shame for us individually.

What a disaster for us as a species.

The IRS – How Big/How Long/How Expensive

With all the bad stuff going on we think it’s time to lighten up for a minute by sharing some

funny quotes. You ask – what in the world can possibly be funny about anything regarding the

IRS? Well, if you’re anything like us you must have wondered at some time about just how long

is the IRS Code really is. The number of employees working in the IRS might have crossed your

mind as well. You might have even wondered what their annual budget is. Well, we’ve got the

real scoop for you. It comes from two sources that you can verify for yourself. The first is an

article found in Trygve’s Digital Diary, at trygveee.com, 2006, entitled How Long is It? :

A US Representative: “The IRS Code and regulations add up to one million words and is nearly

seven times the length of the Bible.”

A US Representative: “The income tax code and its associated regulations contain almost 5.6

million words – seven times as many words as the Bible. Taxpayers now spend about 5.4 billion

hours a year trying to comply with 2,500 pages of tax laws…”

A US Representative: “The heart of IRS abuse lies in the existing tax code. Most of the folks

who work for the IRS are good people just trying to do their job, but they are caught in a bad,

overextended tax system. At 3,458 pages, twice the length of the Bible, it’s impossible for the

average taxpayer to know, understand, and accurately apply its provisions. The length is twice

that of the Bible! Even tax experts cannot do so reliably.”

78

A US Representative: “With its 6,000 pages and 500 million words, the complexity of our tax

code is the prime source of frustration and anger felt by millions of Americans toward their

government.”

A US Representative: “The IRS Code and regulations now come in at one million words and

9,000 pages.

A US Representative: “The Bible, the guide of our lives, is 1,291 pages and contains 774,746

words. But the Tax Code and its regulations which are referred to by some as ‘a person’s worst

nightmare come true’ is 9,471 pages and over 7 million words.”

A US Representative: “The tax code runs 17,000 pages and contains a mind-boggling 5.5

million words. By way of comparison, War and Peace is only 1,444 pages and the Bible checks

in at 1,291 pages.

A US Representative: “The federal tax code with its 44,000 pages, 5.5 million words, and 721

different forms is a patchwork maze of complexity and a testament to confusion over common

sense.”

A US Representative: “The IRS tax code is 44,000 pages long and growing.”

A US Representative: “The current tax code is almost 60,000 pages, longer than the Bible.”

A US Representative: “The current tax code, which at 1.3 million pages is twice the length of

Tolstoy’s War and Peace.”

A US Representative: “The federal tax code has about four times as many words as the Bible.

Accompanying the law are a staggering two and a half million pages of regulations.”

A US President: “The tax code is a complicated mess. You realize – it’s a million pages long?”

Of course, each of these statements is undoubtedly correct. You know, font size and line

spacing can have disastrous effects on precise observations. But, if we go the US Government

Printing Office site (www.gpo.gov) it doesn’t seem to be much of a problem. The IRS Tax Code

(Title 26 of the US Code of Federal Regulations), all twenty (20) volumes can be yours for the

mere price of $974 with free shipping. Now that’s a steal. But wait – there’s more. If you

order today they’ll send you the part of the code written by Congress for an unbelievably low

price of only $179. That part is only 3,387 pages long. By some complicated ciphering, the GPO

has found that Part 26 of the US Tax Code, with the accompanying Part 26 written by a

Congress that apparently doesn’t have any idea how long it is, the President either, to be a

79

miserly 16,845 pages of page-turning enjoyment. Don’t wait! Be the first on your block to own

this treasure bound in genuine faux pigskin. This deal won’t last long! Order today! Remember

it’s ONLY $1,153, and for our special customers, we’ll throw in S&H for free. Don’t wait, our

phone lines are open – Call Now!!!

The other two issues are a bit less clear. Depending on what website you choose there are

anywhere between 90,000 and 116,000 employees at the IRS. Again, depending on the site,

they are able to consistently consume a budget of somewhere between $11 and $13 billion and

rising. In fact, in recent history, it has been rising at a rate over 5% a year. Of course, it is

understood that they will have to hire an addition 10,000 or more workers just to handle the

additional work that will result from the new and fabulous national healthcare plan. Perhaps

we can all get a job with the IRS, or any governmental agency for that matter – they seem to be

the only ones hiring Americans.

You know, if this wasn’t so serious, it would really be funny. Imagine, those who wrote this

monstrosity have no idea what or how much they wrote. But they do know one thing – how it

protects them from all the pain and suffering it’s causing the rest of us. Will anything of

substance ever get changed? Who knows, but if it doesn’t - abandon all hope ye who enter

here!

This trip through the Distribution of Wealth on America has been an interesting but disturbing

revelation for us. While neither of us has any real interest in economics, and absolutely no

formal training, we have learned enough during this exercise to have a real uneasy feeling

about how things have developed. It almost seems sinister and pre-planned. It has wormed its

way into every nook and cranny of our daily lives and has been able to stay under the radar if

you will. We might have suspected the reality, but it just never seemed to be that bad. Well,

we now think it is real bad. So bad, in fact, that the very survival of America is at stake. Again,

we can’t speak as experts in economics. But we do know the empirical physical laws of nature.

We have learned enough about the rise and fall of civilizations to know, beyond any shadow of

a doubt, that the path we tread is unsustainable. We have seen the line drawn in the sand and

know, from history, that we stand at a point where humanity will not cross. We hear our

80

leaders pound the podium with at least one truth: We must know the past in order to plot our

future. If they truly believe that then why don’t they practice what they preach? For, in the

end, there won’t be the dichotomy of the rich and the poor. It will be only one and we shall all

suffer the same retribution for the greed that has permeated our very souls. The little,

worthless green piece of paper will save no one.

81

America’s Crumbling Infrastructure

Every day Americans wake up in a home that is temperature controlled to our every whim and

expecting the lights to come on when we flip a switch. We are accustomed to having clean

water squirt out of the faucet when we want to make a pot of coffee. We drive to work on a

vast complex of highways in our big and comfortable SUVs to find glass-clad offices with air-

conditioning, enough lighting fixtures to shock the rest of the world, functioning restrooms,

break rooms with every amenity imaginable. We utilize an endless array of gadgets to make

the drudgeries of the day a bit more interesting and, hopefully, more efficient, all running on an

endless supply of electricity. We return to our homes and are met with even more gadgets to

watch, play, study, and generally unwind. We expect these things to work and have become so

accustomed to these luxuries that we believe they are a right. We expect for them to last

forever, with no interruptions, for a shockingly low price compared to the rest of the world – if

they have them at all. Given all the problems that could be – life is good! But…

Recently, the History Channel ran a TV special dealing specifically with the condition of our

crumbling infrastructure. As you probably guess, even if you didn’t see the special, the

conclusions they drew were much less than glowing. This is what a spot had to say regarding

the show:

Tens of thousands of bridges are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. A third

of the nation’s highways are in poor or mediocre shape. Massively leaking water and

sewage systems are creating health hazards and contaminating rivers and streams.

Weakened and under-maintained levees and dams tower over communities and

schools. And the power grid is increasingly maxed out, disrupting millions of lives and

putting entire cities in the dark.

They went on to alert us to some of the kinds of man-made disasters that could be lurking just

under the surface. There have been almost countless other articles and programs trying to

warn us of looming catastrophes. The New York Times in a recent article reminded us that a

major water conduit bursts somewhere in the US every two minutes. That works out to be

about 720 times a day. Our storm sewers in some areas are over 100 years old and simply

cannot handle the increased volumes our increased population is causing. They overflow and

82

invade our other utilities and contaminate our ground water. We’re always hearing about the

overload of the nation’s electric grid. Entire regions of the country too often find themselves in

the dark. But that’s not the worst part. When the grid overloads our communications systems

fail, ATMs don’t work, banks can’t function, the stock market trembles, the entire financial

organ shutters, crime escalates, lives are lost, essential services are stressed. It is an overall bad

thing and it’s going to start happening a lot more often. Why? You know as well as us. Some

of this infrastructure was built around the time of the Civil War. It has been ignored by us all

simply because it’s largely invisible. We just expect for it to work and we tend to get quite

incensed when it doesn’t. There are significant problems that simply must be addressed.

Politicians at every level are going to have to get with the program since the allocation of the

funds required now rests entirely on their shoulders. We don’t need any new departments,

they already exist and our taxes pay the salaries of hundreds of thousands of local, state, and

federal employees to prove it. What we do need is a cadre of leaders who will step up to the

issues and tackle them in a reasoned way. Not the knee-jerk action we have become

accustomed to. This can’t be the old Rob Peter to Pay Paul stuff either. Every time that stunt is

pulled it seems that the unforeseen or unaccounted for effects are always worse than the

cause. We are going to have to realize that the required outcomes may be a bit uncomfortable

for us all. There will be a price to pay for all the neglect of the past. Unfortunately, the days of

cheap water are over. Yes, we have a severe potable water problem in the world today. On a

planet nearly three-quarters covered in the stuff, we are on the verge of dying of thirst. And

that’s just one of about 15 issues that carry just about the same level of emergency. We strut,

we brag, and we swagger because we consider America to be the premier society on the planet.

Yet, we are comfortable that we can do no better than a C+ in any of these 15 critical areas and

most are a lot worse than that. If we sound like we’re making a life or death deal out of all this

it’s because we are. If we don’t tackle this stuff right now and start treating our infrastructure

like we treat our expectations, then we are truly doomed. If we don’t, then we deserve what

we get and all the bitching in the world won’t help one iota.

In 2009, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) completed a study of our infrastructure

that was quite extensive, quite scathing, and quite disturbing (but not surprising). They

83

concentrated on the 15 most critical areas that need our immediate attention. They also

computed total investment needs and anticipated funding. As you would expect, that left us

with a huge (we mean really big) hole to fill with little green pieces of paper if we are to avoid a

complete melt-down of our current way of life. Finally, they gave each area a grade, just like

we got in school – A for Excellent, B for Above Average, C for the middle of the road, D for just

barely passing but not good at all, and F for failing. No surprise, none of the areas blew the

curve. We will do our best to condense their findings into digestible hunks in hopes of not

boring you to death. But – folks – we really do have a problem on our hands. If you really are

one of those who gets mad when the electricity goes out and you miss the last ten minutes of

your favorite TV program, just try to imagine how frustrating and dangerous it would be if it

was out for weeks or months or years. How mad would you be if you had to ration water for

those time spans, even if you could find it? How disrupted would you feel if you had to find a

way to rid your home of waste when the wastewater infrastructure shuts down. Rest assured –

these days are coming. This study outlines the sure signs that our system is running down and

doing so fast. Remember back when we talked about the one thing that will ultimately cause

the demise of a civilization. It comes when the population, and no new energy coming into the

system, outpaces the ability of the land to replenish what has been taken from it. Our

infrastructure has been ignored, had poor or nonexistent maintenance for decades, and now

it’s time to pay the piper. You know, you might even wonder if this whole scenario has a

perverse rationalization. We’ve already learned that the rich elite have grabbed up nearly all

the wealth to be had in our country. We know they have few cares except the happiness of the

shareholders and the bottom-line. The human factor absolutely never enters the equation.

Well, if this tight knit group has seen fit to ship their enterprise off shore, and have sent all the

attending jobs along with it, then is there really a need to fret about the conditions here at

home? Now, we don’t want to come across as conspiracy nuts, but the question still needs to

be asked. Enough of that, so - Here we go!

84

Chart made in Excel from data provided by ASCE study. Figures reported in Billions.

All of the information provided below is taken from the ASCE study as reported on

www.infrastructurereportcard.org

Aviation (Report Card = D)

At the conclusion of the study, America’s Aviation Industry had recovered from its past

downturn and reported new highs in both domestic and international travel. It is projected to

continue this increase at a rate of about 3% per year for the near future. This obviously places

an even greater strain on an already overcrowded aeronautic infrastructure.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Avi. Brdgs.

Dams

Wtr Energy

Haz Wst

In Wtr Wys

Lev Pks &

Rec

Rail Rds Sch Sol Wst

Transit

Wst Wtr

Est Need 87 930 12.5 255 75 77 50 50 85 63 930 160 77 265 255

Est Budget 46.3 381 5.05 146 45.5 33.6 29.5 1.13 36.8 51.3 381 125 33.6 74.9 146

Proj Short 40.7 550 7.45 109 29.5 43.4 20.5 48.9 48.2 11.7 550 35 43.4 190 109

Do

llars

in B

illio

ns

Crumbling InfrastructureEstimated 5 Yr. Funding Needs

85

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has a goal of ensuring at least a 93% of runways at

National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) airports are maintained in good or fair

condition.

The good news is that it just barely met that goal in 2007. However, the bad news is there were

370 runway incursions (defined as an incident involving the incorrect presence of an aircraft,

vehicle, person, or object on the ground that creates a collision hazard for an aircraft taking off,

intending to take off, landing, or intending to land) during this same time, compared to a figure

of 330 the year before. That isn’t the kind of data that instills a lot of confidence in the system.

The reasons given are an over-burdened and out-of-date air traffic control system and a lack of

funding for adequate maintenance. We ask, with all the money the government is spending on

airport security because of terrorist threats, why isn’t there a reliable system of controlling air

traffic that can potentially save thousands of lives in place already? No – it doesn’t make sense

and we should be outraged. There seems to be plenty of money to hire thousands of

obnoxious staff to insult, play touchy feely, and harass fliers, but no money to help make sure

the plane can taxi, take-off, fly, and land safely. There’s definitely something fishy about all

this. There are a plethora of empty excuses spouted that make absolutely no sense. There are

ownership issues, funding issues, and delays in statute implementation. Since when did these

kinds of things stop the government? There remains one simple reason – the quest for those

eternal little green pieces of paper – and nothing else.

Aviation’s ability to move goods and services is a critical part of our economic vitality and

deserves the kind of attention it needs to maintain that critical part. We agree that it is a

volatile industry, falling prey to the same things that affect other transportation industries. But,

it is a lot more complex. We must develop a plan that considers this complexity and find ways

to finance it. The old garbage that has been fed to us before simply won’t work this time. We

are tired of hearing that you can’t get blood out of a turnip. We seem to be able to find it for

everything that feeds the corporate bottom-line; we can do it for an industry that affects the

entire infrastructure too.

86

As can be seen on the chart, we need to find an additional $40.7 billion over projected budget

to fund this critical portion of the nation’s infrastructure. We, as individuals, may never fly, but

the function this industry performs definitely affects us all.

Bridges (Report Card = C)

Over a quarter, 1 in 4, of our bridges is classified either structurally deficient or functionally

obsolete. Not a very good way to start the discussion on bridges since every one of us probably

passes over one nearly every day. From the outset a bridge is designed for a useful life of 50

years. The average age of a bridge in the US is now 43. According to the US Department of

Transportation, of the 600,905 bridges across the country as of December, 2008, 72,868, or

12.1%, were categorized as structurally deficient and 89,024, or 14.8%, were categorized as

functionally obsolete. The good news is that from 2005 to 2008, the number of deficient or

obsolete bridges in rural areas decreased. The bad news is that during this same period in

urban areas, where usage and load is much, much higher, they increased.

Of course, deficient bridges are often closed or restricted more frequently for repair than we

would like. Whether due to structural capacity or deficiencies, the costs to the economy rise

exponentially. Just think, if this has already become an economic and safety burden today,

what will the situation look like as the population grows, the ages of the bridges increase, and

the restrictions increase as well? We know you would prefer not to think about it. Of course,

we have to think about it because there’s really no choice. If the goods don’t flow in a well-

planned and timely manner, the economy suffers. An example is the trucking industry. Right

now truck miles double approximately every 20 years and these trucks are getting bigger and

are carrying heavier loads. This significantly impacts bridge deterioration. Trucks now account

for 223 billion miles of travel over bridges each year. That’s a lot of miles and a lot of bridge

stress. And, if the economy suffers, our way of life suffers with it. Heck - Just the costs

associated with loss of time would be enough to pay for the repairs.

This bridge issue will require the collaboration of government at all levels to meet the funding

requirements. The study concludes that over the next five years there will need to be an

astounding $930 billion of funds dedicated to bridge construction and repair. After subtracting

87

all projected funding, there remains a jaw-dropping shortfall of $549.5 billion. This will require

some innovative strategies for sure! The study also found our current bridge infrastructure to

be quite resilient in terms of system redundancy and workarounds, recovery measures,

including rapid restoration ability, security, and robustness against hazards, and structural

redundancy. They have generally been planned and built well. The problem, like is found in

nearly all the categories covered in the study, is maintenance. It has been put off, or

completely ignored until we now find ourselves in a seemingly disastrous and costly situation.

Dams (Report Card = D)

As dams age and downstream development increases, the number of deficient dams has risen

to more than 4,000, including 1,819 high hazard potential dams. Over the past six years, for

every deficient, high hazard potential dam repaired, nearly two more were declared deficient.

There are more than 85,000 dams in the US, and the average age is just over 51 years. This

statement comes directly from the ASCE study and is a grim reminder of the danger we face

and the risks we take by not tackling deficient dams in this country.

Dams provide a number of essential benefits to the system, including drinking water, power

generation, flood protection and control, irrigation, and, of course, recreation. These dams can

be public and operated by government at all levels, or private and operated by businesses and

corporations. Along with the good there can be a lot of bad too. Depending on construction

type, dams can be as high as 770 feet and reservoir billions of gallons of water. You can

imagine the massive devastation if one of these massive dams should fail. Even a relatively

small dam failure could potentially destroy an entire community. In essence we would see an

inland tsunami with all the loss of life and destruction of a costal tsunami, along with all the

costs.

A dam’s hazard potential is classified on the basis of the anticipated consequences of failure

and not on the condition of the dam. A high hazard potential includes loss of life; a significant

hazard potential means damage to buildings; and a low hazard potential would indicate a loss

of the dam, or damage of some sort to the floodplain.

88

According to the National Inventory of Dams (NID), which is maintained by the Army Corps of

Engineers, shows that the federal government owns or regulates only 11% of the 85,000 dams

in the country. All of the others fall under the statutory authority of the states in which they

are located. As you might expect, this means that they also suffer from inadequate resources

and funding to adequately inspect dam safety, to take appropriate enforcement actions, or to

ensure proper construction techniques. We can use Texas as an example. There are only 7

engineers for the whole state, using a budget of $435,000 to regulate over 7,400 dams. You

can imagine the kind of job they can do. Some states don’t have a dam safety program at all,

and there are all kinds of exemptions available for dams (a political term for ignoring them

altogether). For example, Missouri has 740 high hazard potential dams that are exempted

because they are less than 35 feet high. Imagine, 740 dams that, should they fail, would cause

the loss of life, and they are exempted entirely.

Today, the number of dams increasing, and the number of high hazard potential dams is

increasing at an alarming rate. As of 2007 there were a total of 15,237 high hazard potential

dams in the US. From 2007 to 2009 that figure had increased by 3,300. Adding to the problem

is the fact that the number of dams determined to be unsafe or deficient has risen from 3,500

in 2005 to 4,095 in 2007. Included in those figures are high hazard potential dams that are also

classified as deficient. They have risen from 1,367 in 2005 to 1,819 in 2007. Through inference

then is the fact that dam repairs are not even keeping pace with the increase in the number of

dams that are being classified as high hazard potential. Therefore, as times marches forward,

even assuming current funding levels, the numbers of dams that can potentially cause loss of

human life are even growing faster. Obviously these dams are going to grow older each year,

they are going to continue to deteriorate, and the lack of maintenance is likely to continue. We

can find no variable in this equation that can result in positive change without a concerted and

substantial infusion of funds. How likely is that really? For example, out of the rising number of

high hazard potential dams, a significant number (30%) have not had an inspection of any kind

during the last 5 years. And, the number of dams that have Emergency Action Plans (EAPs) has

not risen from its lackluster high of 50% during this same period of time.

89

These are appalling data. They tell us, in no uncertain terms, that we need lots of green paper

just to get our nation’s dams into acceptable shape. The ASCE study projects a total figure of

$12.5 billion. After adjusting for inflation (just like all the categories studied), and assuming

current funding levels, we are left with a deficit of $7.45 billion. Indeed, the dollars are

beginning to pile up and we’ve barely begun.

Dams, just like bridges, roads, and everything else we’ll study, are all essential parts of our

economic anatomy. The study found that they are not very resilient simply because they have

so few redundant structures, because their impacts tend to be regional in nature, and because

so few (50%) have no EAPs. The good news is that some national attention is being given to our

dams and programs have either been implemented or at least developed. The bad news, as

always, comes down to a question of dollars. We still have a long way to go.

Drinking-Water (Report Card = D-)

The nation’s drinking-water infrastructure systems are in such a deplorable shape that it faces

a truly staggering public investment need over the next 20 years is disaster is to be avoided.

This statement from the ASCE study is telling us that we had better quit talking about it and

start doing something.

With the exception of a very small handful of extremophiles, every living thing on the planet

requires water as a prerequisite for that life. And, even though the planet is literally covered

with this simple molecule, it is becoming so polluted with toxic waste, through agricultural

runoff of pesticides and fertilizers, and so filled with the leftovers of discarded human waste,

that is nearly to the point of not being able to support life of any kind. Yes, with three-quarters

of the planet covered with trillions and trillions of gallons of that small molecule of hydrogen

and oxygen, and literally thousands of species are going extinct every year because it has

become so toxic to the organism. Too, thousands of people die every year, year after year,

because of thirst or due to disease and poisoning from consuming this vital natural resource.

Yet, we continue to treat it as an everlasting trash dump without ever stepping back and

considering the consequences of our actions. To us, this is the single most important part of

this study. It is nothing short of appalling what is happening to this precious resource. The

90

stuff supports the entire – let us repeat – entire food-chain, whether marine or land-based, and

most of that is hardly visible or completely invisible to the human eye. Maybe that’s why it’s so

easy to ignore it. But, when we’ve managed to destroy the substance that composes over 80%

of our mass we will have only two choices left. The first is to die of thirst, and the other is to

starve to death. Neither of these options seems acceptable. We guess, however, that there

may be a good thing about all this – it’s probably reasonable to assume that we will be able to

manage our own self-destruction by other means before we either die of thirst or hunger.

Somehow, that doesn’t seem to be very acceptable either.

Back to the study – There are approximately 53,000 community water systems operating in the

US today. Of those, nearly 83% serve 3,300 or fewer people. That equates to just about 9% of

the total US population. In contrast, 8% of community water systems serve 10,000 or more

people and provide water to a staggering 81% of the population. Eighty-five percent (85%), or

16,348 non-transient, non-community water systems and 97% (83,351) of transient non-

community water systems serve 500 or fewer people. These smaller systems face huge

financial, technological, and managerial challenges in meeting a growing number of federal

drinking-water regulations. That seems to be the way things always work. The feds come up

with a nifty list of highly-restrictive (however needed) regulations, usually tied to myriad federal

funding streams, and then don’t provide any funding for implementation. A neat strategy if the

goal is to ensure that the infrastructure reverts entirely to federal control. Of course, every

cause has effects, and in nearly every case where the federal system has taken control,

implementations rarely seems to happen and when they do, the results are marginal at best,

and they invariably cost much more. We know that even the feds have funding issues of their

own and that they are greatly influenced by voters – particularly rich ones. But, you have to

admit that some of the ultimate decisions being made really don’t appear to have the best

interests of the country at-large in mind.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued the Clean Water and Drinking Water

Infrastructure Gap Analysis in 2002. This analysis was to identify and assess potential funding

gaps between projected needs and spending from 2000 through 2019. Are you ready for this?

91

They estimated a 20 year funding gap for capital, operations, and maintenance to be

somewhere in the range of $45 billion and $263 billion, depending on spending levels. Just the

capital estimation was $161 billion. Staggering! The Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

concluded in 2003 that current funding from all levels of government and current revenues

generated from ratepayers will not be sufficient to meet the nation’s future demand for

water infrastructure. Their figures for the same 20 year period ranged from $10-$20 billion.

We could find no reference to explain the wide discrepancy between the two federal

departments. Perhaps it’s true: The Right Hand Doesn’t Know What the Left Hand is Doing.

Whatever the reason(s), federal assistance has not kept pace with demand. Between FY 1997

and FY 2008, Congress appropriated approximately $9.5 billion for the SRF. This eleven year

total is only slightly more than the annual capital investment gap for each of those years as

calculated by the EPA in 2002.

In our opinion, drinking water is by far the most important of all the areas studied in the ASCE

study. It provides a critical public health function and is literally a matter of life and death. It is

also extremely important for economic development and growth as well. Any disruptions to

these systems can critically hinder disaster response and recovery efforts, expose the public to

water-borne contaminants and pathogens, and cause damage to roadways, structures, and

other infrastructure, endangering lives and resulting in billions of dollars in losses. It is

interwoven among every other component of our vast and highly complex infrastructure. It

simply cannot be ignored further.

As always, it can be fixed with money. We may have to put a little effort into it as well. How

does it always boil down to money, money, and money? You know – that’s what makes the

world go around. Every decision made, at every level, for nearly every one, is an issue of

money – that little green piece of paper. Is it true that we can just print more and solve all our

problems?

Anyway, the projected estimate for what it would take to fund the kinds of changes needed for

our drinking-water systems was set at $255 billion by the ACSE study. After deducting

92

anticipating funding of $146.4 billion, we are left with a shortfall of $108.6 billion. The tab just

keeps getting higher and higher.

Energy (Report Card = D+)

Assuming the American citizenry hasn’t died from lack of water or from the effects of drinking

water, we think Energy is next most important part of the ACSE study. We are aware that

humans existed on the planet long before there was anything resembling an electric

infrastructure. But, while civilization continued to grow with that infrastructure, we quickly

realized that it was good, and began to build other infrastructures around it. In fact, it

appeared to be such a good thing that we quickly became addicted to energy. Today, while

there may be a few hearty souls who could reluctantly adjust to a live without all the amenities

energy provides, lifestyles would be forced to change so drastically that few would even

recognize it. Certainly this is not the kind of environment most of us would want to live in. But

it is one that we should quickly begin to plan for. If we continue on the path we have chosen,

there is no doubt that nature will give us a detour. We absolutely worship energy and have

sacrificed much to have as much of it as we can get. In fact, we love it so much that we have

ignored the warning signs of Peak Oil, Peak Production, Global Warming, Destruction of the

Marine Ecosystem, and many, many others, just so we can consume more and more of it. On a

recent program aired on the Science Channel, a geologist (we can’t remember his name)

observed that if everyone on the planet consumed energy like we do in the US, we would need

three planets to provide it. Now that’s incredible! Put another way, the US has 5% of the

world’s population and uses 25% of all the energy (Wikipedia). Yes – we are addicted to it.

Unfortunately, because of this addiction, just like any other kind of addict, we appear to be

willing to sacrifice, or at least ignore, everything else. This was one of the primary motivations

behind the ASCE study, and our Energy Infrastructure is no exception.

The study tells us that there are more than 3,100 electric utilities in the US. Among them are

213 stockholder-owned utilities that provide power to about 73% of the customers; 2,000

public utilities run by state and local government agencies that provide power to about 15% of

the customers; and 930 electric cooperatives providing power to about 12% off the customers.

93

Additionally, there are nearly 2,100 non-utility power producers, including both independent

power companies and customer-owned distributed energy facilities. These are divided into

huge regions and can even reach across country borders. In all, America operates about

157,000 miles of high-voltage (greater than 230kV) electric transmission lines. It is truly vast;

especially considering the hundreds of thousands of lower-voltage lines that completes the

system.

Today, our Energy Infrastructure is at a critical point in its life that requires a substantial

investment for new power generation, and to improve efficiencies in existing structure. To

boot, we need an almost completely new funding stream to build an entirely new distribution

system. It seems there are more and more bottlenecks in our current system that are likely to

cause more and more blackouts in significant parts of the country. It is becoming more

congested that has already stressed the system beyond the limits of its capabilities. The

increase in population coupled with the unbelievable increase in technology that requires

energy has made congestion a real source of concern. It doesn’t take long to imagine what

would happen to our economy if the entire power grid were to fail for even one day. Another

confounding thing about our current infrastructure is there is no way to shut selected parts of it

down for inspection and critical maintenance because nearly every part of our economy

depends on it running 24/7/365 forever and ever. Think about this: We are told that the

backbone of our current grid is dependent on a certain type of massive transformer. There are

several hundred of these specialized transformers controlling America’s electrical grid. Guess

what – there are only a couple of places in the world that manufacture this transformer – not

one of them is in the US! We are told that it normally takes several months to construct even

one of these transformers. And no, we don’t have a warehouse full of extras! Given that we

are not the most popular country around right now, what are the odds that we would be the

first to get one, or two, or …? The media has been telling us chilling scenarios for years about

what will happen should any major calamity befall any part of our infrastructure and the effects

it would have on humanity. You can imagine conflict – lots of conflict that may result in war –

lots of war, and death – lots of death. We have already talked about a whole host of disasters

beyond our control that will surely cause the extinction of a vast percentage of the human

94

species. You remember - those things that are not a question of if, but when. But this one is

under our control and it is bad stuff we’re talking about here. Any understanding of how our

society is structured, and you can see what part energy plays in the whole scheme of things.

Here’s what’s happening. The demand on an already old and sickly system has increased about

25% since 1990 while construction of transmission facilities has decreased by about 30%. That

by itself is insane. To be fair, it has made a very small turn-around in the past couple of years,

but not nearly enough to make any meaningful improvement. Why? Energy is no different

than anything else going on in our country. Public and governmental squabbles throw a wrench

into everything, the permitting process does its best to slow progress down, and concerns

about the environment are restricting modernization (this must be a part of any equation if we

are to even have a chance of survival). Imagine, some idiot is worrying about something as silly

as the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the land we live on. Idiocy – absolute idiocy!

Heck – there’s probably one or two out there who actually believe we are ruining our climate.

Of course, we know that all those Nobel Prize winning climatologists, meteorologists,

geologists, and cosmologists are just in it for the money. We know that our Congress is more

up to date on these issues than some bunch of dusty old scientists. Remember, each and every

one of those interviewed knew exactly how large the IRS tax code was - even a former

President. To us, this really is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.

As we’ve already stated, our energy infrastructure has become so congested that bottlenecks

now affect many parts of the country on a too-regular basis. To give you just a taste of what

these relatively minute bottlenecks cause to the economy, the ACSE study estimates a $25-

$180 billion hit every year. Let us repeat – these costs are associated with relatively small

disturbances on the grid. They could become very much larger should they become more

frequent and last longer. We all understand that. Why aren’t we busting our you-know-what’s

trying to do something about it? Well, it seems (believe it or not) that money is not always the

reason. Significant to this issue are the laws, rules, and regulations imposed on the industry.

Many new transmission lines have been proposed to either alleviate these congested paths or

to provide redundancy so that existing portions of the transmission system can be temporarily

95

taken out of service for proper maintenance and modernization. But, overly stringent

permitting requirements, lawsuits, and other regulatory issues often inhibit critical construction

and maintenance of our transmission lines. We acknowledge that some of these issues are

unavoidable. But, we must continue to stress that to fix these sorts of problems we are going

to cause some disruptions to the way of life we have become so accustomed to. We don’t like

to think about things such as imminent domain either. We know some of these high voltage

towers don’t look like the Eiffel Tower. We also know that if something isn’t done very soon

that the entire grid could fail and cause more grief than we can probably imagine.

Surprise – our national grid lacks a significant degree of resiliency. Utilities are generally

prepared for local and regional responses; however, the national electrical grid, as a whole,

lacks a significant degree of resilience should a much broader response be required. Future

investments in the system must improve system robustness, redundancy, and rapid recovery.

This is easy to say but extremely difficult to achieve. Consider how restrictive things are today

and compound that every year until something actually gets done. This old way of doing things

simply won’t work when it comes to addressing the condition of the infrastructure that serves

as the skeleton for our entire society. The metaphor is true – without bones the entire body

collapses – never to get up again! That we are still relying on a very limited and extremely finite

resource to power our grid is disturbing as well. Of course, we’re talking about fossil fuels

(more on this issue later). True system resilience will require a national effort (local, state,

regional, federal, and international) to modernize the electric grid to enhance security and the

reliability of the infrastructure to facilitate recovery from disruptions to energy supply, from

both natural and man-made hazards.

Here’s what you’ve been waiting for – how much? According to the ACSE study, the estimated

five year requirement for just keeping the system running is $75 billion. Accounting for

anticipated funding of $45.5 billion, we are left with a deficit of $29.5 billion. Remember one

trifling detail – all of this is assuming the grid is not afflicted with some sort of devastating

natural or man-made catastrophe in the meantime.

96

Hazardous Waste (Report Card = D)

The next course we’re going to take is one called Hazardous Waste. This is the stuff we

generate in our quest for immediate gratification. We make a lot of it hoping we can get more

little green pieces of paper and tend to dump it in areas called Brownfields. That would (and

we shall see) be bad enough, but we also dump it over the side of ships and barges so we can

pollute our oceans as well. Remember when we said that the oceans serve the foundation of

the food chain for the whole planet? No, it’s not enough to ruin our land; we have to try to

destroy the oceans as well. Apparently we have found a way to eat those little green pieces of

paper. We wonder if the theme of the movie Soylent Green is about to happen today?

Way back in 1980 Congress enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund). In reality, the only thing

comprehensive about the program was the length of the title and the wonderful acronym it

created. In fairness, the CERCLA did identify thousands of contaminated sites across the

country. But, as you would expect, after more than 30 years of federal attention, little has

actually been accomplished except for the creation of another vast cadre of employees and the

waste of billions in taxpayer money. In fact, the number of sites has remained fairly constant

during this entire time. Also, as you probably expected, the amount of funding has steadily

decreased. The reason? – We can’t afford it! It never ceases to amaze us that we somehow

can’t afford anything even resembling saving our most precious resource(s), but have plenty of

money to rescue crooked financial institutions and to pad the wallets of the insanely rich. Our

observation is that we have nothing to gripe about because we have sat back, promoting our

own immediate gratifications, and let it happen. OK – to put all this in perspective – between

fiscal years 1981 and 2005 Congress appropriated $29.3 billion to the Superfund. The states

have also contributed billions to the process. Remember that the number of Brownfield sites

has remained almost constant during this period. Now, for the period 2007-2008 Congressional

appropriations totaled $1.08 billion, the lowest level since 1998. It appears that having a

significant portion of our land deemed uninhabitable is of little concern.

97

The EPA submitted a report called Cleaning up the Nation’s Wastes Sites in 2004. Even then

they concluded that approximately 350,000 contaminated sites will require cleanup during the

next 25 years. At today’s dollar values this adds up to somewhere around $250 billion. Who

knows what that figure would be over this period when inflation is factored in. Whatever the

cost, it should be apparent that we have a massive problem on our hands. Knowing, at this

point, that the effects on humans are rarely considered, the cost alone should cause enough

concern to move in a positive direction, but that doesn’t seem to be happening.

Making the situation even worse is that the majority of these Brownfield Sites are located in

urban areas where there is a real premium on space. In fact, some urban areas are selling land

by the square foot. Still, there is little apparent motivation to do much. Again, health and

safety concerns seem far and few between. That too is baffling since there are myriad studies

clearly outlining the economic benefits of cleaning-up these sites. According to a survey by the

US Conference of Mayors, meant to gather this exact data, found that redeveloped sites in

2008, returned more than 10,000 acres to economic productivity, resulting in $408 million in

new municipal revenues, and creating 191,338 new jobs, up from $90 million and 83,000 jobs in

2004. To us, this is exactly what current news reports say we need. There are currently 188

cities identified with Brownfields. A survey, with 148 of these cities reporting, projected a total

of 576,373 new jobs and as much as $1.9 billion annually could be generated if these sites were

redeveloped. This is about what the federal government is appropriating. So, we are

essentially paying for something we could get for free while creating desperately needed jobs in

the process. Makes a lot of sense doesn’t it?

So, why aren’t we doing more? Here’s the response – insufficient funding (that always shows

up), environmental assessment, lack of money for demolition, and liability concerns (that’s

always there too). Right now 3,282 sites in 150 cities have simply been eliminated from further

action – deemed as having no chance of redevelopment. This should be considered an outrage,

but it isn’t. When there is a choice between doing what’s right and making more little green

pieces of paper, the paper always wins. We call this (as countless others have as well) our

98

Greed-Based Society. Just as it has caused the demise of countless other societies, it will surely

do the same to ours.

In order to be resilient, Brownfields must be sustainable and meet the needs of both current

and future generations. As technology improves and increases, maybe they will. But, right now

they don’t appear to have any at all. They do hold the potential for enormous economic

benefit though. We have to stop blaming everyone else for our problem in this regard and

develop a marketable plan to get out of the mess we have created. Yes, it will cost a lot of

money, but a lot of money will be returned to the system as well. Remember, entropy requires

that new energy be injected into any system if it is to survive. This is a perfect way to do that if

we just do so. Our survival as a nation literally depends on it. The ACSE study projects a $77

billion price tag on getting the movement started over the next five years. After deducting

assumed appropriations, we are left with a deficit of $43.4 billion – a figure easily returned by

the economic benefits created. This is new energy for our economy for practically nothing

except effort. We can see no reason why this should continue to be an issue.

Inland Waterways (Report Card = D-)

It is likely that the vast majority of people never even consider our Inland Waterways as a

valuable natural resource. After-all, they are just rivers and lakes. We see them, fish and swim

in them, see a few barges now and then, but don’t ever really consider the part they play in the

economic strength of our society. It should be apparent, with a grade barely above nothing at

all, that the decision-makers don’t think much about them either. They are integral to our

society and we hope through what the ACSE study has determined we can instill some interest

in you so you can let the decision-makers know as well.

The study makes it clear that these waterways are essential in moving huge amounts of cargo.

This makes them indispensable as a strategic economic and military resource. In fact, a recent

analysis by the US Army War College concluded that the strategic contributions of these inland

waterways are not well understood. The lack of adequate understanding impacts decisions

contributing to efficient management, adequate funding, and effective integration with other

modes of transportation at the national level. Recommendations demonstrate that

99

leveraging the strategic value of US Inland Waterways will contribute to building an effective

and reliable national transportation network for the 21st Century.

The very existence of these waterways directly affects the vitality of forty-one (41) states and

sixteen (16) state capitols. In fact, it includes every state east of the Mississippi River. They

consist of 12,000 miles of navigable waterways in four systems – the Mississippi River, the Ohio

River Basin, the Gulf Inter-costal Waterway, and the Pacific Coast systems – that connect with

most states in the nation. These consist of 257 locks for raising and lowering river traffic

between the different levels within these systems. The biggest is the Mississippi River system

that encompasses nearly three-quarters of the inland waterway complex (about 9,000 miles).

The next is the Ohio River Basin (2,800 miles), the Gulf Coast Inter-costal with about 1,109

miles, and the Pacific Coast system (often called the Columbia River System) and is the smallest

with about 596 miles. These 11,000 miles of waterways are partially funded through an excise

tax on fuel.

Forty-seven percent (47%) of all the locks are maintained by the US Corps of Engineers and

were classified as obsolete in 2006. If we assume that no new locks are built in the next 20

years, another 93 locks will be awarded the same classification. A little math reveals that by

then 8 out of 10 locks in operation will be outdated.

Currently, the Corps has about $180 million per year to repair all the locks, split evenly by the

excise taxes and congressional appropriations. Yes, that’s a pretty big hunk of change, but

when we consider that the average cost per lock repair has been averaging about $50 million, it

means they can repair about 3 per year. At that rate, the newest will be way past obsolete

before they’re attended to. America – We Have A Problem!

Wait, we have more from the ACSE study. It seems the Corps pretty much took care of all the

locks, and even installed most of them. They have the engineering expertise to make the

needed repairs, thereby saving money. However, the knee-jerk has kicked in and now most of

those repairs are contracted out or privatized altogether. All of this was an attempt to save

money. Have you started to get the picture – every time the government saves money it costs

us money.

100

The system lacks resilience. Usage is increasing as transportation costs increase. The average

barge can carry the equivalent of 870 trailers rigs. It just makes economic sense to keep this

infrastructure operating. Then why aren’t they getting the support they need to make the

system resilient? We don’t know, but the study knows that of the 257 locks still in use 30 were

built in the 1800s and another 92 are now more than 60 years old. Being at least that old, we

know how well they’re probably functioning. The youngest in the group were to retire a

decade ago. Recovery from any significant event would be negatively impacted by the age of

the lock system and the availability of materials for the repairs. This could pose a direct threat

to the American economy.

This list keeps growing and the same observations keep growing. It’s almost as if the decision-

makers don’t really want to save America’s economy. We can only wonder why. Anyway, after

projections and deductions, the ACSE study finds the budget needed to get things back to snuff

to be about $20.5 billion.

Levees (Report Card = D-)

This one is really scary as well. The ACSE study finds that of the estimated 100,000 miles of

levees, more than 85% are locally owned and maintained. This makes it nearly impossible to

get detailed information about their status, except for the fact that most of them are over 50

years old. These levees are generally earthen and can easily fail given unusual and severe

stresses on them – just like the ones we are currently experiencing. We all remember the

devastation of Katrina, largely caused by levee failure, and the recent failures along the

Mississippi and Missouri Rivers due to massive rains, causing massive flooding, causing vast

areas to farmland loss…, and the story just goes on and on. The sheer costs of the disasters are

mind-boggling, especially since the costs of keeping them in workable condition are so low by

comparison.

Levees are made to provide hurricane, storm, and flood protection. But the system is more

complex than just walls. In addition to 100,000 miles of earthen levees, there are pumps,

interior drainage systems, closures, penetrations, and transitions. Many of these systems are

integral to economic development in the protected community. And, the number of

101

communities, and the size of these communities continues to grow, making the potential

disasters even larger as well. In fact, the study concluded that there was a 6:1 return on flood

damages prevented compared to initial building cost. That should provide some wiggle room

when considering the cost to maintain a safe levee system. But, as we indicated earlier, there

are no reliable data available to determine the critical levee safety issues. So, no accurate

projections can be made on the costs.

Fortunately, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is able to give us some data

to help. For instance, there are levees in about 22% of the nation’s counties. Forty-three (43%)

percent of the US population lives in counties with levees. They know that many of those

levees were designed decades ago, mainly to protect agricultural and rural areas – NOT for the

homes and businesses that are now located behind them.

Congress has passed the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2007. This act required

the establishment and maintenance of an inventory of all federal levees, as well as those non-

federal levees for which information is voluntarily provided by state and local government

agencies. The inventory is intended to be a comprehensive geospatial database that is shared

between the US Corps of Engineers, FEMA, the Department of Homeland Security, and the

states. We personally think we will end up with another expensive pile of useless paper. Doing

studies that cost millions instead of spending those millions fixing problems we already know

about has never made much sense, but seems to be the modus operandi of any governmental

activity. We used to call that job security, now we call it putting America’s citizens at risk –

even when we share a geospatial database with every governmental agency on the planet.

Why would we say such a thing? Well, the fact that few states or local agencies have provided

any information at all should be a pretty good indicator. After four years there is virtually no

new information. We’ll just wait around and hope to get a little data, and never mind we are

risking lives while we wait. That kind of makes us upset!

But wait, the WRDA created a committee to begin development of recommendations. Well,

that makes it OK. We have a committee! Our friends in Washington have also given us the

chance to buy additional insurance to protect us against losses from flooding. Of course, the

102

insurance we already have on our homes doesn’t cover it. What have we said before? Every

time the government gets involved in anything it costs us money. Remember too that we

ended up having to bail out insurance agencies for their excesses during the Great Recession.

This is a sweet deal we have worked out to protect us.

So, here’s where we are. The ASCE study learned little except that we don’t know much. Since

we don’t know, we might as well not do anything except follow the no child left behind and give

them a passing grade of D-. The recommendation is to spend about $50 billion to fix who

knows what, deduct funding of $1.13 billion, and find another $48.67 billion to do it right. The

sarcasm here is not from the study. The sarcasm comes from the fact that we know there are

100,000 miles of levees out there and that failures on those levees have already cost us billions

and billions recently, along with many, many lives. And the best answer we can get is that we

have a committee to work on it! This is absolutely the most idiotic excuse we’ve heard in a long

time. The next most idiotic excuse is the one where we learn that the cost of oil is going up

because something might happen somewhere on the planet. Now that’s a beaut if we ever

heard one.

National Parks & Recreation (Report Card = C-)

Parks, beaches, and other recreational facilities contribute $730 billion per year to the US

economy, support nearly 6.5 million jobs, and contribute to cleaner air and water and higher

property values. Despite record spending on parks at the state and local level, the acreage of

parkland per resident in urban areas is declining. While significant investments are being

made in the National Park Service for its 2016 centennial, the agency’s facilities still face a $7

billion maintenance backlog.

This statement from the ASCE study succinctly states where we are regarding our precious

National Parks and Recreation Areas. Just like every other area under scrutiny, the lack of

money is blamed for our predicament. However, a look at the very first line is evidence of the

value of these areas to our economy. Without doubt it returns much more than it takes. We

simply cannot understand how money can be the primary basis for neglect. We are also

103

convinced that there exist ulterior motives for this neglect, and can’t understand how our

leaders can expect us to believe this excuse when talking about Parks and Recreation.

State parks entertained more than 750 million visitors in the year 2006-2007. In fact, visitors to

our state parks outpace those visiting federally controlled areas. This means that a significant

part of the $730 billion flows through state and local budgets, greatly contributing to the

bottom line. Still, even with an influx of federal funds during this time period, they still

reported more than $15 billion in unmet needs, a significant increase over 2006. This can mean

only one thing – funding is being somehow funneled into other areas in the general fund. This

must be true since the income far exceeds reported needs. However, we do acknowledge the

value of these areas to the overall economy and submit that we simply must not allow any cuts

in federal, state, and local budgets in an attempt to balance our budgets. Any accountant will

tell you the same thing (we certainly are not accountants, but know that much). This is true

because of findings in the study. When we consider the exploding population in our urban

areas, the actual number of square feet per person in our parklands has actually decreased

from what they were in 2006. So, we must find ways to increase acreage instead of decreasing

appropriations. This conclusion is simple addition and subtraction of the figures already

presented. When we hear we can’t afford to do it we must rebut by informing whomever that

we can’t afford not to. It’s as simple as that. Just as we’ve found in every other area under this

study, there is a positive and direct correlation between the health of our infrastructure and

the health of our economy. This simply cannot be used as a tool to balance budgets, for

without a healthy infrastructure, there will be no budgets to balance. Voters continually verify

this contention by approving new funding measures for parks and open spaces for individuals.

We hear politicians say they must hear what the voters are saying – this is a perfect example of

what they should have heard already, but apparently have not. Regarding our Parks and

Recreational areas, very little value would be obtained in budgets if we closed each and every

one of them. In reality, spending on parks is a strikingly miniscule part of overall expenditures –

0.231%. That’s two-tenths of one percent. Just by considering the financial side of the

equation and ignoring the enjoyment obtained in the population, and by considering only the

104

dollars gained through their existence clearly shows that it would cost these budgets dearly

instead of bolster them. It simply doesn’t make any sense.

Added to this whole scenario are our nation’s coastlines, a part of this infrastructure. With

more than 84,000 miles of coastline, these areas contribute an estimated $322 billion annually

to the economy. We have known for years that these areas are being seriously compromised

by erosion, pollution, and neglect. In fact, in areas with watersheds, the losses are determined

to be critical since they have the unique ability to mitigate the severe damage caused by storm

surges and hurricanes. That makes these areas particularly important today since it has been

determined that these storms are getting stronger at an unbelievably rapid pace. We must

remember the damage to New Orleans by Katrina. In addition to levee breaches, the

watershed around New Orleans has been compromised to the point that it simply cannot do

much to absorb the power of these storms. Not only was the financial repercussions from this

single event huge, but we simply cannot ignore the human factor. We know that the quest for

money seems to outweigh human safety. We also know that we cannot ignore it further. The

actual expenditures have actually declined, exposing lives, infrastructure, and environmental

resources to the hazards associated with these increasingly strong storms. We cannot afford it!

Parks and Recreational areas are an important asset to humanity and the nation’s economy.

There are a huge number of jobs directly related to our Parks and Recreation areas, and the

dollar intake from their use is approaching one trillion dollars, and yet we are told that we can’t

do what needs to be done because of lack of funds. Again, this is insane. Today, little or no

attention is being given to the resilience of our national park system. These areas are a part of

our heritage and they continue to give so much more than they take. We already know that

they consume such a minute part of the national budget that using them as a widget to balance

those budgets would be fruitless. We must reconsider what it is we want to leave for future

generations. If we decide we want to leave an environment as depicted in the animated movie

Wall-E, then so be it. But we don’t think most people today want to be remembered as the

generation that destroyed our country and our world. Before we lose our voice entirely we

105

must yell at the top of our lungs that we want this kind of business practice to end and end

now.

Regarding our Parks and Recreational areas, the ASCE study projects a need of only $55 billion

over the next five years. It projects an infusion of $36.835 billion in appropriations. That leaves

a deficit of $48.17 billion. We think the $1 trillion being infused into the economy makes the

$55 billion the best bang for the buck to be found anywhere. How can this possibly cause

pause for the decision-makers?

Rail (Report Card = C-)

A freight train is three times as fuel efficient as a truck, and traveling by passenger rail uses

20% less energy per mile than travelling by car.

No doubt about it, letting our rail system deteriorate was a bad idea that’s really biting us now.

The ASCE study took a look at where our rail infrastructure is today and where it needs to be

tomorrow. It’s clear to us that if we don’t get our ducks in a row we just might not be going

anywhere before long. Rail can be our salvation for both moving our freight and for moving us.

The US freight system is comprised of three classes of railroad companies based on annual

operating revenues (isn’t everything?) Currently there are 8 Class I freight railroad systems; 30

Class II regional or short-line railroads; and 320 Class III or local line-haul carriers. About 42% of

all intercity freight in the US travels by rail. As of 2006, Class I railroads owned and operated

140,249 miles of track, even though most of the traffic travels on much less of that figure.

Realizing that they had an excess of capacity and attempting to increase efficiencies, railroads

have been busily increasing investment in their infrastructure in recent years. Specifically, they

have been investing in the areas of new signaling technologies and heavier rails to increase

safety and to accommodate heavier trains. There is good reason. It is projected that the

demand for freight transportation will double by 2035. If this happens, and it surely will, these

railroads will be expected to handle an 88% increase in tonnage by the same date. It could

certainly go even higher.

106

Amtrak, the nation’s only intercity passenger rail provider, carried 28.7 million riders in fiscal

2008, an 11.1 % increase from fiscal 2007. This year alone showed a 20% increase from the

previous 5 years. Of course, this increase in passengers carries with it a corresponding increase

in revenue.

This all sounds great, and it is. We must be careful to consider what all these increases are

doing to the load on our failing energy infrastructure. This represents a perfect example of how

all of our systems fit together to provide the skeleton of our economy. It is critical that we

remember these inter-relationships and not fix a cause without considering myriad effects.

Our rail system is an important component of the nation’s transportation network, supporting

the economy through both commerce and tourism. But, the study concludes that due to a lack

of adequate investment, limited redundancy, intermodal constraints, and energy system

interdependencies, the rail system is not resilient. Current rail security strategies are risk-based

as determined by corridor assessments, corporate security reviews, intelligence analyses, and

objectively measured risk metrics. Therefore, future investments must address life-cycle

maintenance, rapid recovery, multi-hazard threats and vulnerabilities, and technological

innovations. We guess that if you read all this stuff slowly it does make some sense. In other

words, make sure what you do doesn’t make things worse.

So, while our rail infrastructure is rated just below average, it still will require a substantial

Investment to allow it to meet future needs. And, we think they will be substantial. The study

projects a total cost for the next 5 years to be $63 billion, less estimated spending of $51.3

billion, leaving a balance of $11.7 billion. Considering the benefits, this seems to be a doable

project.

Roads (Report Card = D-)

Americans spend 4.2 billion hours a year stuck in traffic at a cost of $78.2 billion a year -

$710/motorist. Roadway conditions are a significant factor in about one-third of traffic

fatalities. Poor road conditions cost US motorists $67 billion a year in repairs and operating

107

costs - $333/motorist; 33% of America’s major roads are in poor or mediocre condition and

36% of the nation’s major urban highways are congested.

The figures above should be enough to demand that something be done to improve travel

conditions on our roads. It is very evident to us that people are very willing to work if they can

tolerate the conditions found in the ASCE study. And, just putting the monies lost back into our

economy would have dramatic effects, considering where interest rates are today. We have

read some articles that contend it would double the economic dollars.

We think it’s fairly obvious that everyone understands the importance of our nation’s roads.

They allow us to move from one place to another, take us to and bring us home from work, and

transport the preponderance of our commerce. They are integral to our economy. We also

know that thousands of people are injured or killed every year doing these things. In 2007,

41,059 people were killed in motor vehicle crashes and 2,491,000 were injured. No doubt,

these are startling numbers. They also cost the US $230 billion per year ($819 for each

resident) in medical costs, lost productivity, travel delays, workplace costs, insurance costs, and

legal costs. The ASCE study calls these findings clearly unacceptable – everyone should.

Next to safety, congestion has emerged as the biggest challenge facing our highway system.

The average daily percentage of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) under congested conditions rose

from 25.9% in 1995 to 31.6% in 2004, and congestion in large urban areas grew even more.

This alone wasted 2.9 billion gallons of fuel. Not only is this a terrible waste of non-renewable

energy, but costs the already strapped worker even more.

Poor road conditions tend to lead to excessive wear and tear on our vehicles as well. There is

no question that this increases the number of crashes that are already way past reasonable in

number. This compounds the steadily increasing demands on the entire system. From 1980 to

2005, while automobile VMT increased 94% and truck VMT increased 105%, highway lane-miles

grew by only 3.5%. We are clearly not keeping up with demand. Of course, the reason is not

enough money.

108

Most of us probably didn’t realize that the Interstate Highway System was constructed as part

of the nation’s homeland defense, illustrating the important role of transportation in

mitigation, defense, and recovery. The ability of our transportation system to withstand

threats from hazards of all types, both natural and human-caused, and to restore service

promptly following such events, is known as resilience. Therefore, building disaster-resistant

roads and highways reduces hazard mitigation costs, limits exposure, and maintains operational

continuity. A multi-hazard approach utilizing next-generation codes, standards, and practices is

necessary to minimize the extent of a disaster.

It is clear that the current funding model for the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) is failing. In fact,

the latest projections by the US Department of Treasury and Congressional Budget Office

indicate that by the end of FY 2009, the HTF will have a negative balance of $4-5 billion if no

corrective action is taken. We simply must find a sustainable funding system for the long term.

The National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission has recommended

an increase of 5-8 cents per gallon per year over the next 5 years to address the current

projected shortfall. This is on top of the already excessive tax on fuel.

Now, we are aware of the facts – roads are getting worse, we simply must reduce our reliance

on foreign oil, and we must reduce our carbon footprint. However, it is clear that the poor

worker is reaching a breaking point where the costs of working are getting closer and closer to

the wages earned. This isn’t their fault. The old you can’t get blood out of a turnip doesn’t cut

it anymore. People aren’t stupid. It is just too obvious that our government always has plenty

of money for the things they want to do. There is absolutely no shortage of funds when it

comes to buying friendships all over the world. We also know that the rich-elite could care less

about the plight of the 90% below their extravagant lifestyles. But, we also know this – If there

isn’t an economy to spend all that money on, what good is it? One thing is for sure, while the

rich may believe enough is never enough, you still can’t take it with you.

The study projects a need for $930 billion to get our roads ready for the needs of the next five

years. They project funds of $380.5 billion. That leaves a shortfall of $549.5 billion. Perhaps

109

our Congress should ask us how to get that money. We’re pretty sure we could come up with

some real answers.

Schools (Report Card = D)

As you already know, both writers chose Education as their career path. We can remember

when one could take pride in trying to mold young minds for the challenges of a new world.

We remember well when a teacher could stand in front of a class and actually teach. Yes, in the

classroom in loco parentis was the rule of the day. There were virtually no discipline problems

that couldn’t be handled in a couple of minutes and then get back to the business of teaching.

Those days are gone forever. Ask virtually any teacher today how much gratification they get

from the stress of paperwork, irate parents, administrations more worried about statistics than

learning, and students who would just as soon stab them to death as learn the alphabet. We

remember when we felt good after a day sharing what we had learned. Not anymore. Our

schools are so bad that high school graduates, waving their little graduation diplomas, can

barely read, don’t know any geography, can’t add and subtract, let alone multiply and divide,

and could care less about getting a job when they do graduate. And graduate they will,

because of some misguided notion that no one can fail. That’s BS and everyone knows it. We

don’t care what psychologists and lawyers say - some people simply don’t have the intellectual

capacity to do theoretical physics. We’ve talked to teachers in preparation for this paper, and

they acknowledge that even advanced classes don’t come up to the level of the average class

ten years ago. Clearly something has happened and none of it is good. We are spending more

and more to get less and less and it’s not surprising to us that the communities at large are

getting fed up with it. Somehow, those in charge equate good education with brand new shiny

buildings with lots of gadgets and widgets that are supposed to make learning better. This is

another bunch of BS. There is virtually nothing to brag about when talking about our nation’s

schools.

Let’s take a step back. Some of our school buildings have fallen into disrepair. We agree with

that. But, there was no reason for that to happen. If the budget guru’s had forgone all the

gadgets and widgets they could have had all those new buildings they’re talking about now.

110

We bet many of you didn’t have anything resembling a widget or gadget when you went to

school and somehow came out of the experience with the ability to read, write, cipher, know

where the US was on a map, and could probably name most of the states. Finding students

who can do that today is much harder than you think.

The ASCE study learned that there were so few data available that they had trouble drawing

any conclusions. In fact, a report out of the Department of Education entitled Condition of

America’s Public School Facilities was completed in 1999. That report concluded that a

substantial number of schools are in poor condition, meaning they were not in good operating

condition. This survey also found that while 15% of schools are overcrowded, 30% of students

attend schools that are overcrowded. They found that 37% of schools had portable buildings.

We can understand why no new data are available. The Department of Education only has

5,000 employees and a trifling $69.9 billion budget. Really! It didn’t make us feel any better

when we found that they couldn’t get any good data at the state level either. And we know

every state has a substantial Education Department. Could this be part of the problem?

Here are some interesting statistics:

1. 49.8 million Students are enrolled in public elementary and secondary schools.

2. Public schools employ about 3.3 million teachers.

3. There are 14,200 public school districts containing about 97,000 public schools.

4. Expenditures for public elementary and secondary schools are about $519 billion.

5. The national average spending per student in the 2005-2006 school year was about

$10,418, up from$9,154 per student.

Despite federal mandates on school performance (which have hurt education by the way),

school facilities are largely a local responsibility, as they should be. There really are ample data

to support the contention that they are having a hard time meeting this responsibility. It’s sad,

but everyone everywhere is struggling to make ends meet. It’s easy to find evidence that kids

can learn and prosper in less elaborate facilities. We did it and are sure they can too. Another

costly wrench in the gears is lawsuits over facility conditions. Folks, we have too many lawyers!

It’s also easy to find evidence that it’s not the money, it’s the law stupid!

111

Our guess is that there is no use looking to the federal government for further funding for our

public schools. They simply aren’t in the loop. Since their children generally go to swanky

private prep schools, they have absolutely no interest in the lowly public school student. So, it’s

up to local districts to pay the bills. We think they can. For instance, within 20 miles of one

writer there are five (5) school districts. In fact, there are over 350 districts in a state of about 2

million residents. This in itself is a gross misuse of public funds. Students in large urban areas

ride the bus further just to get to their local schools.

We know there will be an increasing number of students entering our public schools. To be fair,

new funding streams will be required. But, we also believe that with proper planning and by

making the tough decisions needed to do the right things, our schools can both improve

facilities and accommodate increased student enrollments while improving quality. We also

know that parents need to take back control of their schools. Parents also need to let the

teachers do their jobs, keep out of their business, and take care of parenting duties at home.

Frankly, if we don’t do what that last sentence says, we will lose an entire generation and leave

a gaping blank spot in our already stressed economy.

Given all this, the study also determined that our schools actually perform a dual purpose. In

addition to learning, they serve as community meeting places, and serve as disaster relief areas.

In both respects, they are found not to be particularly resilient because of increased enrollment

and decreased funding. They generally lack any sort of redundancy. Therefore, they find a

need to infuse $160 billion in the next five years. Less the $125 billion in funding leaves a

shortfall of $35 billion. We contend much of this can be found through proper planning and

facility utilization standards. Just proper scheduling can relieve a big portion of crowding

problems. For instance, staggered school curricula can nearly double capacity. We know this

because it was done in a school one of us worked in.

We have a long way to go to get our public school systems back in shape. Unfortunately, most

of it is dollar related. Somehow we have been led astray by policies, laws, psychology, and

sociology. For some reason, when it comes to school, we are more concerned with tender

112

psyches than learning. The time is here when we must decide what it is we want our schools to

do. Please make the right decision.

Solid Waste (Report Card = C+)

Hurray! – We do a better job taking care of our trash than anything else in our failing

infrastructure.

In 2007, the US produced 254 million tons of municipal solid waste. More than a third was

recycled or recovered, representing a 7% increase since 2000. Per capita generation of waste

has remained relatively constant over the last 20 years. Despite those successes, the

increasing volume of electronic waste and lack of uniform regulations for disposal creates the

potential for high levels of hazardous materials and heavy metals in the nation’s landfills,

posing a significant threat to public safety.

We hear the same sentiment in nearly every section regarding our infrastructure – if we don’t

do this it could pose a significant threat to public safety. It seems the public get the picture,

why can’t the decision-makers get it too?

According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), municipal solid waste (MSW),

commonly known as trash or garbage, consists of everyday items from households and

businesses that are deposited in landfills. But, some landfills do accept such non-MSW as

construction by-products, wastewater sludge, and other hazardous materials. Yes, some of

these things can be nasty.

Per capita, solid waste generation in 2007 was 4.62 pounds per person per day. Indeed, we are

trashy people, and the strain on our landfills will rise right along with the rise in population.

Let’s put this in perspective. In 1986 there were 7,683 municipal solid waste landfills in the US.

In October 1991, the EPA adopted stringent new federal regulations for landfill design and

operation to reduce groundwater contamination from hazardous materials disposed of in

landfills. This was a very good thing. We have already learned how serious the potable water

situation is today. By 1992 the number of US landfills had dropped to 5,345. By 1995 the EPA

landfill census recorded only 3,581 facilities. In 2007, the agency counted 1,754 landfills, a

113

decline of 79% within two decades. Of course, this means that the remaining landfills are much

larger, but present a more manageable number for inspection and mitigation. Whether good

or bad, the National Solid Wastes Management Association (NSWMA) estimated that states

have disposal capacity for another 20 years. What happens after that will largely depend on

the steps we take today.

The trend to recycle more is encouraging news with two major exceptions. We are doing a

lousy job dealing with our electronic equipment, and not doing nearly enough to slow methane

emissions from our landfills. Both of these should be an easy fix, with both providing excellent

returns on investment (ROI).

The EPA estimates that in 2005 waste electrical and electronic equipment amounted to

approximately 2 million tons, most of which were deposited in landfills. Only between 345,000

and 379,000 tons were recycled. We have known for years that this equipment often contains

heavy metals, such as lead and mercury, that are highly poisonous to life directly and that can

easily leach out and contaminate ground and surface water when deposited in landfills. That

we are still burying them there is an outrage. As you would expect, there are no national

standards on the recycling of these materials, and uncoordinated state regulations can

discourage consumers from recycling. In fact, many smaller municipalities don’t even provide

citizens ways to recycle. Yet, we are told daily that we should recycle. For instance, about the

only thing one writer can do is recycle aluminum cans. Give people the means and they will do

their part.

In 2006, 23% of human-related methane gas emissions came from MSW landfills, making these

areas the second largest producer of methane. We know that methane is an even more potent

greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide don’t we? The good news is that methane emitted from

landfills can be easily captured and transformed into usable energy. Despite this opportunity,

at the end of 2007 only 456 landfill gas (LFG) energy projects were in operation. However,

these LFG projects produce approximately 11 billion kW hours of electricity per year and deliver

236 million cubic feet per day of gas to direct-use applications. The EPA also estimates that an

additional 500 sites are good candidates for energy conversion facilities. After start-up costs,

114

the sites are nearly cost free. It seems we should be beating down the doors trying to get these

things into operation. One might even consider making these operations localized to ease the

strain on the already taxed electric grid. It’s just an idea.

Although landfills are dependent on energy and road infrastructure, as a system, solid waste

disposal facilities remain resilient, and the potential for future utilization seems bright. But

there remains the problem of air and groundwater contamination that we all know about but

can’t really quantify. There are also long periods involved before landfill areas can be returned

to the economy. However, the possibility of gaining some residual energy from them appears

to justify development.

To make all this happen, the ASCE study estimates a total investment need of $77 billion.

Deducting projected funding of $33.6 billion and we are left with a need for an additional $43.4

billion. The writers think this expense could be quickly and easily returned to the economy if

methane recovery was funded and developed.

Transit (Report Card = D)

Transit use increased 25% between 1995 and 2005, faster than any other mode of

transportation. This finding by the ASCE study should be motivation for developing this

infrastructure further, particularly in this time where our roads are overly and dangerously

congested, and considering the cost of fuel is becoming such an issue. Increasing the use of

transit systems would save literally billions of gallons of gasoline annually. This represents a

huge amount of money that could stay in the US to help us solve some of the other

infrastructure issues we have studied so far.

The percent increase cited in the first sentence translates into 10.3 billion trips a year, the

highest number of trips in 50 years. Again, people will help solve our issues if given the chance.

We can’t use a transit system if there’s no system to use. The evidence is here. On any given

workday 34 million trips are taken on public transportation. Of those, 59% are people going to

and coming home from work, 11% by individuals traveling to and from school, and 9% by

115

individuals traveling to and from leisure activities. This is a lot of people and it represents a

significant economic factor.

In 2004, there were 640 public transit operators serving 408 large and small urbanized areas

and 1,215 operators serving rural areas. There were also 4,836 specialized services for the

elderly and disabled in both urban and rural areas, representing a total increase in these types

of services since 2002. These systems operate more than 120,659 vehicles. Just think how

many cars they replace on the roadways. The evidence is clear that each sector of the transit

infrastructure has grown significantly in recent years and indicates that further expansion is

needed to accommodate a growing population. But, like any other section of our

infrastructure, funding hasn’t kept pace with usage, and many of the vehicles used are way past

their estimated life cycle. We have already learned that revenues in the Highway Trust Fund

are dwindling, so dollar increases from that fund are unlikely without a new funding stream.

This is the proverbial between a rock and a hard place. Too much more on the consumer and

you reach a point of no return. We’ve all seen it recently. When the price of gasoline went to a

certain point, people quit driving as much. As we said before, get the costs too high and there’s

no motivation to work. In other words, the ROI decreases. Historically, when that happens,

anarchy raises its ugly head. None of us want that!

A 2005 survey conducted by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)

and the US Census Bureau found that only 54% of American households have access to bus and

rail transit and only 25% have what they consider a good alternative to such transit. We clearly

need to make these services more widely available. Of course, that means a sizable

investment. We feel, however, that this investment will return cost plus, and pay for itself very

quickly. The more quickly this happens, the more money that can be returned to the economy,

and the better for everyone. Really, it seems that in all these findings we quit at the point of

investment and miserably fail in pointing out that there are returns on our investments. That

money doesn’t just evaporate. Everyone should agree that investments in America are much

preferable to sending it off-shore. Let’s get real folks!

116

Transit systems are key contributors to a region’s economic vitality and emergency

preparedness. And when properly implemented, transit systems offer significant

environmental benefits as well. Currently our transit systems are not very resilient. There is a

lack of integrated systematic planning, security mitigations, and adequate funding. But, it is not

beyond fixing and expanding. If fact, just like every example in our infrastructure, and just like

scientists are telling us regarding cosmic disasters, it’s not a matter of if, but when. Either we

fix things or we go down the tubes. We would think the first is the preferable scenario – and

the sooner the better. That means, according to the ASCE study, we need to put $265 billion

into our transit system. After we deduct anticipated funding of $74.9 billion, we are left looking

for an additional $190.1 billion. This is a lot of money, but it is money that can be recovered

quickly. We would also offer that it’s probably a lot less than we would be spending in terms of

lost wages from delays on an overcrowded road complex, and much less than would be spent

on gasoline wasted idling on the same road. A newer and expanded transit system would be

used if available, and save all of us a great deal. Heck, it would even give our rich-elite and our

decision-makers more to take from us.

Wastewater (Report Card = D-)

Aging systems discharge billions of gallons of untreated wastewater into US surface waters

each year. Now, if that doesn’t make you reluctant to drink a glass of water out of the tap,

nothing will.

Since 1972, Congress has directly invested more than $77 billion in the construction of publicly

owned treatment works and their related facilities. State and local governments have spent

billions more over the years. Total non-federal spending on sewer and water between 1991

and 2005 was $841 billion. Nevertheless, the physical condition of many of the nation’s 16,000

wastewater treatment systems is poor due to a lack of investment in plants, equipment, and

other capital improvements over the years.

Many systems have reached the end of their useful design lives. Older systems are plagued by

chronic overflows during major rainstorms and heavy snowfall and are bringing about the

discharge of raw sewage into US surface waters. The EPA estimated in august 2004 that the

117

volume of combined sewer overflows discharged nationwide is 850 billion gallons per year.

Sanitary sewer overflows, caused by blocked or broken pipes, cause the release of as much as

10 billion gallons of raw sewage yearly, according to the EPA. These figures should make us all

gag. Additionally, we are often advised not to eat fish caught in many of our rivers and lakes

due to this kind of pollution. Personally, we don’t relish the idea of drinking or eating someone

else’s waste, and guess you don’t relish it either. So, we should all get together and do

something about it. On top of all this, federal funding under the Clean Water Ace State

Revolving Loan Fund (SRF) program has remained flat for more than a decade. Apparently our

decision-makers drink bottled water all the time

Construction, operation and maintenance, and reconstitution of service of our wastewater

infrastructure are expensive, and the monetary and societal costs incurred when this

infrastructure fails are even higher – as you would expect. Again, aging, under-designed, or

inadequately maintained systems discharge billions of gallons of untreated wastewater into US

surface waters each year.

The nation’s wastewater systems are not resilient in terms of current ability to properly fund

and maintain, prevent failure, or reconstitute services. Additionally, the inter-dependence with

the energy infrastructure contributes to the lack of system resilience that is increasingly being

addressed through the construction of dedicated emergency power generation at key

wastewater utility facilities.

Future investments must focus on updating or replacing existing systems as well as building

new ones to meet increasing demand; on improved operations processes, including ongoing

oversight, evaluation, and asset management on a system wide basis; and water shed

approaches to look more broadly at water resources in a coordinated way.

Clean and safe water is no less a national priority than are national defense, an adequate

system of interstate highways, and a safe and efficient aviation system. It’s hard to believe

that, with the exception of military preparedness, when one looks around and studies the

nation’s infrastructure. Anyway, we think everyone out there would agree that we need to

make whatever expenditures are necessary to control water pollution, from all sources, and

118

simply must place priority of clean and safe potable water. We know there are those who can’t

believe that it is in such short supply. After all, they call Earth a water planet. But, in fact,

water fit for life, is extremely rare and must be protected at all costs. It is a fact that our lives

depend on it.

The ASCE study found a need for $255 billion over the next 5 years. After an estimated $146.4

billion in appropriations, we are left with a need for an additional $108.6 billion. On this one

there can be no “the economy can’t afford it.” The economy simply MUST find the money or

there won’t be anyone left to worry about an economy. Plain and Simple!

Summary on our Nation’s Crumbling Infrastructure

It doesn’t take a big brain to determine that our infrastructure is literally crumbling around us.

It’s also evident that we have neglected to demand that something be done about it. The

problem here is not money – it’s because nearly every one of us is consumed with immediate

gratification and live by the notion that we should never do anything today that we can put

off until tomorrow. This is the prime directive in America today and it has invaded our

government as well. We should all be ashamed that we have allowed our excesses to

command everything we do. The government just can’t seem to understand that you can’t

write a check unless you have money in bank. But, they do so without ever considering the

consequences. Hopefully, we have learned in this exercise that every action has at least one

and usually multiple effects.

Put together, our entire infrastructure system rates a D. That’s just one jump up from absolute

failure. What does it say about us when the best we can do is a C+? If the whole rest of the

planet can see the shameful condition of our infrastructure skeleton, why can’t we? We keep

hearing about lack of money, yet we have dumped nearly a trillion dollars bailing out the same

criminals that have caused many of our problems in the first place. Why – because they were

too big to fail – it would have destroyed our economy. Unless you haven’t realized it yet, our

economy is already in its death throes. There are no decent jobs to be had; they’ve all been

shipped overseas. The world is running out of oil and we keep buying more. We have, for all

practical purposes, done little to find alternative sources to fuel the country. There is no way

119

we can dig ourselves out of this without tackling the reasons why we’re in this shape in the first

place. Putting off the hard decisions is the problem, answering and doing something about

them is the answer. This old stuff of saying we can’t afford it doesn’t hold water. The

government has already shown that there is plenty of money to do the things they want to do.

Either they take the lead and do it, or we will know for sure that their only interest is taking

care of the other rich-elite. We think that pretty well depicts most of their actions to date.

After going through all these sections on the infrastructure, and learning about their value to

the nation and to each of us individually, and after learning how bad things really are, it just

makes us ill. We need an answer to what it means to say We Can’t Afford It. Again, we would

counter with the statement We Can’t Afford Not To. When our infrastructure fails, we all fail.

Our entire economy, at least the one that sustains the vast majority of our citizens, depends on

our infrastructure to keep the wheels of the economy moving. We depend on it for our health

and safety. We reach out to our schools to teach our youth how to take over the reins when

we pass and they can’t. What have we done? Have we given up and taken a D as the best we

could do? We don’t think so, but if something doesn’t change very soon, we will have no

choice but to accept that we failed.

We feel real sad right now. The bad part is that we have a few more sections to review before

this exercise is done. Unfortunately, we fear that they will make us feel even worse.

120

America’s Welfare State

No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched,

never disappear. Actually, a governmental bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll

ever see on this Earth – Ronald Reagan

To permit a large number of men to live free of charge is to encourage laziness and all the

disorders that follow; it is to render the condition of the idler preferable to that of the man

who works… The race of industrious citizens is replaced by a vile population composed of

vagabond beggars free to commit all sorts of crimes. – Anne Turgot, 1727-1781

A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both. – Dwight Eisenhower,

34th President

For every complex problem there is a simple solution that is wrong. – G.B. Shaw, Irish Poet

Today we live in a peculiar era. There is said to be no ideology. We have drifted since the

Vietnam era without an ideological rudder. We exist in a kind of void, in which individualism

flourishes and narcissism, ego, materialism, the pursuit of self, wealth, status, and greed –

but nothing that moves the masses together. This is a statement from an essay entitled Greed

by Julian Edney, and it provides a succinct definition of what is driving our nation today. We’re

not talking just about the government here. We mean our entire society seems to be driven by

self, with little or no regard for the health of the entire organism. It is a sad commentary, but

one that explains why the world considers America a Welfare State – the theme of this section.

However, we need to take a small step back and consider what it was or is that got us to this

point. Being old educators, we are reminded of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs that was fully

expressed in his 1954 book Motivation and Personality. We realize that Abraham Maslow’s

paradigm has created some negative discourse over the years. Nevertheless, it is clear to us

that many of his contentions have merit and may be partially responsible for our current mess.

Basically, Maslow says that there exists a series of events that must be fulfilled before one can

progress to a higher level. They begin with what he calls Physiological Needs. These are the

biological needs like air, food, water, and a fairly stable body temperature. If people experience

121

a lack of any of these conditions then they can’t concentrate on the next level. The

Physiological Needs will continue to control their thoughts and behaviors.

Safety Needs are rarely thought of except during times of emergency or periods of

disorganization in the social structure (rioting). Children often display the signs of insecurity

and the need to be safe.

Needs of Love, Affection, and Belonging follows Safety Needs. None of us like the feeling of

loneliness and/or alienation from others. This involves both giving and receiving love, affection,

and the sense of belonging.

Need for Self-Esteem is next, but can’t emerge until all the previous needs are met. The need

for self-esteem can become excessively dominant if we’re not careful. But, properly controlled,

the person can feel self-confident and valuable as a person in the world.

Finally we come to Self-Actualization. This one is a doozy. Maslow describes self-actualization

as a feeling completeness and contends that, given all other needs are met, people naturally

move in the direction of self-actualization unless they are hindered by something. He believes

that Education is a perfect example. We think this idea is one of the main reasons for some

discounting his hierarchy. We tend to agree with the critics on this one since it advocates

moving into the realm of self instead of the old model of the 3 Rs. We also believe that, since

education has apparently adopted his hierarchy, the problems we find in education today

developed. While it is good to try to teach people to be authentic, to transcend their cultural

conditioning, etc., they can’t replace the good ‘ol readin’, writin’, and rithmatic of days gone by.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is typically represented as a pyramid with the physiological needs

found at the bottom (the foundation). As we progressively meet each of the need levels we

move higher up the pyramid until we reach the peak of self-actualization. Later, in his work on

the pyramid, he acknowledged that all is not static and that people can move up and down the

levels depending on the circumstances at the time. That makes sense to us. The concept is

sound except we do feel education has suffered because of it. We have come to expect our

schools to be all things to all people. The problem with that notion is that each person is

122

different – making the concept impossible. Schools were created to teach subjects to allow a

student to compete in an increasingly complex technological society. When we find a huge

population of high school graduates that can’t even fill out the application to enter college, we

get the idea that our schools have done a terrible disservice to our youth. These are the ones

who will be charged with running the machine when we leave. Somehow that doesn’t

engender a lot of optimism.

OK, now we understand some things about what makes society what it is today, and provides a

rationale for the Welfare State we have on our hands. Growing out of good intentions, it has

grown into a monster that is eating up the economy and returning next to nothing to the

system. Remember the broken record – if new energy is not put back into the system, the

system begins its decline and ultimately dies. That is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. We

call it Entropy and it certainly has a good foot-hold in America today. Let’s start taking a close

look at this Welfare State and see if we can draw any worthwhile conclusions.

There are many out there in the media that are telling us that our Welfare State is beginning to

corrupt some of our core moral principles. Like many things lately, this wasn’t its original

intention. This entire welfare monster was created to actually help people who were in need

and to provide them with the financial resources and training to get themselves back on track

for re-entering society as productive citizens. We should have learned one thing about

government programs – they seldom do what they were intended to do. We have adequate

proof today that our current system encourages people to ignore, to violate, the moral principle

that it is wrong to live at other people’s expense forever. Yet, here we are with 3 generations

of people in families that have never had a job and don’t intend to ever get one. This has truly

become a cradle to grave enterprise that is sucking the life out of an already fragile economy.

It’s now been around for so long that people view it as a right. We acknowledge that some

people need some help sometimes. But for that help to become permanent for generations is

simply not right for those who chose to delay immediate gratification and prepare for what

they knew would be a difficult future. The core principle holds. Able-bodied adults who live at

the unwilling expense of others degrade themselves even as they demean those forced to

123

support them. Still we hear that they won’t take that job because it’s below their dignity. What

dignity?

We ran across a commentary by Peter Ferrara titled America’s Ever Expanding Welfare Empire

that was presented in Forbes Magazine on 4/22/2011 that we would like to share with you.

We think it will change any ideas you might have about whether or not we have been miserly in

our treatment of the less fortunate. Here’s what Mr. Ferrara had to say:

A fundamental misconception about America’s welfare state misleads millions of voters to

reflexively support ever bigger and more generous government. William Voegeli fingers the

attitude in his book, Never Enough: America’s Limitless Welfare State: “No matter how large

the welfare state, liberal politicians and writers have accused it of being shamefully small” and

“contemptibly austere.”

Barbara Ehrenreich expresses the attitude in her book, Nickled and Dimed: “Guilt doesn’t go

anywhere near far enough; the appropriate emotion is shame” regarding the stingy miserliness

of America’s welfare state. In light of the current budget debate, with House Budget

Committee Chairman Paul Ryan putting fundamental entitlement reform on the table, this

misconception especially need to be corrected.

America’s Welfare State is not a principality. It is a vast empire bigger than the entire budgets

of almost every other country in the world. Just one program, Medicaid, cost the federal

government $275 billion in 2010, which is slated to rise to $451 billion by 2018. Counting state

Medicaid expenditures, this one program cost taxpayers $425 billion in 2010, soaring to $800

billion by 2018. Under Obamacare, 85 million Americans will soon be on Medicaid, growing to

nearly 100 million by 2021, according to the CBO.

But there are 184 additional federal, means-tested welfare programs, most jointly financed and

administered with the states. In addition to Medicaid is the Children’s Health Insurance

Program (CHIP). Also included is Food Stamps, now officially called the Supplemental Nutrition

Assistance Program (SNAP) (don’t you just love these acronyms?). Nearly 42 million Americans

were receiving food stamps in 20210, up by a third since November, 2008. That is why

124

President Obama’s budget projects spending $75 billion on Food Stamps in 2011, double the

$36 billion spent in 2008. (These figures and number of programs are astonishing)

But that is not the only federal nutrition program for the needy. There is the Special

Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), which targets

assistance to pregnant women and mothers with small children. There is the means tested

School Breakfast Program and School Lunch Program. There is the Summer Food Service

Program for Children. There are the lower income components of the Child and Adult Care

Food Program, the Emergency Food Assistance Program, and the Commodity Supplemental

Food Program (CSFP). Then there is the Nutrition Program for the Elderly. All in all, literally

cradle to grave service. By 2010, Federal spending for Food and Nutrition Assistance overall

had climbed to roughly $100 billion a year.

Then there is federal housing assistance, totaling $77 billion in 2010. This includes expenditures

for over 1 million public housing units owned by the government. It includes Section 8 rental

assistance for nearly another 4 million private housing units. Then there is Rural Rental

Assistance, Rural Housing Loans, and Rural Rental Housing Loans. Also included is Home

Investment Partnerships (HOME), Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), Housing for

Special Populations (Elderly and Disabled), Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS

(HOPWA), Emergency Shelter Grants, the Supportive Housing program, the Single Room

Occupancy program, the Shelter Plus Care program, and the Home Ownership and Opportunity

for People Everywhere (HOPE) program, among others.

Besides medical care, food, and housing, the federal government also provides cash. The old

New Deal era Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) is now Temporary Assistance for

Needy Families (TANF), which pays cash mostly to single mothers with children. There is the

Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), which sends low income workers checks even though they

usually owe no taxes to be credited against. The Child Tax Credit similarly provides cash to

families with children. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) provides cash for the low income

aged, blind, and disabled. In 2010 such income security programs accounted for nearly another

$200 billion in federal spending.

125

The federal government also provides means tested assistance through multiple programs for

child care, education, job training, and the Low Income Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP),

the Social Services Block Grant, the Community Services Block Grant, and the Legal Services

Corporation, among other programs.

The best estimate of the cost of the 185 federal means tested welfare programs for 2010 for

the federal government alone is nearly $700 billion, up a third since 2008, according to the

Heritage foundation. Counting state spending, total welfare spending for 2010 reached nearly

$900 billion, up nearly 25% since 2008.

Yet, by 2008, Robert Rector of Heritage reports that total welfare spending already amounted

to $16,800 per person in poverty, 4 times as much as the Census Bureau estimated was

necessary to bring all of the poor up to the poverty level, eliminating all poverty in America.

That would be $50,400 per poor family of 3. Indeed, Charles Murray wrote an entire book, In

Our Hands, A Plan to Replace America’s Welfare State explaining that we already spend far

more than enough to completely eliminate all poverty in America.

The soaring welfare spending since 2008 is not a temporary increase reflecting the recession, as

it is not projected to decline after the economy recovers. By 2013, total annual welfare

spending will have grown still more, to nearly $1 trillion. Over the 10 year period from 2009 to

2018, federal and state welfare spending will total $10.3 trillion. This does not include

Obamacare’s massive expansion of Medicaid, or the massive new entitlement providing

subsidies for families making close to $100,000 per year, and beyond. Together, this abusive

entitlement spending will add trillions more.

Even in 2005, government spending on these means tested welfare programs was 25% more

than was spent on national defense, and that was at the height of the wars in the Middle East.

Indeed, over the past two decades, total welfare spending has been growing faster than Social

Security and Medicare, about twice as fast as education, and nearly 3 times as fast as national

defense.

126

Of course, the big picture comprises the entire scope of entitlement programs, including Social

Security and Medicare. Social Security spending for 2010 was $721.5 billion, with Medicare

spending totaling $457 billion for the year, for a combined total of $1,179 trillion. Adding in

federal welfare spending for the year leaves a combined total for entitlement spending of

$1,879 trillion. The total federal budget for that year was $3.720 trillion. So,

entitlement/welfare spending overall for that year was just over 50% of the entire budget.

These figures are not exactly stingy.

The War on Poverty famously began in 1965. From 1965 to 2008, the total spent only on

means tested welfare for the poor in 2008 dollars has been nearly $16 trillion, according to the

Heritage Foundation. Rector reports that there has been more than all spending on all military

conflicts from the American Revolution to today, in 2008 dollars.

What have we gotten for all of that spending? Poverty fell sharply after the Depression, before

the War on Poverty, declining from 32% in 1950 to 22.4% in 1959 to 12.1% in 1969, soon after

the War on Poverty programs became effective. Progress against poverty as measured by the

poverty rate then abruptly stopped.

In other words, we are getting very little for our increased spending on entitlements. There

simply is no reason to strive for self-sufficiency if the government is willing to take care of you

from cradle to grave. Herein lays the real problem. We don’t have to tell you what much of

those Food Assistance Programs buy – sodas, potato chips, and a wide assortment of high

calorie, low nutrition tidbits. The system is broken and someone up there in the clouds of

decision-makers is going to have to get a handle on all this. We have trillions and trillions of

dollars flowing into a plethora of programs that are, by any standard, failing us all. Coupled

with the fact that nearly 47% of federal income tax filers pay no income taxes at all, and it

becomes crystal clear that the system cannot support such extravagance.

127

The World and Peak Oil

An imminent peak and a sharp decline in oil production could cause a worldwide recession. –

US GAO, 2007

Peak Oil is Now. – German Energy Watch Group, 2008

By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear. – US Dept. of Defense, 2008

& 10

Between 2005 and 2008 conventional oil production ceased to grow. – Global Witness

Foundation, 2009

A global peak is inevitable. The timing is uncertain, but the window is rapidly narrowing. –

UK Energy Research Center, 2009

The next five years will see us fact the oil crunch. – UK Industry Taskforce on Peak Oil and

Energy Security, 2009

It’s clear from the quotes above that this business of Peak Oil is much more complicated and

much less understood than we would like. It seems the date is directly associated with who you

are talking with. But, one thing is generally agreed upon – Either we have already reached peak

oil or we’re getting very close. The other certainty is that fossil fuels are a finite resource and

will not last forever. Another thing we feel is not widely understood is the fact that it took the

planet between 50 and 300 million years to turn plant and animal matter into oil. Yet, we have

been able to burn through roughly half of all global oil is a mere 125 years or so.

The economies of the world are largely dependent upon oil. From the transportation that

moves us and our commerce to the fertilizers that allow agriculture to feed the masses, to the

modern technologies that depend on it, we are addicted to oil. When it’s gone, it’s gone and

we will be in for some dramatic lifestyle changes. We hope to explore some of these issues in

this section and try to learn exactly where we are and where we must go if we are to survive as

a global society.

It has been observed that the Stone Age did not end because of the lack of stones. Likewise,

the Oil Age won’t end because of the lack of oil. The issue today is the lack of further growth,

followed by gradual, and then steep decline. We have seen this happen in all kinds of systems

128

and in every civilization that has ever populated the planet. There is no reason to believe that

our civilization will be any different. It just so happens that we chose oil to be our holy grail and

now we happen to be running low on it.

To put this in perspective, it is now widely acknowledged that we have already found more than

95% of all recoverable oil. Therefore, there is little likelihood that we will run across any major

new finds to pull us out of the predicament we find ourselves in today. We also know that

worldwide discovery of oil peaked in 1964, and has followed a steady decline since. According

to industry consultants HIS Energy, 90% of all known reserves are now in production. If it has

peaked then the issue becomes how long can we make the decline last. So far, new

technologies and enhanced drilling techniques have allowed us to nearly keep pace with

demand, but this can’t last for long. We know that with a rapidly growing population and a

huge number of developing societies across the planet, demand will continue to rise at the

same time supplies dwindle. Sooner or later it will boil down to a simple equation. He who has

the biggest stick or he who has the most money gets the oil. We’re in for a rough ride, indeed.

Exxon Mobile Corporation, one of the world’s largest publicly owned petroleum companies, is

the most forthright of the major oil companies having had the courage and honesty to tell it like

it is. They published the declining discovery trend, based on sound industry data with reserve

revisions properly backdated. They are running page-size ads in European papers stressing the

immense challenges to be faced in meeting future energy demand, hinting that the challenges

might not be met despite its considerable expertise. Chevron recently joined their campaign

publishing an advertisement in national newspapers stating that the Era of Easy Oil is Over.

We are certain that this statement is not made in an attempt to justify rising oil prices. There is

little chance of the world’s demand for oil to slow or reduce on its own. It is also unlikely that

populations will easily agree to reduce the population to ease the stress on oil resources. Right

now, our only chance is to quickly develop alternative energy sources to mitigate demand.

Given what we’ve seen lately, this seems highly unlikely.

129

So, let’s take a closer look at where we are right now. Most of this information comes from

Wikipedia and anyone interested in researching further can find additional information

contained within their examination of Peak Oil. (Wikipedia, Keyword PeakOil)

By definition, Peak Oil is that point in time when the maximum rate of global petroleum

extraction is reached, after which the rate of production enters terminal decline. If that word

terminal sounds scary – it should! M. King Hubbert created and first used the models behind

peak oil in 1956 to accurately predict that US oil production would peak between 1965 and

1970. Applying his model to specific oil fields has proven highly accurate, so it’s certainly

possible that we’ve already reached our limit.

While it should come as no surprise, many observers have offered that the high dependence of

most modern industrial transport, agricultural, and industrial systems on the relative low cost

and high availability of oil will cause the post-peak production decline and possible severe

increases in the price of oil to have negative implications for the global economy. In fact, we

have already seen evidence on the validity of this statement. In the last weeks, when the price

per barrel of oil passes a certain point, consumption went down. This shows that line in the

sand we used as an analogy earlier. Just like in everything else, at some point there will be a

diminishing return on investment. Again, oil is no exception.

There are optimistic estimations on when peak oil will occur. Some contend that it won’t hit

until about 2020 or even later and also contend that by then alternatives will be available. We

don’t want to bust anyone’s bubble, but this isn’t going to happen by 2020, and probably not

before 2050. The International Energy Agency (IEA) says production of conventional crude oil

peaked in 2006. So, regardless of whether it has peaked or not, it’s clear that if it hasn’t is will

very soon. According to our research and observations, we don’t really have anything on the

plate to mitigate. What’s the old saying about getting caught with our pants down?

The demand side of peak oil is concerned with consumption over time, and how fast that

growth occurs. Between 1994 and 2006 demand growth averaged 1.76% per year. Over time

that adds up to a huge figure. For instance, world demand is projected to increase 37% over

2006 levels by 2030. That translates to 118 million barrels per day from 86 million barrels per

130

day. Likewise, a study published by the journal Energy Policy predicted demand would surpass

supply by 2015. People, that’s only 4 years away. Who among us can argue that we are

prepared?

Worldwide use of oil is distributed among four main sectors: transportation, residential,

commercial, and industrial. As you would expect, transportation is the largest by far,

accounting for approximately 68.9% of all oil used in the US, with a worldwide consumption

rate of 55%.

We keep talking about population growth. This phenomenon is a significant factor on

petroleum demand. Data show that using population as an indicator, peak oil occurred in 1979.

That’s when oil production per capita peaked. In addition, oil and gas production are essential

to modern agriculture techniques. Any fall in global oil supplies could cause food prices to rise

dramatically and famine could become even more unprecedented than it is now. In addition to

food prices, interruptions in supply would have dramatic effects on ammonia production that is

used for fertilizers to enhance food crop production. Not only would the price of food go up,

but the supplies would go down as well. Surprise - Geologist Dale Allen Pfeiffer contends that

current population levels are unsustainable, and that to achieve a sustainable economy and

avert disaster the US population would have to be reduced by at least one-third, and world

population by two-thirds. How likely is that to happen?

Let’s stop for a moment and see where we are.

All the easy oil and gas in the world has pretty much been found. – William J Cummings,

Exxon-Mobile, 2005

It is pretty clear that there is not much chance of finding any significant quantity of new

cheap oil. Any new or unconventional oil is going to be expensive – Lord Ron Oxburgh, former

Chairman of Shell, 2008

To pump oil, it first needs to be discovered. The peak of world oilfield discoveries occurred in 1965 at around 55 billion barrels/year. The rate of discovery has been falling steadily since. – Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO), 2007

131

That pretty well covers it to this point. What about oil reserves? Well, they effectively peaked

in 1980. That’s when production first surpassed new discoveries, though creative methods of

recalculating reserves have made this difficult to establish with any degree of certainty. We

have learned that many oil producing nations have been greatly over estimating their supplies

in attempts of bolster share values. Given that, however, it is generally agreed that current

technology allows us to extract approximately 40% of the oil from most wells. Past that point

and costs become excessive and impractical. Any anticipation of pumping more through new

technologies has already been factored into the equation. From a historical perspective, Sadad

I. Al-Husseini, former VP of Aramco stated in 2007 that 300 billion barrels of the world’s 1,200

billion barrels of proven reserves should be re-categorized as speculative. If that proves to be

accurate, and it probably will, then any exuberance over the size of world reserves will be cut

short. Al-Husseini’s observations are now corroborated by the Energy Watch Group that shows

total world Proved plus Probable reserves to be between 854 billion and 1,255 billion barrels.

Pretty close.

Most of us have heard about some of the unconventional sources of oil such as heave crude, oil

sands, and oil shale. Some oil geologists believe, in fact, that there may be more oil in these

designations than the more conventional wells we are so familiar with. The problem is that

getting at that oil is very labor intensive, requires much more energy to process, and releases

higher volumes of greenhouse gasses. Without a breakthrough in renewable energy

technologies, however, it is likely that the time will come when we will have to take advantage

of these sources. Regardless of the unsavory side effects and costs, new regulations from the

SEC allow oil companies to book them as proven reserves. Given the increased costs that

would immediately be passed through to the consumer, we should probably not get too excited

just yet with any new reserve estimates. Moreover, oil extracted from these sources contains a

number of nasty components in addition to the oil such as sulfur and heavy metals that are

highly toxic to the environment. Some of these sites are even deemed unusable by the oil

companies.

132

Let’s get back to the issue of production levels. Anyone interested in these sorts of things will

have noticed that oil companies are now investing heavily in harder-to-reach reserves.

According to the Wikipedia article this should be taken as a sign that oil companies themselves

believe the days of cheap and easy to find oil are over. It is also a sign that higher oil prices

cannot prompt more production. The bottom line then is regardless of the price per barrel, we

are now at the peak of oil production and we are stuck at this point with no alternative(s) on

our plate. So, the way of life we have developed based on oil is about to change in huge and

dramatic ways. No amount of political posturing will change that.

Newshounds will have already noticed that a number of large oil producers have begun to

nationalize their fields in anticipation of the fight to come. This puts politics right in the middle

of the oil production equation – an issue we haven’t had to deal with before. This is another

visible sign that things are about to change. As tensions escalate around the world, these

countries will be less amenable to sharing their assets with the rest of the world and tensions

will escalate even further. According to PFC Energy, only 7% of the world’s estimated oil and

gas reserves are in countries that allow companies like ExxonMobil free rein. 65% are now in

countries that have already nationalized their oil fields. Unless you’ve been living in a cave for

the past century, you are aware that the very areas where these fields are located are the ones

that don’t have fuzzy feelings for the West.

There is no question that our use of fossil fuels has been one of the most significant factors

leading to our economic growth since the industrial revolution. It was so relatively easy that we

have forgotten just exactly how we got here. We have based our success almost entirely on a

resource that cannot be replaced, even in thousands of lifetimes. There are a growing number

of us that believe when oil productions really begins its decline, human culture, and its

accompanying technological society will have no choice but to change drastically. As indicated,

the decrease is a sure thing. What is not sure are the types of alternatives that must be found if

we are to survive in any recognizable way. If these alternatives are not on the horizon, the

products we have come to rely on, such as fertilizers, detergents, solvents, adhesives, and most

plastics, along with lubricants, diesel, and gasoline will surely become much more expensive. In

133

2005, the US Department of Energy published a report titled Peaking of World Oil Production:

Impacts, Mitigation, & Risk Management. Known as the Hirsch report, it stated,

“The peaking of world oil production presents the US and the world with an

unprecedented risk management problem. As peaking is approached, liquid fuel prices

and price volatility will increase dramatically, and, without timely mitigation, the

economic, social, and political costs will be unprecedented. Viable mitigation options

exist on both the supply and demand sides, but to have substantial impact, they must be

initiated more than a decade in advance of peaking.”

There are many things worth reading in this short statement. But the most important is the last

sentence. For anything to be helpful (these alternatives we don’t have now) they have to be

initiated more than a decade in advance of the peaking. Regardless of where you are on the

issue of Peak Oil, that means we are already too late for any mitigation to be of much use. We

don’t even have one viable alternative on the table. Given the historically slow implementation

of anything in this country, even if we came up with a gimmick to delay the inevitable today, it

would probably be decades before it could become implemented (planning, funding,

infrastructure, politics, etc.). In fact, the Hirsch report emphasized the need to find alternatives

at least ten to 20 years before peak if we are to avoid the serious social and economic

implications of a global decline in oil production. These kinds of prognostications can be found

all over the internet and not a single one give much reason for optimism. We have already

learned that our country tends to be active rather than proactive. This is surely a time when

this tack is a bad idea.

There are a few out there, including some oil company CEOs, that believe we have enough oil to

last for another 100 years at least. We don’t know what they’re taking, but folks, the evidence

just isn’t there. If they’re counting on unconventional reserves to save the day, they’re trying to

convince themselves. All we have to do is look at the shape of the world’s economies to see

that they simply could not support the kinds of costs involved without collapsing. That simply

means we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t. Neither scenario is acceptable.

We would like to assume that for every problem there are solutions. Fortunately, for the issue

of peaking oil supplies, and the prospect of declining production, and all the associated

134

problems, there are a number of solutions. There’s only one small problem – implementation.

Regardless of where you stand on the issue we have all been hearing about how we can solve

many of the problems plaguing the planet. We’ve heard about Solar Power, Wind Power, Geo-

thermal Power, Nuclear Power, Hydrogen Power, and Fusion Power. In fact, there are

prototypes of each of these solutions around today. We’ve been hearing about Bio-Fuels,

Ethanol, Electric Cars, and a whole host of other things that can possibly provide alternatives to

what we use today to move ourselves and our commerce around, and use to power the

economy that drives our excessive lifestyle. There are several of these experiments around as

well. The good news is that each and every one of these ideas is great. The bad news is that

building the technology and its supporting infrastructure will take a long time. Many of these

ideas should have been put into action decades ago so they could be used today. The sad news

is that none of these can realistically be put into action before we really start to feel the pain of

diminishing oil.

If we had to bet on which of these technologies should be on the top of the list for

transportation, we would have to say Hydrogen Power. Why? – Because over 98% of the

known universe is composed of Hydrogen. It’s literally everywhere and is the closest thing we

have to being an inexhaustible resource. To boot, if used in the internal combustion engine the

only byproducts are a bit of heat and water. It would certainly be much more efficient than an

engine running on gasoline. Scientists agree that they are only about 20% efficient. The other

80% is lost to heat and pollution in the form of hydrocarbons spewed into the atmosphere,

many greenhouse gasses such as carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, methane, and a few other

noxious fumes. These are the things we don’t want to put into the atmosphere. The side-

effects can be disastrous for life on Planet Earth. Again, all you get from hydrogen is heat and

water. Hydrogen should definitely be the fuel for our transportation system of the future. For

everything else, we bet on Fusion. Why? – Fusion is what makes a star burn and that’s what

makes life possible on Earth. A star like ours can last for billions of years and there are

hundreds of billions of them in our Milky Way Galaxy. There are billions of galaxies in the

known universe. There is a lot of fusion going on and we need it here! The physics of fusion is

the crushing of hydrogen, in the presence of tremendous heat, into heavier elements. Doing so

135

results in fantastic amounts of power. For the kinds of fusion reactors we could build in the

short-term, we would mainly be crushing hydrogen into helium. Hydrogen and Helium are inert

gasses and, therefore, would produce no poisonous by-products. There would be zero waste

products. That’s certainly better than the fission reactors we have now. Waste from these

plants will be around for hundreds of thousands of years, are difficult and expensive to store,

and will probably result in many unintended negative consequences before they decay into

lead. How efficient is fusion? Most scientists will tell us that there is enough potential power in

an 8 ounce glass of water than there is in 500,000 barrels of oil. Kaku brings out this fact in his

new book. He also tells us that we can possibly have an efficient fusion reactor functioning

within a decade or so. But that doesn’t mean we will have a functioning infrastructure by then.

That would likely take decades and we had better get to work on it now. Folks - there is a huge

difference between fission and fusion. There could be no better power source for our electric

grid than fusion. You’ve probably heard that we have prototypes of fusion reactors right now

and that’s true. But, unfortunately they consume much more energy than they produce. That

is a problem that we can probably solve within Kaku’s timeframe.

There is some evidence that some in government are starting to get the idea that our current

economy cannot be sustained on oil dependence. There is a small movement toward more

green sources of energy that are a bit encouraging. However, there are events happening

today that should cause a great deal of alarm for Americans.

It seems there is more than one definition for what is green and what is not. Kaku outlines

many of our attempts at creating a sustainable energy policy – things that do not exist in any

policy to be found today. By experience, we know that fission-based nuclear energy is not a

green source. Not only are the processing costs exorbitant, but the left-over spent fuel rods

are, for all intents and purposes, eternal and pose huge threats to the environment. Storage

problems and the possibility of their use in terroristic activity are very real and very expensive.

The possibility of a tragic disaster in a fission plant is not only possible, but probable. They have

already happened all over the world and have even happened in our country as well.

136

By the time this thesis is read we will probably all know about the recent event at the Fort

Calhoun Nuclear Power Plant located near Omaha, Nebraska. For now we only know that our

own President has ordered a “total and complete” blackout relating to any information relating

to a near catastrophic meltdown at the plant. Right now the only information we have comes

from an article coming out of Russia quoting a statement made by the International Atomic

energy Agency (IAEA). According to their report, on June 7, 2011, the plant has suffered a

catastrophic loss of cooling to one of its idle spent fuel rod pools after it was deluged with

water caused by the historic flooding of the Missouri River. The flooding even caused a fire that

resulted in the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to issue a no-fly ban over the entire area.

It seems quite interesting that we have to find out about such an event from Russia and not

from our own government. What kind of political justification will be used to deny Americans

of the kind of information they need to make appropriate decision that are literally a matter of

life or death? We can only suppose that time will tell. To quote our President in a statement

right after the assassination of Osama Bin Laden – This is the way Democracy is Supposed to

Work. All we can do is express disbelief. Nowhere in the history of democracy has anything

even resembling this kind of disregard for our country ever been documented. Regardless of

the ultimate rationale, nothing can excuse this kind of abuse of power. Couple this with a

government that eternally proclaims for God to Bless America and we are left with

bewilderment and a feeling that we have been betrayed by the very people we elected to

enforce our welfare. Already, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has designated

this event as the largest ever to occur in America.

Where has sanity gone? Where is all the information about the Japanese disaster as it relates

to the huge increases in infant mortality happening all over the breadth and width of the land?

Why aren’t the media all over the statistics proving that infant mortality has increased by 38%

to 53% everywhere you want to look since the earthquake in Japan? It’s all being caused by the

winds that are carrying the nuclear radiation to our borders and beyond. We have heard about

how the Japanese government was withholding information from their citizenry and all about

how outraged we should be. Now we learn that our very own government has done the exact

same thing to us. To top it all off, from all indications in the article from Russia, it’s all due to

137

President Obama’s definition of what constitutes a green energy source. For the record, it’s

easy to confirm that he considers fission nuclear power green. Figure out that one. We already

know that he has ordered the Military, Transportation Security Administration ( TSA) agents,

Homeland Security personnel, and others to conduct training exercises in a number of coal-

producing states, apparently because he has his personal war going on with coal-fired plants,

and therefore, coal producers (kind of reminds us of the travesty he created over a Boeing

plant). If this doesn’t represent governmental intimidation then we don’t know what does.

We are living a dream that is entirely unsustainable and we fear a day of reckoning may be just

around the corner. Some very difficult and far-reaching decisions are on the near horizon. We

know civilizations come and civilizations go. The universe is going to fall victim to entropy at

some point. Bringing all this home means our society, as we know it, is going to fall victim as

well. The questions are how fast and how long. The how fast is when we’ll start to feel the

painful reality of our lack of action. The how long is when whether we do anything or not. In

the long-term it won’t make any difference. Those questions are the only ones within our

capacity to answer and define. We are on the cusp today. Are we going to direct a slide that is

skewed to the right or skewed to the left? There is no time for debate. These questions should

have been debated decades ago so we could have ironed out all the wrinkles then. If we play

the game based on the rules of yesterday there just may be no tomorrow.

138

Global Warming

Here lies the body of Samuel Jan,

Who died defending his right-of-way.

He was right, dead right, as he drove along.

But he’s just as dead as if he’d been wrong. – Unknown

After much contemplation, we decided that we wouldn’t take a lot of time talking about Global

Warming. We know that it is a highly contentious issue and most people have heard enough

about it to draw their own conclusions. Therefore, given that we are not experts on Global

Warming, or much else for that matter, anything we could say probably wouldn’t change

anyone’s mind anyway.

However, there are a few things that warrant repeating and at least one thing you probably

haven’t heard much about to date that we would like to share before we move on. This short

article has already grown into something of a monster and, if we haven’t already, we will

probably soon lose your train of thought as well.

We should say at the outset that we believe that Global Warming is happening and that

humans are playing a significant part in making it happen. Scientists call this an Anthropogenic

Global Warming – meaning one partially caused by human activity.

If you listen to the news or read the paper you probably know that the Vatican recently issued a

major scientific report on climate change commissioned to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.

In their declaration, the working group calls,

on all people and nations to recognize the serious and potentially irreversible impacts

of global warming caused by the anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and

other pollutants, and by changes in forests, wetlands, grasslands, and other land uses.

They continue with,

Failure to mitigate climate change will violate our duty to the vulnerability of the

Earth, including those dependent on the water supply of mountain glaciers, and those

139

facing rising sea level and stronger storm surges. Our duty includes the duty to help

vulnerable communities adapt to changes that cannot be mitigated. All nations must

ensure that their actions are strong enough and prompt enough to address the

increasing impacts and growing risk of climate change and to avoid catastrophic

irreversible consequences.

There would appear to be copious and convincing scientific data to support Global Warming.

Quickly, let’s ask ourselves if it’s happening. The answer is Yes! The Earth is already showing

many signs of worldwide climate change. For instance, average temperatures have climbed 1.4

degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 degrees Celsius) around the world since 1880 and the start of the

Industrial Revolution, and much of this has occurred in the last few decades. In other words,

the rise is speeding up. You observe that this is a tiny amount. We hope to show that it isn’t.

The 20th century’s last two decades were the hottest in 400 years and possibly the warmest for

several, millennia according to a number of climate studies. And the UN’s Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that 11 of the past 12 years are among the dozen

warmest since 1850.

The Arctic is feeling the effects the most. Average temperatures in Alaska, western Canada,

and eastern Russia have risen at twice the global average, according to the multinational Arctic

Climate Impact Assessment report compiled between 2000 and 2004. Arctic ice is rapidly

disappearing, and the region may have its first completely ice-free summer by 2040 or earlier.

Glaciers and mountain snows are rapidly melting. Montana’s Glacier National Park now has

only 27 glaciers, versus 150 in 1910. In the Northern Hemisphere, thaws also come a week

earlier in spring and freezes begin a week later.

Coral reefs that we have spoken about before are very sensitive to even small changes in water

temperature. In 1998 they suffered the worst bleaching (die-off) ever recorded. Experts agree

that these sorts of events will increase in frequency and intensity in the next 50 years as sea

temperatures continue to rise. Please keep in mind two things here – these are the areas that

support the vast preponderance of sea life, including the plankton that serves as the foundation

140

of the food chain for the planet, and that the data assumes we don’t trigger a run-away thermal

event before the dates indicated.

News about the sorry condition of our oceans is often buried deep under the news about land-

based problems caused by global warming. This is a shame because the oceans cover over 70%

of the earth’s surface, serve as the foundation of the global food chain, and provide over 50% of

the oxygen we need for survival. Put together, this means that our oceans are responsible for

our existence. Most psychologists agree that this is a normal response. It seems that humans

are primarily visual beings. We can easily see, and therefore understand, when we see pictures

of rain-forest devastation. Pictures of the oceans only show a deep blue expanse of beauty.

We can’t see what’s going on underneath so we tend to ignore them. Pictures wouldn’t show

how badly the oceans were hurting or realize that humans are the cause. Cause and Effect!

Two recent articles in Time Magazine outline what we have created. We would encourage

everyone to at least scan these two short articles. One is entitled A Scary Report Card on the

World’s Oceans, dated June 21, 2011. The other article is Earth Day: Are We Destroying the

Oceans? dated April 14, 2011. These articles teach us that we have already fished out an

estimated 90% of the major commercial fish species that swim the high seas, including the

giant and endangered blue fin tuna. Recent TV programs show that what we are netting today

are juvenile tuna that are too young to reproduce. How sustainable is this practice?

We learn that climate change is warming the oceans at such an accelerating and alarming rate

that it is affecting the entire and fundamental structure of the marine food pyramid by

destroying coral reefs. Increased CO2 levels are making sea water more acidic. We are rapidly

approaching levels that existed 55 million years ago when over 50% of all species disappeared

from our oceans. Jeremy Jackson, the director of the Center for Marine Biodiversity and

Conservation at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography says that our oceans are becoming a

desert, unable to sustain life. Even the most uninterested people can understand what that

means for our civilization today. Jean-Michael Cousteau, son of the famous oceanographer of

the same name and in the same article, continues by citing evidence that we are using the

oceans as a sewer.

141

We are becoming immune to all the negative talk about the looming apocalypse over Global

Warming. That’s a bad thing! People tend to find relief from all the doom and gloom in any

way they can. In a somewhat humorous statement in these articles, the authors observe that it

almost makes even the most ardent conservationist want to take a long air-conditioned ride

in a big SUV.

The conclusion of the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (ISPO), a global panel

of marine experts that met this year at Oxford University to examine the latest science on

ocean health, was a simple - It is Not Good! They elaborate with we are at high risk for

entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history. This is

meant to tell us that it’s not just one thing like CO2, or another like melting ice caps and

glaciers, etc. It’s all of these things working collectively and occurring much more rapidly than

science originally expected. Alex Rogers, the scientific director of IPSO, in these articles,

explains: We are looking at consequences for humankind that will impact in our lifetime, and

worse, our children’s and generations beyond that. Readers, this is information that must be

heeded. To blithely sit back and contend that it is all a ruse is to condemn our children and our

children’s children to a life of misery. Science has no reason to manufacture such

overwhelming evidence as a hoax on humanity. There is no financial gain to do so. There isn’t

even an immoral reason to do so. Global Warming is real – science knows it. The vast

preponderance of those who don’t believe it’s real are people who either have vested interests

in keeping others in a state of disbelief, or people who have no idea or scientific background

that would indicate they know what they’re talking about.

We also want to share a few observations by Craig Scott Goldsmith, author of Uninhabitable: A

Case for Caution, that was made in preparation for Earth Day 2011. These statements are

contained in an open letter to humanity and its leaders cautioning the detrimental effects of

releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Goldsmith says humans are acceleration CO2 emissions through overpopulation, the use of

automobiles and by building an abundance of new coal fired burning plants, which will bury the

Kyoto treaty. He says the effects of global warming are evidenced by the extreme weather

142

conditions humans are currently experiencing, including decade-long droughts, massive

flooding in Australia, and record-breaking snowfall in the eastern part of the United States.

Global warming doesn’t mean it’s going to necessarily be warmer. It simply means a

disruption in the normal weather patterns.

In fact, the complete opposite could happen as we learned before. If the Thermohaline Current

shuts down, much of Europe and Eastern Canada could find themselves in a mini-ice-age.

Other parts of the world could experience much more or much less rainfall, the rain forests may

become deserts, catastrophe would become the norm of the day.

Goldsmith also speaks to the dramatic downshift of the pH in our oceans, or oceanic

acidification. He says the oceans are absorbing so much CO2 from our modern lifestyle that

they are becoming toxic and void of oxygen, creating dead zones around the world and putting

oceans in jeopardy of collapsing within a few decades. Considering how much of our food

comes from the oceans, this would not be a good thing. Add it to the other things that

accompany it and the entire world population and economy could collapse. Many readers have

probably seen a number of TV programs attesting to the same thing.

We also need to consider the issue of Methane Hydrate, says Goldsmith. This is another

greenhouse gas and just happens to be 26 times more potent than CO2. There are vast

quantities of methane hydrate trapped as ice at the bottom of the ocean. Should ocean

temperature raise enough to release large quantities of this gas, it would raise global

temperatures by as much as 4-16 degrees on average. Sadly, there are already TV shows that

have filmed rather large eruptions of methane hydrate from the ocean’s floor. It is also found

in the frozen tundra around the world, particularly in Siberia. Scientists agree that even

moderate rises in the global temperature could push the limits of human existence. Yes –

methane hydrate could cause a human species extinction event.

This last sentence brings us to the point we raised earlier. What does this really mean for

humans? What are the physiological limits of the human organism? This is an issue we hardly

ever hear about, but to us, seems to be among the most important. It seems that we are

playing with fire here. We stand the chance of making large areas of our planet completely

143

uninhabitable if we don’t get with the program and reverse the changes we see going on

around us. This is the place where we must get past the issue of whether or not humans are

causing global warming. This is where it doesn’t really matter. This is not just about whether or

not global warming is the greatest hoax ever pulled on the American people, as some politicians

would have us think. This is the real thing. Global Warming is happening, whatever is causing

it, and if we don’t fix the problem, we just might not have anywhere to live.

Scientists have terminology for explaining how temperature can cause mass extinctions. It’s

called the Wet Bulb Temperature. That temperature happens to be right about 35 degrees

Celsius. That’s where, over an extended period of time (6 hours to be precise), the human

organism could not exist. By the way – that’s about 95 degrees F. But, you say your

temperature is already 98.6 F., and that’s true. But, if you were outside on a hot day, working,

with no breeze, and no way to cool down, you would soon suffer from heat exhaustion and

perish. It seems we must keep our skin a few degrees cooler than our core temperature so that

heat can be conducted from the blood to the skin in order to shed excess metabolic heat.

That’s why we sweat. We learned this in high school biology class - or should have. This is a

scientific fact, reiterated in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that ran a

model on temperature rise as it relates to global warming and the limits of human physiology.

If you’re interested in all the details you can look it up on the internet. Their model showed the

parts of the planet that would suffer most from rising temperatures and, to say the least, we in

the US wouldn’t like it.

Earth is running a fever – It’s sick and getting sicker. That’s not good! Glaciers all over the

planet are in retreat at a rate much faster than can be explained away as normal climatic

cycling. Tens of millions of people depend on the runoff from these glaciers for their drinking

water and meager agriculture. Their very lives depend on it. Even though Earth has gone

through glacier changes in the past, now there can be no more vacillating – these changes are

being caused by human activity. Humans, not nature, are the culprit. Remember – for every

cause there is an effect – perhaps multiple effects.

144

It’s interesting to watch TV and notice Petroleum and Gas CEOs, and other high-ranking mucky-

mucks, pontificating on what a wonderful thing they’re doing for the country and the world by

providing such an invaluable resource as oil. By the way, we agree that oil has been invaluable

in helping to build the industrial Revolution and all the neat comforts and gadgets we have

today. But, all the jobs, all the good technology, and all the money, have now become

paramount and have now put the health and vitality of the world at risk. Yes – they’re doing it

all for us, indeed. It really gives us heartburn! The pure gall - trying to convince everyone that

poisoning the atmosphere, raping the landscape, literally wiping out countless species, and

killing thousands through pollution of air, water, and land, is somehow magically a great thing!

Just in case there are some who haven’t been out of the house for the last 50 years – it

deserves repeating that the Earth is the only place we have to live right now. And, the way

things are unfolding in our space program; it appears that it will remain so for quite some time.

Today, humans have obliterated over 80% of the planet’s rain forests. You know - those places

that provide one-quarter of the oxygen we require for life, that provide a living for 50% of all

the species left alive today. But, everything is rolling along just fine because the oil magnates

continue to provide us with such a tremendous service. Really! In reality, the loss of benefit to

humanity is already incalculable. This endless quest for expansion and money has accelerated

the demise of civilization to an extent, that many ecologists contend humans have already

pressed civilization past the point of no return. What was good in the beginning has become

what just might spell our demise. Rather than spend just a bit of time working on alternatives

to the use of a very finite resource has been largely ignored by the assumption that oil will last

forever. This false assumption is being re-enforced daily by politicians and much of the media.

This is what history will proclaim was the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind.

Every day more and more people accumulate in cities that are growing faster and faster. There

happens to be a direct and positive correlation between the size of a city and the amount of

energy required to sustain it. Put another way – for each additional person 1.5 watts of new

energy will be needed to sustain him or her. (Wikipedia) And – yes – it’s exponential. The

opposite is true for mammals. The larger they get, the less energy it takes per pound to sustain

145

a healthy life. Why is global warming such a hard reality for people to grasp? This whole

business is unsustainable in every sense of the word. The experiments have been run and the

data have been collected. The evidence has been repeatedly verified as true. Yes – humans

are destroying the planet at an accelerating rate. The evidence is voluminous enough that any

reasonable person must agree. Yet, there remains a contingent of highly vocal nay-sayers

contending that it’s all a hoax. Unfortunately, many of these nay-sayers are the very same

people that enact the laws that govern us all. I have a real problem with believing someone

with absolutely no formal (probably no informal either) training in things scientific spouting

their venom on matters that literally add up to a life and death situation. Folks, this stuff is

happening! As partners sharing this small bit of rock way out in the suburbs of the galaxy we

had better get a grip on reality and really give it the old try to maybe ensure that our children’s

children have a place to live.

This is all we’re going to say about Global Warming – Short and to the point. The time is over

where we can sit around and argue about whether or not humans are contributing to it or if it’s

just a part of the normal cycle of the planet. Global warming is happening, it’s speeding up, and

to continue on the path we’re on can spell disaster for most life on our little rock. We have the

power to mitigate its effects if we can just get past our egos. Yes, it will require some lifestyle

changes and we will have to forego some of our immediate gratifications. But, if it means we

can stay here for a little longer, we think it’s worth it. After all, what choice do we have?

Surely, some out there can remember when there weren’t all the nifty gadgets and sweet

accommodations we have today. We made it just fine – we can do it again. Unfortunately, this

issue has been floating around for quite a while now and we haven’t noticed a groundswell of

support for doing much about it here in the US. In fact, as a nation we only have 5% of the

global population, but we consume 25% of the energy (Wikipedia). Apparently we just don’t

care if the planet dies. That does cause a bit of concern, believe it or not.

146

War on Drugs

It’s no wonder that the rest of the world is suspicious about any and all activities undertaken by

the US – they’re all called a war on something or another. This thing about drugs is no

different. In fact, it’s been around for so long that it may have created a fad for our federal

government. This section is a journey into this war to see if we can draw any meaningful

conclusions.

Here’s a gross breakdown on the money spent on the War on Drugs this year:

Federal = $5,192,339,948

State = $8,850,042,305

Total = $14,042,382,252

The Office of National Drug Control Policy says the federal government spent over $15 billion

in 2010 on the War on Drugs, at a rate of about $500 per second. – Office of National Drug

Control Policy

State and local governments spent at least another $25 billion. – Jeffrey A. Miron & Kathrine

Waldock: “The Budgetary Impact of Drug Prohibition,” 2010

573,219 people were arrested for Drug Law Offenses. Arrests for drug law violations are

expected to exceed the 1,663,582 in 2009. Law enforcement made more arrests for drug

abuse violations than for any other offense in 2009.

Someone is arrested for violating a drug law every 19 seconds. – Uniform Crime Reports, FBI

People Arrested for Cannabis Law Offenses this Year = 295,781

Police arrested an estimated 858,408 persons for cannabis violations in 2009. Of those

charged, approximately 89% were for possession only. An American is arrested for violating

cannabis laws every 30 seconds. – Uniform Crime Reports, FBI

People Incarcerated for Drug Law Offenses this Year = 3,727

Since December 31, 1995, the US prison population has grown an average of 43,266 inmates

per year. About 25% are sentenced for drug law violations.

147

No doubt about it – the War on Drugs is big business and costs American taxpayers a lot of

money. How successful has it been? Are the dollars being spent in appropriate ways? Are we

getting the best bang for the bucks? We hope to present the kinds of information so you can

draw your own conclusions. We contend it’s been an abysmal failure, that money is being

wasted at the point of being criminal, and that we have missed the boat completely as it relates

to what we should be doing about the drug problem in America. With that said, here we go.

The US has been the business of trying to do something about drugs since the passage of the

Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914. So, we would think our government should have learned a

few things since then. Unfortunately, they apparently haven’t. Anyway, on October 27, 1970,

the Nixon administration implemented the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control

Act of 1970, and the term War on Drugs was first used. From the data already cited, it seems

clear that about the only thing we’ve accomplished during this “War” is to put a lot of people in

jails and prisons while failing miserably to thwart the amount and kinds of drugs flowing into

the country. There’s something troubling about this revelation. Throughout the decade of the

1980s, while the number of arrests for all crimes was rising about 28%, the number of arrests

for drug offenses rose by 126% (Wikipedia, keyword, warondrugs). Hurray! – We have a new

reason to hire a slew of drug enforcement officers.

There appears to be a growing contingent that firmly believes that the phrase War on Drugs is

nothing more than a propaganda cloak for earlier military or paramilitary operations, and there

seems to be ample evidence that this is true. The Wikipedia article cites several sources that

show that huge amounts of drug war foreign aid money, training, and equipment goes to

fighting leftist insurgencies and is often provided to groups who themselves are involved in

large-scale narcotics trafficking, such as the corrupt members of the Columbian military. Even

today, the US still gives hundreds of millions of dollars per year of military aid to Columbia,

which is used to combat leftist guerilla groups such as FARC, who have been involved in

narcotics trafficking. And, this is just the tip of the iceberg as we shall see. This seems a lot like

locking the fox in the henhouse to us.

148

Troubles for the War on Drugs began even before the time when the term was first used in

1970. It all started with President Nixon’s attempt to reduce the amount of cannabis coming

into the country from Mexico. In typical knee-jerk action, Operation Intercept nearly halted

border crossing to and from our neighbor and was immediately attacked by officials in

American Border States. Needless to say, there was a tremendous economic uproar and the

operation only lasted 20 days. The same kinds of efficiencies have followed the War on Drugs

ever since.

In December, 1989 the US invaded Panama with 25,000 troops as part of Operation Just Cause.

Many readers may remember the story about the tactics of the CIA, then headed by future

President George H.W. Bush, to keep General Manuel Noriega in business as one of the

country’s leading drug traffickers, and the amount of US dollars that were being sent to Panama

to fund his escapades against Contra groups in Nicaragua. The whole mess eventually became

a huge liability for the US and authority was finally given to the DEA to indict Noriega. After the

usual deaths of American soldiers, a number of Panamanian civilians, and a huge American bill,

the good General finally surrendered and was convicted in a Miami court to 45 years in prison.

Yep – This is another rounding success in the War on Drugs.

As part of its Plan Columbia, the US government has and continues to provide hundreds of

millions of dollars a year in the form of military aid, training, and equipment to Columbia to

fight left-wing guerrillas who are accused of drug trafficking. We know it’s been a huge success

because hardly any cocaine enters our country from Columbia. We’ve also got some wonderful

swampland for sale at bargain basement prices. The Plans just keep going on and on – all

enjoying the same level of success. No one can really tell how many billions of dollars have

been dumped into this bottomless pit, because much of it is hidden in multiple budget lines and

sent to unknown allies.

But, all the neat names for all the plans we dream up don’t tell the whole story. In the bargain,

we’ve been able to force some honest and hard-working farmers and their families in all the

countries we’re helping into abject poverty and starvation by aerial herbicide applications over

their farmland. Of course, we know that herbicides don’t hurt people at all because we have a

149

lot of experience with Agent Orange in Vietnam. Anyway, we now know about these escapades

and that this tactic had caused terrible hardships on the farmers who live below, who have

absolutely nothing to do with the drug trade, by exposing them to dangerous doses of toxic

pesticides and herbicides that cause severe health problems, birth defects, and even death, not

to mention the devastation of some of the planets most fragile ecosystems. And, in the end,

the drug trade has prospered and continues to grow

The War on Drugs has been a highly contentious subject since it began. In fact, in October,

2008, a survey found that 1:4 Americans believe that the War on Drugs has been a failure. We

couldn’t agree more. In fact, we can even give a more contemporary example of how effective

it really is by looking at what has happened in Afghanistan.

Before the US invasion of Afghanistan, the country was estimated to be supplying

approximately 25% of the world’s opium. By comparison, Myanmar was cranking out about

65%, and Lao about 10%. By 2002 those figures were 45%, 45%, and 8% respectively. One year

later, in 2007, the last year statistics are available, Afghanistan was supplying 93%, Myanmar

4%, and Lao, less than 1%. It would seem, therefore, that the billions of dollars we’ve pumped

into Afghanistan probably haven’t provided the best bang for the buck. Even with vast

numbers of US troops and consultants, exotic weapons, and extensive aerial defoliation efforts,

during this same time period, the number of hectares devoted to poppy production has grown

from 82.000 to over 193,000. In fact, with the exception of 19th century China with a

population 15 times that of today’s Afghanistan, no other country in the world has produced

narcotics on such a deadly scale (UN Office of Drugs and Crime). Of course, these figures don’t

even include the tremendous loss of life, the robbing of poor farmers of their meager efforts to

survive, and the contamination of vast areas of farmland. In fact, it would probably be

impossible to even put a dollar value lost through America’s War on Terror and War on Drugs.

We would certainly like to meet the people who still contend we are making progress in this

country. The data simply don’t corroborate such claims. Readers are probably wondering why

we don’t have exact numbers to calculate true costs. Well, according to data provided by the

US National Security Archives, US Foreign Policy Contracts paid by US Taxpayers are being paid

150

to unidentified foreign entities. OK, so we’re sending tens of billions of dollars to a bunch of

unidentified foreign entities. Now, either our government is incredibly stupid, or they’re lying

to their constituents. Either way, this is NOT the way a democracy is supposed to operate.

Don’t get too upset when you learn the government is doing exactly the same thing in a

number of other countries. Egad! – All this at a time when our infrastructure is collapsing, we

have a national debt that equals nearly a third of our GDP, people can’t find jobs, are starving,

have lost a significant value in their homes, and on and on. No matter how much double-speak

they puke out; this simply cannot be justified - Particularly when the same people acknowledge

secretly, that the War on Drugs has been an abject failure, both financially and in suppressing

the drug trade.

We can carry this train of thought a bit further. The Global Commission on Drug Policy report

has a number of things to say about our whole policy on drugs. In a nutshell, it reported the

whole business to be a failure. In addition, their 24 page report, commissioned by the UN,

argues that anti-drug policy has failed by fueling organized crime, costing the taxpayers billions

of dollars and causing thousands of deaths. It cites UN estimates that opiate use increased by

35% worldwide from 1998 to 2008, cocaine by 27%, and cannabis by 8.5%. What that says is

that despite all the money we’ve spent, and all the lives that have been lost, all the devastation

that has been wrought on citizens in the countries of focused, the use of each of the typical

drugs of choice has increased. Not surprisingly, the panel criticizes governments, like ours, who

claim the current War on Drugs is effective. They state:

Political leaders and public figures should have the courage to articulate publicly what

many of them acknowledge privately: that the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates

that repressive strategies will not solve the drug problem, and that the war on drugs

has not, and cannot, be won.

The 19 member panel goes on to contend that instead of punishing users who, the report says

“do no harm to others,” governments should end criminalization of drug use, experiment with

legal models that would undermine organized crime syndicates, and offer health and treatment

services for drug-users. It calls for drug policies based on methods empirically proven to reduce

crime and promote economic and social development. They were especially critical of the US,

151

saying it must abandon anti-crime approaches to drug policy and adopt strategies rooted in

healthcare and human rights. We think it interesting that Columbian President Gaviria says

“We hope the US at least starts to think there are alternatives.” He went on to say “We don’t

see the US evolving in a way that is compatible with our long-term interests.” And, all the

while, the US continues to pour millions of dollars into Columbia under the guise of the War on

Drugs.

Of course, the White House drug tsar Gil Kerlikowske immediately rejected the panel’s

recommendations. He actually said that “making drugs more available, as this report suggests,

will make it harder to keep our communities healthy and safe.” Now, that WAS a mouthful of

BS. A trundle down any metropolitan street today can be a risky walk. There is gang violence

on nearly every corner, drug sales happen every second, kids are murdering each other in huge

numbers, communities are devastated by vandalism, and urban blight is rampant. People are

dying from overdoses due to faulty drug manufacturing at unprecedented rates. The list goes

on and on and still the drug tsar for America says we have to protect the health and safety of

our communities. Wow! Even the government of Mexico was critical of the report. Never

mind that 34,000 people have died in drug-related violence since a crackdown on the cartels

began in 2006. Truly, our government and those in a number of other countries have a bad

case of macular degeneration. They can only see straight ahead and, therefore, miss most of

what’s going on around them. This war is not solving anything. In fact, it’s making things

worse. The evidence is overwhelming. Why can’t they just admit it and get with a program

that will work? We already know what the answer is. But, as long as governments stay in the

business of trying to legislate morality we fear nothing much positive will happen.

In fact, we find it interesting that a government so intent on legislating morality is the same one

that is secretly stuffing billions into the hands of drug cartels in exchange for help in dealing

with insurgents. Yes, that’s happening as we speak and it’s been going on for a long time. It

happened during WWII with the release of Lucky Luciano. Following WWII it happened when

the CIA began working with the Sicilian Mafia, it’s gone on with the CIA and Chiang Kai-Shek and

his group fighting Mao, when the CIA helped the KMT smuggle opium from China and Burma to

152

Bangkok. It’s going on today in Iraq, Afghanistan, Mexico, and Columbia, and many more. Out

of one side of our governmental mouth we spout morality and out of the other we become

drug kingpins ourselves – all on the taxpayer’s dime. Heck of a deal if you ask us.

We have already learned that any military actions against drug cartels have been unsuccessful.

By spending our billions we have inadvertently put even more billions into the hands of the

cartels. Every effort has resulted in increased imports. It would seem that the drug way has no

real interest in its own results. By employing the exact same measures that were implemented

during prohibition, it has been doomed from the start. Maybe that’s been the plan all along.

We will probably never know.

But there are a few things we do know. In his book The Pursuit of Oblivion, Richard Davenport-

Hines shows that only 10-15% of illicit heroin and 30% of illicit cocaine is intercepted. Drug

traffickers have gross profit margins of up to 300%. At least 75% of illicit drug shipments would

have to be intercepted before the traffickers’ profits were negatively impacted. It seems that

the more we spend the richer the traffickers get. Also, Albverto Fujimore, president of Peru

from 1990 to 2000, described US foreign policy as “failed” on grounds that “for 10 years, there

has been a considerable sum invested by the Peruvian government and another sum on the

part of the American government and this has not led to a reduction in the supply of coca leaf

offered for sale. Rather, in the 10 years from 1980 to 1990, it grew 10-fold.” Finally, there is a

growing list of economists that say reducing the supply of marijuana without reducing the

demand causes the price, and hence the profits of marijuana sellers, to go up, according to the

laws of supply and demand.

Finally, all of this posturing has only caused the prison population to literally be busting at the

seams. Since drugs are so easy to find, and since the effort in the War has been directed

toward prosecution, we now enjoy the reputation of having nearly the highest level of

incarceration per capita in the world. That should really be something to be proud of. We

would prefer to spend upward of $25,000 per year to imprison someone than to spend

between $900 and $3,500 per year to treat the problem. And in the balance, we have created

vast populations that have felony records, that will never be able to secure a good job and

153

become productive members of society, and who can never vote. We have a huge cadre of

young people who fell into the drug trap and have lost all hope. We would rather do these

things than take care of the problem at its source. It never ceases to astonish.

So, where are we? US taxpayers have spent an estimated $2.5 trillion on the War on Drugs

since it was declared in 1971. Given the crushing national debt today, it is no wonder that Wars

like this are coming under increased scrutiny. The tack chosen has done nothing except line

foreign drug cartel pockets with lots of those little green pieces of paper. But, instead of

acknowledging that we have a problem with these tactics, the White House is steadfast in its

determination to promote the status quo. Statements funneled through the White House

underscores the lack of government accountability when it comes to the drug war. Drugs are

easy to find and easy to buy. Profits from their sale are immense. There exists overwhelming

evidence that America’s drug policies are flawed and that they actually promote drug use and

sales. Expenditures for the War on Drugs have increased over 600% in inflation-adjusted

dollars in the past 40 years. During this entire time, the use of drugs per capita has increased,

the volume of imports has increased, the incarceration rate has increased, and thousands of

lives have been ruined. How much more value can we get? No, the thing isn’t working.

It’s way past the time where American should take a closer look at its drug policies. While

there remains a sizable contingent against any kind of legalization, surveys support the notion

that most Americans believe that at least some drugs should be legalized so tax revenues can

be funneled into mitigation efforts and treatment programs. With all the changes in moral

structure changing today, it’s time to acknowledge the shortfalls of how we’ve historically taken

care of things. We should have learned from prohibition, but didn’t. Now is the time to take

what we learned then and put it into practice now. We are promoting the exact same

philosophy we use for alcohol as we do for drugs. Just because a certain county in a state is

“dry” doesn’t mean that people don’t drink. Just because using drugs are illegal doesn’t mean

people won’t use them. Likewise, just because a drug is legal doesn’t mean everyone will use

them just the same as all people don’t drink because alcohol is legal Just because tobacco

products are legal doesn’t mean everyone uses tobacco. The arguments can go on and on. The

154

point is this - governments cannot legislate what people do in privacy. They can try, and they

do, but just because there’s a law does not mean everyone will obey it. Enough said. The War

on Drugs should have died on the vine a long time ago. But we already know that America is

not known for carefully considering all the possible outcomes of its actions. We can all sit

around and blame Mexico, Columbia, Afghanistan, and countless others for producing and

smuggling drugs into the US. But, after all the dust settles, we are left only with the realization

that if there wasn’t a market for it they wouldn’t send it. The drug situation is our fault, not

some poor country somewhere else in the world. It’s time for us to step up to the plate and

admit that and then take whatever steps necessary to treat the problem at its source.

155

America’s War on Terror

Or

America’s Warfare State

As we were researching materials for this section we ran across an article from the Excavator,

dated February 28, 2011. It began:

Long before quantum mechanics, the German philosopher Hussert said that all

perception is a gamble. Every type of bigotry, every type of racism, sexism, prejudice,

every dogmatic ideology that allows people to kill other people with a clear

conscience, every stupid cult, every superstition-ridden religion, every kind of

ignorance in the world, are all results from not realizing that our perceptions are

gambles. We believe what we see, and then we believe our interpretation of it, but

we don’t even know we’re making an interpretation most of the time.

We think that this is reality. In philosophy that is called Naïve Realism. What I

perceive is reality. Philosophers have refuted naïve realism every century for the last

2,500 years starting with Buddha and Plato, and yet most people act on the basis of

naïve realism.

Robert Anton Wilson adds:

The world is not governed by facts or logic. It is governed by BS (we like your first

thought, but in the context of the article it means “belief systems”). Seeing is not a

function of the eyes alone, but of the eyes-and-brain working together. A popular

proverb says Seeing is Believing, but as the philosopher Santayana once pointed out,

humans are much better at believing than at seeing.

During our research we consistently asked one question to everyone we interviewed – Can you

remember, in your lifetime, when the United States was NOT engaged in a war of some kind?

You already know the answer to that question, and so did we. In times of prosperity, poverty,

good times, and bad times, America is always at war with some-thing or some-one . Perhaps

that simple observation answers a lot of questions about what people are talking about, writing

about, and contemplating about. Maybe they are the same things we’ve tried to convey in this

rambling article. Do we really believe, as a nation, in what we do, or are our efforts nothing

more than an attempt to rationalize our shortcomings? That is a question best left for

156

philosophers, but it’s also one we should be asking for ourselves. We have lost our way. Our

entire way of living is based on an unsustainable illusion that is killing us as well as our moral

structure, and our way of life. We live in a constant fog of war. How can we maintain

optimism, and seek a better tomorrow when we live under the black umbrella of war?

But, we digress. Let’s take a short tour through the War on Terror, how it began, what it’s

accomplished, what it’s cost us, both financially and spiritually, and where it’s leading us.

Hopefully, then we will be able to forecast the further implications of where this business of

perpetual war is leading us as a nation. We think that journey tells us a lot more about the

United States than the facts would imply. We think the reality is much more than the sum of

the parts we are being told.

The War on Terror, or the Global War on Terror, or the War on Terrorism, or the Overseas

Contingency Operation (the Politically Correct term today) is an international military campaign

led by the US, and the United Kingdom, with support by NATO and non-NATO countries,

originally waged against al-Qaeda and other militant organizations with the intent of

eliminating them. From the outset, we haven’t decided what to call it and still can’t identify

who it’s supposed to eliminate. Sound familiar?

President George W. Bush and a few other high-ranking US officials first used the term soon

after the 9/11 attacks. He said “Our War on terror begins with al-Qaeda, but it does not end

there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and

defeated.” Now, we have to admit, that is a far-reaching statement. Throughout the history of

civilizations, leaders have, without exception, had exactly the same ambitions and they have

never, ever, succeeded. Why can’t America realize that? If al-Qaeda was completely

eliminated today, there would be another group organized and in business tomorrow. By the

very definition of “terrorism” there will always be another one. So, for those who haven’t

realized it yet, President Bush was saying that we have now entered a perpetual, never-ending

war – one that we will never stop.

157

There have been a huge number of operations begun as components of the War on Whatever.

We will just name a few of them, and maybe say a few words, just to give you an idea of its

scope. Details on any of these operations are easily found on the internet.

Operation Active Endeavour – a naval operation of NATO, October, 1991

Operation Enduring Freedom – the official name for the War in Afghanistan,

September, 2001. This War was begun after the 9/11 attacks after the US gave the

Taliban-led government of Afghanistan an ultimatum to turn over Osama bin Laden.

Afghanistan asked the US to turn over any evidence (that it did not do) so they could

find him and try him in an Islamic Court. US and UK forces invaded the country in

October, 2001.

Operation Anaconda – an effort to ferret out al-Qaeda forces within Afghanistan,

March, 2002. They re-grouped in Pakistan.

Operation Enduring Freedom, Philippines – an operation to assist the Philippine military

in combating Filipino Islamist groups, January, 2002.

Operation Enduring Freedom, Horn of Africa – this operation doesn’t have a specific

organization as a target, merely to disrupt and detect militant activities in the region

and to prevent their reemergence, October, 2002.

Trans-Saharan Counterterrorism Initiative – an extension of the Horn of Africa

Operation to encompass more of Africa.

Operation Enduring Freedom, Trans Sahara – is an expansion to include all of central

Africa.

Iraq – after years of conflict with Iraq and the regime of Saddam Hussein, and right after

the 9/11 attacks, Congress authorized the President to use force if necessary to disarm

Iraq in order to prosecute the War on Terrorism in October, 2002.

Operation Iraqi Freedom – The Iraq war officially began in March, 2003.

Operation New Dawn – the war in Iraq entered a new phase in September, 2010 with

the official end of US combat operations.

There have been a vast number of smaller operations that fall under the title of War on Terror

over the years. They have involved a number of countries from both NATO and non-NATO

countries, and have cost countless billions in their economies. Media have been telling us all

158

through this period of the successes had for all this effort. However, we all know that

continuing support for America’s endless successions of wars is fading fast and that the

American public is getting weary of the huge costs incurred for all of these huge successes. For

instance, it only took us about 10 years to find one al-Qaeda leader, right under the noses of

one of our “allies.” In all actuality, there is no real evidence that Osama bin-Laden was actually

the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. Regardless, we’re pretty sure he could have been routed

out much earlier if it would have given us any particular political advantage. We all heard

President Obama tell us right after bin-Laden’s death that this is the way Democracy is

supposed to work. No, we don’t think so! There’s very little around us today to indicate this is

how Democracy is supposed to work.

So, where are we really today? We contend that we are not one inch closer to eradicating

insurgency and/or terrorism today than we were the day after 9/11. What we do know is that

the country has pursued an unreachable concept at the expense of the public well-being. We

have sold our soul for nothing. There will always be groups that don’t agree with our

philosophies. Believe it or not, the vast preponderance of the world’s population could care

less whether they live in a democracy or any other kind of –ocracy. The only thing they care

about is where their next meal is coming from. They are oblivious to issues of politics,

economics, and moral turpitude. They just want to be left alone and allowed to pursue

survival. Then, here comes the US, killing their crops, destroying their land, interrupting their

lives, and telling them how to live, all in the name of whatever. Yes, we’re doing a fine job.

And, should you think we don’t know what we’re talking about here, just write and ask about

Vietnam. One of us spent 18 months there and he can tell you about how much the

Vietnamese cared about our politics. Now, in the aftermath, they can enjoy a country that is

not just half communist, but all of it. Now they can enjoy birth defects, napalm burns, land

mines, and a host of other maladies we so generously gave them. And, in the bargain, we killed

countless civilians and devastated the land so they can enjoy starvation as well. Not to mention

that America lost in the neighborhood of 60,000 of its youth so we could saunter away and

leave the mess we created to the people who didn’t want us there in the first place. From

personal experience, to the vast majority of Vietnamese, they could have cared less. Then,

159

after you’ve asked us that, think about what’s going on all over the world right now and ask

yourself if we’re doing anything, anything at all, different than we did for Vietnam.

We’ve given you a snapshot of what the War on Terror is. Now it’s time to sneak a peek at

what it’s cost us financially. Then we’ll see if we can make sense of America’s Military Budget,

how it’s constructed, and what it’s spent on. If you like balancing your checkbook, you’ll love

this.

When the 2010 budget was signed into law on October 28, 2009, the final size of the

Department of Defense’s (DOD) slice was $680 billion, a mere $16 billion than President Obama

asked for. An additional $37 billion supplemental bill to support the War(s) on Terror in Iraq

and Afghanistan was added to the total. The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) was

unable to provide an audit opinion on the 2010 financial statements because of what they

called widespread material internal control weaknesses, significant uncertainties, and other

limitations. That’s government speak for we have no idea what they spent all that money on.

They went on to say there were serious financial management problems at the DOD that

made its financial statements un-auditable. In the end, 6 out of 33 DOD reporting entities

received unqualified audit opinions. That means that you and I would have been fined big time

for not taking care of business. If we had been using public funds, we probably would have

spent some quality time in one of our fine prisons as well. Any way you slice it, the DOD should

held accountable for its use of our tax monies, particularly since it accounts for about 19% of

the entire US federal expenditures. In addition, including non-DOD expenditures, defense

spending was approximately 28-38% (notice we can’t get any more specific than that) of

budgeted expenditures and 42-57% of estimated tax revenues. Defense spending continues to

grow at about 9% annually. Just perhaps, that’s because they have no idea where they’re

spending it. And, to top all this off, the military’s discretionary spending, meaning they can

spend it on whatever they want was 50.3% as far back as 2003, and has been growing every

year. Not only doesn’t the government know what they’re spending it on, we don’t, and

apparently they have no idea what they need it for either. You can’t tell us that 50.3% of all

that money is for black-ops just so they can bury incompetence under the guise of national

160

security. On the contrary, our borders aren’t really all that secure not that most of our National

Guard troops are trooping around in Iraq and Afghanistan.

By the end of 2008, the US had spent approximately $900 billion in direct costs on the Iraq and

Afghanistan wars. Indirect costs such as interest on the additional debt and incremental costs

of caring for the more than 33,000 wounded by the Veteran’s Administration are additional. To

top all this off, some experts estimate that these indirect costs will eventually exceed the direct

costs. Your calculator, if it has enough digits, should show you that these two wars are starting

to add up to more than $2 trillion. That’s a dollar sign and a 2 followed by 12 zeros!

We keep hearing figures in the billions and trillions talked about like they were just little

idiosyncrasies we have to deal with. Let’s try to state them in terms the average American, like

us, can understand. Let’s assume we have a huge pile of dollar bills. If we stood over a

bottomless pit and threw a dollar into that pit every second, it would take us almost 32 year to

toss in $1 billion. What about a trillion? That little job would take us a mere 31,709 years. If

we had a pile of $20 dollar bills, it still would take us nearly 1,586 years to toss in one trillion.

That’s nearly 3,200 years of dumping 20’s down a hole just to pay for what America has spent

on Iraq and Afghanistan. It would take a small city doing the same thing just to pay the annual

budget, let alone the National debt. Keep in mind that these two conflicts represent only the

tip of the ice berg when it comes to calculating the total cost of this so called War on Terror.

Please also remember that, if we continue on the tack, these kinds of expenditures will

continue until the country is totally bankrupt. After all, the Fed can’t continue to print little

green pieces of paper forever. People, our government has gotten us into a terrible mess that

we probably can’t dig ourselves out of this time. And, even with all the lip-service being given

to cutting spending, can anyone really see that progress is being made? We can’t. If we

handled our budgets like the government is handling the federal budget, we would be in jail

today. Why do we let them get away with it? Fiscal restraint has come to mean cutting the

other party’s pet projects, not ours. Better yet, let’s just take it out of the pockets of the

middle-class, but don’t dare touch the filthy rich. This way of doing business cannot continue.

We are on the verge of losing our credit rating, defaulting on our debt obligations, and going

161

directly into another depression what will make the recession seem like a monopoly game by

comparison. Those scenarios would be minor next to what will happen if the dollar loses its

status as the world’s medium of exchange. Yet, we just let it keep on happening. Neither party

is free from blame. This is not a partisan issue. This is a governmental issue that we’d better

take control of before the whole bottom drops out below us. If the government is too dumb to

see this then they should be pink-slipped like the American worker has, not that it would cause

them any financial harm.

Anyway, there’s no question that the US spends a huge amount of money for military-related

activities, while accomplishing very little these days. How much is that total by comparison

with other countries? Well, in 2009, the US military budget accounted for about 40% of global

arms spending and is over 6 times larger than the military budget of China, that has a lot more

area to protect and a whole lot more people. And, since they own a huge amount of the US

debt, apparently they can afford to our-militarize us if they wanted to. The US and its close

allies are responsible for two-thirds to three-fourths of the world’s military spending, and the

US is responsible for most of that. One would think that with that much military might, no one

would dare cross paths with us. Maybe it’s because we never finish anything we start and the

rest of the world knows it. Yes, the US blusters a lot, but just can’t seem to get its act together.

War is expensive. To put the cost in perspective, a recent New York Times article indicated that

it cost about $1 million a year to keep one soldier in the field in Afghanistan. And if you think

gas is expensive here, it costs $400 per gallon to deliver gasoline to the fighting fields. Can any

honest American publicly proclaim that this is worth it when we’re quietly dying in our own

country just so a few Washington big-wigs can play their stock-market games?

There has been a lot of commentary about the amount of money being spent through our

military activities as compared to the benefits we are getting out of all that money. Most of it

seems to be coming from the Republicans who contend that any cuts now would put our allies

in a precarious position overseas. Indeed, there is growing concern in other parts of the world

that our country is in terminal decline. There is fear that our economic condition will cause us

to pull back from our overseas commitments. We must remember though, that all these

162

commitments were made over conditions that we initiated. It is not written anywhere that it is

our responsibility to be the watchdogs and protectors for the planet, or to support or not

support governments elsewhere in the world. Perhaps global tensions would ease if we

weren’t running around all over the place trying to subject our way of life on the rest of the

planet. We need to and have sufficient military might to protect our country from any direct

attack and common sense would suggest that’s just exactly what we should start concentrating

on and quit worrying about what everyone else is doing. It seems to work just fine for them,

why not us as well? By one credible estimate, the US alone spends as much (43%) on defense

as all other countries in the world – combined! America is smack-dab in the middle of a

spending orgy. For instance, we already have more tonnage in our naval arsenal than any other

nation on earth. Yet, here we are building another $14 billion aircraft carrier to add to the11

we already have. Russia has one, Italy and Spain each have two and they’re our allies. Yes, it’s

a dangerous world. But a thousand $14 billion aircraft carriers would not have prevented 9/11.

Our trillion dollar weapons systems, fancy artillery with lasers, all of our sophisticated fighter

jets and drones could not prevent 9/11. In fact, there is growing evidence that most of us don’t

even really know who was responsible for 9/11. Revelation to the world – we don’t need all

that stuff anymore. Game players can now sit in their air-conditioned cubicles and fly their

drones anywhere on the planet, and shoot artillery or pictures, drop bombs or propaganda, and

generally harass anyone they want and never ever feel the pain of combat. ROV’s can travel

tens of miles without human presence and melt tanks with their sodium lasers and the

operators never have to experience the horrors of war. Computers now control most flight

functions on our fancy fighters because pilots can’t react fast enough. They can fly so high and

the computers can wreck havoc to such an extent that the occupants never have to suffer the

traumas of war. In other words, why don’t we all just buy a $300 laptop for every despot on

the planet and they can hop on the internet and have their machines play war for all of us.

Then no one would have to spend all this money trying to kill each other. That’s really where

we are today. We have all these fancy gadgets and are fighting isolated cells of a few people

running around with AK-47s and home-made bombs strapped to their waists and they are able

to stump all our stuff. We keep mentioning these AK-47s. Maybe it’s because one of us had

163

one when he was in Vietnam. It’s still true today – the AK-47 remains the primary weapon for

terrorists and can be had on the internet for anywhere between $5.00 and $550.00 depending

on condition. (Wiki.Answers.com) The AK-47 kills just fine! Guess what – China and Russia are

giving them away for free to these same enemy forces. Our military has decided to equip our

troops with a brand new rifle called the XM-25. This little beauty costs a piddling $35,000 –

each! Kind of makes you want to take a seat on one of those comfortable $600 toilet seats,

doesn’t it?

There is another small issue we think you need to understand. According to figures provided by

the Department of Defense (DOD) and contained in the Wikipedia article on the War on Terror,

the US has more contracted personnel (159,000) than uniformed personnel (144,000) in both

Iraq and Afghanistan. Total costs for contracted personnel in fiscal year 2010 was: $15.4 billion

in Iraq and $11.8 billion in Afghanistan.

There appears to be “under-the-table” agreement that the rationale for this disparity is due

primarily to accountability issues. Contracted personnel are simply not subjected to the same

kinds of scrutiny that military personnel are. This reality might give reason to re-think how we

feel about this War on Terror. It would seem that it is nothing more than another political

game. We know for sure that it can never be won.

We are still thinking in terms of the 1940’s while living and fighting in the 21st Century. This is

not the kind of war we fought in WWII. For some reason we just can’t understand the logic

here? Where is this military genius that got us into this mess? Of course generals will tell us we

need to be in perpetual war. Of course they testify that they’re doing a great job and strut

around claiming lots of successes. That’s what they do. They want us to wage perpetual war so

they can keep their jobs and are perfectly willing to manufacture lies to justify their claims. But

just remember this – you lost yours so they could keep theirs.

We already have the infrastructure we need to fight any kind of foe that can possible arrive on

the scene. We have the FBI, CIA, and the Department of Homeland Security to take care of

these little groups that will always be on the scene. Let’s lavish them with goodies so they can

do what they do best and feel a little bit comfortable that we already have all we need to blow

164

up the whole planet several times over. How much more secure would we be if we had the

capability to destroy it more than several? We need to be worrying about suitcase- or van-

sized dirty bombs, not megaton hydrogen bombs. We have plenty of those, but we fear those

little dirty ones more – and you should too.

We want to end this section by studying an article in the Washington Post written by Zbigniew

Brzezinski (some of us remember him well); national security advisor to President Jimmy Carter

entitled Terrorized by War on Terror. While this article was written in 2007, it appears to be

even more applicable to today than it was then.

The main thesis of this article is that this so-called War on Terror has created an entire culture

of fear in America. Think a moment about what that means. Remember what you’ve been

taught about human action in times of fear. Three little words, war…on…terror, and an entire

country, perhaps the greatest to have ever populated the planet, was reduced to a state of fear

and doom that has undoubtedly had a negative impact on American democracy. In fact, for all

intents and practices, it has destroyed any vestiges of democracy in this country, not to

mention America’s psyche, and it’s standing in the rest of the world. These three words,

through what we think were cleverly panned and used, have actually undermined our ability to

effectively confront the real challenges we face from terrorism. Again, we think this outcome

was cleverly orchestrated and, to this day, are being used to destroy America.

These words are not those of two crazy conspiracy theorists. They come from two old men

who have done copious research into the dynamics of psychology and economics and have

reached an understanding of how the rich-elite have taken much of American wealth to pursue

their own devious self-interests. We are confident that if you too read all the articles that will

appear at the end of this article, you will reach the same conclusion. The fear is that too few

will take the trouble and nothing will change. Maybe that’s a good thing. It just could be that

the sooner we get this foolishness over with, the faster the planet can recover from the raping

it has endured by human presence.

The War on Terror is really a war on what? It is not against a country, contrary to some media.

It is not against a particular race of people, contrary to many in the entertainment industry. It

165

is not about a particular religion, but both media and entertainment would disagree. In fact,

terrorism is not an enemy in and of itself. Terrorism is nothing more than a technique used to

implement warfare. In other words, it is a political scheme used to instill intimidation. America

has become intimidated by a technique. Now that’s one for the textbooks. By constantly

hearing the word war, by being lambasted daily with the word terrorism, we have fallen victim

to the culture of fear. It’s all we hear about on the news, read about in the newspaper, watch

on TV programming, and think about at night. Fear makes it much easier to control people. It’s

been used for centuries and it’s being used against us now. It obscures reason and intensifies

emotions. It allows those in control to mobilize those they control to do the things they need

to achieve their objectives. That simply means they are able to make us pawns in their

diabolical game of chess. And we have been playing along. But, the tide seems to be changing.

That small voice in the distance is getting closer and louder. Hopefully the din will get loud

enough for even those so insulated from reality in Washington will start to hear – hopefully.

The article directly states:

The war of choice in Iraq could never have gained the congressional support it got

without the psychological linkage between the shock of 9/11 and the postulated

existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Support for President Bush in the

2004 elections was also mobilized in part by the notion that “a nation at war” does not

change its “commander in chief” in midstream. The sense of a pervasive but otherwise

imprecise danger was thus channeled in a politically expedient direction by mobilizing

appear of being at war.

To justify the “war on terror” the administration has lately crafted a false historical

narrative that could even become a self-fulfilling prophecy. By claiming that its war is

similar to earlier US struggles against Nazism and then Stalinism (while ignoring the

fact that both Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia were first-rate military powers, a status

al-Qaeda neither has nor can achieve), the administration could be preparing the case

for war with Iran. Such war would then plunge America into a protracted conflict

spanning Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and perhaps also Pakistan.

The culture of fear is like a genie that has been let out of its bottle. It acquires a life of

its own – and can become demoralizing. America today is not the self-confident and

determined nation that responded to Pearl Harbor; nor is it the America that heard

from its leader, at another moment of crisis, the powerful words, “the only thing we

166

have to fear is fear itself”; nor is it the calm America that waged the Cold War with

quiet persistence despite the knowledge that a real war could be initiated abruptly

within minutes and prompt the death of 100 million Americans within just a few hours.

We are now divided, uncertain, and potentially very susceptible to panic in the event

of another terrorist act in the United States itself.

These statements should slap us back into reason. Not for years have we been so close to

making a series of very badly thought out mistakes – ones initiated through panic instead of

reason. How many out there have already conjectured entering into war with Iran? Has

Pakistan entered your mind lately? Behind them is a whole line of dominoes just waiting to

drop. With all the financial and human resource strains we are experiencing now and with US

support fading across the planet, are these events really logical? We think not! The fear

mongering, along with its multiple reinforcements, tends to generate its own momentum. Just

like our government, the bigger it gets the more momentum it has and the harder it is to stop.

If we let it, this thing will get so far out of control that it can’t be stopped. We’re almost there

(maybe it’s already too late).

It’s hard to deny that America has become insecure about the direction it has plotted. A recent

2003 study reported that Congress had identified 160 sites as potentially important national

targets for would-be terrorists. With lobbyists weighing in, by the end of that year the list had

grown to 1,849, by the end of 2004 to 28,360, by 2005 to 77,769. The national database of

possible targets now has grown to some 300,000, including the Sears Tower in Chicago and an

Illinois Apple and Pork Festival. Have you tried to fly lately? There are security guards posted

nearly everywhere today. There are cameras hidden everywhere today. How many forms do

you have to fill out and how much scrutiny must you endure just to get in to see someone?

Have you had to show a picture ID lately? Paranoia is rampant everywhere just because we

have become conditioned to possible threats that, largely, do not exist. There have always

been people who terrorize other people. We used to call it crime – now we use it to justify a

War on Terror.

What about the general area of civil rights? The culture of fear has become so prevalent that

all progress we’ve made in tolerance of others has been eliminated. We have initiated laws and

167

procedures that completely undermine even the most fundamental notions of justice. We keep

going back to the Patriot Act. Just the name engenders anger and fear. I can’t be a patriotic

American unless I succumb to the elimination of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Innocent

until proven guilty doesn’t exist anymore. In fact, the government can read our mail (both snail

and email), track your every move, and listen to our phone calls - all without a warrant. They

can burst into our homes, haul us away, throw us in jail, deny us legal representation, take

everything we own, and never charge us with anything. All they have to do is declare that it’s a

matter of national security. A recent article in the New York Times, dated June 12, 2011, tells

us that the FBI is getting ready to release a new edition of its operation manual called the

Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide. In this article Michael German, a former FBI

agent and now a lawyer for the ACLU tells us what this new manual will change. Essentially it

gives the agency’s 14,000 agents much more leeway to search databases, go through

household trash or use surveillance teams to scrutinize the lives of people who have attracted

their attention. Some of the most notable changes apply to the lowest category of

investigations, called an “assessment.” This allows agents to look into people and organizations

“proactively” and without any firm evidence for suspecting criminal or terrorist activity. In

other words, they can do whatever they want and you can’t do anything about it. Add this level

of perversion to the Constitution and Bill of Rights, tie it into the Patriot Act and you have 1984

personified. About all that’s left to discover is that the government is secretly putting drugs

into our water supply to make us even easier to control. If you haven’t read this book by

George Orwell, give it a read and we think you will see that the same scenario is unfolding right

before our eyes in America today (less the drugs in the water – as far as we know). People, this

is not how democracy is supposed to work! This additional governmental knee-jerk has

destroyed absolutely everything a democracy is supposed to stand for. It’s constitutionally

illegal, it’s scary, and it accomplishes nothing except to control the masses through fear and

intimidation. And, if you think the government won’t declare martial law to quell civil

disturbance on this matter, just think back to Kent State, Los Angeles, or Waco. Our

government will kill the citizens of America to achieve its goals. Think back to Vietnam as well.

Is that democracy? There is no dictator, no chief despot on the planet dead or alive with any

168

more direct power than the President of the United States - All given in the name of the War on

Terror. That means, whether it’s all used or not, our President has just as much power as

Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Napoleon, Adolf Hitler, and many others we’re sure you’ve

heard of. Perhaps the Antichrist will have more, but despite rampant speculation, he or she

doesn’t appear to be around yet. However, we think that time is not far off.

If you think all that is going on today is what the founding fathers had in mind for America when

they wrote the Constitution and added the Bill of Rights then you didn’t wake up on the same

planet that we did this morning. Remember back when we talked about the fall of civilizations.

We showed that one of the most revealing aspects that a civilization is in trouble of collapse is

the passage of more and more restrictive laws to ensure that the people are easy to control by

the government. And, we’re certainly turning out enough lawyers to keep the courts busy for

centuries. To repeat, we are on the verge of not being able to get out of bed in the morning

without having already broken some law. Knowing that, what do you deduce about the

condition our civilization today?

For over two centuries we have fought to maintain the country we believed in. What in the

world happened? Where is the leader today who is willing to say “This is enough? Let’s put an

end to this paranoia. Let’s step back and again realize that the people of the United States are

the most valuable resource we have.” Even in the face of future terrorist attacks, which are

likely, let us show some restraint and logic. The killing of thousands to avenge the death of one

simply cannot be justified. Revenge is not what made America and all the propaganda and fear

mongering in the world won’t change that. Let’s not forsake our traditions for some flawed

philosophy based on fear. Remember, this is supposed to be a country of life, liberty, and the

pursuit of happiness. Terrorism has always been around. After all, Cain killed Abel and they

were brothers. No war against it will ever change that fact that terrorism has been and always

be a part of the human condition. None of this makes any sense at all. Congress is acting like a

bunch of kindergarten kids having temper tantrums and threatening to take their toys home.

They hide behind state borders to keep from addressing meaningful and critical issues, they

always tattling to the media that the other kids of being mean to them, and they pout – they

169

pout a lot! It would actually be quite funny if it didn’t involve such serious issues that directly

affect the future of our nation and our world.

We predict this – if we don’t become directly involved and become more proactive by

demanding that this silliness infecting our government cease immediately then we had better

get prepared for the pain, agony, and suffering we will awaken to tomorrow. If we follow the

tactics of our government and continue to ignore what is going on around us we won’t like

what’s getting ready to happen on Planet Earth.

170

The American Economy

This is the point where we get to go back to a little bit of science. While we have alluded to

Isaac Newton’s Laws of Motion throughout this article we now want to provide a short

explanation of his three laws, how they fit into the concept of mass, and specifically how they

help explain why moving our national economy in either direction is so difficult. In short:

Newton’s First Law of Motion – Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to

remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it. This we recognize as

Galileo’s concept of inertia, and is often termed simply the Law of Inertia.

Newton’s Second Law of Motion – The relationship between an object’s mass m, its

acceleration of a, and the applied force F is F=ma. Acceleration and force are vectors; in this

law the direction of the force is the same as the direction of the acceleration vector. This is the

most powerful of his three laws because it allows quantitative calculations of dynamics. It

actually grew out of Aristotle’s thoughts on matter, but differs significantly in that Newton

proved that a force only causes a change in velocity (an acceleration). It does not maintain that

velocity as Aristotle held.

Newton’s Third Law of Motion – For every action there is an equal and opposite

reaction. We experience this law every day even though we probably don’t realize it.

These laws can be found in hundreds of sites on the internet. Just like Newton’s Laws of

Thermodynamics, scientists quickly found that they applied equally as well in other disciplines.

Before long they were found in economics. When something is done to affect the economy,

there has to be a reaction to create balance. Remember, Mother Nature deplores a vacuum. A

simple example is when the Fed manipulates interest rates to adjust increasing or decreasing

economic activity. The economy will continue along any given path until an equally or stronger

mass/force compels it to change. Hopefully, by now you will have figured out that our Federal

Government has sufficient mass to instigate such a change. The dizzying economic gyrations of

the past few years have proven this analogy to be true.

171

So, when a force acts on a mass, acceleration results. The greater the mass on the object being

accelerated, the greater the amount of force needed to force the acceleration.

The national economy is like a huge mass and, therefore, it theoretically takes a lot of force to

change its direction. Also, it should be obvious that economic mass cannot be measured as

readily or as accurately as physical mass. It’s not as tangible. This makes it extremely difficult

to determine the amount of force that will be needed to induce motion.

So, we thought the best way to try and wind up this exploration would be to present a few

things about the economy in general. After all, it is something that dominates every newspaper

and news program every day. Even more important is the fact that it is something we feel

every day. When we go to the gas pump, to the food center, to the mall or strip center we get

a real taste of what and where the economy is – and none of it is good. In fact, many

economists are now saying that things are getting so bad with our economy that it may end up

destroying America. And that’s the theme we want to explore briefly here.

From 1946 to 2000, America’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) annual growth rate averaged

about 3.5% and, according to every economic indicator, the country remained relatively

prosperous. This revelation comes from an article in Forbes Magazine on May 12, 2011,

entitled Slow Growth Will Destroy America, written by Rich Karlgaard. This section will use his

observations and his article as the foundation for what we say.

He recalls that during this same time period the country survived nine (9) recessions and still

managed to maintain an average 3.5% GDP growth. In non-recession periods the economy

averaged 4% growth.

We know that people will try to rationalize that this or that did or did not happen and this

period was an anomaly. There were essentially no big problems facing the country or the world

to impede growth. But those of us who lived through that time know that such contentions are

simply not true. During this time, driven by a post-war economy, there was already a crushing

national debt and the economy had to live through the re-absorption of millions of veterans

172

returning to the states. These were the years of mega-companies that did their best to quash

innovation and slow the economy.

As years passed we had to survive a Cold War that drove us to the brink of nuclear war several

times. Arriving in the 1960s, there were race riots, demonstrations, and assassinations. The

government was shooting its own citizens in response. The Vietnam War was driving a mental

attitude of anti-everything.

In the 1970’s there were a number of mild and severe recessions that ultimately caused the

stock market to lose 48% of its worth. Unemployment rose to 11% dwarfing the under 10% we

call inexcusable today. There were oil embargoes and presidential resignations leading to an

economy that saw long lines at gasoline stations and interest rates were out in interstellar

space.

The 1980’s weren’t any better. It started with another recession that caused a governmental

knee-jerk that immediately led to another and worse recession. Unemployment again rose into

double digits. By the late 80’s the economy was in such bad shape that it caused another stock

market panic that left the market searching for its loss of 22.6%

The 1990’s arrived with yet another recession that almost caused IBM to declare bankruptcy.

This resulted in the famous saying by Bill Clinton that it’s the economy, stupid.

No, if you were alive during this period, you know things weren’t rosy and that the steady

growth in the GDP was not some aberration. Even during these stressing times the economy

and the country continued to prosper.

Now we seem to be conditioned to the fact that what we face in 2011 is somehow unique to

the country’s history and that we face a new set of problems that have caused the unenviable

condition we find ourselves in. This simply is not true says the article. What we have are the

exact same problems but without the same political will to do anything about them. Karlgaard

contends: What we have is a huge pile of monetary malpractice and bipartisan

incompetence. The good news is that he says all is not lost. The problems are not

173

insurmountable. He spends the rest of the article saying and showing that the answer to all of

America’s economic problems today is growth.

America’s GDP is a bit over $14 trillion. For each 1% growth the GDP would increase by about

$140 billion, on a sliding scale to $420 billion at 3%, to $940 billion at 6% to $1.1 trillion at 8%.

What he is showing here is that Growth Matters! Growth ameliorates past mistakes, gives us

hope, and creates prosperity. Those three things are paramount to the nation’s salvation. But,

what have we actually witnessed? For the first decade of the 21st century the economy had

slowed to 1.7% annual growth. This abysmal showing turns out to be the crux of all our

problems. Those pesky little things like deficits, debts, unemployment, and a sagging

confidence in ourselves and our government – everything got worse. Unfortunately, all we’re

getting out of the government today is a bit of lip-service on how to cut government spending

by cutting the life out of the middle class, instead to action to spur economic growth. Why isn’t

the government yelling to the rafters about growth? Maybe the reason, according to Karlgaard,

is because our President says he prefers fairness over growth. History will teach us that

fairness will get us around 2% to 2.5% growth, similar to European Social Welfare States today.

Since we don’t seem to have fairness or growth anyway, let’s get to the bottom of this issue by

trying something we already know will work. Let’s bring our jobs back to America, allow the

citizenry to work again, and solve each and every one of these problems in a real and realistic

way. It has consistently worked before and it will work again. Just that 1% of additional growth

over a decade (maybe a generation) and the national debt could be reduced to a manageable

level; our standing in the world markets would be bolstered; and the people would be more

satisfied because they are working and can look toward the America Dream again.

Of course, we can’t just flip a switch and make all these things magically happen. There are a

number of steps that must be taken. Here are the things the article recommends. Not all are

immediately possible, but we agree that they are doable over time. We must:

1. Create a strong and stable dollar

2. Get the federal share of GDP back under 20% (from 25% today)

3. Legislate simpler, flatter tax rates

174

4. Lower (we contend eliminate) corporate tax rates, in line with global competition

5. Form simpler, transparent regulations

6. We would add – Eliminate all federal departments that perform duplication of effort

and eliminate all departments that do not perform at predetermined expectations.

Finally, eliminate most of the IRS by creating a tax code that says merely If you buy it

you pay taxes on it (with only a few exceptions for predetermined causes).

7. Create a Pro-Energy Policy

8. Establish immigration policies that favor skilled immigrants

9. Stop the imagined war with business

10. Ban Public Employee Unions

11. For Pete’s sake, reform Education (ban teachers unions first)

12. Establish Patent Reform (to encourage entrepreneurship)

Rich Karlgaard believes that President Obama is a lost cause when it comes to economic

growth. He says that absolutely nothing has come from all his campaign pontifications

regarding all that yes we can bull, and that it was nothing more than a ruse. We tend to agree.

For all the smarts he contends he has, he somehow has missed what that small 1% can mean

over time, favoring fairness (as defined by him) over the economy. That statement itself makes

no sense. This isn’t an either/or scenario. We are considered to be fairly well read and

nowhere have we ever read that you have to either have a strong and growing economy or you

have to be fair. As a matter of fact, we would contend that to be fair to the American people

you have to have a strong economy that is enjoying growth and prosperity. Something is

definitely wrong here and it’s an issue we can’t afford to ignore any longer. If our economy

remains stagnant it’s entirely possible that there won’t be a country left to be fair to.

The author ends on a positive note by quoting AOL founder Steve Case. Politicians have

injured us. The antidote to political cowardice and stagnation is entrepreneurial boldness and

growth.

But, for the short term we must deal with the reality of slow growth and rising under- and un-

employment. In fact, the drop in our GDP actually understates the extent of what we’re dealing

175

with. The fact is that nearly 75% of the measly growth in the GDP can be attributed entirely to

business inventories, not sales, so the real growth is actually near 0%. How does that make you

feel? To add to this agony is the fact that any real growth could only be found in the first two

months of the first quarter, leaving the rest of the year flat – meaning, of course, that the real

GDP probably slid backwards for the rest of the year, and even then was tied up in inventories

instead to commerce. This can only mean a heap of misguided fiscal policy on the part of our

government. No, we do not mean the Obama administration but the whole government.

Again, we say this is not a Republican or Democrat thing. It’s our government’s inability to

solve meaningful issues for the benefit of the country. The whole mess is so tied up in partisan

bickering that absolutely nothing can get accomplished. To compensate, they spend their days

trying to legislate morality, and poke each other in the back. They are so consumed with their

own sexual shenanigans that they don’t have time to run the country. Well, to be fair, they do

have time for figuring out ways to waste more money on nonsensical programs, but not for

anticipating all the additional problems they will have created by doing so. For this they are

paid a handsome salary and are provided all sorts of valuable perks. Perhaps a constitutional

amendment that says no millionaires may be elected to federal office would prevent some of

this silliness. Like that’s going to happen!

Anyway, to this point we are left with one last issue. What to do with future budget deficits

and an exploding national debt? It’s these issues that are impeding investment and spending

by what’s left of our business enterprise. For instance, the national debt has jumped to 69% of

the GDP in 2009, from 40% in 2008. This figure is expected to rise to 85% by the end of the

decade. (Congressional Budget Office) In addition, there is no clear direction for what we’re

going to do about the loss in value of the American dollar abroad. We keep hearing the

Treasury pound the phrase a strong dollar is good for America while it continues to drop in

value by approximately 7% per year.

The fear that each of the above will get worse, along with a fear that the dollar will lose its

position as the universal medium of exchange in the world has all but suspended all investment

and hiring. We can see no change until the country gets with the program and creates a

176

realistic and sustainable economic policy. Right now it’s all over the place and no one can make

any plans for the future. All of these things are doable, but each also comes with a price. We

had better all decide quickly whether or not we are willing to sacrifice a bit today in exchange

for a brighter future tomorrow. If we aren’t, the terminal decline of America will be upon us.

177

Summary, Recapitulations, and Conclusions

We have learned that we must develop at least a cursory understanding of the laws of

Conservation of Energy, Thermodynamics, and Entropy if we are to understand what is going on

around us today. For instance, we absolutely must understand that our universe is governed by

these laws and that the cosmos will always move toward chaos as it ages. That is a reality that

we simply can’t change. We also know that energy, as we understand it, cannot be created or

destroyed – it can only be changed in form. We know that some of these forms are useful for

us and some are not. We have learned that for a system to survive it must have input of new

energy to replace that changed into a non-useful form. Finally, we have learned that there is

only so much energy in the universe, hence the running-down of the systems we have come to

depend on so much for our survival. Of course, for us the universe consists mainly of those we

encounter in our daily lives – civilization, the energy we use to make our lives more safe and

enjoyable, and the food we use to fuel our bodies. We have created several sub-systems to

help ensure that these macro-systems survive for as long as possible.

But today we are bewildered by the fact that our wisdom seems to have failed us and by our

observation that our sub-systems aren’t performing as we expected. That really shouldn’t be

that surprising given the frailties of the human form and our incessant quest for immediate

gratification. From our arrival on the planet we have been driven by material possessions and

seem more than willing to do whatever is necessary to get them. Hopefully we have been able

to present adequate information to allow us to take an informed look at where we are today

and just maybe come up with some ways to mitigate the problems we are now experiencing.

We now know that the civilizations we have created have been and always will be driven by the

same phenomena. Civilizations will assemble, grow, decline, and die. We know death comes

when the population grows to a level beyond what the land to sustain. When that point is

reached several things can and usually do happen. New methodologies are able to slow the

decline some and further conquest can usually keep things running for a bit longer. But, sooner

or later, the civilization dies and reorganizes itself somewhere else. That same scenario has

repeated itself over and over and will eventually happen to our global civilization as well.

178

What we hope to do now is review some of the problems we have found in our current

organization and offer some ways we think we might lengthen our time between decline and

death. We definitely think we have reached as surpassed our peak and are now in terminal

decline. The question remains – How long will that decline last? We also acknowledge that

there are some extinction scenarios that are beyond our ability to control. We have presented

some of them and further review would seem superfluous. Therefore, we will look only toward

those things we can do with proper planning and execution. Perhaps something as simple as a

list might suffice – Let’s see:

1. Our future fate is not a question of if, but when.

2. By its very nature and design, civilizations are not sustainable.

3. It is unlikely that our civilization will voluntarily make the changes necessary do delay its

death.

4. Diplomacy won’t work.

5. We are a reactive species not a proactive one.

6. The Politically Correct experiment has been and continues to be a total disaster. In fact,

within its foundation lies all the elements needed to destroy our nation.

7. We are a nation driven almost entirely on greed. Greed is all bad regardless of what

some say. After all, it’s one of the 7 deadly sins.

8. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness in America have been lost to greed.

9. America cannot grow its economy because greed has out-sources all its jobs and

stagnated business investment.

10. The American dollar is in much more trouble than most people think.

11. The Distribution of Wealth in America is a public disgrace. Today, 80% of the people are

competing for only 15% of the available wealth. This fact alone makes our country

unsustainable.

12. We learned 200 years ago that when banks and the corporations that grow up around

them gain control of the dollar we will have lost all hope of longevity. We have to

realize that nothing is too big to fail.

179

13. The IRS and the Fed are completely out of control. A 17,000 page tax code is ludicrous

and totally unfair. Remember – our President favors fairness over the economy.

14. Congress is completely out of control. Instead of representing us it is now free to

represent itself. Our legislative branch is now of the government, by the government,

and for the government.

15. The old adage is true – We must understand our past if we are to plot our future.

16. The condition of our Infrastructure is another public disgrace. Perhaps a C+ really is the

best America can do today.

17. America really does have a Welfare State. Dwight D. Eisenhower was correct when he

said “A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both.” Our

country now has 3 generations of families that have never worked a day in their lives.

To us, that is not fairness and that is not the way democracy is supposed to work.

18. We must lose the notion that it is our responsibility to be all things to all people.

19. There are 184+ means-tested welfare programs, beyond Social Security and Medicare,

in effect today. We have cradle to grave programs that cost enough to allow the

government to write every family of three a $50,500 check every year. Still, we have no

fewer people living below the poverty level today than we did 20 years ago.

20. Peak Oil has already happened and demand is still rising. Even Oil CEOs agree that we

have already found 95% of the oil available on the planet. They also agree that all the

easy oil has already been found. Where is the infrastructure to replace oil when the

demand really outpaces the supply?

21. Global Warming is real and we are causing it. The evidence is overwhelming and too

voluminous to disregard. The tragedies it can and will cause if current trends aren’t

reversed will be nothing short of catastrophic. It will end in either a runaway heat wave

or another ice age. Take your pick.

22. The War on Drugs and the War on Terror are both unwinnable, much more costly than

we can afford, and have done no good whatsoever. Besides, they are nothing more

than a political game that is costing American lives. Just as bad, they have cost nearly

180

every guaranteed civil right granted to the public by the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

We’ve given them all away for a game that will last forever.

23. Our economy is stagnant. There is no way America can solve its fiscal mess with a flat

economy. Certainly fairness won’t solve it and Congress doesn’t seem to be willing to

tackle the difficult issues that are causing it. There are too many other issues that need

their attention – like gay marriage, an aversion to successful businesses, and the sexual

escapades of their colleagues. Dealing with the economy is below their dignity unless it

will add to their already vast fortunes.

So, in 23 short statements we have collapsed 170+ pages into a simple list that can be digested

by anyone. Well, we do have a few additional things to say on some of these issues. For

instance, Kaku talks a great deal about civilization in his book. You remember - the one that got

us started on this exercise in the first place. Besides, it is just too interesting to not include.

He begins with a system proposed by the Russian Astrophysicist Nilolai Kardashev in 1964. His

scale is based on the amount of Energy consumed by a civilization. By working from the

contention that an extraterrestrial civilization would probably be much different in terms of

culture, society, government, etc. he developed this quantitative scale for astronomers to use

in their search for ET.

Type I – is planetary in its use of energy. It utilizes solar power that hits the planet to the tune of about 10 to the 17th Watts.

Type II – is stellar, consuming all a star’s power for a consumption of 10 to the 27th Watts.

Type III – is galactic, consuming the star power of the galaxy, or 10 to the 37th Watts

You may have noticed that each Type is separated by a factor of 10 billion. A Type II civilization

consumes energy 10 billion times more than a Type I.

I know your chomping at the bit to learn where we fit on this scale. After all, we think we’re

pretty bright, have a lot of neat gadgets, and we can certainly handle a lot of energy and

information. In addition, we have reached this level of sophistication is a relatively short time.

Sorry – we are a Type 0 civilization based on the Kardashev scale. We still get the vast

181

preponderance of our energy from dead plants and animals, not from the energy output of a

star. So, let’s look at this classification system in a bit more detail.

A Type I then is a Buck Rogers type civilization that controls energy on a planetary scale. They

might be able to harness the power of a hurricane and control weather. They might even be

able to construct cities out in the middle of the ocean. A Type II is a Star Trek civilization along

with its United Federation of Planets. While they might colonize the nearest 100 star systems,

they are still barely able to control the energy output of a star. A Type III civilization is like the

Empire in Star Wars, or the Borg in Star Trek, the Next Generation. Both have colonized a huge

portion of their home galaxy.

Even though Kardashev stopped at Type III, there just might be a Type IV that controls the

energy of Dark Energy and Dark Matter. This could be the “Q” in Star Trek. Dark Matter and

Dark Energy constitute an incredible 73% of all Energy and Matter in the known universe. By

contrast, the universe of stars and galaxies make up only about 4%.

Earlier civilizations tend to consistently progress at about 1% per year in terms of its collective

GDP. Therefore, it would take about 2,500 years to progress from one Type to the Next.

Working from that assumption, regardless of busts and booms, recessions and expansions, we

can mathematically estimate that we’ll reach Type I in about 100 years, assuming we don’t

destroy ourselves first. Actually, there are a number of examples of how we are already

utilizing planetary systems. The Internet is a prime example of a civilization utilizing power on a

planetary scale. Fiber Optics and Satellites for communications are two more good examples.

Another way is through the way we use language. English has emerged as the de facto

language for international information exchange. Out of the roughly 6,000 languages being

spoken today, 90% are expected to become extinct in the next few decades.

We are witnessing a global economy. Things like NAFTA and the European Union are perfect

examples. The Economy, not weapons is the new criterion for a Superpower (this fact is not

good news for America).

182

News is becoming planetary as well. Sports, the Environment, Tourism, Travel, and the nature

of War and Disease are all pointing toward a planetary civilization. National identities are

beginning to fade as social and political issues blend them together into identifiable Blocks of

Nations.

All of these things do not necessarily mean we are moving toward a planetary government. We

will continue to find a need for local government to solve those issues unique to geography and

culture. But many of the governmental functions have already been globalized. The UN is just

one example. The pen used to be mightier than the sword. Today, the chip is. It’s Technology

my friends.

So, the upward mobility to more complex civilization types continues. But who among us can

really predict whether or now we’ll ever even reach Type I status? Again, the Kardashev

classification was developed in the 60’s when physicists were concerned about energy

production. However, with the spectacular rise in computing power, bolstered by Moore’s Law,

who knows – this is interesting stuff to ponder.

But, what would happen if a civilization lived on a planet plagued with electrical discharges,

lightening, etc., that would preclude the development of a computing infrastructure to support

their own Information Revolution? They would find it extremely hard to progress.

Because of this dilemma, Carl Sagan introduced another scale, based on information processing

that used an alphabetic scale to rate civilizations. For instance, a Type A civilization is one that

processes only a million pieces of information. That translates to one with only a spoken

language, but not a written one. On Sagan’s scale, Ancient Greece would be considered a Type

C. Going up the scale, we can place our civilization at Type H. By combining the two scales we

become a Type 0.7H civilization. In many ways this isn’t that bad considering how quickly we

moved from steam power to rockets and from horse-drawn carriages to supersonic aircraft.

Our communication infrastructure is already largely planetary. Just remember, the first ever

electronic computer arrived on the scene a mere 70 years ago. We have made tremendous

technological strides.

183

But we fear that we have neglected to develop the wisdom to handle all this technology.

Considering what we’re doing to our planet and our atmosphere we would have to conclude

that we have not. Both Type I and Type II civilizations are rapidly rising on a scale that depends

on energy and information to achieve their goals. Both of these efforts produce a huge amount

of waste and pollution. So much waste and pollution in fact that they just might destroy the

civilization before it can graduate to the next level. We can see evidence of this happening to

us already. Remember, based on standards we have today we only have about 20 years of

landfill space left.

For a Type II civilization, utilizing the total power of a star has a similar problem. Let’s assume

that their engines are 50% efficient (much more efficient than ours at about 20%). That means

they are able to use 50% of the energy. Where does the other 50% go? We have learned that

it is not destroyed, merely changed into another form. You’ve already learned that it escapes

as heat. This much power and this much heat (which is unusable for work) could eventually

melt their planet and make it much like Venus is today (entropy in action).

The lesson here is appropriate for us today. When we let energy grow out of control we may

be committing suicide. We need a new rating scale based on Entropy. Ideally, we want to have

a carefully thought out system of energy and information that will not destroy our planet. This

is what happened to the civilization depicted in the Disney movie Wall-E we’ve mentioned

before. This is where the Laws of Thermodynamics become important, and we’ve already

learned about these three laws. We’ve also learned about Entropy, so it’s pretty easy to guess

the two new types of classifications that were developed. The first, of course, is the Entropy

Conserving Civilization that does everything it can to mitigate Entropy’s effects. The Second is

Entropy Wasteful and simply moves on to another planet when their home planet becomes

uninhabitable. Entropy will ultimately win anyway, but which one do you think will survive the

longest? We should all give this question a great deal of thought.

President Obama campaigned for office under the mantra that yes we can! He also promised

to create the most Transparent White House ever and to end the petty bickering so prominent

between the Republicans and the Democrats. He promised to end decision-making on the basis

184

of lobbying dollars, and is on record as saying that he prefers fairness over the economy.

Hopefully, we have been able to show that this is nothing more than the same political double-

speak that we’ve heard for the last 100 years. Outside of the Washington Beltway, we think it

would be hard to find anyone who thinks the yes we can has resulted in anything except an

aching and lingering feeling of no we can’t. In fact, it almost seems that politicians have built

another Berlin-like Wall in the isle separating the two political parties. One party is always

wrong and the other is always right and the two shall never meet. That might be okay if it

didn’t create a gridlock that keeps anything at all from happening except the throwing around

of a lot of sniping without ever offering any sort of solutions. In fact, in a vain attempt to try

and justify their existence, they have centered on idiotic issues that they largely have no

business fooling around with in the first place.

What about a Transparent White House? In reality the exact opposite has happened. We can

think of no other administration that has withheld more from the American public. We think

back to the Patriot Act that was first passed in the last administration. It was bad enough in its

original iteration. But now it seems that there is even a “secret” version utilized by the

government to strip us from even more of our civil liberties, if we had any left in the first place.

How much have we heard about the new FBI Operations Manual that allows the FBI to pilfer

through our entire private life without provocation? We have heard very little except for an

article or two posted on the internet. Not very transparent! Now we’re learning about what

will probably become the largest nuclear disaster in our nation’s history and the Obama

administration has ordered a complete news black-out on the whole thing. This is not only

opaque, but, in our opinion, criminal. There is absolutely no way this can be buried under the

guise of national security when the very lives of Americans may be at stake. Actually, how

much have we really learned about the Japanese nuclear disaster? Have we heard much about

the extreme rise in infant mortality all the way from the West coast to Philadelphia? What else

could possibly be to blame for the 38% to 53% rise in infant deaths than radioactive fallout

spreading out from the disaster site in Japan? We know we were upset when we learned how

the Japanese government was withholding information from their citizens about the extent of

the damage and how much radioactive materials had been released into the atmosphere. Now

185

we’re really upset to learn that our Transparent White House is doing the exact same thing to

us.

It is extremely easy to track the amount of dollars changing hands through Lobbyists in

Washington today. Data from literally hundreds of sites will show that there are more little

green pieces of paper passing from one rich-elite hand to a congressional rich-elite hand than

ever before. This money is used to influence what decisions need to be made and which ones

should not. Therefore, we should not be surprised to learn that the decisions that need to be

made are the ones that favor the rich-elite. Duh! Now, tie this into the statement that the

President favors fairness over the economy. We already know that fairness won’t do very

much to create jobs and bolster the GDP. We said before, based on the findings by people on

the inside of the political machine, the President’s definition of fairness doesn’t necessarily

align with ours and that it isn’t an either/or sort of thing. For instance, is it fair for a news

blackout to be placed on an incident that can potentially cause death to countless Americans?

Is it fair for countless billions to be spent on a War on Drugs that is greasing the palms of drug

cartel bigwigs in order to get help with fighting insurgents in a War on Terror? This has to be

the most insane logic we’ve ever heard. Here we are, fighting two different kinds of war,

neither of which can ever be won, are using our dollars to fund one to fight the other and vice-

versa, and all the while Americans are being killed in both efforts. Does this make any sense to

anyone reading this? We’ll say it – It doesn’t make any sense to us.

Finally, back to this issue of preferring fairness over the economy? The entire world can see

that America is in extreme financial trouble. There is a real concern by our foreign neighbors

that just happen to own a huge slice of our national debt, is that we will end up defaulting on

our obligations. That same feeling exists within our borders as well – even by Republicans who

are almost willing to let that happen to reign in their version federal spending regardless of the

consequences. Any reasonable person knows that would cause a disaster that we could

probably never recover from. And, what do you think of an elected official that would walk out

of budget talks just because it wasn’t going his way? How does this solve anything? That fine

186

Representative should be told to not let the door hit him in the butt on his way home to

wherever.

Now we are faced with the need to raise the national debt ceiling even further, are being

warned of inflation by the fed, and probably will end up printing even more worthless little

green pieces of paper out of thin air. We can see absolutely nothing good about this whole

scenario. Yes We Can, Transparent Government, Fairness, Economy – These are empty

statements made by not just one person but an entire government that is unwilling to tackle

the real issues we face today. We wonder now if there are any politicians anywhere, local,

state, or federal, that can open their mouths without spewing out a string of lies and innuendo.

Just a bit of truth now and then would greatly raise the attitudes and optimism of Americans.

It seems nothing ever changes. When one party is in office it’s always the other party that has

caused all the grief. Then, in the next election, the other party is in office and they blame the

previous one, and on, and on, and on… For all infinity - nothing changes. However, we seem to

never hear anyone offering a fix for the problems. It’s always blame and no alternatives.

Nothing worthwhile can ever be implemented because it’s always the other party’s fault – end

result - Gridlock. Now we have a President that thinks compromise means giving the other

party or the other nation whatever they want. He thinks that diplomacy is bending to the

squeakiest wheel. None of what’s going on today makes any sense at all. All of this

compromising and diplomatic flim-flam is costing us the support of our allies and we can’t

blame them. We are now hearing one party complaining that the other party is trying to turn

back the clock toward isolationism. In reality, both parties are creating it by default. Just

maybe a little more isolationism would be a good thing for America. As we have contended all

along – we must get out of the business of trying to make everyone else like us. Right now we

have very little that anyone else would want – we’ve already given most of it away. We

continue to let our nation fall apart for some misguided notion that it is our responsibility to be

the overseers of the rest of the world. Besides that, our government is attempting to convince

us that our problems are being caused by the rest of the world. For instance, it’s some else’s

fault that we have a drug problem in America. How many of us out there really buy that? We

187

continually hear from Congress that we need to let capitalism work our fiscal problems out.

The drug issue in America has become a part of capitalism. It is as simple as a case of supply

and demand. If there was no demand there would be no supply. Since we can never stop the

importation of drugs, it would seem logical to treat the problem at its source – those that use

them. Besides, it wouldn’t cost the billions and billions we are wasting today through wars that

have proven to be unwinnable and unsustainable and that have been shown over and over

again to be largely ineffective. Few would argue that we need a whole lot less government and

a whole lot more minding our own business.

What is it that separates us from other primates? That is a question that science has pondered

for hundreds of years. It seems that only recently we have been able to come to some sort of

consensus. The answer is a consciousness that consists of about three basic components.

1. Being able to sense and recognize the environment. We must also learn to appreciate

it.

2. Self-Awareness.

3. The ability to plan for the future by setting goals and plans, that is, simulating the future

and plotting strategy. This one presents sort of a problem however. Have we really

been able to plot a strategy that makes sense given what we know about past

civilizations? We think not. What this third statement really means is that we have a

unique ability to delay gratification. While we may have the ability we really haven’t

displayed willingness. In fact, not doing so can probably be traced back to each and

every one of the problems we have today.

There is an old saying that goes Be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it.

Kaku says that all philosophies and social systems are ultimately based on scarcity and poverty.

Throughout human history this has been the dominant theme running through society, shaping

our culture, philosophy, and religion. He says that in some religions, prosperity is viewed as a

divine reward and poverty as just punishment. Buddhism, by contrast, is based on the universal

nature of suffering and how to cope with it. In Christianity, the New Testament reads: It is

easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the

188

kingdom of God. We exhibit a distribution of aristocrats versus peasants in our country today.

In fact and rightly so, our capitalistic notions are based on the idea that energetic, productive

people are rewarded for their labors by starting companies and getting rich – just as long as

they don’t crawl over the back of the less fortunate to get there. Unfortunately, that is

happening much too often today. But, if lazy nonproductive people can get as much as they

want by living off the labors of productive individuals, then capitalism breaks down. That’s

where we are with our current Welfare State. We are rewarding a plethora of lazy

nonproductive people by giving them much more than the average worker for doing nothing

when they are perfectly capable and able. By itself, our Welfare State makes America

unsustainable.

To reiterate, we are reaching a threshold in America where our technology can easily become a

liability instead of an asset. When we reach the point where robotics and other technology can

replace the worker we have gone too far in the wrong direction. So, since it seems that is

already beginning to happen, we much exploit that one human characteristic that machines

should not be given – common sense. We must find a way to add value to common sense to

offset what we’ve lost to the machine.

MIT economist Lester Thurow has said With everything else dropping out of the competitive

equation, knowledge has become the only source of long-run sustainable competitive

advantage. He also says Success or failure depends upon whether a country is making a

successful transition to the man-made brainpower industries of the future – not on the size of

any particular sector. What he’s saying is that we absolutely must transform our schools to

accommodate this new kind of learning. So far we have failed in this effort miserably.

The generations living today are probably the most important ever to walk the surface of the

planet. This observation comes out of Kaku’s book and we think it is quite prophetic. It is those

alive today that will determine whether we attain the goal of a planetary civilization or descent

into chaos right away. Already perhaps 5,000 generations of humans has populated planet

Earth. It seems ironic that we alive during this century will ultimately determine the fate of

humanity.

189

It seems wisdom is hard to come by in our society today. Dr. Isaac Asimov, the famous

biochemist and science fiction writer, once said: The saddest aspect of society right now is that

science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom. Unfortunately that’s true. We

serve as the perfect example. Mahatma Gandhi wrote in his Roots of Violence:

Wealth without work,

Pleasure without conscience,

Knowledge without character,

Commerce without morality,

Science without humanity,

Worship without sacrifice,

Politics without principles.”

Is this to be our legacy? We hope not. We have truly enjoyed researching for this, our magnum

opus. We have learned a lot and hope you have enjoyed reading it. We hope you might have

gained some insights as well along the way. We, as a nation, are experiencing many problems,

but maintain many assets. Our prayer is that we can delay the inevitable for many years to

come and hope that we can maintain the optimism to try and do our part to make it happen.

Change requires the efforts of us all. This is still the best place to live on the planet. Let’s

regain that pride and foresight that made it so. We can and we must! Our best wishes to you

all. If we have insulted you in this work, please accept our apologies, it was not intentional.

But, we wrote from our hearts about the problems as we perceive them. Your interpretation

may be totally different. We hope you can appreciate that tiptoeing around the issues would

have been worse.

190

A Rose by Any Other Name…Is a Thorny Issue

References

Introduction

Kaku, Michio: Physics of the Future: How Science Will Shape Human Destiny and Our Daily Lives by the Year 2100. Published in 2010.

Entropy

allaboutscience.org/third-;aw-of-thermodynamics-faq

nexialinstitute.com/social_entropy

ohio-state.edu/ch5_law

pyropath.com/sparks/09-12-11/societal-entropy…

Rifkin, Jeremy: Entropy: A New World View, 1981. ISBN 0553262998

wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy

wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy

The Rise of Causality

Biology.ucsd.edu/earthessays/02

Huntington, Samuel: The Clash of Civilizations, 1996.

Spengler, Oswald: Decline of the West, 1919.

wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality

wikipedia.org/wiki/DeclineofResources

Civilizations (Historical, Rise & Fall, Future)

articles.latimes.com/2011/may/15/opinion/la-ed-population-20110515

biology.ucsd.edu/msaier/earthessays/02_Rise…

converge.org.nz/pirm/growth

corson.org/archives/sociological/S27

duke.edu/aparks/SPENG7

duke.edu/aparks/SPENG8

duke.edu/aparks/SPENGO

duke.edu/aparks/SPENT

191

Huntington, Samuel, The Clash of Civilizations, 1996.

Jensen, Derrick: Endgame. Published by Seven Stories Press, 2006. ISBN: 1-58322-730-X and 1-58322-724-5.

library.thinkquest.org/C002291/high/present/stats

Life Science, March 31, 2009. “Earth’s Limits of Sustainability.”

livescience.com/7058/C002291/high/present/stats

New York Times, June 7, 2011. “The Earth is Full.”

nytimes.com/2011/06/08/opinion/08friedman

planetaryrenewal.org/ipr/civilization

Rifkin, Jeremy: Entropy: A New World View, 1981.

Spengler, Oswald, Decline of the West, 1919.

strangecosmos.com/content/item/104776

UNPopulationFund.org

USCensusBurear.gov

Werner, Helmut, The Decline of the West, 1926.

wikipedia.org/…/Endgame_(Derrick_Jensen)

wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization#Fall_of…

wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation

wikipedia.org/wiki/Population

wikipedia.org/wiki/Risks_to_civilizations,_humans_and_planet_Earth

wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse

Global Extinction Events

wikipedia/wiki/climate-change

wikipedia/wiki/computer-history

wikipedia/wiki/global-extinction-events

wikipedia/wiki/the-green-revolution

Being Politically Correct

articlealley.com/article_19236_27

192

associatedcontent.com/article/122396/high_cost_of_being_politically_correct…

thelantern.com/opinion/being-politically-correct-isn-t-always-correct

vexen.co.uk/USA/hate-america

wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness

xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/20031109

The Greed-Based Society

counterpunch.org/roberts07102008

g-r-e-e-d.com/GREED

ibtimes.com/…/economic-demise-manufacturing

newint.org/columns/essays/…/greed/

reuters.com/article/2011/04/18/us-usa-ratings-impact-idUSTRE73H70J201104

utne.com/…/An-Economy-of-Greed

Distribution of Wealth in America

dailypaul.com/111232/us-wealth-distribution

good.is/americans-are-horribly-misin…

marketwatch.com

newint.org/columns/essays/…/greed/

sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth

trygve.com/taxcode

vanityfair.com/top-one-percent-2011

Federal Reserve Board, “Survey of Consumer Finance,” 2004.

finance.fortune.cnn/2011/05/24/big-bank-ceos-the-billion-dollar-bust/?...

America’s Crumbling Infrastructure

American Society of Civil Engineers: “A Study of America’s Infrastructure,” Completed in 2009.

Behrer, William H.: Real Truth. “America’s Crumbling Infrastructure: A Path to Ruin,” July 12,2010.

citybranding.typepad.com/small-city-branding-around-the-world

infrastructurereportcard.org

theeconomiccollapseblog.com/america’s-crumbling-infrastructure

193

Turner, Daniel S.: USA Today. “America’s Crumbling Infrastructure,” May 29, 2011.

US Chamber of Commerce Magazine: “Fixing America’s Crumbling Infrastructure,” July 1, 2008.

USA News: “America’s Crumbling Infrastructure,” October 8, 2010.

America’s Welfare State

atlasinitiavivegroup.org/why-leave-the-monetary-system

blogs.forbes.com/peterferrara/2011/04/22/Americas-ever-expanding-welfare-empire/

commondreams.org/view/06/0217-31

Ehrenreich, Barbara: Nickled and Dimed.

Ferrera, Peter: Forbes Magazine. “America’s Ever Expanding Welfare Empire,” April 22, 2011.

forbes.com/2011/04/25/welfare-labor-immoral

g-r-e-e-d.com/greedII – Edney

honolulu.hawaii.edu/…maslow

Maslow, Abraham: Motivation and Personality, 1954.

New York Times, Opinion Page, Bob Herbert, Losing our Way, 3/25/11.

toledoblade.com/…/Data-show-inequity

Voegali, William: Never Enough: America’s Limitless Welfare State.

wikipedia.org/wiki/maslow’s_heirarchy_of_needs

Peak Oil

inteldaily.com/2011/the-centiry-of-famine

nation.com.pk/Pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Inernational/18-Jun-2011.

oildecline.com/

US Dept. of Energy: Peaking of World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigation, & Risk Management (Hirsch Report).

wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

Global Warming

blogspot.com…/odds-of-cooking-gra…

foxnews.com/story/0,2933.29789,00

Goldsmith, C.S.: Uninhabitable: A Case for Caution, Earth Day, 2011.

194

indacatholicnews.com/news.php?viewStory=18215

nationalgeographic.com/…/1206_0412

prweb.com/…/prweb5263964

reporternews.com/news/2011/may/12/Vatican-appointed-panel-warns-of-climate…

UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Walsh, Bryan. Time Magazine, April 14, 2011. “Earth Day: Are We Destroying the Oceans?”

Walsh, Bryan. Time Magazine, June 21, 2011. “A Scary Report Card on the World’s Oceans.”

wikipedia.org/…/Current_sea_level_rise

War on Drugs

bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13524303

Davenport, Richard: The Pursuit of Oblivion.

drugsense.org/cms/wodclock

fox5vegas.com/news/28156116/detail

Global Commission on Drug Policy

myspace.com/snowfoxxes/…/376949606

nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/American+policy+on+drug+trafficking+has+been…

newsok.com/panel-calls-drug-war-a-failure/article

UN Office of Drugs and Crime

US National Security Archives

wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs

War on Terror or America’s Warfare State

armscontrolcenter.org/…/securityspending…

forbes.com/ending-the-warfarewelfarestate

infowars.com/perceptions-and-facts-about-the-war-on-terror

useconomy.about.com/od/usfederalbudget/f/War_on_Terror_Facts

wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States

wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt-by-US-President

wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

195

wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Terror

washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/23

dailycensored.com/2010/04/11/America%E2%80%99s-priorities-war-plunder-and-gr…

Wall Street Journal, April 12, 2010.

Wilson, Anton: The Excavator. “The War on Terror,” February 28, 2011.

wired.com/dangerroom/2011/05/secret-patriot-act/

nytimes.com/2011/06/13/uw/13fbi (FBI Agents Get Leeway to Push Privacy Bounds)

The American Economy

Feldstein, Michael, The Wall Street Journal, “The Economy is Worse Than you Think,” June 8, 2011

Forbes,com./richkarlgard/2011/05/12/slow-growth-will-destroy-america

Summary

Clintion, Bill. “It’s Still the Economy, Stupid.” Newsweek, June 19, 2011.

Geohegan, Thomas. “Get Radical: Raise Social Security.” New York Times, June 19, 2011.