U.S. Department of Defense failed audit

My comment at TRNN:

We have enabled a rich and powerful Military-Industrial-Complex to legally bribe politicians, policy makers and regulators through campaign contributions, political action committees, think tanks, ideological foundations, revolving door employment, etc. In return, all American taxpayers are forced to pay for ever more expensive, excessive and often unnecessary military hardware (with a side effect of excessively militarized local police) while less advantaged taxpayers send their children to become war fodder by foreign hands or self-destruction by suicide. We pay with our treasure, we pay with our future in our children, we pay with the future of our grandchildren. 

MIC and the military get away with this degree of theft by hiding information. An audit is information about how the military spends its funds. Their audit failure is not an inability to track and report their spending; it reflects an unwillingness by the military to report their spending and allow themselves to be held accountable to our elected representatives. [BTW, elected representatives who have been bought by the MIC and eager the stories told by the military.] It's not about the defense of nation from enemies; it's the offense of military, especially MIC, against Americans and anyone who might interfere with their profits.

It's all legal

Comment at Smirking Chimp (it's a quick and worthy read):

The true conflict is not between the U.S. and Russia/China/N.Korea/Syria/Mexico or Saudi Arabia & Yemen or any other nation-vs-nation aggression. The real fight is between the power elite and everyday working people on the planet. Any 'special' interest (such as Jeff Bezos, Koch bothers, Sheldon Adelson, Robert Mercer, big pharma, oil industry, military industrial complex, health insurance industry) that lobbies Congress for policies/laws/rules that increases their profits at the expense of the well being (health/education/standard of living) of their workers and consumers is participating in a long campaign against public interests. 

As every maker knows, the quality of any end product is largely determined by the quality of the starting material. This also hold true for economies; the quality and productivity of an economy is largely determined by education and health of its starting material of workers and consumers. Neo-liberal economics are marketed on the contrary principle that strong foundations are not necessary for strong economies. The Trump tax cut directly depletes economic foundations by removing money from a slowly growing economy - and he tells taxpayers it will grow faster. Unless neo-liberals have cracked the secret of creating something from nothing (aka, Big Bang), our current economic trajectory offers no hope of better conditions to workers.

Information is power

TRNN did a segment about ballooning drug prices as an issue in the Maryland governor's race.

A commentor wrote: 

"...funding for research should be increased and any licensed, FDA-approved manufacturer should be able to make and sell the drugs, whose patent belongs to the government. This would introduce competition and drastically lower cost."

My response:

Public ownership of publicly funded intellectual property would resolve the problem of big pharma. Tight limits on private control of intellectual property would place severe limits on the corporate growth which would have positive impacts on income inequality. Severely minimizing state secrets would set limits on the power of the state. Information is power. If information were less controlled, the power of current institutions would be curtailed.

The Grifter

Bob Woodward was on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert and said this:

Great missile system called THAAD. It’s the best missile interceptor in the world. We put it in S. Korea so we can shoot down N. Korean missiles… it’s a terrific missile system. So Trump asks, “Well how much does it cost?” “It’s a billion dollars.” … and they show him the lease…. “It’s great we have a 99 year lease.” And Trump says, “Who’s paying for it?” They said the United States. He says, “Take it out! Put it in Portland.”

It's pretty illustrative of Trump. For all his claims to be a 'businessman,' he doesn't understand the relationship between investment and return-on-investment. DJT is all grift.

He's apply the financial model that caused the Flint water crisis on a national level with the leading nuclear superpower. 

For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the message was lost.
For want of a message the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

Brett Kavanaugh is playing semantics

DJT's Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh supposedly said to Susan Collins that Roe v. Wade is 'settle law'. C&L posted Lindsey Graham's comments.

My opinion:

It is highly disingenuous for any nominee to the Supreme Court including Brett Kavanaugh to call any Supreme Court decision "settled law." For any American not sitting on the Supreme Court, all their decisions 'settle law' (as determined by the U.S. Constitution. Justices on the Supreme Court use their Constitutional power to 'settle'/'resettle' law according to their procedures. As a non-Supreme Court justice, Brett Kavanaugh can legitimately claim he personally considers Roe v. Wade 'settled law'. But as a potential Supreme Court justice, that statement is using semantics to deceive the public. Lawmakers know this; Brett Kavanaugh knows this and Brett Kavanaugh's nomination shepherds know this. It is the people most impacted by Supreme Court decisions who do not know this and in a democracy, that is reprehensible.

New value system needed

Good interview at TRNN with climate scientist Will Steffen.


My comment:

"All of these [efforts to mitigate climate change] need to be underpinned by new value systems that value stabilizing the earth's systems as the highest priority that any economy must strive for." 

This should be the take home message of every economics course/lecture from now on. Economics and the values of economics must be defined beyond goods/services and financial return. My preferred definition of economies are self-organizing and self-sustaining systems of production, distribution and consumption of goods and services that promote the well-being of all participants. Capitalism would not be an acceptable primary economic system under this definition because it is not self-sustaining... using fossil fuels will eventually degrade the environment to the point where it cannot sustain human life as we know it. Placing profit and 'economic growth' above all else is the source of climate change, income inequality, health care crisis and many other social ills. But economies are human made social constructs; humans made/make them, humans can reshape them.

When lies are/aren't lies?

Every schoolchild has heard the thought experiment: If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it,does it make a sound?

I was thinking about this with regards to 'POTUS' DJT's incessant lying. With any lie, there are two participants - the liar and the recipient. Does the intent of the liar or perception of the recipient change the value or intent of the lie? For the U.S., this is not merely a thought experiment. The answer will have broad and long lasting implications for the future of the country, especially in regards to Constitutional rights, freedom of press/speech and transparency.

If a lie is told by someone without the intent of lying, is it a lie? [American press tends to say no. The intent of the liar is more relevant than correcting the lie for the sake of viewers.]

If every pronouncement is presumed to be a lie, is it a lie? [In some respects, this is fiction... But we are currently living under a president who seemingly cannot utter a truthful statement.]