BUILD AMERICA NOW

BUILD AMERICA NOW

Proposal

Federal Guarantee Municipal Bonds

Infrastructure Stimulus

The Federal government should guarantee municipal bonds to accelerate public works construction. This would encourage local governments to improve needed roads, sewer & water, curbs and sidewalks, schools, and other important infrastructure this year when we need the stimulus. Put America back to work. Build America now!

This is the year for municipalities, school districts, and other governments to build major capital projects. We need the economic stimulus and jobs. Contractor prices are low. They need work, and we need infrastructure improvements. This would be a great way to stimulate our economy.

The goal is to help communities stay vital and not slip into an irreversible decline. Schools and community infrastructure are critical to supporting home values and stemming the declines we have seen in recent years.

Most local governments have a backlog of needed public infrastructure improvements. With support and encouragement from the Federal government, we could have major local programs underway soon.

This should be a very simple and low cost way to stimulate substantial public works expenditures this year.

____________________________

As economic uncertainty continues, corporations cut back on spending and jobs. This is the correct course of action for them - they have to stay solvent to survive.

At the same time, the Federal Government cranks up spending in order to revitalize the economy. Substantial national government spending is required to stimulate the economy. Government acts in an anti cyclical fashion to get the economy growing again. And our Federal Government is spending.

State and local governments, however, often act like private corporations. They, unlike the Federal government, cannot print money. But for many reasons, this is the wrong course of action. Local governments can borrow money at cheap tax exempt rates, and build needed public improvements such as improved roads, schools, and sewer and water systems.

The Federal government should support and encourage local and State government spending. They could do this by guaranteeing bonds and using the bully pulpit of the Presidency to advocate for an aggressive program of local and State government public works expansion efforts.

Strong local governments with AA and better bond ratings have no trouble borrowing money now. But weaker rated governments do have trouble getting good rates. And local governments tend to slow capital spending during recessions. The country needs them to crank up capital spending substantially.

A Federal guarantee would ensure good rates for all municipal and State borrowers. This would be a strong incentive for local governments to borrow and construct needed improvements now.

This stimulus effort by all levels of government is a safe and effective way to get America back to work. Local governments are good at building local public works projects that are needed and worthwhile. They usually do a good job at cost containment. And they seldom default, so the risk to the Federal government is quite low.

Build America Now

buildamericanow.blogspot.com

 

 

 

Peopling of America

The theory that humans first came to the new world from Siberia via a land bridge has long been the conventional wisdom.  The closest land connection from the old world to the new was between Siberia and Alaska. During the ice age there was a land connection between the two hemispheres since the sea level was lowered by glaciers as shown by the graphic below. The shaded area on the graphic below shows the land above water during the ice age.

Click to view the source article

This theory has been supported by DNA testing that indicates that most Native Americans are closely related to Asians by MtDNA that is inherited from mother to child, and by Y DNA that is inherited from father to son. The graphic below shows the theoretical movement of people from Asia to the western hemisphere by MtDNA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_gene_flow_in_and_out_of_Beringia.jpg

The graphic below shows the likely path for the five major MtDNA haplogroups that pass from mother to child.  Haplogroups A, B, C, D follow a similar path from the old world to the new. The only surprise here is that Haplogroup X has few links to Asia, with more to the middle east and Europe.

The graphic below shows the distribution of the "Q" Y DNA passed from father to son. The majority of  Native Americans are descended from "Q" which is also located in Siberia. The two continents are shown to be interconnected by the graphics below. It is obvious that this came from Asia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas

The theory of a Siberian only connection to the human settlement of the western hemisphere has been challenged by a number of individuals who believe that the Clovis stone age technology is similar to the Solutrean stone age technology found in Spain and France.  "Across Atlantic Ice" by authors Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley presents an interesting theory that people could have traveled by boat along the ice pack that connected Europe and the new world during the ice age. They make their stone tools in a very similar manner and in way much different then those made in Asia.  They would have used boating and hunting technologies similar to modern Inuit peoples, hinting seals and fishing and living on the ice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean_hypothesis

The graphic below below shows the location of MtDNA Haplogroup X passed from mother to child. Note the concentrations in the northeastern part of North America and Europe, West Asia, and North Africa. There is minimal connection to western Asia and Siberia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Haplogroup_X_(mtDNA).PNG

The graphic below shows concentrations of the Male Y DNA R1. Note the concentrations in Europe and central Asia and northeastern north America. 

Main article: Haplogroup R1 (Y-DNA)

"The majority of members of haplogroup R belong to its subgroup R1, defined by marker M173. R1 is very common throughoutEurope and western Eurasia in the form of its subclades R1a1a-M17 and R1b1b2-M269.^[11][12]

R1 is the second most important haplogroup in Indigenous peoples of the Americas following haplogroup Q, and spreads specially in Algonquian peoples from United States and Canada.^[9]"

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R_(Y-DNA)}

Some people believe that the R1 "Y" Haplogroug and "X" MtDNA came across the land bridge from Siberia with the other native American immigration.  But the distance is great across Asia, and the distribution in America makes a European connection more logical.

DNA testing can tell you what your "Y' DNA is from your paternal ancestor, and what your MtDNA is from your maternal ancestor.  Many people who thought they had a Native American ancestor have been told that their MtDNA is not Native American, and that they are descended from Europeans.  

A new book by geneticist Bryan Sykes, DNA USA, indicates that many Americans in the northeast part of the United States have little or no Native American ancestry, judging from their MtDNA.  And Professor Louis Gates has been advising African Americans that the ancestors whom they thought were Native American actually were European.

I think that there must be more Native American DNA in the descendants of early immigrants to the US.  There would have been far more men immigrating than women.  They reproduced, and I am assured that females are required.

I think that the eastern half of the US must have been settled in ancient times by people from Europe.  This can be proved or disproved by DNA taken from pre Columbian remains.  If all the MtDNA is A, B, C, D, or X than perhaps the Asian immigration only theory is correct.  But I will bet that we will find plenty of European DNA among ancient Native Americans.

It appears likely that human migration into the new world was more complex then the conventional wisdom of a connection only from Asia to America on the land bridge. New DNA research will likely improve our understanding, expecialy if DNA can be obtained from ancient American remains. But the last two graphics certainly support a possible connection via the Atlantic Ocean. 

Further information at:

wearetheindians.blogspot.com

High Capacity Magazines and Assault Weapons

Click to Read the Article

Mother Jones Yearlong investigation into gun laws and mass shootings. 

Click here for the full view of the data set.

_____________________________________

I spent 32 years in the Marine Corps Reserve including two tours in Vietnam. I know something about weapons.

I support a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. I think it is reasonable for people to have weapons for self defense. But why do you need a magazine with 30 or more rounds? To kill lots of people.

We used 20 round magazines for our M-16's in Vietnam. My father used 8 round clips in his M-1 in World War II. In World War I and II and in Vietnam we used the 1911 .45 Pistol with 7 or 8 rounds.

_____________

Guns are pervasive in America.  They are very difficult to control. Gun rights advocates vigorously oppose any restrictions, despite some of the recent mass murders.

Weapons used in the American Revolution took a long time to reload after each single round was fired.  A mass killing of numbers of civilians by a lunatic gunman was virtually impossible.

www.11thpa.org/neumann.html

But guns gradually became more accurate and with a much higher rate of fire.  We developed revolvers with 5 and 6 round capacities. And then bolt and lever actuated rifles with higher rates of fire. And  then finally semi automatic and fully automatic weapons.

We do accept some limitations on guns.  We prohibit fully automatic machine guns and grenades, for example.  This came about in 1934 when America was aghast at the carnage committed by organized crime with Thompson sub machine guns. It was obvious that the Thompson was good for war, gangland slayings, mass murder and nothing much else. The laws let citizens keep rifles and shotguns and pistols for hunting and self defense.

listvisit.com/top-ten-most-dangerous-guns-in-the-world

In 1934 normal guns were far more limited then they are today.  We regulated fully automatic weapons, but did not restrict semi automatic weapons.

A fully automatic weapon continues to fire as long as you keep the trigger pulled. A semi automatic weapon fires one bullet with each trigger pull. The movies make it seem that fully automatic weapon fire is very deadly. It is, but aimed semi automatic fire is also very deadly. In fact, in Vietnam our M-16's were all fully automatic, encouraging the troops to shoot too fast and too wildly. Our M-16's now permit firing in three round bursts - one trigger pull for three rounds.  

The weapon above is the M1911 .45 caliber semi automatic pistol, called the 1911 for the year of its beginning. It was used by the US Military in World War I and II and in Korea and Vietnam and helped us win those wars.  It is still used by some units in the military.  It had a magazine of seven or eight rounds. It was the weapon my father used in World War II and it was the one I used in Vietnam.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1911_pistol

The weapon below is a more modern Glock, a popular pistol. It can be used with 33 round magazines.  This number of rounds could be handy in a firefight in a war but are not needed for self defense unless you are a really poor shot and unconcerned about wounding nearby innocent people.

Glock with 33 round magazine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock

The weapon above an Ar-15 GL-Shock M4 similar to the M-16 that we used in Vietnam and currently and the M-4, the carbine version of the M-16. We used twenty round magazines in Vietnam - you can get 30 to 50 round magazines now.

50 round magazine for AR 15

Videos: 

Civilian versions do not permit full automatic fire. Still, it will shoot as fast as you pull the trigger. A very formidable weapon.

Another facet to the appeal of the assault rifle is that it looks cool and dangerous and is dangerous. That is fine for normal people. But for angry suicidal lunatics Rambo Wannabes it is a formula for disaster.

Do we really want lunatics to have access to these weapons?  Do the rights of responsible gun owners trump public safety?

Would gun control opponents agree to any legislation that would restrict them from high capacity magazines?

Let us look at two recent examples.  The shootings in Arizona were stopped when the gunman ran out of ammo and had to reload.  People were able to jump him and disarm him.  Two teachers in Connecticut apparently tried to jump the gunman. But with his high capacity magazines they could not succeed. If either man had had to reload after a few rounds the carnage might have been much less.

Politics is the art of compromise.  I advocate that the second amendment and our history supports the rights of civilians to own rifles, pistols, and shotguns for hunting, target practice, and self defense.  

And I get the idea that permitting concealed carry by responsible citizens could be a good thing.  I support that idea. But it is unlikely that the right person will often be in the right place at the right time.

But I also support the elimination of assault rifles, and the elimination of any magazines over 7 rounds.  That permits anyone to hunt and defend themselves, but limits the carnage created when a lunatic finds high capacity weapons.

We Are the Indians

Members of the Creek (Muscogee) Nation in Oklahoma around 1877. Note the evidence of mixed European and African ancestry. L to R, Lochar Harjo, unidentified man, John McGilvry, Silas Jefferson or Hotulko miko (Chief of the Whirlwind).

The conventional view of the settlement of America is that white Europeans immigrated to North America, stole the land, and killed most of the Native Americans. The few survivors were driven to reservations, where a relative few descendants live today.

This view is partially incorrect. Murder and mayhem did occur but what happened in many cases is that whites and Indians intermarried and interbred. The second and third generation American was often a hybrid North American, carrying genes from European, Native American, and African genes.  Continuing immigration of white settlers gradually increased the percentage of European contribution to the population. Our ancestors gradually forgot their origins and that they were part Indian.

The early settlers in the 1600's and 1700's were tough people immigrating to a difficult environment.  There were many young men coming to the new world to make their fortune. They often came without wives or their wives died in childbirth.  They did what was natural and what occurs whenever two population groups come together - they intermarried.  Who did these settlers marry if not Native American women? I have it on good scientific authority that women are required for the creation of descendants.

When two populations come into contact they usually interact, socialize, and intermarry to form a new population group.  This takes place in all countries. In North and South America there are a number of countries that proudly recognize their Native American roots. Mexico and Chile are two prominent examples. But Argentina and the US are examples of countries where large ongoing European immigration continued to dilute the original population mix.

Improved immunity from disease favored intermarriage. Children of Native Americans and immigrants would have better immunity to old and new world diseases.

Our history is full of conflicts and short wars between colonists and Native Americans. The wars get a lot of publicity and are a big part of our historical understanding of the past. But relatively few Native Americans and settlers killed in the Indian wars. For the most part they peacefully traded and interacted and intermarried.

Marriage of Pocahantas and John Rolfe

There are numerous accounts of intermarriage. The marriage of Pocahontas to John Rolfe is perhaps the best known example. But there is little historic memory of intermarriage since it was not very noteworthy. People simply married and had children. Their children did the same and after a few generations little was remembered about the origins of the great and great great great grandparents.

Both my wife and I have family histories that indicate that one or more of our distant ancestors were Native American. And most of the known intermarriage would have occurred in the 1600 and 1700’s, when much of the European immigration was young men. And in the early years the population of the country was majority Native American.

Most of the social intercourse among Native Americans and colonists would have occurred at the edge of the colonial settlement.  And this line very slowly moved west, allowing for many years of opportunities for trade, sexual intercourse, and marriage.

Disease also played a part. Europeans brought diseases which heavily impacted Native Americans who had no natural immunity to old world disease. And the Americas were the home of diseases for which Europeans had little native immunity. A person carrying both European and Native American genes had better immunity and a better chance of surviving and passing on his genes. The hardy survivors intermarried and passed on their immunities to their descendants.

Most people do not know their complete ethnic heritage back over 3 or 4 generations.  There are roughly 10 generations back to pre colonial America.  Ten generations equals 1024 forbears. Virtually no one knows the background or makeup of all of their 1024 ancestors.

I can only follow a dozen or so names back to the colonial era. Most of these were male lines who kept their last name. It is much more difficult to determine the ancestry of the women they married, who changed their name with each marriage.  And some of them were probably Native American - more then my one known Native American ancestor.

In Mexico, for example, male ancestors are often of European descent while female ancestors were Native Americans. This follows the pattern of the conqueror, with better technology and wealth who successfully father the most children. The same situation prevailed in the US, but with ongoing waves of European immigration overwhelming the Native American contribution.


http://minglecity.com/group/knowledgeisking/forum/topics/black-native-americans-in-the

http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/2009/06/claim-they-have-native-american-blood.html

Communism and Murder

27 million people were murdered by the Axis countries in World War II in addition to those killed in war. The United States, Great Britain, Canada, and Australia were joined by the USSR, China, and other allies against Nazi Germany, Japan, and Italy. Most people believe that the War was necessary and justified.

145 million people were murdered by the Communist countries  in addition to those killed in war. The United States and Great Britain were joined by our old enemies and other allies against our former allies, the USSR, China, and other Communist countries. Most people believe the Cold War was necessary and justified.

Communism was everywhere on the attack from 1945 to 1985.  Communism expanded from Russia into Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Albania, China, Cuba, Czechslovakia, East Germany, Tibet, North Vietnam, North Korea, and a number of other countries. Communists used terrorism, murder and subversion to destabilize countries. Political murder and terrorism was an integral part of “Wars of Liberation.”

3.8 million more people were murdered in South Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos when the Cold War went hot. Millions more were imprisoned, enslaved, and ethnically cleansed.Communists used terror and subversion. 

The anti war movement changed American policy. They believed that the War was immoral and that the U.S. was there for oil. They contended we were imperialist fascist war mongers. They believed that war is evil and to be avoided at all costs. They considered  Ho Chi Minh and Pol Pot as Freedom Fighters. "Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh, NLF is sure to Win". They thought Communism was an excellent system and not monolithic. They believed that Communists were fighting for freedom and self determination. They contended that the war in southeast Asia was a civil war. 

I believe an individual and a nation must oppose that evil, especially when their avowed policy was to take over the world. We were both moral and right to oppose Hitler, Tojo, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, and Pol Pot.


We have largely prevailed over Communism. It has been abandoned in Europe. It is liberalizing and improving in Asia. China, Laos, North Korea and Vietnam remain totalitarian police states.

I believe that many of the anti war folks were sincere in their beliefs. And they were successful in their efforts to halt financial and military support for Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. But millions of people are dead, tortured, ethnically cleansed and enslaved partly as a result of their success.

Never again. Until the next time.

Photos from the killing fields of Cambodia. Vietnam and Laos were just as bad, but the people who committed the genocide and ethnic cleansing are still in charge and don't publicize what happened after the Communist takeover. 

References on Murder

Professor Rudy Rummel of the University of Hawaii has published extensive referenced and documented estimates on murder by government, which he terms democide. The table below summarizes some of his work.

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/

1.Laos, Pathet Lao regime (1975- )

o Rummel:

* Democide in Laos: 130,000 (33% blamed on Laos; 67% blamed on Vietnam)

* Laotian war dead: 54,000

* TOTAL: 184,000 (1975-87)

o SIPRI 1989, civil war, 1977-90:

* military: 10,000

* civilian: 30,000

* TOTAL: 40,000

o Polish Press Agency, 3 Dec. 1998: 300,000 killed for political reasons, acc2 dissident Laotian Council for Independence and Democracy.

users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat5.htm

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democide

The Boat People


boatpeople75.tripod.com

Grapefruit MPHS

I have a close friend who was in the habit of getting into arguments with an older relative, who holds a number of provocative and politically incorrect opinions. Something like Archie Bunker without the pleasant personality.

My friend argues with him. It is hopeless to change his mind, he knows what he knows, and the discussion rapidly turns into a rancorous argument.

I have pointed out to her that she is arguing with a gentlemen who knows what he knows and cannot conceive that there is another legitimate viewpoint. She has no chance of influencing his opinion. And to argue with him also reflects badly on her - Only a fool would argue with a grapefruit. If you argue with someone dumber than a grapefruit, well, then you are also dumber than a grapefruit.

So when the argument starts I just work the term grapefruit into the conversation. This makes her laugh and she see the futility of the conflict. He can't hear well and so does not hear the word grapefruit.

Smooths things over and we avoid having a tedious and disruptive hassle.

A grapefruit does not have to be stupid. In fact, there are a number of very smart folks who are so angry and obsessed about someone or something they don't like that they become grapefruits, albeit smart ones. They know what they know, they cannot accept anyone who has a different opinion, and often become hostile and abusive. This often manifests itself in hatred of political figures, for example hatred of Presidents Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama.

It is not a particular vice of either liberals or conservatives. Grapefruititis can strike anyone of any age and any political persuasion. It perhaps gets worse with age, with hardening of the arteries.

It is easy to see others who are grapefruits. It is hard to see ourselves.

Now everyone should want to avoid being a grapefruit. And it is hard to see if you are becoming a grapefruit. Like alcoholism, many people gradually slip into grapefruititis without realizing.

Some danger signs that you might becoming a grapefruit:

• You are sure you know all the answers.
• You have taken to calling other people stupid or liars.
• You are often outraged when you read things you don't agree with.
• You constantly demean elected officials, not with well reasoned arguments, but with name calling.
• You insult people frequently.
• You attack the man, and not the argument. 
• You throw out strong opinions without facts.

Best antidote to becoming a Grapefruit:

• Be tolerant of the view point of others. 
• Think before you write or speak. 
• Practice the golden rule. 
• Use logic, not rants. 
• Eat and drink sensibly, avoid drugs. 
• Get enough sleep. 
• Love often.
• Don't eat grapefruit.