The following is an un-proofed, un-edited document.
The new economic crisis:
On The Fourth of July, 2012, the voices of some of the most respected figures referenced by the British press in London, had shocked the politically sentient circles of the planet, with the publication of a report whose source has included the members of a circle of public figures from among the most highly respectable, relevant circles of Great Britain. Those voices had announced that some crucial elements of that famous empire’s leading press had suddenly called for wiping out the nominally richest British banks in the world, in order to rescue both Britain and the United States from a terrible catastrophe. The relevant British proponents had proposed cooperation between the United States and Britain on this specific account.
Contrary opinion on this subject, has been centered in people from around those leading financier circles of the world, who appear to have attempted, so far, to appear unshaken by the announcement of their own widely publicized plunge into a virtual likelihood of their own political extinction. Dinosaurs, anyone?
One might choose to wonder what this will do to the political chances of both U.S. President Barack Obama and his putative election rival, Mitt Romney? Did some kindly angel drop something intended to pass for “justice from heaven” on the ranks of Wall Street and those candidates alike? The advice is: do not worry about the chances of either Romney or Obama now. Had this news from London not been solidly based in fact, the news would have been different. The relevant, real news was, and will remain solid fact on the record. There is no hope for the chances of what had been, until this past Monday, some among mthe nominally most powerful banks and related speculative institutions of the trans-Atlantic world.
Be clear-headed in respect to this matter. These prospectively doomed financial institutions have been plunging into a virtually global state of hopeless bankruptcy since the cancellation of the original U.S.A.’s Glass-Steagall law; the effect of this began to take over the trans-Atlantic communities during the latter half of 2008, with the launching of what was to become known as the great “bail-out” swindle. The result has been, that the economies of the United States and of western and central Europe, have been doomed until now, since the cancellation of Glass-Steagall on November 12, 1999 (a foolish action done in favor of the foolish, Gramm-Leach-Bliley monstrosity which made possible the great trans-Atlantic economic collapse of 2007-2012).
Admittedly, the support for Glass-Steagall found among the relevant, properly prestigious circles in the United Kingdom, is fully justified and otherwise meritorious; at the least, that is what is to be seen from my vantage-point as both an economist and statesman. Such has been my authority in such subject-matters, and also among the among the most significant of the other leading economists on the record of the U.S.A. and others, since my initial, August 1956, economic forecast’s success in late February/early March, 1957, the latter the worst post-World War II such crisis, a near-depression, at that time.1
The relevant point of the report to be made on that account, is the fact, that, in general, as among most who could be regarded reasonably as leading economists, is that their generally consistent reliance on the folly of statistical forecasting based on the past effects, rather than actually forecasting based on the actual future, as I had done, in late August 1956, in composing my uniquely successful forecast for February-March 1957.
Now, the relevant British advocates of a needed immediate reform, have proposed to cooperate with the United States in efforts to bring this current crisis-situation under control—a very radical change from 1999 conditions of drift of the U.S.A. itself, as also Britain, into something far worse than a mere depression: a general economic breakdown-crisis still in an advanced state of ruin-in-progress at this present time. It is my recommendation, that the United States government should consider uttering an immediate proffer of cooperation with the appropriate citizens of Britain on that specific account.
That recommendation of mine is presented on elementary types conditions. First, that the proposed cooperation is as stated by the relevant British parties. Second, that it is a commitment to sharing the benefits of a common good, as with trust in those among my predecessors whom I have high regard have always done, essentially, since the break with an imperialist Britain since the separation of our nations over the issues of the February 1763 Peace of Paris, and the diplomacy of such as John Quincy Adams and the exemplary President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his specific circles of cooperation during his time as President.
The qualification is that the British party concur in a stated principle of commitment to a common human interest in related matters. My tendency would be to move quickly to exploratory discussions with relevant parties.
There are several compelling reasons to believe in the faith of those Britons who have presented this suggestion to citizens of the United States.
First, the human species has lately entered a general planetary condition under which general warfare in thermonuclear warfare, or something soon beyond such dimensions of action, is not a feasible option. We have moved past the time, that the human species could engage in the use of such means, even when the issues in favor of conflict are extremely compelling. This principle has been shown with remarkable excellence-in-action among the U.S. Joint Chiefs Of Staff. The urgency of general cooperation on behalf of a common good is, presently, far more compelling than at any past time. There are very special pre-conditions for such a confident sort of outlook on conditions before us at this time. The relations to Russia on this same account, have been recently excellent, and there is justified confidence that such a relationship with the U.S.A. is desirable by both parties.
The relative greatest likelihood danger comes, in fact, from the policies of a more or less programmed policy of suppression of scientific and related requirements of a policy of advancing the scientific level of progress of the per-capita human conditions on this planet. This progress is to be gained through science-driven technological progress in the advancement of the degree of effective energy-flux density per capita and per square kilometer of habitable territory.
In fact, in the known history of living species on Earth and implicitly beyond, the ability even to maintain the even existing species demands the benefit of a continuing rise in the net energy-flux density of living species inhabiting Earth. Frankly, the schemes of such proponents of a dubious “Second Law of Thermodynamics,” of Rudolf Clausius et al., are directly contrary to all currently competent notions of biology of our planet. A contrary presumption, such as that launched during the Nineteenth Century, is a product of British oligarchical-imperialist conjectures, whereas competent scientific criteria demonstrate a direct opposite: relics of the oligarchical ideology.
This matter of “environment,” both on Earth, and within the relevant considerations for the Solar system, shows an indispensable long trend to rise of “energy-flux density” in, especially, the existence of the human species. The entry of mankind into the increasing need for attention to matters outside the present range of human habitation on Earth itself, requires our attention to changes in the characteristics of the weather within and beyond the Solar system as such. As we have already moved beyond nuclear-fission, and into higher orders of thermo-nuclear fusion and matter-antimatter considerations, the science-driven increase of energy-flux density essential to continued human existence on this planet, is the mandatory standard for measuring expressed sanity in human behavior generally.
It is to be acknowledged, that among some cases, called “traditional cultures,” this emphasis on science-driven cultural progress tends to be resisted. Such beliefs are grave errors, ultimately, potentially cultural suicidal ones. We must manage the problems of social relations so defined, but, we must not permit that to delude us into believing the people sharing such cultures are actually viable expressions of the human species. It is not pleasant to suggest that animal species are interchangeable with human identities; but the existing animal species’ continued existence depends upon the forms of support which human husbandry affords them, either to our economic advantage, or to our pleasure in the company of certain animal companions.
The general in this matter, is the necessary, accelerating increase of the energy-flux density created by, enjoyed by, and used by a human species.
Read the rest of this hugely significant and important paper at LPAC