Pass into your nearest city early in the daybreak and you’ll see a number of applied sweepers on the roads tidying up the mess left from all the shenanigans of last night. It’s a typical early morning scene, especially the beeping noise! We don’t actually give rubbish a second thought as we feel keeping the streets unlittered is not our problem.

Yet, there is a sometimes imperceptible yet substantial impact litter plays on human psychology. Individuals are more likely to think an area is lacking law and order if litter is lying around, and therefore felons see litter as a potential indication for a chance of a break-in, a mugging, or car-theft. The same signal creates some fear in other individuals who are concerned they may be walking through a more risky area and are concerned about possibly being assaulted.

There’s also the impact on the aesthetic attraction of an area. Litter strewn around can make an area seem unkempt even if it’s only been trashed by party revellers from the night before. This can hurt the reputation of a location if individuals are only within the location for this specific short period of time and only view it in its littered state.

There’s no purpose to drop rubbish if there are empty litter bins within the area. If there are no rubbish bins, or the rubbish bins that are there are stuffed, this is a problem to take up with the local council. Trashing an area has a damaging impact on everybody.

The Iranian elections are certainly interesting indeed. The ruling party is doing their utmost to block satellite TV downloads which might not be positive to their rulers. In fact they are using microwaves to disrupt the satellite TV and Internet prior to the election. This is typical of a corrupt regime. The opposing groups are quite concerned over this abuse of power and violation of their freedoms of press and speech.

There have been several bombings of government buildings trying to stop the health costs of these microwave beams into the populated areas of Tehran. Is Iran over stepping its bounds and trying to gain more control over its masses? Will the peoples of Iran ever be free from harm? Will the masses rise up and fight off the radical and tyrannical government there? Do they have the manhood to do what is right?

Some Iranians have had enough and want to boycott the elections, but if they do they will simply have more of the same. Others want everyone out in force voting. Yet if they vote the hardliner radicals out, will they actually leave or simply call the election void as they did not like the results and have no intention of leaving power. There is a good chance of that and the citizens and moderates of Iran will need to fight if they want true democracy and freedom. They may lack the will to do what is right or the manhood to fight for their freedoms, some say.

What can America do, but show her current support for those enslaved to the tyrannical government which threatens more than just her population, but the world as well; with Weapons of Mass Destruction capable of killing millions of people in other nations which are free, worthy of mention and pillars of what the world can become. Will the Iranian people do the right thing and take care of their problematic government there? We shall see, as the world is watching to see if Iranians have what it takes to do what must be done. Think on this.

“Lance Winslow” - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/wttbbs/

There is often much talk of the right to be treated equally, despite one’s religion or one’s ethnicity or one’s gender. Over the past century, our society has shifted this debate from such older-discussed traits as skin color and gender to things such as sexual orientation. Though there are still Civil Rights battles going on today for equal treatment of individuals regardless of ethnicity or gender, Civil Rights today also encompasses other traits of individuals which before were discriminated against without so much as a thought.

The reason why it is irrational to discriminate against someone on their race is because one’s race does not (normally) interfere with their line of work. Now, there are definitely circumstances where such preference is absolutely justified. If a company was advertising and their statistics department had told them that few African humans buy their products, they may decide to advertise with more African models. Would it be rational, in any reasonable man’s mind, that the company should be forced to hire as many Caucasion models as African models? I would doubt that with great sincerity. If, however, an insurance company was looking for a secretary, then the race of the secretary would be completely irrelevant. Being a good secretary is not about one’s appearance, but wholly about one’s intellectual capabilities, perhaps typing skills and diligance. It is not a question of looks, but a question of intellect. To say that the modeling company was discriminating by choosing an African human over a Caucasion human is equally true as saying the insurance company was discriminating by choosing a smart secretary over an unintelligent secretary.

The battles for Civil Rights of the people, regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation, will continue on for perhaps an inestimable number of years. The advocates of Civil Rights will exist as long as there is Reason and active compassion, and the opponents of Civil Rights will exist as long as there is some ignorance and selective cruelty. A White Supremacist may say that he will deny himself friendship or comradery with every non-White, based on that non-Whites are incapable of making good friends. As every good person of non-White ethnicity passes by this Supremacist, as every human being possesing the traits of kindness and reverance, beauty and vitality, intelligence and understanding, as every good person with any skin color passes by this supremacist, the man will find himself a little more alone, a little less knowledgeable, and gravely disadvantaged. So the battle of equal rights will continue, as long as there is a group being persecuted, and as long as there are heroes of our species to defend them. Every man or woman denied an opportunity because of traits which he cannot control is a badge of dishonor upon the ever-weakening chest of humanity, a boulder upon the back of truth, and a slash across the face of beauty. As long as there is discrimination in the heart of any man, there will always be fallacies in his mind and intolerance in his actions.

There is one battlefield that has almost been entirely unsuccesful in the case for Civil Rights. This is the battlefield for the Right to Opinion. Think not that I am speaking of the right to belong to any political party, or believe in any religion. These rights, however, are still under siege by those without a rational framework of thought — this right to political theory is still a source of hate for those who do not weild Reason or humaneness, and it will probably always exist, as long as there is a ruling class. The Right to Opinion that I speak of is the right to believe all that you wish, without being discriminated against. Though the right to belong to any political party or any religion may be counted as part of this, the Right to Opinion still does not prevail. What man can openly, publicly, and brazenly say that he finds Nazism to be a sound ideology, and then easily find employment? Would a black shop owner hire this man, even if the Nazi was willing? If a man were to announce his membership in North-American Man-Boy Love Assocation (NAMBLA, working for the rights of adults for consensual sexual relationships with minors), would announcing one’s membership of such an organization boost their chances of employment or relationships? It is unpopular today to even assert that Nazism is right, or that Pedophilia may be right. But if someone were to cling to such ideologies, based on the juries of their mind, they will be harmed in all ways: employment will be difficult, friendships and family may be curtailed, and other social or economic conditions may worsen, simply by holding an opinion.

If an employer refused to hire someone on the grounds that they held a certain opinion, how could they respond? There are probably a thousand laws inhibiting employers from such actions, or completely disallowing public institutions from denying citizens their right to equal treatment. But there are amazingly few laws upholding a man’s right to belief in whatever he wishes. If a man professed belief in Nazism, the business across this nation may very well refuse to employ him or to serve him. And, if he were to seek aid in his right to belief, I doubt there would be a single politician who would stand beside him. The ruling class are not concerned with justice so much as they are concerned with looking good in the eyes of the public. Being associated with a Nazi is not something that would help reelection of any public official. But do not only think of Nazism as a creed a man may hold that would harm him. If a man were to shout out in public, “It is okay to have sex with children!” he would be outcast. Employment would be impossible, people would sneer, and the whole of society would be his enemy, as much as they are enemies to the Right to Opinion.

Do humans have the Right to Opinion beyond political parties and religious belief? It is undeniable. So much as a man cannot choose his skin color, in many ways a man cannot choose his belief. If we see a crime being committed, we cannot help but believe that it took place. If we are presented with the evidence of a crime, we cannot help but believe that there is a high probability that it took place. But these are the thoughts of a rational man. If, being presented with the evidence, a man comes to believe that Caucasions are superior to Africans, or Africans are superior to Jews, or Jews are superior to Hispanics, — if a human being, with his own mind and his own will, gathers evidence for himself and discovers reasons to believe as he does — if a man does this, then what do we accomplish by punishing him for speaking? Every man certainly must have the right to judge facts for himself, regardless of what any court in the world says. It is not about supressing Nazism, Fascism, Sexism, Racism, Capitalism, Speciesism, and every other ill-doctrine by any means possible. It is not about silencing those who oppose me ideologically. It is about holding up the individual as the supreme leader of society; it is about understanding the right of every person to believe as they wish, allowing the pathway to the temple of any theory, opening the door to a kingdom of ideas and concepts, releasing the chains around the legs of every slave and holding the torch up at night so they know where to go to get to freedom. The Right to Opinion is the same as the right to belief, and upholding it is the same as the responsibility to decency, and the duty to civilization.

If a man comes to me and tells me that all other races are inferior, that Free Enterprise benefits the worker, that animals have no right other than to be eaten, or that real religion consists of a god in a far-away Universe, I will not insult this man. Nor would I harass him in any way that would cause discomfort or antagonism. I would only offer my opinion, as he offered to me. I would not rise in an uproar to upset his creed. I would raise the lantern of Reason, and soundly offer logic in opposition to his creed. There can be nothing so irrational as resorting to unkindly sentiments to those who hold different opinions, or to denying opportunity to those who with different ethics. It is not my right to say that a man cannot believe one thing or another. Everyone is their own individual, capable of believing as they wish for themselves. Anyone who states differently, that claims we have no obligation of kindness or sincerity to those who believe otherwise, is an obstacle in the race for knowledge, a blockade to the doorway of opportunity, a stone on the path for life.

When I say that discrimination should not occur to man because of his beliefs, I do not mean to govern the lives of those who may sometimes judge on beliefs, and I certainly do not mean to fill their lives with guilt. There is a number of great individuals who refuse to have a relationship with someone outside of their race. And this will not be out of scorn, or of hate, or of some other unbecoming trait. It is because of uncomfortability, or even an inability to relate to someone. A man cannot be blamed for being uncomfortable around other races any more than a man can be blamed for the race he is. If an individual with this uncomfortable sentiment concerning members of other races were to see a member of another race afflicted with some ailment, and if this “race-phobic” person were to offer aid — not out of any sort of fear or reward, but out of the sake of pure compassion — can we honestly call this person full of hate or anger? To make such a claim would be to advance ignorance and to put a scar on the face of humaneness. Though individuals who feel out of place when among other races may stereotypically have one image of being pristine, this stereotype — like every other — does not hold true for all of these individuals. In this group of individuals, there are good, warm-hearted, kind people, and to make an opposition against them is to become an enemy of every Humanitarian who contends that duty and justice are our first priorities.

Just as it is an atrosity to try to make someone act the same to other races when they themselves are uncomfortable with other races, it is also cruel and inhumane to insult someone for not being comfortable with others of different beliefs. A person may find it displeasurable to be among other races. So a person may find it displeasurable to be among believers of Nazism, Fascism, Democracy, the electoral process, Socialism, Communism, Pacifism, or any other creed which has been wrought from humanity. If a man honestly tells me, “I will not be among those people, because the things they say and the way they act bothers me,” then I can hold no animosity whatsoever to him, but if a man tells me, “I will not be among those people, because they are innately cruel, beyond recompense, passed the point of worth,” then I will only be deep within disappointment. There are few creeds that a man can believe that will put him beyond the point of opportunity. Though a man has a right to association, to be with those he likes and avoids those he dislikes, I can only hope that the star of fairness will shine, and all of our hearts will be open to others. But beyond this matter of association, it is important that a man can receive a job, a place to live, a place to buy food and other necessities, without harassment for his creeds. Let a man believe as he wish, and you can only hope that Reason will govern his judgment. Harassment will accomplish nothing, but will work away at the man’s tolerance for others. I cannot govern society or its members, but as far as the economy goes, no man should be behind bars because of their beliefs. This is a testament to freedom as much as it is a confession of humaneness and a declaration for beauty in tolerance.

Though observation will allow us to easily see that our society is not always accepting of another man’s Right to Opinion, a person cannot go far in their intellectual journey without hearing someone say, “That person has their to their own opinion!” Though this is certainly true, it is unlikely for someone to say this about a man who believes Pedophilia is justifiable. It would be of most difficulty to hear a man say “You have your right to your opinion” when another attempts to justify Pedophilia. It would be gravely difficult to hear the same when a person makes a heretical remark, mocking a god or the unseen spirits of the worlds’ religions. I only feel the need to comment on this, that though everyone has their right to their opinion, we always have the right to comment on their opinion, or hold an opinion of an opinion. The point of existence for intellectual debate is not to find some conclusion, or to meet some compromise about some philosophical triffle. It is, utmostly, so that we can understand each other and — with the serene hope that only sleeping children can dream of — that we will clear the way a little. That will we remove any fog that pollutes our thinking, destroy stereotypes, burn all aspirations that are made from imitation, and bury every vice. Intellectual debate is the foundation for anything that was individually great and accomplishing.

Before closing, there are some facts which ought to be put into light for those who still disagree with me. Before anyone lights a torch in effort to burn out their enemy for some ideology, first think of Giordano Bruno. Remember the monk who travelled throughout Europe, dodging the hounds of the Vatican as much as he could, only so that he could write out what he believed, only so he could try to prove that compassion would conquer the world. Remember the physician Servetes, burned at the stake by a tyrant. Remember his exodus from the church, breathless for life as he searched the land for some refuge, and denied any sentiment of compassion, as John Calvin mercilessly ordered death. Think of Thomas Paine. He wrote a book, and they unleashed the hounds of iniquity with the orders of destruction and cruelty. He spoke his mind, and they gave him the death sentence. He was put behind the bars of a French prison as much as he was put behind the bars of intellectual prison. Think of Francisco Ferrer. He taught the children of Spain a secular education, gave them the gift of literacy and thought, instilled in them an insatiasable appetite for knowledge and truth. His only gift to humanity was teaching and kindness, and his only sacrifice was his own life. Remember all who have given their lives only because they believed as they did, only because they felt that they were compelled towards truth, and remember the animosity we gave their offenders — remember the unbridled scorn and contempt held for those who executed heretics and heathens. Before anyone raises their fist in indignance towards someone with another creed, remember our heroes, how they were killed for their beliefs, and why we will always cherish their memories in our hearts.

http://www.punkerslut.com

For Life,

Punkerslut (or Andy Carloff) has been writing essays and poetry on social issues which have caught his attention for several years. His website http://www.punkerslut.com provides a complete list of all of these writings. His life experience includes homelessness, squating in New Orleans and LA, dropping out of high school, getting expelled from college for “subversive activities,” and a myriad of other revolutionary actions.

The first reaction of economies in transition is a sharp decline in their production, mainly in industrial production. In the countries which attained independence with the demise of the British Empire (where the sun never set) - industrial production fell by 20% on average. Even this was because these countries continued to maintain economic ties with the “mother” (the United Kingdom). They also continued to trade among themselves, with the rest of the British Empire, through the Commonwealth mechanism.

This was not the case when the second biggest empire of modern times collapsed, the Soviet empire. When the USSR and the Eastern Bloc disintegrated - the COMECON trading bloc was dismantled, never to be replaced by another. All the constituents of the former Eastern Bloc preferred to trade with the west rather than with one another. The Empire left in its wake mountains of trade debts, total lack of liquidity and money losing barter operations carried out in unrealistic prices.

Thus, industrial production plunged in the newly established countries (CIS and the countries which were part of Former Yugoslavia) as well as in other former members of the Eastern Bloc by 40-60% over a period of 5 years. A slow recovery is discernible only in the last two years and industrial production is picking up at an annual rate of 2% (Estonia) to 8% (the Czech Republic) - depending on the country.

This disastrous drop in the most important parameter of economic health was largely attributable to a few, cumulative factors:

• The sudden evaporation of all the traditional export markets - simultaneously. Macedonia has lost 80% of its export markets with the bloody and siege-laden disintegration of the Former (federation of) Yugoslavia. Similar vicissitudes were experienced by other countries in transition.

• A huge, unsustainable internal debt between the companies themselves (each acting in the dual role of supplier and of client) - and between the enterprises and the state. This burden was only very mildly ameliorated by bartering. Mostly, it led to severe cases of insolvency or lack of liquidity and to a reversion to pre-monetary economic systems.

• This lack of liquidity also prevented the investment in capital assets (plant modernization, personnel training, data processing and decision making tools) necessary to sustain efficiency gains, increase productivity and maintain competitiveness.

• Gross inefficiency of the industrial plants which was due to massive hidden unemployment, low maintenance standards and the aforementioned lack of capital.

• Outmoded and outdated management techniques. The old guard of managers in industry were ill adapted to the rapid changes wrought about them by capitalism and wise industries. They continued “to fight the last (and lost) wars”, to bemoan their fate and not to provide a sense of direction, a vision of the future and the management decisions which are derivatives of the above.

• Faulty legislation, dysfunctioning law enforcement systems, crony capitalism and privateering (the sale of state assets to political allies or to family members of influential political and economic figures) - all led to fuzzy ownership structures and to a virtual abandonment of the protection of property rights. In the absence of clear ownership and under the threat everimminent loss of property, the profit motivation has degenerated into speculative binges and bouts and decision making was transformed into power contests.

• These industries produced and manufactured goods in accordance with some central planning, an theoretical model of the marketplace, or rule-of-thumb thinking. The result was mountains of shoddy merchandise, of low quality and very little demand. Antiquated design and lack of responsiveness to market needs and consumers’ wishes only exacerbated the situation.

• This absence of market research, market analysis and, more generally, market awareness led to the almost complete absence of marketing, sales promotion, or advertising (in the modern sense). Paradoxically, the communist era industries demonstrate a deeper belief in “the invisible hand of the market” than do their capitalist brethren. They entrust the function of the dissemination of information and its influence upon the decisions made by consumers - entirely to the market. If the product is either needed or good enough, it will sell itself, was the thinking. Marketing and advertising were thought of as illegitimate cajoling, pushing consumers to make decisions that they would not have made otherwise.

• Industry operated under all these crushing constraints in an environment of heavy to impossible regulation, trade protectionism (which denied them the benefits of competition), corrupt bureaucracy, rolls of red tape, heavy political involvement and a total distortion of economic considerations by “social” ones. This was further compounded by a decaying banking system (where the distinction between lender and borrower was rendered superfluous by the concept of “social capital” which belongs to everyone equally). It could not supply the industrial sector with capital replenishment and the total absence of capital markets did not help.

• Last - but far from being least - was the non existence of a “Protestant” or “Asian values” work ethic. Low salaries, feigned “equality” and absent profit motivation - all led to a disincentived work environment. The norm in many of these countries is still: “come to work, open and close the door and get paid”, as the saying goes. This is the benign case. Stealing from the workplace has become an acceptable way of complementing income and moonlighting was done at the expense of the official “primary” workplace.

But it seems that the worst is over and that the scene is fast changing.

However sloppy or criminal the process of privatization, still hundreds of thousands of new capitalists were brewed and introduced, willy nilly, to the profit motive. The spectre of capital gains, made most of them (except the most hardened) discover marketing, advertising, design, export, trade financing, public offerings, strategic partnerships, concessions and business plans.

Industries are much more focussed and market oriented. The new religion of capitalism, replete with entrepreneurship, free choice, personal profit and the invisible hand of the market has been successfully phased in.

Both the domestic markets and international trade are recovering nicely. Consumption is growing and with it exports. The political level is withdrawing from the scene through more or less successful privatization or transformation schemes and appropriate legislation to minimize the role of the state in the economy.

Some countries have opted to “skip” some of the industrial portion of the classic, evolutionary economic cycle - and go directly to investing in information and knowledge industries. They educate their workforce and retrain it accordingly. They invite multinationals - using a cocktail of tax incentives and direct grants and subsidies - to open back office operations (accounting, administration) and telemarketing operations in their countries. This calls for lower investment than in classic (or sunset) industries and has a high value added to the economy.

But the single largest driving force behind economic recovery is foreign capital. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is pouring in and with it: new markets, technology transfers through joint ventures, new, attractive product mixes, new management, new ideas and new ownership - clear and decisive.

So, industrial production is picking up and will continue to grow briskly in all countries in transition that have the peaceful conditions necessary for long term development. If Macedonia will follow the examples of the Baltic countries, of Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, even Russia, Ireland, Egypt, Chile, Indonesia, Israel and the Philippines - it will double its industrial production within 10 years and redouble it again in 15 years.

Israel, Ireland and … France and Japan (!) are examples of poor, agricultural countries, which made the transition to thriving industrial countries successfully.

But was their secret? How come Hong Kong and Singapore are richer than Britain by some measures? Together with South Korea and Taiwan they have been growing at an average rate of 7.5% annually for the last 30 years. China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, The Philippines have joined the “Asian Tigers” club.

They all share some common features:

• Massive injections of labour (by massive immigration from rural areas to the cities, urbanization). Massive injections of capital and technology. The above injections were financed by an exceedingly high level of savings and investments (savings amount to 35% of GDP, on average).

• Wise government direction provided through a clear industrial policy. This, though, is a double edged sword: a less wise policy would have backfired with the same strength.

• A capitalist, profit seeking mentality.

• An annual increase of 2-3% in productivity which is the result of copying technology and other forms of technology transfers from the rich West.

• Strong work, family and society ethics within a cohesive, conformist and supportive social environment (the “Asian Values” are the Eastern equivalent of the “Protestant Work Ethic”).

• Low taxation and small government budgets (less than 20% of GDP compared to twice as much in the West - and 3 times as much in France today).

• Flexible and mobile labour and c (in certain countries) capital markets. When mobility or flexibility are restricted (Japan) it is the result of social treaty rather than of legislation, regulation, or other statist intervention.

• A firm, long lasting commitment to education and to skill acquisition, even in hard circumstances. The number of educated people is low but growing rapidly, as a result.

• Openness to trade, knowledge and to technology.

• Imports are composed mostly of investment goods and capital assets. The culture of conspicuous, addictive (or even normal) consumption is less developed there.

Still, these countries started from a very low income base. It is common economic knowledge that low income countries always grow fast because they can increase their productivity simply by purchasing technology and management in the rich country. Purchasing technology is always much cheaper than developing it - while maintaining roughly the same economic benefits.

Thus, Hong Kong grew by 9% in the 60s. This growth coefficient was reduced to 7.5% in the 80s and to 5% in the 90s. But China, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia are likely to grow annually by 7-9% during the next decade.

Not that these countries are exempt from problems. The process of maturation creates many of them. There is the dependence on export markets and volatile exchange rates (which determine the terms of trade). When the West reduced its consumption of microchips and the Dollar appreciated by 50% against the Japanese Yen - all the tigers suffered a decline in economic growth rates, current account deficits of 5-8% of their GDP, strikes (South Korea) and Stock Market crashes (Thailand, to name but one of many). In Singapore and in Hong Kong, the industrial production plummeted by 5% last year (1996).

Years of easy money and cheap credits directed by the state at selected industries starved small businesses, created overinvestment and overcapacity in certain, state-supported, industries and destabilized the banking and the financial systems. It helped forge infrastructure bottlenecks and led to a shortage in skilled or educated manpower. In Thailand only 38% of those 14 years old attend school and in China, the situation is not much better.

Finally, the financial markets proved to be too regulated, the government proved to be too bureaucratic, corruption proved to be too rampant (Indonesia, Japan, almost everybody else). There were too many old conglomerate-type mega - companies which prevented competition (e., the Chaebol in South Korea or the Zaibatsu in Japan).

So, the emerging economies are looking to Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan to supply the ideal: truly flexible labour markets, no state involvement, lots of nimble, small businesses, deregulated markets, transigent industrial policies. These countries - and the rest of the Asian Tigers - are expected to beat the West at its own game: money. They have many more years of economic growth ahead:

Each Korean worker has only 40% of the capital goods, available to his Western comrade, at his disposal. Putting more technology at his fingertips will increase his productivity.

An industrial worker in the west has a minimum of 10 years of education. In Indonesia and Thailand he has 4 years and even in South Korea he has merely 9 years. On average, an industrial worker in one of the Asian Tigers countries carries 7 years of education in his satchel - hardly the stuff that generals are made of. Research demonstrated that the more educated the worker - the higher his productivity.

Finally, increasing wages and looming current account deficits - will force the tigers to move to higher value added (non labour intensive) industries (the services, information and knowledge industries).

Then, it will be the turn of countries like Macedonia to take their place in some labour intensive areas and to rise to tigerdom.

About The Author

Sam Vaknin is the author of “Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited” and “After the Rain - How the West Lost the East”. He is a columnist in “Central Europe Review”, United Press International (UPI) and ebookweb.org and the editor of mental health and Central East Europe categories in The Open Directory, Suite101 and searcheurope.com. Until recently, he served as the Economic Advisor to the Government of Macedonia.

His web site: http://samvak.tripod.com

Washington DC council member David Catania actually suggested that the council should consider claiming eminent domain of certain widely prescribed pharmaceutical formulas in order to help reign in rising drug costs for the city. Catania suggests that the patents should be acquired by the government through the mayor’s declaration of a public health emergency and then generic manufacturers would be contacted to produce the drugs for cheaper than they are commercially available.

There are so many things wrong with this proposal that it is hard to decide where to begin. First off, convincing anyone that there is a public health emergency due to the cost of medicines is absolutely ridiculous. The cost of health care does need to be addressed in order for our economy to thrive, but when one breaks down the actual costs of health care one finds that medications account for only 10 percent of the overall health care spending. What would be next, claiming eminent domain over hospitals so the government can set the prices that they are allowed to charge?

Also, what Catania fails to realize is that even under eminent domain claims the government is still required to pay the fair market value to the person/entity that they are seizing the property from, so not only would they need to pay for the intellectual rights to the drugs, the government would then need to pay a generic company to produce and get approval from the FDA to sell the drug which would basically wipe out any savings Catania would hope to realize.

The eminent domain seizure of the patents of drugs would all but guarantee that pharmaceutical companies in this country would have no incentive to develop new drugs, so one hopes that all the drugs required to treat any future aliments have already been discovered. Getting these drugs cheaply now, comes at the very expensive cost of losing any future developments from pharmaceutical companies.

Daniel Spankie is the creator/editor of http://www.Chemtracker.net, a Pharmaceutical news forum for professionals.

Many in the peanut gallery of society are so quick to attack the republican party, out of duty to their side of the sound and fury of human endeavor, however if you are really going to attack people without debating their concepts then in fact you are no better than those you condemn. I recommend to all that you look at both sides and see how similar we really all are. I recommend you go buy the Audio Tape about the Dole-Kemp Plan and play it in your car. If you still wish to blast them personally or the Republican party then at least you will have a better understanding of what you are talking about without making a fool of yourself. Here the name of the audio tape and yes it is also available in CD, I knew you would ask:

Audio Tape Review or Compact Disk; “Trusting the People, The Dole-Kemp Plan to Free the Economy and Create a Better America; By Bob Dole and Jack Kemp.

This is an interesting audio tape in that at the time their logic is as sound as it is today and will always be. Perhaps this is why Bill Clinton’s administration acted more like a Republican Administration during his second term with regards to the economy. The only fall back in the business-economic sense, which has now come to light is the onerous regulatory process that stifled the economy, entrepreneurship and capital investment by business both big and small.

They were right on the money when stating that the American economy rests on the shoulders of small business as it’s foundation. As much of the figures depicted in the book are misquoted or out of context the rational remains the same. Perot often used the figures game and it tended to work by quoting big numbers in the Billions when 10 billion is actually very little when it comes to moving this economy anywhere. Bill Clinton looked better on TV, was able to relate to the people better. That was his strong suit. He was also extremely savvy in his politics.

The Friedman economic views recited in this book are pretty much what is being done now with the Bush Administration and we will see a huge reemergence of the great economic powerhouse we are. I personally agree with most of their advice, although question the 15% reduction in income tax and favor a real low flat tax as designed by Steve Forbes, and a Constitutional Amendment that government live within it’s means. No taxation without representation in the hidden realm of fees, licenses, permits, fines, lawsuits, etc. A tax is a tax, and tea in the bay is still tea that tastes bad. The other disagreement I have with their plan is with regards to FCC Licensing of frequencies. This is unacceptable in that it causes artificial inflation of users and subscribers of those frequencies and therefore is paid by the American people, as business has to move those costs onto the public. In hindsight we can see the problems with the telecoms. In any economy of any value we still see a few underlining necessities in this era: A system of education, Infrastructure, Systems of mass distribution, Communication, Transportation, stable currency and banking system. Communication should be as little cost as possible to insure it is used to the best of its ability and that the most possible users use it. This promotes economic growth. Causing artificial barriers of any sorts such as artificial price inflation through frequency auctions to the highest bidder means the consumer and business user will bare its burden causing inefficiency. Same as a dam restricts water flow, or a toll bridge hurts commerce. If fewer people are using the system of communication due to costs there is a barrier to entry to the world of efficiency thus hurting everything we buy. That is so short sided it is pathetic and moronic. It is so obvious; I for one cannot fathom the in competency here. The billions of dollars paid to the FCC has costs this nations 10xs that in lost efficiency and lost tax revenue for the government due to the slowing of trade, innovation and profits from that very inefficiency.

The FCC is a government agency and with the extra money they will get bigger. Who needs a bigger FCC? Who needs any branch of government any bigger unless it promotes freedom, free markets, or protects our citizenry or people? So in summary I disagree with the figures used for the arguments on the economy, but agree with the basic premises. I strongly disagree with the FCC frequency auctions. The frequencies should go the companies who can best fulfill their duties to all Americans and offer the best trouble free communication to the most markets both large and small. Once it has been determined the best companies to fulfill this mission they should be granted to those companies forthwith and get on with the program as fast as possible thus helping the most amount of people quickest. But the tape was good and the rest was fine. You should listen to it.

The hardest thing for you is going to be proving to yourself that Bill Clinton’s economic policy was bad when we had a hell of a great economic run. It was about the economy then and now and Bill was not stupid and still isn’t. It was not the policies that were so terribly bad it was the regulatory paper tiger run amuck. That was what hurt us. Best to read Ann Rand’s “When Atlas Shrugged” to understand what I mean. Another good book is “The Business End of Government” by Dan Smoot. Since Bob Dole and Jack Kemp did not win the election we will never know and even with this little recession we just got through, I do not see it to be so bad since inflation was also low, but looking for a space to run. Sometimes looking at the recent past can provide guidance for our future, think on this.

“Lance Winslow” - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/wttbbs/

Mesothelioma is a uncommon cancer of the tissue that lines people’s inside organs. Almost two thousand new cases are recognized each year in the whole United States. Out of this group, nearly 75 percent of cases affect the sac around the lungs, called the pleura. This is known as pleural mesothelioma. In nearly 10 to 20 percent of occurrences, malignant mesothelioma may involve the tissue that encloses visceral organs, referred to as the peritoneal membrane, resulting in what is then referred to as peritoneal mesothelioma.

Being exposed to asbestos is absolutely the largest risk factor for this uncommon sickness. After exposure to asbestos, the time period to development of the mesothelioma disease may be 2 to 4 decades. Due to job related exposure, malignant mesothelioma is nearly 3 times more routine in men, than in females. Because the mass of instances moves upward with age, there are around ten times more occurrences in the men more than age 64 than in the men in their 30s.

Developing Mesothelioma is a severe disease, which, at the current moment, has a incredibly poor rate of continuing endurance. Nonetheless, if it is recognized early, regimens are then in existence that might considerably stretch the patient’s life. Cutting edge approaches continue to be and are being promoted through clinical trials.

The American criminal justice system is not appropriately named because it meets justice to criminals. It is appropriately named because the justice system itself is criminal. Those who operate these ever expanding bureaucracies don’t care at all about justice and have no clue what justice is. When President Bush speaks of American justice as though it was judicial caviar, I want to vomit. You should too. The problem is foundational. The U.S. Constitution, which is the pattern for many State Constitutions as well, prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Wiser people would have forbidden cruel punishments, usual or not. An unusual punishment would be victim restitution or compensation. It would be unusual but it would not be cruel, so it is not forbidden. Family support is not even a punishment, so it is not forbidden by this law.

The problem is, the wording allows cruel punishment as long as it is usual. We can be usually cruel. If we can be unusually cruel and get away with it for a year or two, it becomes usual cruelty and legal. This is how the U.S. prison bureaucracy has constantly increased in legal cruelty. Like the phony wars on poverty, drugs and terror that will never end, so is the war on crime. All were created as social cancers that consume the national economy by people who want government to be the sole employers of people. If bigger is better, biggest is bestest.

Cruelly deprive a child of love, affection, self esteem and build a cage for the adult you created. When you have this adult locked in a cage, deprive him or her of dignity, love, affection and self esteem. Make him totally dependent for everything he needs for life. Don’t allow him any productive work and don’t pay him any meaningful pay for menial chores. Isolate him from all he knew except the violence and see that he gets regular doses of violence in continuous survival conditions. Further isolate those who get caught up in the violence.

Make the whole environment so unattractive, as to discourage visitation. Restrict, for half and non legitimate security reasons, his access to decent food and health care. Repress, oppress, suppress and depress this person who did not properly respect some law or other.

When he has become completely dependent on the system, turn him loose with nothing and tell him he better get a job. I say, send him to Washington or the State Capitol to make new and never ending laws. He will do better than the professionals we hire. He at least knows what justice is not. Turning people into beasts is never justice. It is insanity. Once the damage is done it needs to be undone, not compounded.

For years, the prison industry has been the fastest growing segment of the American economy. Those who don’t get government jobs will fill these prisons and drive up the demand for more, bigger and uglier high security housing. It is such a delightful prospect. If what recently happened in Iraq is unattractive, what would it be like here if the prisoners were all liberated? Let the good times roll, eh? Millions of people who can no longer take care of themselves, settling scores. Let’s try that on global TV.

I have noticed the recent progress in animal husbandry and I am sincerely pleased by the trend. Could we learn enough about humane treatment for animals to teach us humane treatment for people? Can we warehouse people who are restricted but healthy, happy and productive? Do lawbreakers need to permanently forfeit their humanity as punishment? How can incarceration be a just punishment for anything but kidnapping murder and rape, where one deprives another of liberty?

In the Old Testament, we had an eye for an eye and tooth for tooth. It was justice without mercy. The New Testament teaches merciful justice but the New Testament is lost on America. Have you noticed? We have become the stronghold of devils our enemies claim and this criminal justice is the ugly proof. This system is a gauge of national spiritual immaturity. It portrays the value we place on soul or spirit. It is an Old World relic of barbarity that needs serious reform.

Government schools don’t identify and support neglected and abused children and wasted lives become the object of corrupted government. Government sweeps its social mistakes into Graybar hotels, out of public sight, out of public mind. It’s a non issue. The public neither knows nor cares. Let’s outlaw criminal justice. Let’s outlaw public ignorance.

Unlike citizens, criminals are created, not born. Negligent and abusive parenting, which is often multi - generational, and unspiritual education create perhaps half of the U.S. criminal population. The rest is created by incessant lawmaking. An entire professional class writes new law, year in and year out and people pay them to do it. We ask what schools our children should attend. We need to ask what prisons their children will attend. It is time for everyone to take an interest in modern prison life. It affects all of us, even if we choose to ignore it. It is a storm cloud over the national spirit. Our prisons are spiritual mirrors and there is none fair in the land.

The political will as concerns prison, swings with liberal and conservative influence. Conservatives want every aspect of prison life to be punishment. Liberals want humane treatment and rehabilitation. Because liberals never remain in power, prisoners eventually lose any gains they make and conditions usually get worse than before the liberal swing improved them. That is, prison life becomes increasingly accommodating to the desires of prison administration.

Much of what is done in the name of prison security, is like that we see done in the name of national security. Shortcut solutions to save time, expense and staff, that infringe the rights and humane treatment of others. If some prisoners use telephone communications to run con games on the public, with or without outside help, all prisoners are restricted in telephone communication. It is restricted by the telephone time allotted each prisoner every month. It is monitored, recorded and restricted to the length of call. It is restricted because only collect calls are allowed at rates up to ten times higher than a direct dial or phone card call. This is a blatant infringement on the privacy and economic rights of the person called and discourages people from accepting the charges. In many cases, the state gets rebate kickbacks from the phone company as part of this monopoly contract.

To restrict the profits of smuggling drugs and other contraband to prison staff, (Just Us) visitors often must submit to searches and strip searches which effectively discourages visitation as commanded in the Bible. When is the last time you visited a prisoner? Wasn’t it a special experience?

The same is done with mail. If you send a letter, a money order and a simple gift that is not on an authorized list or appears homemade, the entire package is returned with a notice of what is unacceptable. The U.S. Postal Service only takes responsibility for prison mail delivery to the prison itself. If mail gets lost or sits on the mailroom floor for weeks, there is nothing the inmate can do but complain and the same for the sender. Prison mail rooms should be operated by specially trained employees of the U.S.P.S. as they would a small town or village.

Prison food is poor and to save costs, only meets minimal dietary requirements. There are prisons with farms that inmates operate. The fresh farm crops are then sold for profit and the inmates are fed canned and spoiled food. When you are living in a din of noise, under constant threat of attack and abuse by staff and other inmates, the ever present stress, from which there is no escape save solitary punishment, boosts nutritional requirements. Over time, anyone will become ill, probably everyone.

When an inmate becomes ill, no matter what the problem, it is of little concern to administration. They will provide medical attention when it is convenient to them. The prison physician is poorly paid, overworked and may be so incompetent, he could find no other paid employment. Prison malpractice is the rule and not the exception. If an outsider wants to send an inmate dietary supplements or herbs for a health problem, it is not allowed in most prisons. In some, probably few, it is allowed if it is sent in by a commercial distributor, reducing the likelihood of contraband.

Often inmate victims of medical neglect, abuse and malpractice, have to sue the system to get help. When they do so, they come in for punishment by administration and staff. More often than not, their case is dismissed on legal technicalities, which only the most experienced paralegals can avoid, after many years of filing what the courts call frivolous lawsuits. They have to file, just to learn all the snares and pitfalls. The courts are in no hurry to adjudicate inmate cases, so they languish in courthouse IN baskets for months and years, forcing inmates to file motions to move their cases. If they win their lawsuits, their condition is usually many times worse than it was when they filed suit and they will get the minimal medical attention the prison can get away with under court order, or worse, more malpractice.

No matter what your crime may be, imprisonment is always a de facto death sentence. Prison life robs one of health and the life force, one day at a time. Most of America does not know this. Most of America does not care, unless a friend or relative gets caught up in the great Just Us system. But now you know, dear reader, and with a little imagination you could do much to improve the lives of many who were somebody’s victims, long before they ever committed any crime. Have mercy on the more than two million souls whose lives are long stories of abuse and neglect that never ends.

About the Author

Freelance writer published on websites and newspapers.
edhowes@hotmail.com
justanotherview.com