My Thoughts/Concerns Blog

To legalize marijuana has been a major topic as of late. As for my opinions on the topic, there have been numerous studies done on the short term and long term effects of marijuana usage on a person. As of right now, there is no life-threatening side effects (or even major/minor side effects), unlike what smoking tobacco does. The only side effect of marijuana that has been proven, is the fact that it helps alleviate pain and can help with appetite. This makes the decision very easy, and that is that the legalization of marijuana/hemp/cannabis should be very possible. It has also been proven that hemp makes very good paper, better than trees. As this fact stands, it would help stop the deforestation of our world, if we were to rely on hemp for paper. Of course, there is heavy advocates against using hemp as paper, and those originally came from the paper companies. The use of hemp for paper would cripple the current paper industry of America. Hemp is cheap and doesn't take up a lot of space. Hemp also takes 5 months to grow to maturity, compared to trees which take anywhere from 30 to hundreds of years to grow.

There would be stricter laws on getting disability. Laziness is not a disability. In order to qualify for disability, the person must fulfill two conditions. First, they are physically unable to do work (like missing limbs, or being paralyzed and in a wheelchair). And second, they are mentally unable to perform simple tasks that would be given to them (ADHD and ADD would not be a disability). There are too many people in this nation that would claim that they are disabled, when they would be perfectly fine to go out and work. They should stop being a leech, and contribute something useful to this country.

To be added later.

It is sad business when hundreds of millions of dollars are raised just to put advertisements on television. Those hundreds of millions don't even include the PACs (or political action committees). Under the ruling of the Supreme Court, PACs are eligible to raise hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars for a candidate. What I would like to see, is a politician get their office without mud-slinging, without lying about something or even stretching the truth. I would like to see them run for office without using the hundreds of millions given to them by the top 5% of Americans. I haven't even mentioned so far that nearly all of our Presidents have been from wealthy families. They already don't have the interests of Americans in their eyes as they take political offices. And, nearly all of our political offices are held by one of two people. A Democrat, or a Republican. It has come to the point in America where you are either a red or a blue, and it is a very sad state of affairs. The needs of America has outgrown what our two political parties can do for us as a nation.

Enough with the back story, so here is what I propose. I propose that every candidate will be an independent, or the complete dissolution of every political party there is. I would have the candidates of offices put their positions on the many topics plaguing the US out into the light. No lying, or stretching the truth. Everyone's stances on the subjects would then be posted, by the government, on a free website that will allow everyone to view them and decide which candidate is best for them. I would also eliminate PACs, as well as all political fundraising. The government will set aside a certain budget for those that will be running for an office, that way everyone is on the same foot, and has just as good a chance as everyone else at getting to office. I would also ban the use of mud-slinging television commercials. Most Americans now days are annoyed by these negative political commercials, or are even just plain annoyed with politics.

I know there is a lot wrong with our current electoral system, but I don't even want to get started on that. I would just say that whoever has the majority (popular) vote of Americans, would be the winner of the elections.

Fossil fuels have become too dangerous for this planet to keep using. Nuclear fission has become too much of a problem, especially with proliferation. And renewable energy efficiency is atrocious. What is there left to use? Nuclear fusion is the solution, and is the only energy process that we can currently use that has no dangers what-so-ever. Fusion is an amazing process of fusing two atoms together, and harnessing the energy given off by the reaction. Fusion power currently uses hydrogen, the most abundant element in the universe, for it's reactions. It is thought that the current supply of hydrogen on Earth would supply us with enough energy for the next few billion years. The product of using fusion with hydrogen is helium, which in turn can be used again in the fusion process.

Now, there are the fears that nuclear fusion will produce a black-hole, or a star on Earth. This is entirely impossible. On Earth, the process of fusion doesn't occur naturally, so if a fusion power plant were to ever lose power, or be shut down, the fusion process would stop immediately. This makes fusion power very safe.

This world is very dear to us as a species living on it. And the time has come to a critical point that will decide the future of this planet. The increase in the use of fossil fuel energies, and the increase in industrialization of third world countries, has added way to much carbon dioxide and other toxic chemicals to the air. These chemicals alter the weather patterns across the globe. The green house gases increase the temperature, making super-storms (like those we've recently had) more prevalent, and has raised the issue of rising sea levels. Now, I know there isn't a "one solution fits all" situation with the environment, but, there can be many improvements to what is currently taking place. The sharing of advanced energies, will reduce the amount of fossil fuels used for energy production. Reforestation of rain forests will help sequester large amounts of carbon dioxide, which might help alleviate the increasing temperatures. That in turn would allow the planet to slowly recover, as the process of glaciation takes centuries. Taking care of our environment now, will reduce the future costs if we were to do nothing.

Now, the protection, and eventual revival of endangered species will be much more difficult. To this, there isn't a very good solution without hurting the economies around the world. But compared to the mass extinction waiting for the currently alive species around the planet, finding solutions to bring the planet back to it's full functional form is a better alternative.

It would take way to long to cover everything, so I have a little animated video to share with everyone. I encourage those reading this to take a look.

To be added later.

To be added later.

Our constitution, bill of rights, amendments, and other charters are a sort of religion that we all must follow, and like other religions, there are those that will peck at it to change its tenets in effort to meet their own ideologies, since they, after all, know what's best for everyone else.....Fact is, the founding fathers were very well educated and experienced in their ambitions to create their new "bible" which would form the blueprint to civilized society that would be able to thwart the oppressions which they had experienced, as well as provide an equal balance which they, as historians and scholars, knew were forever embattled by tyranny, whether at the highest levels of government, or at the lowest most local enforcement levels. This group of rebels were an assembly like no other and one that cannot be duplicated in today’s climate. The foundations they laid were purposeful, they wished the general populous, the individual citizen, to be able to protect themselves in their own homes and communities, from not only dangerous animals and thugs, but from the corrupt and oppressive government. The foundation for a government intended to be "for the people" must demand a checks-and-balances system that places power in the hands of the people. Power for protection and for resistance. Our founding fathers would be rolling over in their tombs if they knew of the gun control efforts being made by those that would "rewrite" their "bible". By those that know better and those that know what best fits our modern society, so that they themselves can feel safe. I'm not a religions man, but I know the bible, and I understand that it contains many truths and teaches us history, that unless learned can lead down a dark path. Gun control advocates, with their rhetoric to fight crime and provide communal safety, are simply providing a smoke screen to their true agenda which is to build a new oppressive and controlling tyrannical form of government.

To be added later.

Immigration is what made this country the way it is. The Melting Pot of the world. Before all the strict legislation on Immigration, anyone and everyone was able to come into this country, so long as they could speak English. Now, people have to jump through hoops just to start the application process. Once they start, it can take up to years to get approved. After getting approved, you have to take a test. This test is one of the most brutal tests given, even surpassing what normal people learn in school. A person who pass this test with flying colors, knows more about our country than we do ourselves.

If I had my way, I would get rid of these strong anti-immigration legislation. In my books, so long as you can read/write in English, you can live in this great nation. If you can't, you must take classes to learn how to before you become a citizen. If you still can't... well then, you don't deserve to be here. Every other country on this planet requires you to speak the National language of that country. Europe does it, Africa does it, Asia does it, and South America even does it. We should not have to force ourselves to learn their languages just because their being too stubborn to learn ours. If your living in this country, you better damn well know how to speak English.

To be added later.

To be added later.

To be added later.

To be added later.

To be added later.

There should be no need for nuclear weapons. I would propose a disarmament of such weapons, and use the fuel that was put in them to better use. I know that they are built as a deterrent, but the possibility of them being launched at each other is rising little by little. I would want to end the prospect of M.A.D. (otherwise known as Mutually Assured Destruction) before it's too late. I've played many games where the Earth had been destroyed by a nuclear war, and it wasn't too pretty.

To be added later.

To be added later.

There really should be no reason to comment on this topic. Everyone should have the right to follow their own religious beliefs. No one should impose onto others their beliefs and religion. I also think that no one should die trying to spread their religion, and should not kill other people who follow a different religion. As far as I know of, most religions teach peace and acceptance. No one knows who is right, or who is wrong. The only time we will find out, is when we die. Until that point, everyone is free to follow their own religious beliefs.

As to our national anthems and songs, they shouldn't be touched. It doesn't matter if you don't believe in the Christian God or not, but you must sing the song and pledge as they should be. Or you can just not say God. We shouldn't have to change what's been used for hundreds of years, just because some people get offended. There will always be things that you don't like, that you must do. You get over it, and move on with your life.

To be added later.

To be added later.

To be added later.

If I had my way, there would be no unemployed, unless you were over the retirement age, in school, and/or fulfilled the requirements to be disabled. Every single person that can't find a job will have a job protecting this country. It might not seem fair to force people to serve their country, but it sure does beat living on the streets in the freezing cold with nothing to eat. And when I mean serve their country, I mean that they will be a part of the military.

There are those that go out onto the streets everyday, panhandle for money, and take home more money then those that do an honest day's work. That is just ridiculous.

This is not about a National Budget, just about wages.

Maximum Wage:
There should be a maximum wage imposed within the USA. I propose this limit to be $300,000 a year, with taxes. Living off of $300k a year is more than enough for any human being. Look at all the number of people who live happy comfortable lives off of just under $75k a year. Any amount earned over $300k would go straight to the government, to help fund the country. I know this is counter-intuitive for a capitalistic society, but there really is no need for anyone to earn more than $300k a year. Only about 2% of Americans earn more than $300k a year. And roughly 0.1% of Americans earn over $1 million. Imagine how much revenue America would have if the extra income went to the government. 0.1% of America is 235,413 people according to the IRS, and those people took in a total of $726.9 billion. $300k times 235,413 people is $70,623,900,000 (or roughly $70.6 billion). Then we take the $726.9 billion minus the $70.6 billion, and we get $656,276,100,000 (or $656.3 billion). That's not even including those that are tax evaders, or the incomes between $300k and $1 million. That's still a lot of money.

Minimum Wage:
The minimum wage in America is atrocious. It is so bad, it's at it's all time low in my opinion. The cost of living in America keeps increasing, outpacing the amount of money people earn in a given year. As of right now, the minimum wage in America is $7.50 per hour, whether you're full-time or part-time. The amount of money needed to live a prosperous life, without being in poverty, is approximately $11 per hour. As a salary, that amount would be roughly $23k a year.

Additional Thoughts:
I would even be prudent enough to pass some laws regarding a "social" wage. This would entail three different level tiers at the bottom of the wage ladder. The smallest wage would be for those that choose not to work. The social wage for non-workers who aren't either in retirement or have a debilitating condition, would be zero dollars. People must work, if they want money. Second, above the non-workers, would be part-timers. Part-timers should not be entitled to earn as much as a full-timer. This would cut part-timer wages to half the lowest paid full-timer wages. The third lowest tier, would be the minimum wage for full-time workers. Please refer to Disability and Welfare for more information.

To be added later.