Chapter 3: Bottoms uP!
Welcome to Irreni World Scale
By: Mybrid Trees Wonderful
Circa: 2016
DRAFT ONLY
This is the third chapter in what will be a book describing Irreni.
This chapter addresses this apparent contradiction by explaining the role free-thinking plays to break-down group-think so as to advance to the new ideas.
The US Constitution is a very sloppy attempt at top-down with bottom-up design.
First, the US Constitution was originally conceived only as top-down. No bottom-up design was considered until the Bill of Rights. This shows the US Constitution is haphazard work. The Bill of Rights was an after thought. And when the Bill of Rights was created no consideration was expressed as to balancing those rights with the original document, like say the Commerce Clause or Full, Faith and Credit clause. This design gap, this void has left our individual rights exposed to capricious and fickle interpretations by the Supreme Court.
The Bill of Rights does make a weak attempt to balance future rights, aka powers, between Federal, State and people in the Tenth Amendment:
And then here's the punch line with the Tenth Amendment: the Tenth Amendment is superceded by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. What a mess.
The inherent contradictions within the top-down and bottom-up design of the US Constitution has been our undoing.
In Roe v. Wade the US Supreme Court got involved because a woman can cross state lines to get an abortion and abortion is commerce. Should a woman's right to an abortion be adjudicated as commerce regulated by the commerce clause or adjudicated as a State or individual right?
What the Supreme Court should say is crossing state lines to exercise rights only available in another state cannot then be prosecuted. For example, if abortion is illegal in Mississippi and legal in Georgia then a woman getting an abortion in Georgia cannot be prosecuted for an abortion given in Georgia. Either State rights end at the border of the State or the concept of State has no definition.
This is exactly the case with interstate banking. Did you know that in the State of California there is a usury law that caps interest rates at 20%? Interest rates higher than 20% are breaking the law. As a citizen of California I should be able sue the various credit card companies in my life that have charged me over 30% interest rate on my credit cards.
Can I? Nope. Why? Because the Supreme Court has ruled that interstate banking only has to comply with the banking laws of the State of incorporation. I can't sue using the laws of the State I'm in, California. There are only three States in the Union that allow 30% interest rates. Guess what? Every credit card company in the US is incorporated in those States. No surprise there.
So why doesn't the same precedent apply to abortion? Why can't any State outlaw abortion? Why can't a woman cross State lines to get an abortion and it be perfectly legal just like credit card interest rates of 30% are legal only in three States?
In the bottom-up, top-down design of the US Constitution we are dysfunctional today due to a bad design. The Supreme Court can just willy-nilly invoke the Commerce Clause for any service that crosses State lines so as to nullify or create rights when they see fit; as with interstate banking and abortion. With Roe v. Wade the Supreme Court did the opposite of interstate banking and went with individual rights. In the year 2016 when every service can cross state lines then we are all beholden to the capricious whim of the courts. This is not a good constitution, but a bad one.
Contradictory power design is a terrible design. As a citizen of California I should enjoy the right of maximum credit card interest rate of 20%. I can't do that because all the credit card companies retreated to three States.
And the citizens being screwed by the courts is what is going to happen with health care if we deregulate health care and allow health care providers to cross state lines. Previously Republicans sold us on deregulating the banks with interstate banking competition providing better banking. Ha ha ha! What a joke that turned out to be. In reality two catastrophically bad things happened to we the people when banks were deregulated:
This is what is going to happen to health care in this country if we let Republicans deregulate. If health care is deregulated then the same banking catastrophes listed above will be the outcome for health care deregulation and NOT the benefit of competition lowering prices.
This is not a good Constitution.
Free thinking is best applied when being constructive while destructive.
It is true that free thinkers such as myself can be negative to a fault. We tend to criticize everything to the point of being mere reductionists, rebels-without-a-cause, cynics and contrarions.
I freely admit that avoiding being negative is a daily struggle for me.
The reason reductionists are so frustrating is because every good political plan and every good innovation has gaping holes, unknowns, and flaws. This includes the US Constitution. During the 1992 Presidential elections Ross Perot argued that there is time a to criticize and then a time to commit. Perot stated that once the time to commit has come, criticism is put aside. Perot argued that his executive team could challenge and criticize plans up until a plan has been decided. Once a plan had been decided upon then people need to get behind the plan, warts and all. A defeatist, negative attitude is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Wall Street is large-scale proof that positive public opinion is essential for success. In 2001 Enron collapsed. Enron was a top three Fortune 500 company. Enron collapsed in one year and Congress held hearings to get to the bottom of the matter. Congress discovered during the hearings is that Wall Street brokers issue buy orders 99% of the time...even for companies like Enron with known bad financials. Why? The answer given was that consumer confidence about the market greatly influences the market. Wall Street brokers issuing sell orders are seen as undermining the market and so buy recommendations bolster stock prices.
This means that free thinkers like myself who criticize without a better plan poison the well.
The Irreni World Scale book is not engaged in pointless criticism. No. This book uses free-thinking for the express purpose to connect-the-dots from the failures of the of the US Constitution to the corresponding improvements contained in Irreni World Scale.
Free thinking provided herein is not to be taken as presentation of definitive proof that the US Constitution is failed beyond repair. That proof needs to be researched elsewhere.
Free thinking done right is a valuable tool for breaking up group-think and brain storming. When done right free-thinking can break mental paralysis caused by group-think and emotional attachment as well as provide ideas to brain-storm solution possibilities.
This book uses free thinking to help address known failures of existing criticisms in the US Constitution and then draws the lines to the solutions provided in Irreni World Scale.
So, it is only an apparent contradiction in Chapter 1 to claim free-thinking to criticize the US Constitution and then in Chapter 2 claim we assume the US Constitution is failed.
The free-thought criticisms herein of the US Constitution are solely for illuminating the problems to be solved and to provide motivation for people to move on emotionally.
The Irreni book design is going to use the Irreni process, including bottom-up with top-down design. Some other Irreni design principles that will follow in later chapters and future versions:
<<< Back to Chapter 2: Silicon Valley
>>> Continue to Chapter 4: Coming Soon
By: Mybrid Trees Wonderful
Circa: 2016
DRAFT ONLY
This is the third chapter in what will be a book describing Irreni.
Chapter 3: Bottoms uP!
It is an apparent contradiction in Chapter 1 to use free-thinking to criticize the US Constitution but then in Chapter 2 claim to say we assume the US Constitution is failed.This chapter addresses this apparent contradiction by explaining the role free-thinking plays to break-down group-think so as to advance to the new ideas.
Bottoms uP! Top !Down Design
The free-thinking criticisms herein of the US Constitution are solely for defining the problems to be solved and to help people move on emotionally. For example, here we identify the failure of the top-down, bottom-up design of the US Constitution. Later we'll present the solution.The US Constitution is a very sloppy attempt at top-down with bottom-up design.
First, the US Constitution was originally conceived only as top-down. No bottom-up design was considered until the Bill of Rights. This shows the US Constitution is haphazard work. The Bill of Rights was an after thought. And when the Bill of Rights was created no consideration was expressed as to balancing those rights with the original document, like say the Commerce Clause or Full, Faith and Credit clause. This design gap, this void has left our individual rights exposed to capricious and fickle interpretations by the Supreme Court.
The Bill of Rights does make a weak attempt to balance future rights, aka powers, between Federal, State and people in the Tenth Amendment:
Tenth Amendment
Yeah, so basically the only individual rights you get are those stated in the US Constitution and then those afforded to you by the States.
And then here's the punch line with the Tenth Amendment: the Tenth Amendment is superceded by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. What a mess.
The inherent contradictions within the top-down and bottom-up design of the US Constitution has been our undoing.
Commerce Clause Trumps All
The US Constitution Commerce Clause trumps all state and and individual rights when the Supreme Court says so.Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:
[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
In Roe v. Wade the US Supreme Court got involved because a woman can cross state lines to get an abortion and abortion is commerce. Should a woman's right to an abortion be adjudicated as commerce regulated by the commerce clause or adjudicated as a State or individual right?
What the Supreme Court should say is crossing state lines to exercise rights only available in another state cannot then be prosecuted. For example, if abortion is illegal in Mississippi and legal in Georgia then a woman getting an abortion in Georgia cannot be prosecuted for an abortion given in Georgia. Either State rights end at the border of the State or the concept of State has no definition.
This is exactly the case with interstate banking. Did you know that in the State of California there is a usury law that caps interest rates at 20%? Interest rates higher than 20% are breaking the law. As a citizen of California I should be able sue the various credit card companies in my life that have charged me over 30% interest rate on my credit cards.
Can I? Nope. Why? Because the Supreme Court has ruled that interstate banking only has to comply with the banking laws of the State of incorporation. I can't sue using the laws of the State I'm in, California. There are only three States in the Union that allow 30% interest rates. Guess what? Every credit card company in the US is incorporated in those States. No surprise there.
So why doesn't the same precedent apply to abortion? Why can't any State outlaw abortion? Why can't a woman cross State lines to get an abortion and it be perfectly legal just like credit card interest rates of 30% are legal only in three States?
In the bottom-up, top-down design of the US Constitution we are dysfunctional today due to a bad design. The Supreme Court can just willy-nilly invoke the Commerce Clause for any service that crosses State lines so as to nullify or create rights when they see fit; as with interstate banking and abortion. With Roe v. Wade the Supreme Court did the opposite of interstate banking and went with individual rights. In the year 2016 when every service can cross state lines then we are all beholden to the capricious whim of the courts. This is not a good constitution, but a bad one.
Contradictory power design is a terrible design. As a citizen of California I should enjoy the right of maximum credit card interest rate of 20%. I can't do that because all the credit card companies retreated to three States.
And the citizens being screwed by the courts is what is going to happen with health care if we deregulate health care and allow health care providers to cross state lines. Previously Republicans sold us on deregulating the banks with interstate banking competition providing better banking. Ha ha ha! What a joke that turned out to be. In reality two catastrophically bad things happened to we the people when banks were deregulated:
- Banks consolidated to the point of "too big to fail" and now abuse financial power with impunity.
- Banks shopped States with most favorable banking laws favorable to the banks, antagonistic to consumers and then incorporated in those states only.
This is what is going to happen to health care in this country if we let Republicans deregulate. If health care is deregulated then the same banking catastrophes listed above will be the outcome for health care deregulation and NOT the benefit of competition lowering prices.
This is not a good Constitution.
Free Thinking Applied
Free thinking is best applied when being constructive while destructive.
It is true that free thinkers such as myself can be negative to a fault. We tend to criticize everything to the point of being mere reductionists, rebels-without-a-cause, cynics and contrarions.
I freely admit that avoiding being negative is a daily struggle for me.
The reason reductionists are so frustrating is because every good political plan and every good innovation has gaping holes, unknowns, and flaws. This includes the US Constitution. During the 1992 Presidential elections Ross Perot argued that there is time a to criticize and then a time to commit. Perot stated that once the time to commit has come, criticism is put aside. Perot argued that his executive team could challenge and criticize plans up until a plan has been decided. Once a plan had been decided upon then people need to get behind the plan, warts and all. A defeatist, negative attitude is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Wall Street is large-scale proof that positive public opinion is essential for success. In 2001 Enron collapsed. Enron was a top three Fortune 500 company. Enron collapsed in one year and Congress held hearings to get to the bottom of the matter. Congress discovered during the hearings is that Wall Street brokers issue buy orders 99% of the time...even for companies like Enron with known bad financials. Why? The answer given was that consumer confidence about the market greatly influences the market. Wall Street brokers issuing sell orders are seen as undermining the market and so buy recommendations bolster stock prices.
This means that free thinkers like myself who criticize without a better plan poison the well.
The Irreni World Scale book is not engaged in pointless criticism. No. This book uses free-thinking for the express purpose to connect-the-dots from the failures of the of the US Constitution to the corresponding improvements contained in Irreni World Scale.
Free thinking provided herein is not to be taken as presentation of definitive proof that the US Constitution is failed beyond repair. That proof needs to be researched elsewhere.
Free thinking done right is a valuable tool for breaking up group-think and brain storming. When done right free-thinking can break mental paralysis caused by group-think and emotional attachment as well as provide ideas to brain-storm solution possibilities.
This book uses free thinking to help address known failures of existing criticisms in the US Constitution and then draws the lines to the solutions provided in Irreni World Scale.
So, it is only an apparent contradiction in Chapter 1 to claim free-thinking to criticize the US Constitution and then in Chapter 2 claim we assume the US Constitution is failed.
The free-thought criticisms herein of the US Constitution are solely for illuminating the problems to be solved and to provide motivation for people to move on emotionally.
Irreni on Irreni
The Irreni book design is going to use the Irreni process, including bottom-up with top-down design. Some other Irreni design principles that will follow in later chapters and future versions:
- Team effort. Irreni relies on small teams as building blocks for all political innovations. Therefore future versions of this book will have multiple authors reflecting the team principle. You'll see this as the author list in the chapter heading grows.
- Continuous scientific human nature updates. Irreni calls for a constant changing political landscape to parallel advancement in human nature science. As our scientific understanding of human nature gets better then the new science will be applied to this book.
- Scale out. The book will be targeted at small audiences initially. Advertising and marketing of the book will happen as success is demonstrated, when this thing works!
- Experiments. Political endeavors manage human nature with only a limited scientific modeling of total human behavior. Innovation and engineering deal with the unknowns in part using experience derived from experiments of trial-and-error. The continuous improvement of this book will also be subjected the experiment process of collection data and analyzing results.
- Moral relativity. Irreni is built to optimize freedom. Moral relativity is synonymous with freedom. This book is designed to be forked. The Irreni book copyright is open source and made freely available for forking.
- Ongoing. This book will never be complete just as Irreni World Scale will always be every changing and a work in progress.
<<< Back to Chapter 2: Silicon Valley
>>> Continue to Chapter 4: Coming Soon
Comments
Post a Comment