US, China, North Korea Policy Proposal

The New 
US - China/North Korea Policy 
 
The US questions several of China's Claims about their relationship with North Korea: 
 
China claims they do not control North Korea’s actions: 
But China’s claim cannot be true. If it were true, wouldn’t China fear a nuclear armed NK on its border? And why, over the last three decades, has China failed to do everything in its power to prevent NK from developing nuclear weapons and the ballistic missiles to detonate them anywhere within China?  
 
The only logical explanation must be that China controls North Korea's leadership along with that nation’s rapidly expanding nuclear arsenal. 
 
China claims that a failed North Korean state would lead to a mass exodus of NK refugees into China.  
This claim also cannot be true. Why has it not already happened? Aren’t the NK people starving now? Haven’t they been starving for decades?  If the 1 million active personnel in the NK army is sufficient to prevent the starving NK hoards from crossing over the Chinese border, isn’t the 2.3 million active Chinese army at least as capable? 
 
The China-North Korean border is 880 miles long. Most of that border is naturally defended by the Yalu and Tumen Rivers and the Paektu Mountains.For comparison, the US-Mexico border is over twice as large at 1,989 miles. In 2003, the Chinese military took over border control from the police. Since then, China has been building walls and fences to better control the flow of refugees. 
 
In truth, if North Korea were to fail; 
  • China's military is more than adequate to blockade their border with NK. 
  • China has the resources to meet the refugees with food, water, medicine and temporary shelter within NK before most even attempt to cross into China. 
  • China could request and would receive UN assistance to help rebuild NK and support the hungry and the homeless. 
  • Any responsible government has in depth contingency plans to deal with a failed state on their border. Everything in Communists China’s history indicates they too have such in depth plans to deal with a failed North Korea. 
 
The Reality: 
China doesn’t fear a failed North Korea. China permits the North Korean government to exist because the North Korean policies are in fact China’s policies. 
 
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: 
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, commonly known as the Non-Proliferation Treaty or NPT, is an international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology. 
 
Five nations are recognized by the NPT as the Nuclear Weapons States (NWS). They are Great Britain, Russia, The United States of America, France and China. These five nations are also the five permanent members of the UN Security Council. 
 
Article I of the NPT: 
               Each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; and not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear-weapon State to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices. 
 
The United States has determined that: 
  • In violation of the NPT, China has provided and continues to provide North Korea with the tools, materials, technology and support to develop nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. 
  • China controls the leadership of North Korea and their actions. 
  • China’s Policies direct NK to act against the interests of the US and her allies.  
  • China’s Policies direct NK to threaten the US and her allies with Nuclear tipped ICBMs. 
 
As a result: 
  The US will hold China responsible for all North Korea actions. 
 
In addition, and in accordance with Article VIII, Paragraph 1 of the NPT, the US proposes the following amendments to the Treaty. 
 
Article XII PENALTY:  
Whereas nuclear weapons pose an existential threat to any nation, and whereas they could cause the deaths of hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of people, and whereas they could wreak world wide havoc upon the planet and the planet’s natural resources for generations; Be it resolved that any nation deemed by a majority of the Nuclear Weapon States (NWS) to be working toward the development and/or acquisition of nuclear weapons or to be in possession of nuclear weapons, whether a signatory to the NPT treaty or not is determined to be a “rogue” nation. Once so identified, the majority of the NWS MUST decide to either  
  • Dismantle the “rouge” nation’s nuclear weapons program through any means that one or more of the NWS deems appropriate or 
  • Replace the Regime of the rogue nation with an interim government decided by the majority of the NWS and overseen by the UN until  the UN determines the people of the rogue nation have established a functioning government of their choosing that complies with this treaty. 
 
Article XIII Nuclear First Strike:  
In the event that a majority of the NWS agree to enforce the NPT Penalty Article by replacing the regime, then one or more of the NWS are authorized by the UN to conduct a limited nuclear first strike to eliminate the regime, and eliminate its nuclear weapon infrastructure, and eliminate its capacity to restart a nuclear weapons program, and to neutralize the capacity for the rogue nation’s military or other defenders of the rogue nation to retaliate. 
 
Article XIV Aftermath of a UN Authorized Nuclear First Strike to Replace a Regime: 
In the aftermath of a UN authorized nuclear first strike to replace a regime, and once the areas involved are deemed safe by the UN for UN personnel and others, the UN shall immediately offer assistance to all impacted nations to include Medical Services, Decontamination Services, Food, Water, Security,Temporary Shelter and shall work with all functioning neighboring governments to assist in rebuilding those areas impacted. 
 
Conclusion: 
The above actions may encourage China to return to the purpose and spirit of the NPT and help the world to either disarm or decapitate the North Korean Nuclear Monster they created.  
 
Regardless of China’s actions, the US shall invoke Article X of the NPT and announce its withdrawal from the NPT three months from the date these proposed changes are submitted to the UN. If the UN approves the proposed amendments prior to the effective date of the US withdrawal from the NPT, the US shall cancel its Article X withdrawal proclamation. 
 
Whether the US remains in or withdraws from the NPT, the US reserves its right now and at any time in the future to conduct a Nuclear first strike against any nuclear capable rouge nation that threatens the US or its allies with one or more nuclear weapons. 
 
As of this writing there are two nations not exempted by the NPT that are known to have Nuclear Weapons programs. They are 
  • North Korea and 
  • Iran 
However, at this time, Iran is in compliance with the separate and distinct Iran Nuclear Deal. At the conclusion, cancellation or other termination of that deal, Iran will fall under the NPT as amended and will become a rogue nation unless they disband their Nuclear Weapons program. 
 
The authors welcome your thoughts and recommendations regarding this US Policy proposal. 

Specter of 'earmarks' haunts GOP

Specter of 'earmarks' haunts GOP: House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., sidestepped a fight with outside conservative groups and fiscal hawks and avoided public backlash Wednesday when he resisted calls from some within his conference to bring back earmarks, those pet projects slipped into spending bills that can sweeten the pot for legislators and help get bills passed. But many Republicans admitted Wednesday was just about process and timing, and were confident that earmarks, which some call directed congressional spending, will come back in some form. It's about optics, Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., said before Ryan convinced sponsors of two amendments to partially roll back the 2011 earmark ban to pull their proposals.

The AUP responds.

1. Congress has no incentive to respect taxpayer dollars since they still only answer to the Special Interest Groups that fund their elections.

2. No government agency should have the authority to issue any regulation that serves as a law. Only Congress can enact laws. Agencies should only be permitted to recommend laws to Congress. But then Congress must approve the regulation and the President must sign before it becomes a law just like every other law.

3. Any project or funding for a project that can stand alone in a seperate bill must stand alone in a seperate bill.

4. Congress should only be able to spend when a majority of the states or a majority of the population would be impacted directly by the law (not the taxes needed to fund the law) or when 3/5 of both houses approve. Otherwise, the activity shall be left to the individual states to decide.

Open Letter to John Kasich

Dear Governor Kasich,

I have long been  a supporter of yours and still believe you would make a superb president. But now I ask for your help.

I share your concerns about Donald Trump and as yet, I  have not committed to vote for Mr. Trump. But, at this time I am fairly confident that I will not be voting for Mrs. Clinton.

I will not necessarily vote for the person I like the most, trust the most, respect the most or agree with the most. I will vote for the person who I believe will be the best for the long term health and values of my country.

That is why, if the vote were today, logic would force me to vote for Mr. Trump for the simple reason that not voting for him would help elect Mrs. Clinton and would help to hand the House and Senate over to the Democrats and the Supreme Court over to the Progressives. I believe that outcome would be far more harmful to the long term health of our country than my fear of what an unknown Donald Trump might try to do.

President Obama has been very successful in hobbling many of America’s greatest strengths because he is very smart, a gifted orator, knowledgeable about what he could and couldn't do as President, and was supported by an ideologically driven plan that was designed to do exactly what he did. Perhaps his greatest triumph from his perspective was to render Congress feckless as a check and balance against Executive overreach.

A President Trump will have no such gifts, plans or support. He will have to convince his own party in Congress not just to pass legislation but to make controversial Executive Orders stick.

In fact, a President Trump might be the best remedy to unify, strengthen and reaffirm the Constitutional role of Congress to restrain a rogue administration. Consider how different the Obama Presidency might have been if the Democrats in Congress had enforced their Constitutional role and not acted as a rubber stamp for anything Mr. Obama wanted to do.

At the time, I couldn't understand how my fellow Republicans could have nominated Mr. Trump  when so many worthy alternatives were available. Now, as I consider my own arguments I'm struck by just how smart the voters may have been after all.

That is why I ask you to contact Mr. Trump personally with this letter in hand and commit your full support to get him elected and offer to serve, in a mutually agreeable capacity, in a Donald Trump administration.

I know that I and many other Americans would feel much better about our vote for Mr. Trump if we knew that you were a trusted insider within the Trump Administration who had once again taken the oath to protect and defend our Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

I wish you good health and great success in whatever role you decide is best for our nation,

James Schneider
Concerned Citizen

Terrorism: Words Matter


Enough already. Its time for Americans to convince our leaders to stop calling ISIS and their sympathizers “Terrorists”. I propose the adoption of a far more descriptive term.

I'm flipping between cable news channels listening to the talking heads argue whether the pressure cooker and pipe bomb explosions that occurred this weekend in New York City and Elizabeth New Jersey were acts of terror or not.

Americans are once again subjected to this endless, irrelevant argument because our leaders rely on one word and its derivatives to describe three distinct steps of an investigation.

1. What happened?
2. Who did it?
3. Why did they do it?

Republicans and Fox News conclude that when a bomb blows up, it’s terror.
Democrats and their media prefer to wait until all three investigative questions have been answered. To many Americans, the term terror is synonymous with Islamic Terrorism. 

The colloquial definitions for terror, terrorist and terrorism have become ambiguous and a constant source of controversy and division. That is why we should adopt the following term to describe ISIS et al.

Whereas ISIS and other Radical Islamic groups are armed but are not recognized as legitimate states by the United Nations, they are by definition paramilitary groups.

Whereas these groups adhere to a version of Islam that is wholly intolerant of any other belief, they adhere to Intolerant Islam.

Whereas their stated goal is the global domination of their intolerant Islamic belief, therefore the new term to describe ISIS et al shall be:

Paramilitary Intolerant Islamic Globalists – PIIGs.





Washington Examiner - FIX THAT

An Open Letter:

To the editors of the Washington Examiner.
From James W. Schneider July 1, 2016

In response to your June 30, 2016 editorial  entitled:

Trump brings heat, not light, to trade debate.”

I am not a Trump supporter and I agree with the bulk of your criticisms of his speech. But your US economic solution at the end of the article is overly simplistic and no longer true. 

You state...

       "Over the last five decades, free trade has allowed Americans to buy more for each hour they work than they otherwise could have. The economic solution needed is one that neither major party's candidate is suggesting: America should open its doors, seek every new opportunity for freer trade (for example, with Great Britain), and have faith in its workers and businesses to compete with the world as well as they always have."

You imply that once the Federal Government passes these “freer trade” deals, the government will have no impact on America’s ability to “compete with the world as well as they always have”. Nothing could be further from the truth.

US business taxes and regulations have increasingly placed US based labor at a distinct disadvantage for decades. And our present course only promises to make our disadvantage worse. 

Businesses do NOT pay taxes - ONLY PEOPLE PAY TAXES. The taxes that businesses remit must be recovered by increasing prices or reducing wages. Likewise, the cost of all business regulations must also be covered in the prices that a business charges.

Until the voters learn that government imposed business costs reduce the demand for US based labor, and increase the costs of US made goods, Congress will continue to hide taxes within US based businesses. This will force more of our best middle class jobs (tradeable manufacturing jobs) overseas. 

The problem with our trade deals is not that they allow trading partners to specialize and export what they make best and cheapest - that's a good thing.  The problem is the excessive costs that US based businesses must incur to comply with US regulations. These excessive costs have made offshoring and outsourcing, which the trade deals facilitate, the only logical economic choice for many businesses.

This is the main reason why Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders and so many Americans on the left and right believe our trade deals are so bad. They have mistakenly concluded that the trade deals alone caused the loss of so many US jobs to foreign shores. When, in actuality, it was our Government’s failure to recognize how stupid it is to make US based businesses increasingly less competitive in the face of an ever expanding global economy.

You want America to “seek every new opportunity for freer trade”? Then you should demand that both parties FIX THAT!

The solution is simple.  But the solution is only politically possible IF the voters learn that they, and they alone, pay for every business tax and every business regulation. But before voters would take action, they must be able to see how much these burdens actually cost them.

Imagine a new law that required every sales receipt include two numbers that totaled to the price the consumer pays. The first number includes the business price. The second number includes all the federal, state and local costs imposed on business and labor. Imagine the voter reaction when they see on every receipt for an American made product, that the total government business TAX is in excess of 30%?

Then the solution would be obvious. Transfer all non-safety related government imposed costs from US based businesses to a consumption tax, or some other non business tax. Some might argue that the price the consumer paid would remain the same, but they would be wrong.

Businesses would focus entirely on the best way to produce their goods and services and eliminate the 30% of unproductive, non-product related costs. This would make US labor cheaper - creating demand for more US based jobs. It would make US made goods cheaper to our trading partners - causing demand for more US exports.

Along the way, because of the tax visibility, a miracle would occur. The people would become aware and continuously question the cost vs. benefits of these programs with every receipt. Every consumer would demand their politicians optimize the efficiency of these programs, or get rid of them. The people would begin to unite on what the role of government should be.

Hiding taxes in business is a corrupt and sneaky way for politicians to hide taxes from the people. But the real calamity is how these burdens are killing America's greatest strength - the world's largest middle class with the world's highest standard of living.

Yes - the solution is simple - never allow politicians to hide the costs of their taxes and regulations in the prices that the people have to pay for the goods and services they receive. If we could do that, then we would end up with a government and an economy that works for all Americans.

Washington Examiner - FIX THAT

An Open Letter:

To the editors of the Washington Examiner.
From James W. Schneider July 1, 2016

In response to your June 30, 2016 editorial  entitled:

Trump brings heat, not light, to trade debate.”

I am not a Trump supporter. And your critiques of his speech are accurate. But your US economic solution at the end of the article is overly simplistic and no longer true. 

You state...

       "Over the last five decades, free trade has allowed Americans to buy more for each hour they work than they otherwise could have. The economic solution needed is one that neither major party's candidate is suggesting: America should open its doors, seek every new opportunity for freer trade (for example, with Great Britain), and have faith in its workers and businesses to compete with the world as well as they always have."

You imply that once the Federal Government passes these “freer trade” deals, the government will have no impact on America’s ability to “compete with the world as well as they always have”. Nothing could be further from the truth.

US business taxes and regulations have increasingly placed US based labor at a distinct disadvantage for decades. And our present course only promises to make our disadvantage worse. 

Businesses do NOT pay taxes - ONLY PEOPLE PAY TAXES. The taxes that businesses remit must be recovered by increasing prices or reducing wages. Likewise, the cost of all business regulations must also be covered in the prices that a business charges.

Until the voters learn that government imposed business costs reduce the demand for US based labor, and increase the costs of US made goods, Congress will continue to hide taxes within US based businesses. This will force more of our best middle class jobs (tradeable manufacturing jobs) overseas. 

The problem with our trade deals is not that they allow trading partners to specialize and export what they make best and cheapest - that's a good thing.  The problem is the excessive costs that US based businesses must incur to comply with US regulations. These excessive costs have made offshoring and outsourcing, which the trade deals facilitate, the only logical economic choice for many businesses.

This is the main reason why Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders and so many Americans on the left and right believe our trade deals are so bad. They have mistakenly concluded that the trade deals alone caused the loss of so many US jobs to foreign shores. When, in actuality, it was our Government’s failure to recognize how stupid it is to make US based businesses increasingly less competitive in the face of an ever expanding global economy.

You want America to “seek every new opportunity for freer trade”? Then you should demand that both parties FIX THAT!

The solution is simple.  But the solution is only politically possible IF the voters learn that they, and they alone, pay for every business tax and every business regulation. But before voters would take action, they must be able to see how much these burdens actually cost them.

Imagine a new law that required every sales receipt include two numbers that totaled to the price the consumer pays. The first number includes the business price. The second number includes all the federal, state and local costs imposed on business and labor. Imagine the voter reaction when they see on every receipt for an American made product, that the total government business TAX is in excess of 30%?

Then the solution would be obvious. Transfer all non-safety related government imposed costs from US based businesses to a consumption tax, or some other non business tax. Some might argue that the price the consumer paid would remain the same, but they would be wrong.

Businesses would focus entirely on the best way to produce their goods and services and eliminate the 30% of unproductive, non-product related costs. This would make US labor cheaper - creating demand for more US based jobs. It would make US made goods cheaper to our trading partners - causing demand for more US exports.

Along the way, because of the tax visibility, a miracle would occur. The people would become aware and continuously question the cost vs. benefits of these programs with every receipt. Every consumer would demand their politicians optimize the efficiency of these programs, or get rid of them. The people would begin to unite on what the role of government should be.

Hiding taxes in business is a corrupt and sneaky way for politicians to hide taxes from the people. But the real calamity is how these burdens are killing America's greatest strength - the world's largest middle class with the world's highest standard of living.

Yes - the solution is simple - never allow politicians to hide the costs of their taxes and regulations in the prices that the people have to pay for the goods and services they receive. If we could do that, then we would end up with a government and an economy that works for all Americans.