Freedom of thought is more important to me than prosperity. I think of prosperity as a byproduct of innovative societies.

I think of prosperity as being a byproduct of innovation and freedom of thought. Even though it seems like most countries strive for prosperity, authoritarian regimes seldom, if ever achieve it. More innovative societies often do. To me, the ability to innovate is more important than the prosperity itself.

Sexual minority rights can be used as a litmus test for whether a country is truly democratic.

Source www.cato.org/blog/democracies-autocracies-same-sex-unions.

I have often thought that sexual minority rights can be used as a litmus test for whether a country is democratic or authoritarian. It seems quite accurate. I ran the idea past AI and found that there is quite a bit of writing about that connection. Here is one of the interesting articles that came up in my search including a clear graphic.

I've also thought that the world is struggling to provide for over 8 billion people so it doesn't make sense to persecute people who are less likely to procreate.

Coming in AI's response is this sentence, "Authoritarian regimes do not look at population through an ecological lens; they look at it through the lens of economic and military power."

Now phasing in my own words, I see competition between countries and races for power vested in workers and solders. This goes back to ancient times, but could lead to mass die-off of populations today. Today's technology has much stronger impact on the environment than before. Old thinking becomes obsolete.

Old ideas continue to be propelled as much of the world is facing a demographic shift as population growth slows down. More retired people versus young workers. This causes countries to push "pro-natalist" policies viewing traditional families as units to replace the workforce.

On the other hand, democracies face a solution to the possible worker shortage as an overwhelming number of migrants wish to relocate to those countries as they flee the more authoritarian and war torn societies. This is overwhelming existing infrastructure for housing, transportation, water supply and so forth. Rather than embracing this new talent pool, democracies are tending toward tighter restrictions on immigration.

As time goes on, the need for labor may be reduced due to AI and automation as well.

If the US military were to charge for pushing oil through the gulf, it could be like a carbon tax that should be charged for burning fossil fuels.

As gas and especially diesel prices go up, some, mostly conservatives, call for relief in gas and diesel taxes. Problem is, potholes in the roads. Most of these taxes maintain the expensive highway system. Yes, foreign wars are costly. We can't do this all on low taxes. War taxes, carbon taxes, we may have to pay for what we get.

Whether one believes in climate change, or not, insurance companies are raising rates for property insurance in high risk places from seaside areas of Florida to dry forests of California.

Trump has signed one of his many executive orders broadening the sale of so called red dye diesel to other users besides farm use. I just learned about the existence of this tax free diesel for use on land that isn't the public roadways. Truckstops and other fuel retailers are reluctant about this plan, so says the news.

A red dye is used to better prevent tax cheating if that fuel is found being used where it is not supposed to be. We learn a new thing everyday.

I remember a famous red dye taken out of food. Now I look up in AI to aid my memory. It was Red Dye #2, removed from food in 1976 due to a 1969 Soviet Study linking it to more tumors in rats.

Was pressure from Israel a big reason for Trump to start the war with Iran?

Tucker Carlson is now critical of Trump; especially the war on Iran. A war largely driven by the government of Israel according to Carlson in an interview on NPR.

In my own thoughts, Carlson has been an advocate of conservative agendas and agendas can go too far. Trump has stumbled into the war in Iran, which in some ways does not suprise me. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is also a hardliner, religious conservative along with the leaders of Iran. Hardline, religious conservatives.

I even think it could be true that creation of the state of Isreal, in reaction to the German atrocities in World War II, was likely a mistake. I have heard that hindsight can be better than forsight.

Still, Israel's recent scorched earth reaction against the Palistinians in Gaza is a reaction out of fear and concern for safety after the brutal Hamas attack on Isreali civilians on October 7 2023. Violence begets violence.

I am hoping for at least a slightly more liberal leadership, in Israel, after the upcoming election there. Also hoping for more liberal members of Congress to better put guardrails on our president, after the US elections in November.

The people and the nations that exist on earth are realities that we still have to work with, or maybe work around. Change seems to best come incrementally.

I also think part of Trump's war against Iran was his desire to help the civilian protesters, who were rising up against that brutal regime at that time. The war was not a good strategy.

At this point, it seems like Saudi Arabia is benefiting from higher priced oil now being pushed, by the US military, through the Persian Gulf at higher prices.

Oil dependency still plays a big part in recent wars, including George Bush's first war against Iraq in 1990; Operation Desert Shield. This was partially waged to protect stability of oil supply out of the gulf for the global economy. There was that dispute over sideways drilling and so forth between Kuwait and Iraq. We and many other nations got involved when Iraq invaded Kuwait.

President Carter warned us of the possibility of major wars in the Persian Gulf clear back in the 1970s when world dependency, on that oil, was a big issue. Remember his speech about that thin line of oil tankers stretching halfway around the world?

Back then, the Vietnam War and even the Red Scare and the Cold War was starting to fade into history.

Could the cost of trying to reopen the Strait of Hormuz be paid for by a carbon tax?

More oil being pushed through Persian Gulf by US military at great cost. Gasoline and especially diesel is still expensive anyway, though more supply could lower prices in longrun.

Who pays for US military? Will US start charging a toll on oil it pushes through the gulf given its 40 trillion dollar debt? Right wingers don't want a carbon tax to address climate change, but the cost of defending supply chains is a factor also.

Will Alberta become the 51st US state? No, but an even dumber idea is for Alberta to become an independent country.

That referendum is being voted on Oct 19 and it isn't expected to pass. If Alberta was to leave the great nation of Canada, it would be North America's only landlocked country; something like Mongolia, which is stuck between Russia and China.

Part of this referendum is probably for political leverage as that landlocked province wishes to push more oil and gas out through pipelines to the BC coast. This helps to avoid depenency on the now more unfriendly US, for bringing product to market.

Oil and gas consumption is still a reality around the world. Transition to greener energy is happening too slowly as demand and populations continue to grow around the world.

Much of the world's fossil fuel supply comes from authoritarian, places in the troubled Middle East as well as Russia. There is the opportunity for Canada, a more democratic society that respects human and gay rights, to cash in on supplying more of that continued world demand.

Some Canadians say it is better to produce the oil and gas in Canada where there are more environmental controls. Much of the consuming world is in crisis with cutoffs of supply from the war torn and troubled parts of the world.

Living in Bellingham, WA. I listen to lots of Canadian news on the radio.

Better than an artistic arch that Trump also wants to use as a weapons facility, how about just a weapons facility?

Trump wants his triumphal arch to serve as a weapons facility. I have a better idea, but I actually think the whole concept is garbage.

An arch is an art piece that is not necessarily the best design for modern military technology. I often think that technology, itself, can be considered art. Maybe they could build a military facility in the middle of Washington DC and call it art.

There is the concept of "found art" that I learned in high school art class with a wonderful instructor named Vic Moore. Found art is art that the viewer finds in everyday life things, like the gleaming beauty of a microwave tower.

Microwave relay on Mount Spokane, around 1968.

I'm a fan of steam plants, powerlines and so forth that are just doing their work, but they can be art to me.

Using spellchecker on the word triumphant, I realized the word is a bit like the word phallic. Asking AI, I found there isn't a strict linguistic connection, but there is a historical connection.

According to AI, in ancient Greece, a thriambos (the root of triumphant) was a wild, festive hymn sung in processions for Dionysus, the god of wine and fertility.

During those exact same festival processions, participants routinely carried large phalloi (the root of phallic) as symbols of generative power and fertility.

If associate membership in the EU can work for Canada, how about for the UK as a bridge beyond Brexit?

Now that there is talk about Canada becoming an associate member of the European Union, I got to thinking that idea could help heal the wounds, for Great Britain after Brexit. A larger, slightly less binding layer of the EU?

Thinking my ideas might have been thought of before, I went to AI. Yes, lots has been said about that. AI can sift through lots of media, that I don't have the time, patience, eye strain, or paywall money, to do.

Yes, things, like associate memberships for UK and other places, have been being discussed with both their pros and cons.

A telling phrase, "be careful what you ask for as you might get it."

Some institutions that we have had, since WWII, in the so called Global Order may have not been perfect. At the same time, that world still exists with the US and Europe prominent. It seems to be being frayed. Many of us look back with a bit of nostalgia.

Freedom to criticize is good, but some of the criticism could be a case of "crying wolf." Often people start to tune out a constant background of complaints which can lead to complacency, apathy and eventually the vote going in more sinister directions.

For instance, local police haven't been perfect at times, but now we've had ISIS and its aggressive roundups. Local police, at least in my area, are much better. Bellingham is noted for excellent and compassionate police, but some people still complain.

Today, people even think Richard Nixon and the Bush presidencies were reasonable, compared to Trump. Inequality has been a problem all along, but it seems to get worse. Things can get better as political pendulums swing.

As a gay person, I am sure glad I do not live in Turkey, given today's news I've been hearing from that oppressive society.

There is lots of talk about sex, but anger is our most morally troubling emotion.

There is lots of talk about sex and morality, but I think anger is the most morally troubling emotion we have. Each emotion has it's moral consequences and pitfalls including sexuality, but anger seems to be the most anti social of all.

Our emotions are part of our being. We are said to be an animal species.

Emotions need to be filtered through our intellect for living in society, however. Some people say, "speak and act from the heart instead of from the head" (the heart being emotions), but another saying applies here as well. That saying is "be careful what you ask for as you might get it."

I tend to avoid anger if possible. In fight or flight I tend to favor flight. That strategy has worked pretty well for me.

I do get anger at times, but it's usually short lived. I've found myself swearing at a car that came close to hitting me or a dog that was chasing me. The reaction is almost subconscious as it usually happens before I'm aware of it. Then I'm sometimes surprised and think, "I yelled that?"

Most of the time, I try and avoid those situations if I can help it.

When growing up, I remember having some debates with people. I thought folks should not get angry. Other people would say that anger is a healthy emotion. They would say that there can be constructive anger and how anger is expressed is what matters, not that anger is bad.

Some would also say that you had to let anger out, or it would build up inside you, like in a reservoir. I think that theory has been debunked to some extent, but trying to fix the situation that makes you angry is still needed, rather than just letting someone walk all over you.

I used to say anger was bad, but justified if someone got mad at you. Then you had a right to get angry back. That was a little rule I articulated during childhood.

Since then, my ideas have become more nuanced, but I still have similar thoughts. I realize now, that anger is an emotion that is part of us. It's like sexuality, fear, sadness and other emotions. Though emotions are a part of being human, they are often problematic. This is why I think, today, that anger is the most problematic of our emotions.

During childhood, I also remember saying that anger leads to wars. Other people would counter by saying that, "war is a different topic." They would say that, "war is politics, economics and so forth, rather than anger."

Now I realize that war, between nations, is sort of a stretch to a different context than just plain anger between individuals. I still hold to some of those ideas, however.

Maybe a more convincing thought is that anger, between individuals, can escalate to more destructive things, like bar fights and violence. Those escalations happen all the time.

During my childhood, I didn't think about that point. The connection between anger and escalation to more violence at a personal level is a closer connection than war, but war is still in my discussion.

Today, many people are saying, "there is too much anger in politics." The connection to war is still there, though a bit more distant than my childhood ideas.

I think that anger isn't a good tool in politics. It tends to bring pushback so the side with the most power usually wins.

Anger can also lead to internal strife and factionalism within a political movement. Sometimes these internal conflicts, within a movement, are called "the circular firing squad."

For many people, anger is a motivation to get folks off the couch and out in the streets, or maybe to get out the vote. Yes, it does motivate, but I still see it as not normally a good tool for political change. There are other tools. Anger often just brings retrenchment and "doubling down" on the other side, rather than change or more understanding.

Yes, anger is a natural emotion, but it tends to be more problematic than other emotions, like sexuality. Sexuality can be problematic also and it does tend to get most of the limelight in terms of discussions about morality.

I put in a vote for saying that anger is our most troubling emotion.

Remembering the people and buildings destroyed by hatred 25 years ago.

Picture I took at end of my 1993 bike trip which got me as far as Hudson, NY. Then I took train back home changing trains in NYC, the only time I've been in that city.

I stayed 1 night and walked around a lot. Didn't go up to observation decks as it seemed like they were up in the fog. This image taken while I was walking across the Brooklyn Bridge. My bicycle was being shipped back to Bellingham from Hudson.

I walked across the plaza and quickly walked through a lobby, 1993.

During childhood, I had a big interest in buildings and city planning. That interest is still with me to this day. I wrote to quite a few places for information, including Rockefeller and the World Trade Center. I still have a box of brochures from many places.

Here depicts state of the art technology from around 1971.

Violence and anger are usually counterproductive.

I often think that if the October 7th 2023 Hamas attack against Israel that killed so many civilians had not happened, maybe Trump would not be president today.

That attack led to Israel killing many more people as it retaliated against Gaza. Moderate Democrats, in USA such as Biden and Harris, lost votes for not taking stronger action against Israel. Many people, on the left, did not vote in the 2024 election feeling there was little difference between the candidates.

This allowed Trump to get back into office with his even more unfriendly policies toward the Palistinians.

Should Canada put a surcharge on oil it sends to US and call it a carbon tax?

I've been listening to the news from both sides of the US Canadian border about the tariffs. Trump gone rouge as usual.

We do get lots of oil, natural gas and electricity from Canada. Maybe Canada could add a surcharge to the oil they send? Call it a carbon tax? That would really make Trump mad.

Maybe I shouldn't suggest it even though I don't drive. It would be a double tax to us in the Northwest as we get some of our oil from Alberta through Trans Mountain Pipeline. Washington State already has cap and trade which is kind of like a carbon tax so it would be like a double tax for Washingtonians.

We get much of our natural gas, here in the Pacific Northwest, from Canada also. Yes, the building I live in uses natural gas in its boilers for heating. My little studio apartment, nestled in a big building, is pretty efficient.

Eastern Canada gets some of their oil and gas from the US, as there aren't pipelines from Alberta to Eastern Canada that don't at least run part way through the US.

We're shooting ourselves in the foot and China is likely laughing, or feeling sorry for us.

The Second Amendment can be stretched too far. How about drones?

The Second Amendment of USA's Constitution, about the right to keep and bear arms, was written long ago when guns were a lot different than today.

These days drones are becoming weapons of war, in the Russia Ukraine conflict as well as the Middle East. Is it likely that interpretations of the Second Amendment could be stretched toward the right to keep and bear drones?

Yes, I guess there isn't the right to keep and bear bombs, but where do we draw the lines? Certain drones could just be sophisticated guns if not including a bomb, I guess. There are so many kinds of powerful guns these days, compared to the 1700s when the Constitution was written, that the original intent has been stretched anyway.

The Pride Parades are becoming about acceptance of a broad spectrum of lifestyles

I think that pride parades have evolved over the years. At the historic roots are in the LGBTAQ rights movements, but the concept of acceptance can be broad. It's called the Bellingham Pride Parade, or sometimes called Pride In Bellingham. Acceptance of a broad spectrum of lifestyles, sexual orientations, races, national origins, and so forth. Some people might feel that the original seed has been watered down, but it is turning into a nice message of acceptance. There are parts of the world where people fight over these things. Here we celebrate many flags of many colors.

Zuanich Point Park memorial takes a hit, but gets restored.

Where I go for Saturday's silent disco dance brings memories of fun, calming bay views and sunsets. Now there's social media posts that the memorial, at Zuanich Point Park for those lost at sea, was badly vandalized with paint. It's being cleaned and restored.

Fortunately the granite is hard to vandalize permanently, but restoration comes at cost in dollars and time.

I haven't paid much attention to that sculpture as it quietly watches over the park. It's hard to imagine why someone would want to do that except out of meanness.

Memorial being cleaned and restored from the paint dump.

Two conservative teams battled to a standoff in Seattle. The city, itself, won by calling it the Pride Match.

While both countries are culturally conservative about gay rights, Egypt and Iran's teams played to a tie score in the World Cup. This game took place in the US city of Seattle, noted for liberal attitudes on gay rights; the city calling that game "The Pride Match."

Some rainbow flags were flown in and around the stadium to the dislike of both Egyptian and Iranian officials. Meanwhile, back in the Middle East, war is still more deadly than a soccer game. Missiles fly between Iran and Gulf state Sunni nations more aligned with Egypt. The Sunni and Shiite split, in Islam, is one of many friction points among conservatives in the Middle East.

Ironically, the "elephant" in the Middle Eastern room is the United States with its ally Israel, each with the most powerful weapons of all. These countries are leading a sputtering war against Iran under the leadership of their conservative leaders Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu.

Still, within the belly of the US elephant, rainbow flags fly peacefully in Seattle, in spite of more conservative leadership at the top of the US government. Freedom of speech is still alive in USA.

The soccer match between Egypt and Iran took place to a stalemate, as rainbow flags flew and crowds cheered more peacefully than the war that is now taking place in the Middle East itself.

Here in Bellingham, far out in the hinterlands of Seattle, some rainbow color projected on our Acid Ball Sculpture. Sculpture, a leftover from former Georgia Pacific Pulp Mill.

The carrot is often better than the stick.

Seems like the "go to" solution for Republicans is war rather than foreign aid. The War Department is highest priority.

A better strategy could be to offer aid to Iran in exchange for Iran's corrupt government making reforms, such as western expertise in dealing with the Iranian water shortages and so forth.

If the Iranians refused to do some reforms, we could have withheld the aid. Instead, Trump chose war as the response to what was seen as an opportunity for change when Iran was having civil unrest.

As the news is now saying, we nearly have to beg them to reopen the strait of Hormuz. Looks like the demonstrations in Iran are now supporting the government as people rally behind their country being attacked.

Bad planning is now leading to an algae bloom and paint peeling at the Washington Mall.

At least they ahve reversed another bad choice announcing a halt to the dismantling of NSF's floating scientific observatories in the oceans.

There may be a flaw in the idea that the Demographic Transition to sustainable population depends on prosperity.

During college I studied something called the Demographic Transition. It basically said that before there was modern medicine and sanitation, both deathrates and birthrates were high. As deathrates decline, there comes a transition period where birthrates remain high and populations explode. As time goes on, this is followed by a drop in birthrates and stable population.

Economic development was seen as the key to a stable world of low death and sustainable population. Problem is, now that the world has over 8 billion people, economic development, for all those people, can bring ecological catastrophe. The good news is that aside from economic development, there can be a change in value systems. Many poor countries have been able to reduce their birthrates without necessarily becoming rich. Others, however, have lagged behind in reducing birthrates. This is one reason why I connect issues like gay rights, feminism and overall modernity to sustainability. Getting rich doesn't necessarily have to be a prerequisite for sustainable cultures with low deathrates.

Simple living and less materialistic aspirations, combined with modern values on sexuality, are needed.

Meanwhile, the idea that prosperity and material wealth is the key to sustainable populations has it's problems. Yes, people do need enough to survive, but much of the opulent wealth in the world is unneeded. Over consumption in rich nations, but also the opulent wealth of leaders in many poor nations is a problem. Military spending is another large and growing problem worldwide. Rich nations are now ramping up their military budgets while many poor nations have long spent large percentages of their small GDPs on warfare.

Here is something I just thought of. Population growth is a key to economic prosperity. These days, as the world's demographic transition is trending toward lower birthrates, many are worried that less young people can bring economic stagnation. As populations age, there are less young people to pay into Social Security, for instance. This creates an incentive to try an boost population growth.

I think the philosophy behind the Demographic Transition is broken. The road to sustainable population, through increasing prosperity, is an environmental minefield. Changing values about overall culture and sexuality are needed instead.

Here are some things to ask about the future.

Will more labor be needed in a world with more automation and AI technology?

Another question is, if there is a labor shortage, why don't richer countries jump at the chance to fill their labor shortage needs with immigration? There is no shortage of people wishing to migrate to better living situations, worldwide.

Most rich countries in the world are now cutting back on immigration. This might be because all 8 billion people, in the world, can't live like people live in rich countries. As people migrate to rich countries, it does put strains on housing, water, resources and transportation systems as people adopt richer lifestyles. Just look at the traffic. This, of course also assumes dependency on the automobile and the vast amount of space it takes up for parking and transportation.

Things need to be done differently. Our value systems need to change all over the world. Just increasing prosperity will not fix it.

Will a greener China be the adult in the room during Trump's visit?

China's government may look like the adults in the room when Trump visits China. They are quickly transitioning toward green energy while the US government is rededicating its efforts to fossil fuels. China still does burn lots of coal, but it has over 1 billion people to serve. While China progresses past that, the Trump Administration seems to want to go back to the past.

Coal trains do travel through Bellingham on their way to ships, waiting in Canada, for Asian ports, but China is making progress with solar, railroads and so forth. Their system may be more authoritarian than ours, but it's less likely that populism will push China erratically. As for war in the Middle East, China seems well prepared for oil shortages in the long run. Less reckless in its foreign relations.