Unruly State of Affairs in the United States of America

Recent Discoveries

USOA Latest Content

The Actual Factual States

USOA v2.0 -- April 2025 -- Education & Outreach Committee -- HelpDesk Support is available... Click here to visit the Contact Page...

Evolving & Reinventing The Western Hemisphere

 

Rise of The Federated Western Hemisphere 

By: James Allen Homyak

-- to think outside the box --

If the people on the Western Hemisphere land masses are to continue on in nationalisms of one flavor or another, then I propose a revision to the interrelationship between our land masses from the farthest south all the way to the farthest north and from the farthest west to the farthest east. 

Imagining that very large space, what do we now call it geographically?

We section it off based on events from long ago.

  • Greenland;

  • North America - Canada, United States, Mexico;

  • Central America - Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama;

  • South/Latin America - Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay, Venezuela;

  • Caribbean - Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Haiti, Jamaica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago;

Thinking boldly, and outside the box, if we were all nationalists, what would the list of countries be looking like, internationally speaking, if we as a people were to do something innovative with all of the area in question?

Attached is a link to my PDF which simply does this to help The People arise in becoming federated in peace and collaboration. It will allow you to download and print a list of the entire western hemisphere -- where each line item is a country, with its own flag, and its own borders and its own nationality and the sovereignty of its people.

No longer would there be a bully-pulpit federal government -- as we tried that once and it failed after 250 years. 

United Countries Of The Western Hemisphere - TWH

A bold new way to remake the sovereignty of 140 various countries full of people.

A people who each get a piece of this source code to run better household systems than any of us have ever had under the messy Big Tech thus far. Better than iOS. Better than Android. Better than Windows. Better than Linux.

Imagine a 'FAFO-based home system' that runs on 'your language model' to achieve peace, harmony, equality and abundance amongst all the people -- without any repeat from the likes of the ancient Barbary Coast. 

What part of earth does JD Vance refer to as the Global South?

Understanding the Global South in JD Vance’s Context

JD Vance, in his discussions about globalization and international economics, refers to the Global South as primarily encompassing countries that were formerly colonized and are now considered developing or low-income nations. This term typically includes regions in Africa, Latin America, parts of Asia, and some areas in the Caribbean.

Characteristics of the Global South

Economic Status: The Global South is characterized by lower levels of industrialization and economic development compared to wealthier nations, often referred to as the Global North.

Dependency Theory: Vance’s remarks align with dependency theory, which suggests that these countries remain economically dependent on wealthier nations for high-value goods and technologies while being relegated to producing low-value commodities.

Geopolitical Dynamics: The Global South is often seen as being trapped in a cycle of dependency due to historical colonialism and current economic practices that favor richer nations.

Current Context: In recent discussions, including those at events like the American Dynamism Summit, Vance has highlighted how policies from wealthier nations aim to maintain this division between rich and poor countries.

In summary, JD Vance refers to the Global South as a collective term for poorer countries primarily located in Africa, Latin America, parts of Asia, and some Caribbean nations that have historically been marginalized in global economic systems.

But, how about some form of a partnership between all 140 nations of the Western Hemisphere where each of the American 50 states are also individually restored back to Nation State status?

Concept of a Partnership Among The Federated Western Hemisphere Nations

The idea of forming a partnership among all 140 nations of the Western Hemisphere, while also restoring each of the American 50 states to nation-state status, raises several complex political, economic, and social considerations. We are able to address complex and complicated matters such as this with evolutional thinkers -- seemingly missing from a giant swath of geopolitics.

Overview of the Western Hemisphere

The Western Hemisphere includes North America, Central America, South America, and the Caribbean. This region is home to a diverse array of cultures, languages, economies, and political systems. The concept of partnership among these nations could take various forms:

Economic Cooperation: Countries in the Western Hemisphere could collaborate on trade agreements that promote mutual economic benefits. This could involve reducing tariffs, enhancing trade routes, and fostering investment opportunities.

Political Alliances: A formal alliance or organization could be established to address common challenges such as climate change, security threats, and public health issues. This could resemble existing organizations like the Organization of American States (OAS) but with a more focused agenda on cooperation.

Cultural Exchange: Promoting cultural understanding through exchange programs can strengthen ties between nations and foster goodwill among their populations.

 

Restoration of America's union States back to Nation-State Status

Restoring each of the 50 U.S. states to nation-state status would fundamentally alter the political landscape not only within the United States but also in relation to other countries in the hemisphere. Key considerations include:

Sovereignty Issues: Each state would need to navigate its sovereignty while still participating in broader partnerships with other nations. This could lead to conflicts over governance structures and international representation.

Economic Viability: Many states may struggle economically if they were to operate independently as nation-states without federal support. Economic policies would need to be developed that ensure sustainability for each state.

Law & Order Frameworks: The law and order implications of such a transformation would be significant; new constitutions or sovereignty frameworks would need to be established for each state as an independent entity.

Legal Frameworks: The legal implications of such a transformation would be significant; new constitutions or legal frameworks would need to be established for each state as an independent entity.

International Relations: Each state would have to establish its own foreign policy and diplomatic relations with other countries in the hemisphere and beyond.

 

Vice President JD Vance explains that "the idea of globalization was that rich countries would move further up the value chain while the poor countries kept making the simpler things."

United States   (aka the Federal Corporation)

Some have said they would appreciate some level of taciturnity when it comes to geopolitics, but this government seems to have abandoned any and all pretense of soft power.

Even I doubt that's going to help them though. So, at the end of the day, you're basically in a quandary in terms of technological development and moving up the value chain, unless

  1. You are already an East Asian country like Taiwan, Japan and SK who's fate is extremely tied to the US, and supply most of the high value stuff the US consumes. Even then, you're probably not going to move up the value chain into software stuff like design of EDA tools, state of the art LLMs and SaaS, etc. You're probably going to be largely stuck where you are, though that place is pretty high up the value chain.

  2. You are a European country/Canada/Mexico, if the US is under democratic leadership.

  3. You are under the Chinese sphere of influence, which most south east Asian countries are under. China will fill up the gap which the US wouldn't.

Here's J.D. Vance via a Reddit Posting with a short video

 

A Bold New Way To Finance Everyone

Imagine once we are all prepaid one guadrillion units of gratitude in a new "gratitude is money" tax free pre-paid credit exchange ISO 20022 monetary policy. Jubilee payoffs. Full compensation plus reparations and refunds. Actually a MOCEE (mutual offset credit exemption exchange) that extinguishes over 450 fiat dollars for every gratitude,  in a gold-backed AFD spiece of value. Then everyone would be payable at 550g in credits per hour for showing up to the workforce.  

We The People each having restored our political status back home to our home state land & soil jurisdictions in order to reconstruct our home states to then rise up to reestablish the union of the original republic and to expand to a larger region of federated republics, all debt free and paid in full. 

 

Conclusion

While the idea of a federated partnership among all nations in the Western Hemisphere is intriguing and has potential benefits for collaboration on various issues, restoring each U.S. state to nation-state status presents substantial challenges, only to the so-called "elites" who've been running roughshod over nearly everyone for centuries, that would require careful consideration and planning across multiple dimensions—political, economic, social, legal, lawful and household.

In summary, this concept involves complex household dynamics that necessitate thorough exploration to carefully work forward toward all the practical implementations which can occur.

~ James Allen Homyak
Minnesota, TWH

 

 

 

Details
Category: a government of the people, by the people, and for the people
Hits: 268

USOA Menu

Member's Virtual Center

  •  

     

    THE ABUNDANCE PARADIGM: WHY AI FORCES A RETHINKING OF MONEY ITSELF — PART 1

    By Ellen Brown on May 11, 2026

    A Universal Basic Income (UBI) has long been proposed as a way to cushion the blow of jobs lost to automation. Under that model, everyone receives a modest monthly payment – enough to cover basic needs and prevent extreme poverty. 

    But Elon Musk has gone further. On April 16, he posted on X:

    Universal HIGH INCOME via checks issued by the Federal government is the best way to deal with unemployment caused by AI.

    Rather than a subsistence stipend, Universal High Income (UHI) would be a level of income allowing ordinary people to live well in a world where machines do most of the work. Musk has also said that AI and robotics are the only things that can solve the massive U.S. debt crisis. 

    That sounds promising, but where will the government get the money to pay the UHI? Critics say any government that tried it would go bankrupt. There are also other concerns, which will be addressed in Part 2 of this article. Here we will look at the financial underpinnings: why UHI is even thinkable, why AI forces a reexamination of how money enters the economy, why the current system cannot scale to meet what is coming, and the implicit transition needed to meet that challenge.

    Why the Current Money System Cannot Scale

    The national debt of the U.S. government just topped $39 trillion. China’s is $18.7 trillion. Japan’s is $8.6 trillion. Those of the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain are each in the multi-trillion-dollar range. Collective global debt now stands at $353 trillion, 305% of the world’s annual economic output. So even if, hypothetically, everything produced in the world in a year were applied toward liquidating the debt, it still would not be enough to pay it all off. 

    In fact the debt can never be repaid, because of the way money currently enters the system. Nearly all of the money supply today is created by banks when they make loans. Banks do not lend their existing capital. The loan itself creates the money. The bank adds the loan amount to the asset side of its balance sheet and balances that sum with the same amount on the liability side. When the borrower withdraws or transfers the funds, either the bank takes them from its reserves in “vault cash” or the Federal Reserve debits the bank’s digital reserve account at the central bank. But the lending bank typically has funds coming into its reserve account at about the same rate as they are going out, so its reserves are continually replenished. Thus a very small reserve account can support a much larger money creation engine. For decades before the Fed discontinued the reserve requirement in 2020, it hovered at around 10%.

    The chief problem with this debt-based system is the interest, which the bank does not create in its original loan. For a typical long-term loan, interest can double the total tab or more. Where is the money to come from to pay this added liability? Across the system as a whole, it must either come from more borrowing or from existing funds. In the case of governments, that means issuing interest-bearing bonds or tapping taxes and other revenues. The interest on the debt compounds, meaning the government is paying interest on interest. This makes the debt increase exponentially, until it is mathematically unsustainable. Then bankruptcies occur, of banks or even whole governments. Booms turn into busts, and the cycle begins again.

    Today, interest on the federal debt is the second largest budget line item after Social Security, exceeding $1 trillion. Meanwhile, workers are losing jobs to AI/robotics, shrinking the income tax base. The system is clearly unsustainable.

    How to Raise Demand to Scale to the Upcoming Supply

    A Universal High Income would replenish the shrinking tax base by replacing the lost wages of unemployed workers. But where will the money come from to pay the UHI? The only sustainable solution is for the government to issue it interest-free. That does not mean through the Federal Reserve, which creates money in the same way banks do: it buys federal interest-bearing securities with accounting entries. The Fed collects the interest, which it is supposed to return to the Treasury after deducting its costs. But since 2008, its costs include paying interest on the reserves of its participating banks, which consumes its profits. (See my earlier article here.) 

    The only interest-free, debt-free solution that will actually increase the money supply sufficiently to match the projected productivity of AI/robotics is for the money to be issued directly by the Treasury.

    This is not a radical new idea. It is authorized in the U.S. Constitution, which provides in Article 1, Sec. 8, that “The Congress shall have Power To … coin Money [and] regulate the Value thereof .…” Abraham Lincoln used government-issued “Greenbacks” to avoid a crippling debt to British-backed bankers. Debt-free government-issued money was also the funding mechanism by which the American colonists succeeded in creating a thriving economy and liberating themselves from the oppressive yoke of the British Empire.

    In his 1729 pamphlet “A Modest Inquiry into the Nature and Necessity of a Paper-Currency,” Benjamin Franklin argued that a lack of currency was a tax on industrious farmers and producers, and that a reliable, locally issued paper currency was the “oil” for the gears of trade. The “Nature and Necessity” of this currency was to facilitate the movement of goods between neighbors. Franklin observed that the British strategy of keeping the colonies short of cash was a method of economic suppression. By forcing the colonies to use gold and silver, which were constantly drained back to London to pay for imports, the Crown kept the colonies in a state of permanent debt and low productivity. When the money supply matched the productive capacity of the people, universal prosperity resulted without inflation. 

    This logic evolved into the “American System of Political Economy” championed by Henry Carey, economic advisor to Abraham Lincoln. He wrote:

    Two systems are before the world… One looks to pauperism, ignorance, depopulation, and barbarism; the other in increasing wealth, comfort, intelligence, combination of action, and civilization. … One is the English system; the other we may be proud to call the American system, for it is the only one ever devised the tendency of which was that of elevating while equalizing the condition of man throughout the world.

    In the context of the 21st century, the “oil” that best lowers the friction of trade is debt-free government-issued money similar to Lincoln’s Greenbacks and colonial scrip. Rather than implementing a radical financial innovation, we would be returning to our roots.

    Inflation or Deflation?

    The chief objection to the colonies’ paper “scrip” was that they tended to over-print, so that “demand” (money) outstripped supply. Too much money chasing too few goods produced price inflation. But in the 21st century, we will soon have the opposite problem: too little money chasing too many goods. Machines don’t need food, clothing, shelter, transportation, medical treatment or other services. So who will buy those goods and services? 

    Money needs to be issued to human consumers, and not just to a few wealthy human consumers serving as debt brokers thriving on interest. To create sufficient demand for the voluminous output of AI/robotics, it needs to go to the whole national population, evenly distributed. Not only can UHI work in that sort of abundant supply without producing price inflation; it is actually essential to prevent deflation.

    In a conversation on X, Musk wrote:

    In a normal economy, issuing more money simply increases the dollar price of the existing output of goods & services, meaning people do NOT get more stuff. If AI/robotics massively increase goods & services output, then you actually MUST issue dollars to people or there will be massive disinflation. 

    As paraphrased on Yahoo Finance (reposted from Benzinga), Musk wrote that handing out more dollars becomes a problem only when the economy’s supply of goods and services fails to surge alongside the money supply. His claim is that AI and robotics could lift production so sharply that the bigger risk would be falling prices, not rising ones.

    But aren’t falling prices a good thing? In this case, no. Prices would be falling due to a lack of demand, meaning producers can’t find customers for their products. They wind up laying off workers and eventually going bankrupt. When spread across the whole economy, the result is a deflationary spiral: prices fall, businesses lose revenue, and the economy contracts, not because production is inadequate but because purchasing power is insufficient. The result is recession or depression. In the Great Depression of the 1930s, food was rotting in the fields while people were starving, because they were out of work and had no money to spend. 

    Job cuts from AI are already happening. According to the same Benzinga article:

    Evidence of near-term strain is showing up in corporate announcements: employers disclosed more than 27,000 job cuts linked to AI in the first quarter of 2026, according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas. The outplacement firm said that figure was up 40% from the same period a year earlier. 

    Robert Reich reports that wages are around two-thirds of the typical corporation’s total cost, and that in the first four months of 2026, big U.S. corporations cut over 128,000 jobs. 

    How Soon Will All This Happen?

    Another Benzinga article, reposted on Yahoo Finance on March 16, detailed Musk’s projected time frame:

    Speaking remotely to the Abundance Summit last week, Musk told XPRIZE founder Peter Diamandis that the global economy is on the verge of an explosion so massive it defies historical precedent.

    “I’d say the economy is 10 times its current size in 10 years,” Musk said, before quickly clarifying that the growth could be even more explosive. “Greater than,” he added, framing the projected shift in economic output as a “fairly comfortable prediction.” …

    Ray Kurzweil, author of The Singularity Is Near, sees AI reaching Artificial General Intelligence (human-level intelligence across virtually all domains) by 2029, and full transformative abundance by 2045.

    Other experts question these time projections, but a radical transformation of traditional manufacturing and trade is likely to happen sometime in the reasonably near future. The question is, will the money system transition soon enough to rescue all the laid-off workers from homelessness and famine?

    The Sovereign Wealth Fund Alternative

    There is another model for distributing the gains of automation, one that can be phased in gradually as the AI workforce expands. It comes from Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI. In an ironic twist, Altman and Musk, who jointly founded OpenAI in 2015, are now locked in a high-profile legal battle over whether Altman diverted Musk’s $44 million investment to transform what was conceived as a nonprofit “for the benefit of humanity” into a highly lucrative for-profit enterprise.

    That dispute aside, Altman’s alternative model for sharing AI-generated wealth is a national sovereign wealth fund seeded by the profits of AI and robotics. His proposed American Equity Fund would take public stakes in the companies and technologies driving automation, capture a portion of the resulting productivity gains, and distribute them as universal dividends. The Fund would not replace a Universal High Income but would complement it.

    This approach has several advantages. It ties payments directly to real output, scales automatically with productivity, and can be introduced gradually, avoiding the shock of issuing large payments before the supply side has fully expanded. It would resemble the Alaska Permanent Fund, which distributes oil revenues to residents, except that here the resource would be the most powerful general-purpose technology since electricity.

    Conclusion: A New Monetary Logic for a New Productive Era

    For centuries, money has been issued as a claim against the future productivity of human labor, repaid from the income that labor generates. The logic of this debt-based system collapses when machines become the primary producers of goods and services. Then the limiting factor becomes purchasing power — the ability of human beings to access the abundance their own technologies create. That requires a monetary architecture that expands with output rather than debt, and distributes income not through wages alone but through mechanisms tied to the productive capacity of the whole system.

    Universal High Income and a sovereign wealth fund are two ways of doing that. One ensures a stable floor of demand; the other ensures that the public shares in the gains of automation. Both would be grounded in real production. But for the public to have access to those gains, the money supply needs to expand in proportion to the expanding pool of goods and services. This can be done by restoring the innovation our forefathers baked into the Constitution: debt-free money issued by the government itself.

    How to fund a UHI without triggering inflation or driving the government into bankruptcy is the first objection critics raise, but there are others. They argue that people would stop working or stop learning, that society would collapse into idleness or chaos, that life would lose meaning without jobs, that the government would have the power to control how people spend their money.  Will a UHI ring in the promised utopia or lock us into a state-controlled digital prison? Part 2 of this article will address those concerns. 

    _______________

    This article was first posted as an original to ScheerPost.com. Ellen Brown is an attorney, founder of the Public Banking Institute, and author of thirteen books including Web of Debt, The Public Bank Solution, and Banking on the People: Democratizing Money in the Digital Age. Her 400+ blog articles are posted at EllenBrown.com.tom of Form

     

     

  •  

    WAY TO GO MR PUTIN - RUSSIA FINALIZES 'LBGTQ PROPAGANDA' BAN

    Posted By: The_Fox [Send E-Mail]
    Date: Thursday, 1-Dec-2022 05:31:08
    www.rumormill.news/212414

     

    Many a time I often think about moving to Russia, so sick and tired of living here in the West.

    Over there things get done and child molesters etc don't just get away with a slapped wrist, free to again prey on the innocent.

    Those promoting society's moral decay will now have to answer for their actions also.

    Way to go Mr Putin.

    Read more: 'LBGTQ PROPAGANDA' BAN

Older Content

Similar Items