The Prophet Margin 
Member since Feb 28, 2015

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
I'll never stop believing in human potential and the power of collaborative effort. Our political process is broken and our dollars no longer carry financial voting power. We need to build a new economy inside the old one, claiming efficiencies of scale, living wages, local reinvestment, and quality of life over quantification. We don't just need a bigger slice of the pie in the commons, we need a better recipe. Let's co-create the changes to what We The People cannot accept!

Recent Comments

Re: “Reader: We need safer streets

Thank you for publishing, Mr. Schniper. To clarify my position and reason for writing, my concern is specifically with the intersections and the conflicting green and white signals, not just the streets in general.

Drivers get a green signal at the location they are expecting it, the one they are mentally entrained to focus on. They are not usually paying attention to the walk signals 30 feet away, which are being given to pedestrians at the very same time, carving the path of the driver through a left turn which crosses perpendicular to the walking path.

No matter how safe a pedestrian is, he is in the path of traffic while following his legally mandated timing and trajectory. Both are following the law but one is at multiple disadvantages and much more at risk for injury.

Putting two objects in the same space doesn't pan out well, this is a simple problem with a simple solution: Stop sending pedestrians into oncoming traffic, or stop sending oncoming traffic into pedestrians!!

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by The Prophet Margin on 11/12/2018 at 5:31 PM

Re: “Reader: We need new traffic engineers

I second that motion, Malcom.

0 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by The Prophet Margin on 11/12/2018 at 5:23 PM

Re: “Reader: We need safer streets

All of those things may be true, but they do not address the inherent safety conflict of drivers getting a green light to move their projectile right through the path of a pedestrian who cannot possibly be looking in all directions and is at a severe disadvantage in terms of line of sight when compared to a driver, who can glance at his mirrors and see everywhere very quickly. A pedestrian would need mirrored headgear for that.

There is also the issue of a significant speed difference. In the time it takes to turn your head 180 degrees, today's nimble cornering machines can come flying around the corner only to honk at you, or more. The intersection at Cascade and Bijou at Penrose Library is the worst.

I wonder what the cameras pointed at these problem intersections have to say.

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by The Prophet Margin on 11/12/2018 at 5:14 PM

Re: “A realistic remedy, committing to solar, a Dem's plea, and more

We definitely agree!

John Stewart really should be in his cabinet somewhere. Chief Correspondent seems appropriate - talk about high ratings!! People listened more to him than President Obama.

Let's draft him... We can hold a letter writing party and convince Bernie to make the call: "Bernie - make politics popular again by letting Jon Stewart poke fun at the wingnutz, billionares, and extremists!"

Sanders/Warren/Stewart would be the most powerful catalyst of political awareness I can imagine at the moment. Consequently, we would dramatically increae involvement!

This should happen. Seriously.


3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Kevin Brewton on 01/22/2016 at 8:56 AM

Re: “A realistic remedy, committing to solar, a Dem's plea, and more

You're right, Mr. Mucus - I do agree, and I did misread your comments. But I'm actually sitting corrected ;-)

I see a lot of nonsensical commentary by shills for the establishment, and I summarized your comment with a scan of the handle and the last line, which seemed at first like an attack on the validity of a socialist viewpoint. I didn't read thoroughly.

I am apologizing, and I don't mean to make excuses, but I answered in a very anxious and irritated mood. I've been the subject of some serious misdeeds over the last few days, and my stress level is through the roof.

That said, as far as being controlled goes (presumably vs. an idealistic total-freedom scenario called anarchy), you make a good point that government control is only necessary because not all will properly control themselves. But if the incentives included the proper end goal, we wouldn't need to police them. It's as simple as doing the right thing for the right reason.

Rational people make decisions at the margin, where it affects them. First - not all are rational. Second, the root of the problem is the internal value system, which says that I am more important than you, and I can own whatever I can control.

These are the root arguments: Private property (and rule) or communal property and rule. Crony capitalism (not Adam Smith's free-hand-of-the-market version) represents exclusive strength of capital, and communism removes all control of capital and determines it's own intent. These are both extremes, and we can see from history that neither can produce long term balance on any front.

Not only do we have divisively influencing cognitive factors such as religion, which have a decision-making structure that is proud to exclude reason as necessary), but we have an economic and power structure that is based on maximizing externalization and absolving corporate entities from liability via the 'corporate veil'. This is why the Trans Pacific Partnership is SO evil - completely unchecked power.

So, even if someone has 'enlightened self-interest' (Socialist) values, their decisions are still affected by a system that pits them against those values at the margin where they find equilibrium.

Therefore, our incentive system (economy) must be engineered to create maximum good for everyone, lowering costs and needs. We must engineer incentives to internalize all actual costs to the well being of others and of the planet. To me, that is democratic socialism.

But democracy IS socialist. I wasn't referring to a document called We The People, but to an ideology represented and repeated throughout the Constitution. Nowhere does it say, "In the interests of those who control or own capital." When you make something in the interests of The People, you are making something socialist.

The word Socialist means ownership of the means of production by the proletariat. This doesn't determine the delivery method, though. Communist Socialism like we see in Russia gives the reins of that desired socially-beneficial (socialist) outcome to a dictator or government.

Democratic Socialism puts the reins in the hands of those who VOTE. Big money has incentives that externalize costs, absolve responsibility, and concentrate wealth in the hands of a few. When we combine low turnout with special interest lobbying and an open door for purchasing our political system, we get something totally mutated from Adam Smith's enlightened self interest. That's what we have now.

Not only do we need to take the reins back (with democracy), we need to restructure our incentives (with socialism) so that if a person wants to be great or powerful, or significant, then they figure out how to solve a problem that inhibits humanity.

Before capitalism made wealth so scarce and hard to obtain, people could pursue profits AND still have the greater good in mind. Winfield Scott Stratton was a good example. But this city is a bit short on that type of socialism.

Our solutions will be found in worker co-ops, small businesses and thriving local economies based on local ownership, local currency, local production, local distribution, owner management, and by drying up the mainline of revenue that we send out of our local economy with internet purchases and chain store patronage.

I hope that clarifies for you my understanding of history, as well as my reading comprehension skills, both of which have been realigning my values for quite some time now.


4 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Kevin Brewton on 01/21/2016 at 6:11 PM

Re: “A realistic remedy, committing to solar, a Dem's plea, and more

I'd write a more lengthy response, but your mucous-lined handle indicates either an inability to locate either your values or a spine with which to enforce them.

KISS: No part of "We The People, By The People, Of The People, For The People" mentions capital. Or self-interest.

0 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Kevin Brewton on 01/20/2016 at 10:53 PM

Re: “A realistic remedy, committing to solar, a Dem's plea, and more

I'd reply with more, but your handle indicates an inability to locate either your values or a spine with which to enforce them.

KISS: No part of "We The People... For The People... By The People... Of The People" indicates self interest. Nor capital.

1 like, 2 dislikes
Posted by Kevin Brewton on 01/20/2016 at 10:47 PM

All Comments »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

Find stories »

All content © Copyright 2018, The Colorado Springs Independent

Website powered by Foundation