I have several posts in the pipeline after a year-plus pause in publishing on this blog. They are lined up and will start coming fast and furious, shortly… Meanwhile, in the process of streamlining the pipeline and revisiting some of the more recent ones, I still find valuable information buried halfway down a 10,000-word post that I’d like positioned closer to the top.

I do keep my “ear to the ground” (actually to the on-line airwaves, and some telephonic) in ongoing developments within the family courts and beyond, and have a sense of what mainstream media is UNlikely to ever report, and too few private bloggers (it would seem) are reporting, in part because it takes more sustained attention to understand. In the light of current events, I decided to still take material from a two-year-old post to speak and teach about what I’m seeing in ever-accelerating, and unobstructed (because it seems largely unnoticed!) action.

[First post was not most recent version.  This one, similar, has a few more paragraphs in the Intro, bring it to just over  4,000 words. Feb. 22, 2pm PST/LGH]

So, this post is just over 4,000 words and lifted (verbatim, below this introduction, I’ll indicate the dividing line between intro and re-post) from about half of my 2/25/2014 post “The Stacked Deck, the Coups d’Etat, and the Fork in the Road,” which combined exhortation with some complex passages and quotes on consolidation of political clout, into business roundtables, about the history of CalPERS (as a major investment platform, as most institutional investment pools are), and more.

Not everyone wants to talk about all that! But we all can and should be able to talk about how public institutions — such as the California Judicial Council, with its Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), its websites, and its linked referrals from that website — are becoming turnstiles to the private-industry (often, nonprofit) outsourcing of government functions, and how this process only encourages the development and expansion of the PRIVATE sector setting up shop in PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS, by coordinated agreement that the public, half or more of the time, had little awareness of, and next to no participation in, into force-fed (court-ordered and court-website-advertised) consumption of services.

It is hard not to consent to things about which one is not fully conscious. That’s no secret to those who, starting (I’m learning and becoming increasingly convinced deducing from other evidence) at a minimum 100 years ago, at least by 1913, met privately in specific places and institutions, to plan in advance. Look at the major turning points and changes within US history, and on what did events and by what authorities, Presidential or Congressional, did they seem to hinge? I will be blogging on this in 2016 also…

So long as the public doesn’t figure out the basic power schematics (i.e., blueprints), we will continue being stripped down, outsourced, and at points determined no longer-exploitable, etc.

SPEAKING OF “BLUEPRINTS”: One clue, I should say, is the habit of using the term “Blueprint” or “Models” in talking about externally-planned system changes to government operations. Whatever happened to the concept of grassroots anything? What, exactly, is the relationship of those funding the debt to having any say in what blueprints are applied to their lives, remotely assembled and coordinated?

That’s INCREMENTAL, DELIBERATE, PRIVATIZATION/STANDARDIZATION of government (across jurisdictional lines):

This thinking (devising blueprints, models to apply nationally, etc.) obviously resembles more the corporate world than what we might like to think still exists of individuals having a voice in the institutions affecting their lives, as expressed primarily through state-legistlatures, i.e., the states where those same individuals pay, “through the nose,” DMV fees to drive, State (and other) taxes, Fees to get married, get divorced, file anything in court (unless waived), and in which they have to declare residency, and depending on which state, varying prices for gas, real estate, or potentially even (see “Flint, Michigan” recently) safe drinking water, let alone schools.

In fact, one of my draft posts “in the pipeline” (from early January, 2016), in stunned awareness, I had to introduce almost as a joke: “A Judge, a Lawyer and a Psychotherapist walk into a bar…”.. (for that particular blueprint, those professions were actually involved — but on closer scrutiny, the judge [as I recall] acknowledged the inspiration from a judicial membership association ((and HHS grantee, and key player in (Years 2000-2008) “The Greenbook Initiative”)) based at University of Nevada-Reno. This, so far, is the title:

“Miami Child Well-Being Court(tm) Model, with its roots in “NCJFCJ” (also tm), part of the HHS-dedicated DV Cartel”

(My use of the word “DV cartel” is deliberate, based on extensive lookups of nonprofit organizations and how they are networked together, and the behavior of these nonprofits over time.  The word “cartel” has a commonly understood and negative meaning and a dictionary definition, and I am using it in this sense.

People who do not read tax returns, or read ENOUGH on who is conferencing with whom about which policies (over time) may not have a basis for using this term “cartel,” but I certainly do. I am a “DV” (domestic violence) survivor and am NOT using this term in the sense that, for example, some fathers’ (or mens’) rights groups might use it simply to discredit the existence of violence towards women, or the dangers of unchecked domestic violence to society at large.  OK? And the NCJFCJ is indeed involved in said DV cartel as a policymaker, and proud of it, too.

[Link describing the “MCWB Court(™)” Model, found at “cap.law.harvard.edu” uploaded there looks like on 7-22-2015, but referring to a 2011 publication]<=check out the description, and fine print on who-all was involved. Hint: “RTI” is one BIG entity)(cf. “Research Triangle International” in NC). Details included:

• Work with the Children’s Bureau T & TA Network to carve out a national learning collaborative to support effective diffusion of the Miami model and related best practices in court, child welfare, and child mental health. The collaborative will foster shared knowledge and strategies related to funding challenges, organizational barriers and solutions, and discipline‐specific leadership.

Carve out ? Effective diffusion? Sounds like a chemical experiment….The proud leadership has already determined it should be nationally diffused, overcoming funding and organizational barriers. “Parent protests” isn’t apparently on the list because the average parent may not know, in advance, what’s coming, in such situations.

MEANWHILE, the PUBLIC has already PRE-FUNDED the PRIVATE MODELS. HOW?

The same USA public, some of which is being forced into consumption of all kinds of services (ESPECIALLY in anything related to families, children, and mental health/relationships/Behavioral modification programming), already through, for example, the long-standing Social Security Act(administered through the US HHS) and other Acts of Congress (such as the VAWA act administered through the USDOJ/OVW) has already pre-funded the establishment, “capacity-building” and maintenance of these services — encouraging a superstructure of professions, and then profession associations to keep it organized nationwide (actually, more often internationally).   The pre-funding comes simply because the public is, by and large, tagged for producing the tax revenues to keep the juices flowing through the federal agencies.

Now, consider that while these are all evolving over time, that HHS only came into being in 1980, the HHS/ACF (Administration on Children and Families) only in 1991, the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) only in 1994, and a RADICAL restructuring of the 1934 Social Security Act in 1996, labeled (that version), “PRWORA”.  All that timing, coincidence?  You think?

Now consider who is going to be taking advantage of this “macro market awareness”, and who is going to be taken advantage OF, in any equation where the one, smaller (fewer members) “sector” IS aware of the pre-funding grants streams, and the other (the public at large, generally speaking) IS NOT.  Where one realizes that the public is going to be in more significant distress through their position on the tax spectrum, and the tax-exempt organizations (which typify who business is directed to) can expand operations and public relations simply because they are operating on a different basis when it comes to funding government itself, across the system (all levels)?

Hmm….

The older (February 25, 2014) post, further down, simply says what I want to be talking about:

The Stacked Deck = the Racket/eering= about the FEDERAL BUDGET = about TAXES.  

Because taxes produce revenues. They are taken from some, exempted from others, enabling them to consolidate power and preserve family (private) wealth with which to influence government, and they are simply evaded by yet others —  often characterized on websites as a nonprofit or charitable organization …

and, in referencing California Judicial Council’s “CFCC” site below (main reason I copied this post to a new one), it also summarized a subset of this situation:

So, when I say, again:

For yet others, their assets (or, if they had none, children) are being stripped out simply through the family courts, conciliation courts and/or “Unified Family Courts,” with presiding judges strapped into the “AFCC*/CRC**/NACC/*** “CFCC” etc. system.

Each of those is an element in a system designed to steer and access federal money (grants, or contracts) into programs.  People involved have overlapping (vertical and horizontal) relationships among the whole.  In the above link:  Access/Visitation:  FEDERAL FUNDING (GRANTS CFDA 93.597) Social Security Law, etc.

And, just a reference (but I left most of it in the original post) to the VAST scale of wealth represented by institutional investment platforms.  I live in California and took CalPERS for an example, but quoting Walter Burien on this, as he summarizes the situation in plain terms, which I have yet to see anyone rebut based on the facts.  I have seen (and posted on) attempts to rebut based on “ad-hominem” (personality) attacks, which is perhaps an indication of a weak argument, if indeed there is an argument against the facts he presents which can be rebutted (sp?) by showing they are either (1) false or (2) irrelevant or (3) both.

(My Dec. 2012 EconomicBrain [“Cold,Hard.Fact$”] post combines several articles — I think pretty well — but see “Are You Ready for Real Change,” Jan./2012 therein, and towards the bottom):

Government has built their internal empires by and through selective presentation and utilizing taxpayer revenue systematically separated from the general purpose operating budgets to build power-bases of standing wealth outside of the “general purpose” operating funds. /// A large local government can be crying “Budget Shortfall’ under their selectively presented general purpose operating budget but upon review of the financial wealth power based funds held and “other” income, the same local government upon total and comprehensive review can be clearly in the black by millions if not billions of dollars.

---

There is nothing complicated here. If an individual or a government has established significant fund balances developed over decades, those funds balances are power-bases by investment that makes or breaks many individual fortunes by where those funds are invested.

---

If an individual or a local government thinks they can tag someone else to pay for shortfalls in other areas without tapping into their power-bases of funds under domestic and international investment management they will do so.

As others have pointed out already– governments tend to pool their investments, for example, “CALPERS” (essentially created ca. 1931) is the largest “public pension” investing platform around, or at least in the country. Getting started earlier sure helped, then adding players (subscribers) over time ALSO did.  That summary is from “Allgov.com” and goes (at least about half of it) like this; notice the progressive growth and expansion of what was included under this FUND, and the various names it went under (CalPERS was not the original one).

Overview:

---

The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) administers the largest pension fund in the country. It manages a portfolio exceeding $200 billion in assets that provides retirement benefits for more than 1.1 million active and inactive public employees and around half a million retirees and beneficiaries.   The 1.6 million members of CalPERS are current and retired employees of the state, schools and public agencies. In addition to retirement, CalPERS manages health benefits for more than 1.3 million members and their families.

---

CalPERS is transitioning from the State and Consumer Services Agency to the new Government Operations Agency by July 1, 2013, as part of a larger government reorganization.

(California also, I noticed, seems to have been radically restructuring its reporting and accounting procedures for at least K-12 public education, around 2013.  I found out while attempting to locate CAFRs (Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports) for certain school districts.  WHAT a hunt that was!  There’s an attempt to make the accounting follow the individual child (from school to school), publishing “unaudited” results, breaking it down fifteen different ways, etc.).  Not, however, main topic of this blog….

I still believe that standing on as truth is a very solid ground.  It just may be an often-challenged ground — not necessarily safe ground, and at times it may not seem like a very wide arena.  But, it is solid ground, and it takes solid ground, a good center of balance so to speak, from which to navigate down the slopes and roads of life. (See Snowboard Cross / “demolition derby” photo image below).  Even if it’s breakneck speed at a demolition-derby style, and feels like a free-fall..  Develop the skills efficiently as possible, and get better at assessing which ones are more valuable!

These are the things the public should be talking about in an un-dumbed-down state.  First, admit that’s what state most of us started in– I’m talking as to the rapid evolution of the privatization and reorganization of government engineered apart from the consent of the people —  and second, do something about it, THEN start talking, freely (exercise the right!) with others.  Do not subject these conversations to intense moderation/mediation with the same individuals who discouraged conversations on the same subject matter!!  Why would anyone want to continue dealing with people  or groups completely unrepentant about longstanding attempts to control, redirect, and censor public, on-line discussions about things whose existence simply can’t be “silenced” away, or “pretended” into non-existence — like those federal grants.  Who will just continue talking (in an ongoing stream) as if they’d been all along involved in studying, discussing, and illuminating the public on these issues?

Who really wants to engage in reform conversations incorporating a large component of fairy-tale, make-believe and the story-teller professionals at the podium, calling out who can and who cannot interrupt with a tough question?

 (ANYTHING BELOW HERE is QUOTE from my PREVIOUS POST)

Look, across society in the USA, things are sliding downhill fast, and knocking people out of the competition along the way.

Did anyone see this competition, recently?

(link to article below).  It has been compared to a demolition derby.  However –notice these people have snowboards, jackets, boots, and helmets.  They know when they push off, they might get taken out in a moment, maybe even injured — but they will get up and race again another day.  they may not know the whole course, but they know there’s a finish line.  They have sponsors, team-mates and a training regime.

Not so for our nation as a whole.  We have public schools, we have education THROUGHOUT this system and we have been induced to pour billions into the “training” functions of almost every major federal agency, while the same continue to misplace trillions  (this post, below), especially the Dept. of Defense and Housing and Urban Development (HUD).  My category in this subject matter is moreso HHS and to a degree, DOJ.

But we are deliberately NOT being brought into the planning sector — which has been compartmentalized by profession, then centralized through affiliations and institutionalized into leadership from certain universities, which then maintain loyalty to their own (while collaborating on how to run the world).  The leverage has been moved away from individuals.

DOWNHILL SLALOM SNOWBOARD CROSS, SPEEDING, JUICED UP ON LIES,  “STARVATION SLOPE” — and we funded this ourselves, and facilitated it, too.

While some sectors are prospering, they are doing it at the expense of others and because of positioning in the market, or previous positioning in the market. The market is affected by the caste system enabled by the tax system, which sets up nonprofits for some and wage deductions (for taxes) for others; and wage deductions AND child support garnishments for others.

For yet others, their assets (or, if they had none, children) are being stripped out simply through the family courts, conciliation courts and/or “Unified Family Courts,” with presiding judges strapped into the “AFCC*/CRC**/NACC/*** “CFCC” etc. system.

All of those except “CFCC” refers to a nonprofit association being used to lobby for legislative changes affecting the federal (and from there, state, local, county, etc.) fundings (and bringing on more membership professionals).

 “CFCC” means “Center for Families and Children in the Courts” [or a version of that phrase] and “CFCC” centers can be found, well, a major one in California under the AOC (Administrative Office of the Courts); another one at a law school at UBaltimore, Maryland, and no doubt there are more, some probably at other universities.  The general phrase has caught on, and until any specific one is examined, we don’t know its corporation, or funding, status.  BUT, that “CFCC” connection is important — because it centralizes influence in some respectable institution.

CFCC in CALIFORNIA — RECOMMENDED TO STUDY THE SITE; California has the largest court system in the US, has become extremely centralized within the last 20 years, still hosts  many key “Association of Family and Conciliation Court” professionals in high places (not just judgeships…) and is home to many of the nonprofits behind and working parallel to AFCC’s agenda:  multidisciplinary treatment in place of criminal law (systematic language change) and promotion of the psychological and mental health fields by lawyers and judges.  It works like a cult.   (2016 update — one of the links even refers customers to a curriculum produced and promoted in Canada, not the US!  “international alignment of the justice system…through private, nonprofit membership associations”)

CFCC in California — the label isn’t even on the website banner but does show on the lower right side under “contact info” The website — and it’s a government website — says:

This section includes resources and program information in the areas of Family and Juvenile law.  It also includes conference materials and a comprehensive list of publications produced by the Center for Families, Children and the Courts (CFCC).

but the contact information reads:

CONTACT INFO

Center for Families, Children & the Courts
Judicial and Court Operations Services Division
Judicial Council of California – Administrative Office of the Courts

Ph: 415-865-7739
Fax: 415-865-7217
E-mail: cfcc@jud.ca.gov

And at the VERY bottom of a complex (multi-link, lots of texts, and left-sidebar, center, and right-sidebar) web page:

So, when I say, again:

For yet others, their assets (or, if they had none, children) are being stripped out simply through the family courts, conciliation courts and/or “Unified Family Courts,” with presiding judges strapped into the “AFCC*/CRC**/NACC/*** “CFCC” etc. system.

Each of those is an element in a system designed to steer and access federal money (grants, or contracts) into programs.  People involved have overlapping (vertical and horizontal) relationships among the whole.  In the above link:  Access/Visitation:  FEDERAL FUNDING (GRANTS CFDA 93.597) Social Security Law, etc.

All government operations, of course, are going to cost something — there are courts, there are courthouses, there are people who must staff the courts ,paperwork software systems (Security personnel — weapons-screening for the courthouses!), and  so forth. We understand that the courts are of course part of government.

However, when I say that Government Itself has become a private corporation — and am referring specifically to the operations that deal with divorce, families and children, custody and/or child support (which is to say — for the most part — they are dealing PEOPLE).  Think, for a moment, about just how many “people” may have within range of an immediate relative, or their own household, or their immediate neighbor, employee, or boss — someone who’s been run through the gauntlet on those issues, and may be paying child support.

The programs are literally targeted to the entire population of a state, just about — as a human market niche, and using multiple distribution streams for a very FEW basic philosophies, most of which have their origins in: social science, religion, or psychology.  These are then connected to pharma, institutional, and big bucks economics.  How big is that?

And as this AND other state using government websites to market private products — you have NO IDEA until you start looking at some of this.  I have an idea because I have been looking, and I have seen just how single corporate products (with a very few updates or tailoring for each new market segment).  The research AND testing is done at public expense with private injections — they are field testing what works for mass behavioral change.  BUT, even if it doesn’t work, the money is STILL for the most part, made up front through grants!

Because most of this post, I want to talk in the macro, larger sense (to show “Coups d’Etat and The Fork in the Road) — I’m moving the “STACKED DECK” conversation, which I again just wrote out — off post.  It’s too large otherwise.

It’s also fascinating information.

The”Stacked Deck” designed to produce exactly what it has been producing — this downhill slide and eventually elimination of a “middle class” in favor of starving masses, and those who get to chose among them for laborers — in association with the bystanding professional classes still needed to run various businesses. As corporations have product, government institutions have “outcomes.”  If you don’t believe this — read their  language!

As technology outpaces human beings’ ability, or should I say, desire and decision-making ability, to USE their own minds intelligently, those professional classes may be fewer than before.  If you’re in this position, reading my blog and think, “well that’s not ME and my family line” — don’t be too sure.   You’re being used now.  What is done with products (including human capital) who have outlived their usefulness, in our culture? Dumped or recycled, or sold off right?  Just like divisions of corporations who are nonproducing….

So if you’re further up the hill, presently, I’d appreciate your ear, and participation in making some changes to this business model involving human capital and what looks like engineered breeding programs for domesticated labor force (with dissidence bred out of the breeding stock).

The Stacked Deck = the Racket/eering = about the FEDERAL BUDGET = about TAXES.  

Because taxes produce revenues. They are taken from some, exempted from others, enabling them to consolidate power and preserve family (private) wealth with which to influence government, and they are simply evaded by yet others —  often characterized on websites as a nonprofit or charitable organization.

It takes several people operating systems elements in place to pull it off, over time.  Anyone who refuses to look at these elements in combination with each other will not see the operational ‘schema,” let alone have any words (or paradigms/pictures) to describe it with.

It’s also impossible to describe unless people will get at least a few basic terms straight, and know which are basic concepts, and which are the icing on the cake, or just “a piece of the pie.”

On the other hand, if people WILL get a few terms (at least) straight, they can make more sense of the whole.

The one critical difference between AFCC and the others (and its  various chapters) is that CRC and NACC, with cross-relationships among the founders (I.e., Jessica Pearson et al. — who is also currently running CPR in Denver (contracts with federal government to evaluate how well the programs of the others are running, including child support, fatherhood, mediation, access visitation etc. are getting their ends accomplished) — is that AFCC as a coherent corporation hasn’t been a continuously incorporated one over the years.

 This has been known for about fifteen years now (since 1999) and has been tolerated and essentially ignored — no one prosecuted, no  one sat on them, no one forced compliance.  MOREOVER, the federal funding has ALSO been known — but not stayed on the front burner of advocacy groups (whether court reform, child abuse prevention, or even domestic violence) groups.  The public has been weighed in the balance and found — dumbed down.   ONLY the public can organize itself to stop this mess.

Have you watched the Olympics, the giant slalom, or the Snowboard Cross (a.k.a. demolition derby) where six people race down the hill starting all at once, and by the end, typically, someone has taken out two or three en route; one “oops” by a speeding snowboarder can take out two others on the way down, letting perhaps less skilled but more fortunate speedsters make it to next round. BUT, this is known in advance, and trained for. They wear helmets. It’s part of the deal and for the thrill and glory:

Olympics Recap: The brilliant wipeouts of Snowboard Cross. Plus: A touch of Seacrest!

By Darren Franich on Feb 19, 2014 at 3:39AM

NBC’s primetime Tuesday coverage of the Olympics was filled with chilly thrilling spills, as crazy weather bedeviled crazier sports. The women competing in the Alpine Giant Slalom faced rough terrain, while the men competing in Snowboard Cross faced rough terrain and the fact that Snowboard Cross is basically a demolition derby without any safety protocols. Summer Olympians Lolo Jones and Lauryn Williams crossed over into a whole new weather pattern, competing in the Women’s Bobsled (or “Bobsleigh,” as they call it in Westeros.)

Well, many of us were thrown into this race without adequate practice drills, and we’re further down hill.

THIS BLOG is my consistently calling out “Look Ahead” to those who haven’t slidden so far into marginalized America; that there is a dumping ground at the end. Would this have been appropriate before people were herded into trains to go to labor camps half a century ago, plus some?

What if the same individuals, corporations, and practices were involved in organizing the WORKFORCE in America today? With the same agenda? Would it be, still, “OH NO! That can’t be – not here.”

Well, so much for the concept of learning from history and noticing similarities. ANYHOW, some concepts are simply basic — and wealth attracts wealth (but can be stolen) and pooled wealth has more clout than unpooled.

Poor (“low-income”) people by virtue of their poverty attract others who want to use them for social science experiments, or some agenda, like (there’s no end of causes for which the poor can be used because face it — who’s defending them?? Law enforcement? Rule of law? Our Courts? Our social services network? Our religious institutions?

[Just thought I’d ask…]