I get different opportunities a day to see different highlighted stories in the news.  This morning i saw one that said, "Putin Wants a Grand Bargain with the West:"

Oh really, i said to myself.  Well here is a grand bargain with the West for you.

1. No war tribunals

2. Ukraine recovers all of Ukraine including Crimea

3. Russia is invited back to make the G7, the G8 again.

4. NATO will consider an application from Russia to "join" NATO if Russia would so choose to do.

BTW, on that fourth point.  Think on this.  Russia is an extremely "weak" country that only has "missiles" to back its bluster.  Putin's War has brought all of this out into the open.  So, it is "missile" threats that Russia keeps throwing out there because that is all they have.  

Shit, when you come to think about it (Russia's weakness, that is), Russia was defeated by Ukraine, not by NATO.  Sure, U.S. weapons helped quite a bit, but think how things would have gone if NATO had gone full in supporting Ukrainian troops with NATO troops.  Putin's troops would have been 

Anyway, back on point.  NATO countries have no desire to take over any part of Russia.  NATO would rather work together with Russia trying to work toward a more peaceful future.  But when you look at China, China may not feel the same way about Russia as the NATO countries do.  Russia looks like "red meat" to China now, especially those northeastern oil wells.  Russia is so vulnerable right now, the only chance they have to stay whole is to join NATO to gain the protection that NATO offers a member country.

And for you globanomic players.  This very logical "next move" is the big one.  Cut the deal.  Make the deal today, not tomorrow.  Make it before midterms in fact.  2023 is the year we form the World Federation Constitutional Committee to establish the new rules and parameters for a new World Federation.

What i am saying is this.  Quit stalling.  There is no reason to waste any more time "looking for holes" in globanomics; instead, you should be out promoting it--with your friends, colleagues, VIPs, etc.  And that goes tenfold for any of you who just recently earned their "junior undergraduate degree" in globanomics.  Let the Constitutional Committee work on finding or filling any holes in Globanomics.  Globanomics, like democracy before it, will always be a continuously adjusting process as our human species learns more and more about itself and its place in the universe of all things.

ps.  I know full well that the most controversial part of globanomics is the 49.99% figure.  Well, let me tell you something.  I can win that argument from both a verbally logic standpoint as well as a "mathematical" standpoint.  So, my point is this: i have stated what conditions are "required" for the optimal solution in globanomics, which includes the 49.99% share for the U.S. 

ps2. And if you still do not understand--take the 49.99% concept to the financiers in Wall Street--because they are the ones that would have to make this work.  But the truth is--they could make it work quite easily.  And what that 49.99% share to the United States is actually does--it restricts the U.S. to the benefit of the rest of the world--who is guaranteed to be responsible for 50.01% of all future business development.

ps3. Without this restriction here is what the future would look like.  The United States would continue to increase its share of all the world's business activity, growing stronger while the rest of the world grows weaker.  Things would continue along this same pattern until something had to give.  Either complete dominance or War.

ps4. With this 49.99% restriction (which the U.S. loses out in "taxing" matters, but makes up for any voting power), the U.S. is in effect saying all future "market growth" will be shared amongst all the players in the world.  Sure, one country dominates, but it does not "own" the world (the 50.01% who own the rest of the world--own the world).  But what the U.S. does do, is it "leads".  It leads, but it will still need world's consensus to get anything done.

ps5. Run the 49.99% concept to a mathematician and give her the problem.  How to divvy up decision making weights most optimally--given the fact that we have a situation where say 1 company dominated an industry by controlling 50% of all the "market share" in his industry and a bunch of smaller companies who controlled the other 50%.  Because here is what will happen without a 50% limit.  The 50% guy will start checking out the different operations of the various smaller companies that control the other 50%--and it will start, picking and choosing, on which ones it wants to absorb first, gaining share all the way (this is ps3. said in a different way).

------

I think it is time to we start hearing the term "globanomics" bouncing around in the financial, business and worldly news media.  In fact, i think it is past time.