As I sit here watching mother nature paint the world white creating the
illusion of purity, I came to the realization that Thoreau was really
right about "the masses of men lead lives of quiet desperation.
As an example (and the subject of this blog) consider the one thing men
will fight to the death over but has no value. It is power.
The power I speak of is not a bigger engine in a muscle car, although
symptomatic, but rather power over other beings. I use the term beings as
I have witnessed this effort expended over dumb animals. No, not your
second-cousin Frankie. Although he is dumber than a box of rocks. No the
power I speak of goes under guise of leadership.
This fool's quest runs the gamut of the crude brute in grade school all
the way up to and including the POTUS aka leader of the free world. It is
just feeding the ego plain and simple. Boys, typically, are conditioned
from infancy to be a man among men. Failure is deemed weakness.
The argument for leadership are legion; there is altruistic, neccessity,
power for the sake of power, masculinity and the list goes on.
All of them are bullshit.
The altruist claims we have to fix things for someone else and they can
get it done. Few dare ask why it must be fixed or why should they lead.
The neccessity typically claims we need a powerful leader to defend
ourselves. Perhaps, but show me the threat. I mean SHOW ME the threat. We
are enmeshed in an endless war without a clear threat. But just our leader
time, some intel from a satellite will emerge with plenty of analysis by
people we don't know with a motivation we haven't a clue about.
Hitler and Idi Amin are classic examples of power for the sake of power.
Power is control of the people.
Masculinity is the most perverse of them all. This is all part of the
mating ritual. Many women are transfixed by the possibility of mating with
a powerful leader. They have confused power with strength. In the end,
many of these women learn that their leader is too consumed with leading
to pay any attention to them. Some, perhaps in a twisted reality, assume
leadership among other women who are wives of her mate's subordinates.
This leadership nonsense assumes a leader is requisite. For a transient
problem, this may be true. Problems arise, are dealt with and then go
away. Between problems, there is no logical reason for a leader to exist.
Some will claim that having a existing leader will expedite the problem
solving.
First of all, a leader isn't a worker. Workers build and repair. A leader
doesn't research, his advisors do all that. In heirarchial systems, the
leader decides after consideration and then delegates to subordinate
leaders who delegate to subordinates, etc.
The need for future leaders is so intense that the Army long ago mandated
an up or out retention system. Get promoted to a leadership position or go
home. The Army will even send the soldier to leadership training. It
appears so important that Army recruiting advertisements brag about the
leaders they produce. So hire the vet; they will get the job done.
The problem is exercising power. Few who start down that path can ever
escape it. They practice it in small ways every day. Commands to family
members (especially the little lady), advise and sticking their noses in
other people's business.
It is time to tell them to shut their rat crap mouth. Those who have risen
above the ego-feeding need have pity on them and at the same time,
recognize that they are dangerous,willing to fight to the death to
maintain power.
They can never be a friend. A friend is an equal and the power-seekers
won't stoop that low. It is time to end the age of hero worship. (Heros
are a good subject for another time.)
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Herd Animals, Law and the Individual
Having grown up in the American West, I found occaisions to work around
livestock. First is was Arabian horses and later, cattle. One thing was a
constant, herd mentality. Even my dog team exhibitted herd mentality.
So just what is herd mentality? It is a protective mechanism based upon
the premise that there is safety in large groups. For the group to exist,
each member must conform to the standards/rules of the group.
With the advent of government, many of these standards became codified
into law. Many of these standards exist for logical reasons that can
easily withstand critical scrutiny. Some just won't. Other laws are
grouped into the category of herd expectations. You are expected to ... .
Within the herd, the "law" is accepted as a protective construct. All
members are expected to obey and defend the law. None the less, the law is
NOT for protection. It is codified punishment. Its sole purpose is to
punish transgressors.
The herd demands compliance. It is just a logical offshoot of the "because
I said so" admonishments of harried mothers. Birth of an infant
constitutes automatic enrollment in the herd. Choice is NOT optional.
Rather than teach children why a law exists, we practice forced
compliance. The herd can brook no questioning of the law. The law is, was
and will always be.
The herd accepts anything handed down from on high as gospel. In the US,
the on high is government composed of elected representatives. These laws
are trotted out as consensus, compromises and neccessities for order. The
herd accepts them for one reason. Each herd elected its representative to
the central body. The representative is a member of the herd. This is why
encumbants enjoy re-election more often than not.
Yet within every herd, there appears some individual that questions the
logic, leadership and motivations of the herd. In almost every case, the
individual is isolated by the enforcers and under pain of seperation from
the herd told to "get with the program."
Some will ask, "Why are questions met with so much hostility?"
Here is a dose of bitter reality. The members of the herd aren't very
smart. They don't know why a particularly obscure law, rule or standard
exists. But there must be a good reason. Questions cause distress to the
members due to the evidence that they don't know why. You are one of us or
you are against us. Notice that there are no other possibilities?
This herd concept has been around forever. Ants, bees, coral, ... the list
goes on. It works. It is group-think. If you attack one of us, you have
attacked all of us. If we stampede, we all stampede.
However, there is a problem. The more rigid the rules, the lower the
adaptability of the herd is to changes in the environment. Humans abhor
change. Change is disruptive to the status quo. Change forces unskilled
minds to react in fear.
Individualism is the realm of the free-thinker. The herd forces them to
the outskirts and relegates them to obscurity. The individual must be
marginalized for the mental security of the membership.
The individual has choices: move on and become more isolated, remain on
the outskirts of the current herd or resign from the ranks of
individualism and seek full membership. There is one other choice;
self-elimination.
Returning to the fact that this herd issue has always been, leads us to
the evolution of the concept. First came family with an authoritarian
leader. Next came the tribe with an elected leader. As the tribe enlarged,
the need arose for more authoritarianism. Education brought us cooperation
and the democratic ideal. Democracy is herd mentality. Orderliness
demanded some authoritarianism, but it must sound logical. Enter the
philosophers.
Philosophy provides good sounding arguments for why such must be. It
discounts the individual and demands coordinated efforts by the masses. To
be governable, the masses must beleive their herd is sovereign even when
it ain't. The easist method for accomplishing this is by repackaging and
relabeling it as Communitarianism. The top designs the framework,
methodology and common interests. The herds think they are contributing
when all they are doing is complying with a predetermined outcome. The
herd was conned into thinking they decided.
It is just another episode of Borg attacks. You will be assimilated,
resistance is futile.
The why is simple: fear and profitability.
livestock. First is was Arabian horses and later, cattle. One thing was a
constant, herd mentality. Even my dog team exhibitted herd mentality.
So just what is herd mentality? It is a protective mechanism based upon
the premise that there is safety in large groups. For the group to exist,
each member must conform to the standards/rules of the group.
With the advent of government, many of these standards became codified
into law. Many of these standards exist for logical reasons that can
easily withstand critical scrutiny. Some just won't. Other laws are
grouped into the category of herd expectations. You are expected to ... .
Within the herd, the "law" is accepted as a protective construct. All
members are expected to obey and defend the law. None the less, the law is
NOT for protection. It is codified punishment. Its sole purpose is to
punish transgressors.
The herd demands compliance. It is just a logical offshoot of the "because
I said so" admonishments of harried mothers. Birth of an infant
constitutes automatic enrollment in the herd. Choice is NOT optional.
Rather than teach children why a law exists, we practice forced
compliance. The herd can brook no questioning of the law. The law is, was
and will always be.
The herd accepts anything handed down from on high as gospel. In the US,
the on high is government composed of elected representatives. These laws
are trotted out as consensus, compromises and neccessities for order. The
herd accepts them for one reason. Each herd elected its representative to
the central body. The representative is a member of the herd. This is why
encumbants enjoy re-election more often than not.
Yet within every herd, there appears some individual that questions the
logic, leadership and motivations of the herd. In almost every case, the
individual is isolated by the enforcers and under pain of seperation from
the herd told to "get with the program."
Some will ask, "Why are questions met with so much hostility?"
Here is a dose of bitter reality. The members of the herd aren't very
smart. They don't know why a particularly obscure law, rule or standard
exists. But there must be a good reason. Questions cause distress to the
members due to the evidence that they don't know why. You are one of us or
you are against us. Notice that there are no other possibilities?
This herd concept has been around forever. Ants, bees, coral, ... the list
goes on. It works. It is group-think. If you attack one of us, you have
attacked all of us. If we stampede, we all stampede.
However, there is a problem. The more rigid the rules, the lower the
adaptability of the herd is to changes in the environment. Humans abhor
change. Change is disruptive to the status quo. Change forces unskilled
minds to react in fear.
Individualism is the realm of the free-thinker. The herd forces them to
the outskirts and relegates them to obscurity. The individual must be
marginalized for the mental security of the membership.
The individual has choices: move on and become more isolated, remain on
the outskirts of the current herd or resign from the ranks of
individualism and seek full membership. There is one other choice;
self-elimination.
Returning to the fact that this herd issue has always been, leads us to
the evolution of the concept. First came family with an authoritarian
leader. Next came the tribe with an elected leader. As the tribe enlarged,
the need arose for more authoritarianism. Education brought us cooperation
and the democratic ideal. Democracy is herd mentality. Orderliness
demanded some authoritarianism, but it must sound logical. Enter the
philosophers.
Philosophy provides good sounding arguments for why such must be. It
discounts the individual and demands coordinated efforts by the masses. To
be governable, the masses must beleive their herd is sovereign even when
it ain't. The easist method for accomplishing this is by repackaging and
relabeling it as Communitarianism. The top designs the framework,
methodology and common interests. The herds think they are contributing
when all they are doing is complying with a predetermined outcome. The
herd was conned into thinking they decided.
It is just another episode of Borg attacks. You will be assimilated,
resistance is futile.
The why is simple: fear and profitability.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
I Just a Freakin' Ray of Sunshine
It is Thanksgiving Day morning and I sit here seeing gold at $1192USD and change. Everything is going as planned. By Monday, gold will break $1200 and the jobs will stabilize in number for the holiday season.
This holiday season is our last grand hurrah. Credit is virtually maxxed out. US dollars are being dumped in favor of gold by central banks. The US has roughly $4.3 trillion coming due in the next 12 months. The natives are restless and the politicians are taking pills, obtained at your expense, in hopes of controlling their bed-wetting.
It is all circling the drain and nobody or no thing can plug it. Oh they will try and they will fail. It ain't nice to fool mother nature.
Yes, mother nature. Tis a simple premise that goes like this: In nature, everything will balance out in the long-term average. The corrections trend towards masssive. In nature, debt is short-term and is paid off within hours or days. Failure to pay is death. In nature, the stupid are food. In nature, the old die. In nature, there just flat ain't no economists, bankers or financial advisors.
I am happy this Thanksgiving. I have no debts, no credit and no money. I have great friends and a so-so family. I am living at a pivotal time in our specie's history. I have spent years learning arcane and anachronistic drivel that will soon be important to the colony.
I see today and all my tomorrows as opportunities soon no longer constrained by stupid regulations, international balance of payments nonsense, and gnomes.
I live in a state of nervous excitement. What's in the box, what's in the box, can I open it!!!
It is said, "A person's nature will always out itself." Every scientist knows that the nature of nature is change. In every environment, the individual must adapt to change or die.
Social animals circle the wagons into colonies when threatened. Just hope you have selected the right social group. I am thankful that I have. We may be older, gimped up and broke, but we have friendship, respect and a whole passel of knowledge (some even have wisdom to make up for my lack).
Welcome to the future. "Do you know John Galt?"
This holiday season is our last grand hurrah. Credit is virtually maxxed out. US dollars are being dumped in favor of gold by central banks. The US has roughly $4.3 trillion coming due in the next 12 months. The natives are restless and the politicians are taking pills, obtained at your expense, in hopes of controlling their bed-wetting.
It is all circling the drain and nobody or no thing can plug it. Oh they will try and they will fail. It ain't nice to fool mother nature.
Yes, mother nature. Tis a simple premise that goes like this: In nature, everything will balance out in the long-term average. The corrections trend towards masssive. In nature, debt is short-term and is paid off within hours or days. Failure to pay is death. In nature, the stupid are food. In nature, the old die. In nature, there just flat ain't no economists, bankers or financial advisors.
I am happy this Thanksgiving. I have no debts, no credit and no money. I have great friends and a so-so family. I am living at a pivotal time in our specie's history. I have spent years learning arcane and anachronistic drivel that will soon be important to the colony.
I see today and all my tomorrows as opportunities soon no longer constrained by stupid regulations, international balance of payments nonsense, and gnomes.
I live in a state of nervous excitement. What's in the box, what's in the box, can I open it!!!
It is said, "A person's nature will always out itself." Every scientist knows that the nature of nature is change. In every environment, the individual must adapt to change or die.
Social animals circle the wagons into colonies when threatened. Just hope you have selected the right social group. I am thankful that I have. We may be older, gimped up and broke, but we have friendship, respect and a whole passel of knowledge (some even have wisdom to make up for my lack).
Welcome to the future. "Do you know John Galt?"
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Ron Paul and the Terri Schiavo Gambit
The patient lays there, totally dependant upon infusions, injections and
daily inspections. The treatment specialists ponder, devise and impliment
modified treatments that vary little from what has already been done. The
results remain the same. Slow and steady deterioration.
The believers circle round. Ever optimistic that given just a bit more
time, a miracle will occur. Just a few more days, weeks or maybe a year or
two will provide the time needed for someone to develop a magic bullet
that will make everything all right.
On the other side a lone voice declares, no more. He knows there is no
cure, no hope and the only path forward is to recognize the issue, accept
it and pull the plug on the failed experiment.
However on center stage, the technicians and managers wring their hands
and console both sides while reaping substantial profits. They can't and
won't make the choice. After all, just a few more weeks and the new Beemer
will be parked in their garage. The heavy costs of life-support are being
borne by those affected.
The lone voice gets louder by the day. Openly declaring that the patient
is dead. The media broadcasts it nationwide and the viewers look to their
own pathetic circumstances and cry for justice. If the plug is pulled, it
will affect us all in the end.
----------------------------
The US economic system is entirely based upon belief. The foundation is
"full faith and credit" in the United States. Our money is backed only by
the willingness for the public to foot any and all bills incurred by the
USA.
Enter Senator Ron Paul. In a fit of rage, he demands an audit of the
Federal Reserve System. He has a deeply commited belief that once the
spreadsheet is presented to the people, the voters will demand positive
efforts to terminate the patient.
Little does he realize that he is demanding the death of the people's god.
It matters little if we call it god, Keynesian Economic Theory or faith in
the system. It is belief. If the people lose faith in the system, their
money will become as worthless as it really is. Confidence vanishes and
all that is left is work for the accountants.
All the hopes, dreams and possessions are shed in the death spiral of
demands for payment due in full immediately. The nice house bought on
credit is no longer their home. The cruelty of realizing that buying is
not the same as owning. The employers can no longer stay in business when
they are forced to accept worthless paper. Everyone is affected. Overseas,
the holders of worthless paper scramble to exchange paper for tangible
assets. The house of cards, built on sand and propped up by faith falls.
-----------------------
Will auditing the Federal Reserve have a positive result in the short run?
Not at all. Politicians will find themselves unemployed and unemployable.
No one will hire a person who can't manage money. The vast numbers of
people completely dependant upon the system will rebel. Many of these
rebellions will be violent. A dark cloud of anger will shadow the earth
and no one will be safe.
Before the depression of 1929, many people lived close to the land. Now,
they live in the cities and are totally dependant upon transportation to
bring them the essentials of life. Even something as low-tech as water
needs transportation to the city. The depression of today will be far
better termed "The Great Desperation."
In all species, once a certain level of population is reached, the specie
experiences a collapse. Only a fool would believe that the specie known as
homo sapiens would be exempt. Family, community and the resources in
materials and knowledge within the circle will prevent complete
extinction. The family and community will have to protect itself from the
criminals. Some of these will come wearing a mantle of officialdom. All of
them come to take what little you have left. Misery loves company.
Can this audit have a positive effect down the road? It is possible. Time
is the key element. The economy needs to be rebooted with a different
operating system installed. The people need to be conditioned to a new
world where self-sufficiency is the norm. Savings must become a high
priority and consumerism is seen as sillyness. Most of all, money must
have backing in tangible assets. The depression of "29" lasted into the
1950's. Whatever would cause a person to think that this one will last a
shorter time? It takes a generation and a half for a dependable reboot to
work.
-----------------------
Some will say I trot out doom and gloom. But if I, you, we make a few
preperations, we can get through this together. United We Stand. I look to
the future with nervous excitement. This will be a pivotal period in our
specie's evolution. We will be spectators and participants in rebuilding a
far more responsible community, nation and world. A world where death and
misery is accepted as natural. A world where no person is exempt from
their own choices and the natural outcome of their choice. The people must
re-learn self-sufficiency. Governance is never a solution, it is the
problem.
daily inspections. The treatment specialists ponder, devise and impliment
modified treatments that vary little from what has already been done. The
results remain the same. Slow and steady deterioration.
The believers circle round. Ever optimistic that given just a bit more
time, a miracle will occur. Just a few more days, weeks or maybe a year or
two will provide the time needed for someone to develop a magic bullet
that will make everything all right.
On the other side a lone voice declares, no more. He knows there is no
cure, no hope and the only path forward is to recognize the issue, accept
it and pull the plug on the failed experiment.
However on center stage, the technicians and managers wring their hands
and console both sides while reaping substantial profits. They can't and
won't make the choice. After all, just a few more weeks and the new Beemer
will be parked in their garage. The heavy costs of life-support are being
borne by those affected.
The lone voice gets louder by the day. Openly declaring that the patient
is dead. The media broadcasts it nationwide and the viewers look to their
own pathetic circumstances and cry for justice. If the plug is pulled, it
will affect us all in the end.
----------------------------
The US economic system is entirely based upon belief. The foundation is
"full faith and credit" in the United States. Our money is backed only by
the willingness for the public to foot any and all bills incurred by the
USA.
Enter Senator Ron Paul. In a fit of rage, he demands an audit of the
Federal Reserve System. He has a deeply commited belief that once the
spreadsheet is presented to the people, the voters will demand positive
efforts to terminate the patient.
Little does he realize that he is demanding the death of the people's god.
It matters little if we call it god, Keynesian Economic Theory or faith in
the system. It is belief. If the people lose faith in the system, their
money will become as worthless as it really is. Confidence vanishes and
all that is left is work for the accountants.
All the hopes, dreams and possessions are shed in the death spiral of
demands for payment due in full immediately. The nice house bought on
credit is no longer their home. The cruelty of realizing that buying is
not the same as owning. The employers can no longer stay in business when
they are forced to accept worthless paper. Everyone is affected. Overseas,
the holders of worthless paper scramble to exchange paper for tangible
assets. The house of cards, built on sand and propped up by faith falls.
-----------------------
Will auditing the Federal Reserve have a positive result in the short run?
Not at all. Politicians will find themselves unemployed and unemployable.
No one will hire a person who can't manage money. The vast numbers of
people completely dependant upon the system will rebel. Many of these
rebellions will be violent. A dark cloud of anger will shadow the earth
and no one will be safe.
Before the depression of 1929, many people lived close to the land. Now,
they live in the cities and are totally dependant upon transportation to
bring them the essentials of life. Even something as low-tech as water
needs transportation to the city. The depression of today will be far
better termed "The Great Desperation."
In all species, once a certain level of population is reached, the specie
experiences a collapse. Only a fool would believe that the specie known as
homo sapiens would be exempt. Family, community and the resources in
materials and knowledge within the circle will prevent complete
extinction. The family and community will have to protect itself from the
criminals. Some of these will come wearing a mantle of officialdom. All of
them come to take what little you have left. Misery loves company.
Can this audit have a positive effect down the road? It is possible. Time
is the key element. The economy needs to be rebooted with a different
operating system installed. The people need to be conditioned to a new
world where self-sufficiency is the norm. Savings must become a high
priority and consumerism is seen as sillyness. Most of all, money must
have backing in tangible assets. The depression of "29" lasted into the
1950's. Whatever would cause a person to think that this one will last a
shorter time? It takes a generation and a half for a dependable reboot to
work.
-----------------------
Some will say I trot out doom and gloom. But if I, you, we make a few
preperations, we can get through this together. United We Stand. I look to
the future with nervous excitement. This will be a pivotal period in our
specie's evolution. We will be spectators and participants in rebuilding a
far more responsible community, nation and world. A world where death and
misery is accepted as natural. A world where no person is exempt from
their own choices and the natural outcome of their choice. The people must
re-learn self-sufficiency. Governance is never a solution, it is the
problem.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Why a Blog Pt2
Recently I was asked why writing this blog was so important to me. While attempting to frame my response in a manner that would make sense, I realized it was a form of stress management.
There exists a rare beast known as the free-thinker. In any community, they make up less than a percent or two at best and in some cases, they just don't live there anymore. The reasons for this are simple.
Ridicule, rage and isolation.
The free-thinker trends towards no beliefs at all. The community exists by virtue of commonalty. Ergo, you are one of us or you ain't. Get with the program. Here is what you need to do. We expect you to ... . Why do you have to be such a hard-head.
Each member of the community believes. No argument will counter the belief system in place. The free-thinker is marginalized. Each faces their own form of hell on earth.
Homo Sapiens is a herd animal. A few million generations of breeding only the successful variants has left us with the genetic propensity to herd up for survival and protection. Separate an individual from the herd and they become stressed.
Each stressed individual has some coping skills. Most are ineffective and the few remaining tricks trend towards marginal relief of the stress at best.
The herd has been conditioned to the belief that the free-thinker is violent by nature. In some respects, it would be easy to go along with the herd's analysis. We had the K.C. bomber, the Uni-bomber and countless fictional TV and movie characters presented to you this evening by "Flatus-be-Gone," for those times it just ain't cool to cut the cheese. Stay tuned for the news.
Only the free-thinker can keep fiction and non-fiction separate. The herd has no need to think. They have been conditioned from birth to respect authority. Listen to your betters. Because I said so!
The free-thinker is NOT violent. Huh!!! The free-thinker ... Wait a minute. I'm getting tired of typing the same term over and over again. So the new and improved term shall be FT. If you can't figure out that every FT means free-thinker, go away. You are too stupid to butter a piece of bread. And by the way, use birth control.
The FT knows that violence is completely ineffective unless you eliminate every idiot. The FT knows this is impossible and really, really stupid. Every FT realizes that the economy needs worker bees. Even the over-paid and over-compensated hub-cap installer is needed to keep the economic machine operating.
The FT recognizes the right to think and respects it. They aren't foolish enough to presume that the right means actual thinking. The mastery of any subject demands practicing until it becomes part of the individuals nature. We, collectively, have failed to make thinking a need. Our social structure permits, no encourages compliance without question. For the FT, this demonstration of worker bee-ness is frustrating.
The FT walks his/her own path and respects those of others. None the less, society doesn't respect the FT. The mere idea threatens the cohesiveness of the group. The FT might provoke us to think. Thinking leads to questioning. Questioning leads to disobedience. Disobedience leads to change. We are quite happy with the way things are. Well, not so much happy, but content. Well not exacly content, but more like we are just use to it.
It is completely ironic that the masses owe their existence to the very FT trait they abhor. Every idea and invention came from free thought aka imagination. It was these ideas and inventions that made population growth, education and products possible. If you turn the TV on to a channel that has no station, all you get is static. Nothing emerges from static, nothing. Without FT, all society will ever have is static growth and eventual decline.
Bet you never saw that "imagination" thingy coming, did you?
Invention is a clever human trick. It begins with recognizing a problem. Once the problem is clear, imagination begins. Creation and implimentation can never exist without imagination. Sometimes the human brain recognizes a problem with its own error detection subroutine and does a gosub "imagination.exe". We call it "daydreaming" and do our best to stamp it out. You can teach a dumb dog to roll over, whatever would make you think we can't train an intellegent human to quit free thinking?
So why do we (the coolective) stifle imagination? The answer is awful crude, we were trained to. Thousands of generations of tribe/village life has taught us that new ideas must be studied thoroughly by a select group and then we might let some hint of it gradually emerge. We like it just the way it is. New ideas force a change, ergo stop the thinking process beyond the basic skills level. Everybody has a place and there is a place for everybody.
Oooooo ... The tribe/village is an organism. Acts in its own best interests, functions as a unit, fears the unknown, ... hmmm. Yes, of course. The FT is a free radical invading the body.
You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
-----------------------------------
Have you forgotten the title of this tome? It is "Why a Blog Pt.2".
It is therapy. It is a venting process. It lowers my stress levels. Perhaps it feeds a need to organize my thoughts and once in a while, break out a little humor. As this blog is for me, I laugh at my own jokes.
And most of all, it helps me refrain from choking the shit out of some people that desperately deserve it.
Fortunately, this area has a disproportionate number of free-thinkers. Maybe it is the weather. Or maybe it is as Nobel Laureate Richard Feynman stated, "Likes like like."
Or ... (sound of diabolical music please) it might be a coded message to the others. "You are not alone." (Dim lights, ... pull back and ... fade to black. Cut and that's a wrap)
(You gonna do that redhead grip at the post-production party?)
(Just what do you ...
Imagination creats new universes. Each full of possibilities. Some intersect with our own. Life is a journey. It is to be lived. Don't let it become too late to start.
If you were paying attention, I left you with the why of "Fortunately," hanging. The cacophony of two or more free thinkers laughing at some irony is soothing music that tames the savage beast. We render each other harmless. We are too busy debating to accomplish any creative mayhem. Besides, we would never agree on the type, manner and extra points for creativity mahem to engage in. So many possibilities, oh well I can dream.
There exists a rare beast known as the free-thinker. In any community, they make up less than a percent or two at best and in some cases, they just don't live there anymore. The reasons for this are simple.
Ridicule, rage and isolation.
The free-thinker trends towards no beliefs at all. The community exists by virtue of commonalty. Ergo, you are one of us or you ain't. Get with the program. Here is what you need to do. We expect you to ... . Why do you have to be such a hard-head.
Each member of the community believes. No argument will counter the belief system in place. The free-thinker is marginalized. Each faces their own form of hell on earth.
Homo Sapiens is a herd animal. A few million generations of breeding only the successful variants has left us with the genetic propensity to herd up for survival and protection. Separate an individual from the herd and they become stressed.
Each stressed individual has some coping skills. Most are ineffective and the few remaining tricks trend towards marginal relief of the stress at best.
The herd has been conditioned to the belief that the free-thinker is violent by nature. In some respects, it would be easy to go along with the herd's analysis. We had the K.C. bomber, the Uni-bomber and countless fictional TV and movie characters presented to you this evening by "Flatus-be-Gone," for those times it just ain't cool to cut the cheese. Stay tuned for the news.
Only the free-thinker can keep fiction and non-fiction separate. The herd has no need to think. They have been conditioned from birth to respect authority. Listen to your betters. Because I said so!
The free-thinker is NOT violent. Huh!!! The free-thinker ... Wait a minute. I'm getting tired of typing the same term over and over again. So the new and improved term shall be FT. If you can't figure out that every FT means free-thinker, go away. You are too stupid to butter a piece of bread. And by the way, use birth control.
The FT knows that violence is completely ineffective unless you eliminate every idiot. The FT knows this is impossible and really, really stupid. Every FT realizes that the economy needs worker bees. Even the over-paid and over-compensated hub-cap installer is needed to keep the economic machine operating.
The FT recognizes the right to think and respects it. They aren't foolish enough to presume that the right means actual thinking. The mastery of any subject demands practicing until it becomes part of the individuals nature. We, collectively, have failed to make thinking a need. Our social structure permits, no encourages compliance without question. For the FT, this demonstration of worker bee-ness is frustrating.
The FT walks his/her own path and respects those of others. None the less, society doesn't respect the FT. The mere idea threatens the cohesiveness of the group. The FT might provoke us to think. Thinking leads to questioning. Questioning leads to disobedience. Disobedience leads to change. We are quite happy with the way things are. Well, not so much happy, but content. Well not exacly content, but more like we are just use to it.
It is completely ironic that the masses owe their existence to the very FT trait they abhor. Every idea and invention came from free thought aka imagination. It was these ideas and inventions that made population growth, education and products possible. If you turn the TV on to a channel that has no station, all you get is static. Nothing emerges from static, nothing. Without FT, all society will ever have is static growth and eventual decline.
Bet you never saw that "imagination" thingy coming, did you?
Invention is a clever human trick. It begins with recognizing a problem. Once the problem is clear, imagination begins. Creation and implimentation can never exist without imagination. Sometimes the human brain recognizes a problem with its own error detection subroutine and does a gosub "imagination.exe". We call it "daydreaming" and do our best to stamp it out. You can teach a dumb dog to roll over, whatever would make you think we can't train an intellegent human to quit free thinking?
So why do we (the coolective) stifle imagination? The answer is awful crude, we were trained to. Thousands of generations of tribe/village life has taught us that new ideas must be studied thoroughly by a select group and then we might let some hint of it gradually emerge. We like it just the way it is. New ideas force a change, ergo stop the thinking process beyond the basic skills level. Everybody has a place and there is a place for everybody.
Oooooo ... The tribe/village is an organism. Acts in its own best interests, functions as a unit, fears the unknown, ... hmmm. Yes, of course. The FT is a free radical invading the body.
You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
-----------------------------------
Have you forgotten the title of this tome? It is "Why a Blog Pt.2".
It is therapy. It is a venting process. It lowers my stress levels. Perhaps it feeds a need to organize my thoughts and once in a while, break out a little humor. As this blog is for me, I laugh at my own jokes.
And most of all, it helps me refrain from choking the shit out of some people that desperately deserve it.
Fortunately, this area has a disproportionate number of free-thinkers. Maybe it is the weather. Or maybe it is as Nobel Laureate Richard Feynman stated, "Likes like like."
Or ... (sound of diabolical music please) it might be a coded message to the others. "You are not alone." (Dim lights, ... pull back and ... fade to black. Cut and that's a wrap)
(You gonna do that redhead grip at the post-production party?)
(Just what do you ...
Imagination creats new universes. Each full of possibilities. Some intersect with our own. Life is a journey. It is to be lived. Don't let it become too late to start.
If you were paying attention, I left you with the why of "Fortunately," hanging. The cacophony of two or more free thinkers laughing at some irony is soothing music that tames the savage beast. We render each other harmless. We are too busy debating to accomplish any creative mayhem. Besides, we would never agree on the type, manner and extra points for creativity mahem to engage in. So many possibilities, oh well I can dream.
Cruel and Unusual Punishment, If You Say So Pt1
Most folks concur with the Constitutional prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. Too bad nobody knows what this is.
What started as a good idea morphed into a total philosophical mess with the public held hostage. On one side of the argument are the conservatives screaming for capital punishment and lengthy prison terms. The liberals clamor for rehabilitation. Each decade the prevailing consensus seems to sway one way or the other. I use the term consensus only in the sense of the powers that decree thus is such.
Before we try to determine what is cruel and unusual, we first have to determine what is crime. The simple explanation would be harm to property, preson or possession. Perhaps we need to expand this to include possessions held in common by the populace. The question that remains is are their any other crimes. If we include inciting others to violence, we have to include ordering soldiers to war. How about theft? Would this not include eminent domain and tax foreclosure? Does calling it public good make it right?
Don't get the idea that I'm a Libertarian. It is a failed philosophy just as much as Hegel's or Adam Smith's fo that matter. All philosophies have something to teach us, but they all depend upon a compulsive and instinctual social imperative by the complete membership of a community to be actualized. Ain't a'gonna happen.
We still have to consider the so-called victimless crimes. These include prostitution, substance ingestion, conceled weapons carry, public nudity and several others. What is the criteria for harm determination?
So now that we have an idea of what constitutes crime, what would be cruel and unusual punishment for each type of crime. Would it not be logical to fit the punishment to the crime? If the punishment fails to match the crime, I would tender that it is cruel and unusual. If the punishment isn't applied fairly to everyone that commits the same crime, then once again, we have cruel and unusual.
I can just hear the howls of outrage. What about mitigating circumstances? What about the manner of the crime? How about the character of the perpetrator?
I killed him because he abused me for years. You killed him, plain and simple. He chopped her head off with an axe. He killed her, plain and simple. He's a pillar of the community and this was just an unfortunate lapse. He committed the crime, plain and simple.
In each of these cases, the harm was caused. Everything else is just a coward's excuse. The perps are afraid of the punishment for the harm they know they caused.
If we are to consider what are deemed capital crimes, all of these are violent. The question then becomes one of the probability of rehabilitation. If high, rehab. If low, then any return to society is out of the question. A return offender for the same crime is proof of inability to be rehabilitated.
We, as society, have two options. Death or banishment. Can death be cruel and unusual? Everybody dies and those who participate in dangerous vocations and hobbies are aware that their actions might cause premature death. If you cry out "choice is the difference", didn't the perp choose to engage in a crime with the knowledge that society might get pissed off? Prison is not banishment. In prison, the perp retains a substantial benefit from society while society gains nothing in return. Is this not theft of services?
End of part 1
What started as a good idea morphed into a total philosophical mess with the public held hostage. On one side of the argument are the conservatives screaming for capital punishment and lengthy prison terms. The liberals clamor for rehabilitation. Each decade the prevailing consensus seems to sway one way or the other. I use the term consensus only in the sense of the powers that decree thus is such.
Before we try to determine what is cruel and unusual, we first have to determine what is crime. The simple explanation would be harm to property, preson or possession. Perhaps we need to expand this to include possessions held in common by the populace. The question that remains is are their any other crimes. If we include inciting others to violence, we have to include ordering soldiers to war. How about theft? Would this not include eminent domain and tax foreclosure? Does calling it public good make it right?
Don't get the idea that I'm a Libertarian. It is a failed philosophy just as much as Hegel's or Adam Smith's fo that matter. All philosophies have something to teach us, but they all depend upon a compulsive and instinctual social imperative by the complete membership of a community to be actualized. Ain't a'gonna happen.
We still have to consider the so-called victimless crimes. These include prostitution, substance ingestion, conceled weapons carry, public nudity and several others. What is the criteria for harm determination?
So now that we have an idea of what constitutes crime, what would be cruel and unusual punishment for each type of crime. Would it not be logical to fit the punishment to the crime? If the punishment fails to match the crime, I would tender that it is cruel and unusual. If the punishment isn't applied fairly to everyone that commits the same crime, then once again, we have cruel and unusual.
I can just hear the howls of outrage. What about mitigating circumstances? What about the manner of the crime? How about the character of the perpetrator?
I killed him because he abused me for years. You killed him, plain and simple. He chopped her head off with an axe. He killed her, plain and simple. He's a pillar of the community and this was just an unfortunate lapse. He committed the crime, plain and simple.
In each of these cases, the harm was caused. Everything else is just a coward's excuse. The perps are afraid of the punishment for the harm they know they caused.
If we are to consider what are deemed capital crimes, all of these are violent. The question then becomes one of the probability of rehabilitation. If high, rehab. If low, then any return to society is out of the question. A return offender for the same crime is proof of inability to be rehabilitated.
We, as society, have two options. Death or banishment. Can death be cruel and unusual? Everybody dies and those who participate in dangerous vocations and hobbies are aware that their actions might cause premature death. If you cry out "choice is the difference", didn't the perp choose to engage in a crime with the knowledge that society might get pissed off? Prison is not banishment. In prison, the perp retains a substantial benefit from society while society gains nothing in return. Is this not theft of services?
End of part 1
Cruel and Unusual Punishment, If You Say So Pt2
So here we are, prison is not banishment and it inflicts financial harm on the citizenry. So what would constitute banishment? I like Adak Island. It has a bit of infrastructure and is remote. give them a ten hour block of instruction on survival, let them choose 200 pounds of gear/supplies and drop them on Adak by parachute. One small Coast Guard vessel can target practice on anything floating away from the island.
So now we have theft/harm of possessions. Repeat offenders go to the island. For first time offenders, here is a good argument for indentured servitude in a prison environment. Yep, that good ole prison labor thingy. The debt created must be paid off before any argument can be made for the perp being rehabilitated. The prison must pay its way.
Oh, this overtheedge guy is out of control. Am I? Not yet, but here it comes:
No plea bargaining is allowed. Murder is a choice to kill. Manslaughter is stupid action that resulted in unintended death. Theft/destruction of property is choice.
Inciting to violence must be kept in the proper context. Ordering a soldier isn't a crime. Ordering or inciting your friends to commit harm is a crime. However, the harm must be tangible. If the harm can be easily seen and touched by a disinterested visitor the next day, it is probably harm. Restitution must be made.
This brings us to the victimless crimes. I'll prattle on about a few of them. Just remember, these are my thoughts and I don't care what you think. This doesn't preclude a debate that offers a good counter-argument.
Prostitution. What are the supposed harms? Religious, disease, family values, crime attraction and maybe some more obscure nonsense. Several minor and at least one major religion accepts prostitution. Argument fails. Disease is reduced by testing and treatment. Argument fails. An older couple wants to hire a prostitute for a menage a trois. It is family business and not the state's. Argument fails. The criminal element can only thrive when the victim has no access to law enforcement. Let's face it, cops just love a righteous bust.
Substance ingestion. Here we have a few problems. Some can be innocuous when used responsibly. Some can cause a relaxing of inhibitions towards violence and/or failure to foresee outcomes in a percentage of the population. Some of these substances are deemed illegal. Some are not only legal, but are widely prescribed to people driving cars. The only realistic method for dealing with this is by actual harm. Society can't claim ingestion is harm. The 300 pound man is causing as much if not more harm than the pot head. Arguments fail.
The concealed weapons carry laws are just a deluded means of reassuring a fearful public. These abortions are feelgood, stroke the public bullshit laws. Worse of all, these claim to prevent harm. This is utter nonsense. The criminal doesn't abide by the law, but will appreciate an unarmed victim. Argument fails.
Try as I may, I failed to find an argument for public nudity/decency laws. I considered embarrassment, bad taste and sheltering children from sex. Actual sex crimes are physical and mental harms. The BS crimes I'm talking about only involve appearance. Sex and sexual expression are human attributes. They are normal even if done in public view. Is there an argument for discouraging these forms of conduct? Perhaps, but not by enacting law. The best course of action is pointing and laughing at the performers. Humiliation is a powerful motivator. Few of you will ever appreciate the mental conflict I faced when children are the spectators. The father in me screams for child protective laws, but logic demands a coherent reason. Attractive nuisance, distractive nuisance, public nuisance, I don't have a clue.
So what would be cruel and unusual punishment? Us dropping every politician that devalues our money on to Adak Island. Those violent criminals don't deserve that. The punishment must fit the crime, but society has a peculiar idea of cruel and unusual. They figure re-electing a politician isn't for the rest of us.
THE END (not bloody likely)
So now we have theft/harm of possessions. Repeat offenders go to the island. For first time offenders, here is a good argument for indentured servitude in a prison environment. Yep, that good ole prison labor thingy. The debt created must be paid off before any argument can be made for the perp being rehabilitated. The prison must pay its way.
Oh, this overtheedge guy is out of control. Am I? Not yet, but here it comes:
No plea bargaining is allowed. Murder is a choice to kill. Manslaughter is stupid action that resulted in unintended death. Theft/destruction of property is choice.
Inciting to violence must be kept in the proper context. Ordering a soldier isn't a crime. Ordering or inciting your friends to commit harm is a crime. However, the harm must be tangible. If the harm can be easily seen and touched by a disinterested visitor the next day, it is probably harm. Restitution must be made.
This brings us to the victimless crimes. I'll prattle on about a few of them. Just remember, these are my thoughts and I don't care what you think. This doesn't preclude a debate that offers a good counter-argument.
Prostitution. What are the supposed harms? Religious, disease, family values, crime attraction and maybe some more obscure nonsense. Several minor and at least one major religion accepts prostitution. Argument fails. Disease is reduced by testing and treatment. Argument fails. An older couple wants to hire a prostitute for a menage a trois. It is family business and not the state's. Argument fails. The criminal element can only thrive when the victim has no access to law enforcement. Let's face it, cops just love a righteous bust.
Substance ingestion. Here we have a few problems. Some can be innocuous when used responsibly. Some can cause a relaxing of inhibitions towards violence and/or failure to foresee outcomes in a percentage of the population. Some of these substances are deemed illegal. Some are not only legal, but are widely prescribed to people driving cars. The only realistic method for dealing with this is by actual harm. Society can't claim ingestion is harm. The 300 pound man is causing as much if not more harm than the pot head. Arguments fail.
The concealed weapons carry laws are just a deluded means of reassuring a fearful public. These abortions are feelgood, stroke the public bullshit laws. Worse of all, these claim to prevent harm. This is utter nonsense. The criminal doesn't abide by the law, but will appreciate an unarmed victim. Argument fails.
Try as I may, I failed to find an argument for public nudity/decency laws. I considered embarrassment, bad taste and sheltering children from sex. Actual sex crimes are physical and mental harms. The BS crimes I'm talking about only involve appearance. Sex and sexual expression are human attributes. They are normal even if done in public view. Is there an argument for discouraging these forms of conduct? Perhaps, but not by enacting law. The best course of action is pointing and laughing at the performers. Humiliation is a powerful motivator. Few of you will ever appreciate the mental conflict I faced when children are the spectators. The father in me screams for child protective laws, but logic demands a coherent reason. Attractive nuisance, distractive nuisance, public nuisance, I don't have a clue.
So what would be cruel and unusual punishment? Us dropping every politician that devalues our money on to Adak Island. Those violent criminals don't deserve that. The punishment must fit the crime, but society has a peculiar idea of cruel and unusual. They figure re-electing a politician isn't for the rest of us.
THE END (not bloody likely)
Saturday, November 21, 2009
In God We Trust
Will you be paying with gold or silver?
It is all about trust. Mayhaps some folks trust in God or the US dollar
bill, but I don't. For trust to exist, a person needs to know just what
the other party will do for any given event. This demands intimate
knowledge of the other party's ethos and motivations.
The gold standard of excellence, good as gold, gold star, ... the list
goes on. Why? Just why does this equating value and gold have in common
and why does it persist?
Gold is a pretty rock. It is soft, heavy, durable, doesn't corrode and
scarce. It can be used to make pretty dodads that last for centuries.
All of these properties makes it ideal as a medium of exchange. It
functioned as money. Granted, you can't eat it. But I'll bet you a new
shiny Krugerand that someone will trade me a sack of grain for gold.
Gold has a downside; scarcity. This results in a high valuation. That
Krugerand has a valuation today of $1150.90. Then to purchase it, you will
have to pay a premium to cover profits and fabrication costs. So what
happens when I go to buy that sack of grain? Do we cut a chunk off ala
"pieces of eight" concept?
Our only practical option is a bimetallic currency or more metals. In the
past it was gold, silver and copper.
Silver has several uses as well as copper. Both lack one or more of gold's
properties, but as a lower value metal this is acceptable. Today's silver
price is $18.50 per troy ounce and copper is roughly $0.18 an ounce.
Neither silver or copper is recycled in minute quantities. It costs more
to recycle than the value of the metal. Larger quantities are actively
recycled.
As an example of this valuation versus recycling, it was only a few years
ago that computers were thrown out. The metals value was just too low to
pay the cost of recycling. Nowadays, computers and other electronic items
are a valuable resource. The gold value went up and although the quantity
of gold in a computer dropped, enough still exists for a recycling
industry to earn a profit.
The financial talking heads will point out that gold, silver and copper
are poor investment vehicles. They are right. An ounce of gold purchased
in 1920 is still worth exactly 1 ounce of gold. The day to day prices will
fluctuate depending upon demand, but each must be converted into currency
to gain a profit or loss.
Gold and silver do maintain purchasing power. An ounce of gold, exchanged
for dollars will buy about the same quantity and type of goods as it would
in 1890. Silver lost some of its purchasing power, but this is due to
speculation by the Hunt brothers and the changeover to digital
photography. The Hunt brothers' attempt to corner the silver market left a
bad taste in investors mouth and pocketbook.
In severe economic turmoil, gold and silver retain purchasing power. If
our dollar continues to be devalued, gold and silver will return to be the
medium of exchange. For poor folks and small transactions, silver coins
will be the preferred currency.
Another argument for silver is its source. Most silver is a byproduct of
copper, zinc and lead refining. In an economic downturn, these metals will
be in far less demand. Hence less mining. Less mining results in less
silver production.
-----------------------------
I am not a financial advisor. I don't advise anyone on anything. Go do
whatever you do. I don't care. If I can ever get a few bucks ahead, I
might buy silver. Until then, I buy knowledge in the form of used books.
When the economy tanks, the jack-of-all trades never starves.
If you hire me, remember that I take only gold or silver coins. I wonder
if that is the reason I'm not employed.
It is all about trust. Mayhaps some folks trust in God or the US dollar
bill, but I don't. For trust to exist, a person needs to know just what
the other party will do for any given event. This demands intimate
knowledge of the other party's ethos and motivations.
The gold standard of excellence, good as gold, gold star, ... the list
goes on. Why? Just why does this equating value and gold have in common
and why does it persist?
Gold is a pretty rock. It is soft, heavy, durable, doesn't corrode and
scarce. It can be used to make pretty dodads that last for centuries.
All of these properties makes it ideal as a medium of exchange. It
functioned as money. Granted, you can't eat it. But I'll bet you a new
shiny Krugerand that someone will trade me a sack of grain for gold.
Gold has a downside; scarcity. This results in a high valuation. That
Krugerand has a valuation today of $1150.90. Then to purchase it, you will
have to pay a premium to cover profits and fabrication costs. So what
happens when I go to buy that sack of grain? Do we cut a chunk off ala
"pieces of eight" concept?
Our only practical option is a bimetallic currency or more metals. In the
past it was gold, silver and copper.
Silver has several uses as well as copper. Both lack one or more of gold's
properties, but as a lower value metal this is acceptable. Today's silver
price is $18.50 per troy ounce and copper is roughly $0.18 an ounce.
Neither silver or copper is recycled in minute quantities. It costs more
to recycle than the value of the metal. Larger quantities are actively
recycled.
As an example of this valuation versus recycling, it was only a few years
ago that computers were thrown out. The metals value was just too low to
pay the cost of recycling. Nowadays, computers and other electronic items
are a valuable resource. The gold value went up and although the quantity
of gold in a computer dropped, enough still exists for a recycling
industry to earn a profit.
The financial talking heads will point out that gold, silver and copper
are poor investment vehicles. They are right. An ounce of gold purchased
in 1920 is still worth exactly 1 ounce of gold. The day to day prices will
fluctuate depending upon demand, but each must be converted into currency
to gain a profit or loss.
Gold and silver do maintain purchasing power. An ounce of gold, exchanged
for dollars will buy about the same quantity and type of goods as it would
in 1890. Silver lost some of its purchasing power, but this is due to
speculation by the Hunt brothers and the changeover to digital
photography. The Hunt brothers' attempt to corner the silver market left a
bad taste in investors mouth and pocketbook.
In severe economic turmoil, gold and silver retain purchasing power. If
our dollar continues to be devalued, gold and silver will return to be the
medium of exchange. For poor folks and small transactions, silver coins
will be the preferred currency.
Another argument for silver is its source. Most silver is a byproduct of
copper, zinc and lead refining. In an economic downturn, these metals will
be in far less demand. Hence less mining. Less mining results in less
silver production.
-----------------------------
I am not a financial advisor. I don't advise anyone on anything. Go do
whatever you do. I don't care. If I can ever get a few bucks ahead, I
might buy silver. Until then, I buy knowledge in the form of used books.
When the economy tanks, the jack-of-all trades never starves.
If you hire me, remember that I take only gold or silver coins. I wonder
if that is the reason I'm not employed.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Mostly Just Static
As I was making my morning excursion outside to take care of certain
biological functions as well as letting the dog take care of his, I
noticed the thermometer pegged at 30 below. I just figured oh-well, just
another day in paradise. The National Weather Service called this cold
snap right on the money. Of course anyone who has lived in this rural area
of Alaska more than a decade or two could have done as well. We almost
always have a cold snap in November.
So as I was standing there waiting for the dog to finish his business,
he's old and his bodily functions move slow, I realized why I live here
and most don't.
Humans fall into two groups; statics and dynamics.
The static seeks a steady state in thier life. They want everything to
remain just as it is. This is carried to the extreme by demanding that
government, industry and NGOs actively pursue a stabilized environment.
The dynamics thrive on change. Life is supposed to be an adventure. The
dynamic knows that the nature of nature is change. Each day brings a form
of nervous excitement. What will today bring?
Shit oh dear, if this dog was any slower, he would be in reverse. Here I
am standing next to a snowbank in sandals, shorts and a t-shirt freezing my butt off and he has to inspect his toilet area.
Anyway, he finished and now I can get this typed out before I forget it.
Henry David Thoreau stated, "the masses of men lead lives of quiet
desperation." I just can't think of a more apt statement about the statics. These mental cripples will eagerly accept the status quo, no matter how miserable, rather than embrace change. They vote the same mental cripples back into public office, they remain at the same
miserable job, buy insurance for every contingency and ... the list is
endless. They spend thier lives in clustered hovels that present the
appearance of wealth, but lack richness of life.
I would have no problem with statics if they would mind thier own
business. But Noooo. The get their local, state and federal representatives to enact crap laws to force the dynamics into the static mould. Here is an example: 30+ years ago, I was living in rural Lake County Oregon. I witnessed a home owner lose to the statics by enforced
building codes. The house had to have complete plumbing and all the
electrical system had to be up to code. The problem: No water and the
probabilty of bringing in a well was zero and the nearest powerline was
over 3 miles away (roughly $24,000 for single phase). The house wasn't
finance, but a build as you can afford it. In the end, the owner-builder
couldn't afford to finish the house or move in. The added costs of
compliance with the building code had wiped out his meager savings.
I live right on the jagged edge. My house doesn't meet code and I don't
care. Alaska has a privacy clause in our constitution that real Alaskans
will defend. It is time for the statics to defend the right of dynamics to
live over the edge.
Special Note to Statics: You watch, we do. Without dynamics, you statics
couldn't engage in your form of voyeurism or have anything to talk about. We are your entertainment.
biological functions as well as letting the dog take care of his, I
noticed the thermometer pegged at 30 below. I just figured oh-well, just
another day in paradise. The National Weather Service called this cold
snap right on the money. Of course anyone who has lived in this rural area
of Alaska more than a decade or two could have done as well. We almost
always have a cold snap in November.
So as I was standing there waiting for the dog to finish his business,
he's old and his bodily functions move slow, I realized why I live here
and most don't.
Humans fall into two groups; statics and dynamics.
The static seeks a steady state in thier life. They want everything to
remain just as it is. This is carried to the extreme by demanding that
government, industry and NGOs actively pursue a stabilized environment.
The dynamics thrive on change. Life is supposed to be an adventure. The
dynamic knows that the nature of nature is change. Each day brings a form
of nervous excitement. What will today bring?
Shit oh dear, if this dog was any slower, he would be in reverse. Here I
am standing next to a snowbank in sandals, shorts and a t-shirt freezing my butt off and he has to inspect his toilet area.
Anyway, he finished and now I can get this typed out before I forget it.
Henry David Thoreau stated, "the masses of men lead lives of quiet
desperation." I just can't think of a more apt statement about the statics. These mental cripples will eagerly accept the status quo, no matter how miserable, rather than embrace change. They vote the same mental cripples back into public office, they remain at the same
miserable job, buy insurance for every contingency and ... the list is
endless. They spend thier lives in clustered hovels that present the
appearance of wealth, but lack richness of life.
I would have no problem with statics if they would mind thier own
business. But Noooo. The get their local, state and federal representatives to enact crap laws to force the dynamics into the static mould. Here is an example: 30+ years ago, I was living in rural Lake County Oregon. I witnessed a home owner lose to the statics by enforced
building codes. The house had to have complete plumbing and all the
electrical system had to be up to code. The problem: No water and the
probabilty of bringing in a well was zero and the nearest powerline was
over 3 miles away (roughly $24,000 for single phase). The house wasn't
finance, but a build as you can afford it. In the end, the owner-builder
couldn't afford to finish the house or move in. The added costs of
compliance with the building code had wiped out his meager savings.
I live right on the jagged edge. My house doesn't meet code and I don't
care. Alaska has a privacy clause in our constitution that real Alaskans
will defend. It is time for the statics to defend the right of dynamics to
live over the edge.
Special Note to Statics: You watch, we do. Without dynamics, you statics
couldn't engage in your form of voyeurism or have anything to talk about. We are your entertainment.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
The Palinistas are Coming, Run for the Hills
I admit, I voted for Sarah Palin for governor. I could claim there wasn't
much of a choice. I could claim she was a woman and she was/is hot, but
the truth is, I failed to dig deep enough.
I can say with all truthfulness that I didn't vote for the McCain-Palin
ticket. Perhaps this was a mistake, but I don't think so. It was
Republicans that started this current mess and I won't be conned into the
idea that the fools that embroiled us in fake, but costly armed conflicts
have the capacity to extract us.
So why my anger with myself over darling Sarah? I allowed myself to be
conned. She trotted out all her motivations after being sworn in. If you
know another person's ethos and motivations, they will do just what is
predictable. Nature always outs itself.
Sarah ran on the "out with the ash and trash" ticket. She was gonna set a
new standard for Alaskan politics. I won't go into the messes she made in
Juneau or her machinations behind closed doors (secret e-mails).
Here is my big beef. She got elected to the governorship, bailed out to
run for the Veep ticket, lost and then quit the governorship. She was a
fraud.
Recall her famous speil about the "difference between a hockey mom and a
pit bull"? "Lipstick."
All I could think of was a bitch in heat, screwing every dog in the
neighborhood and then leaving lipstick stains on the mauled bodies of
little children.
Ah, but why the title of this rant?
With money in her pocket from a book deal, Sarah will rise again. She,
with the adoration and monies of the Republican party, will make a run for
the White House. And I know that the American electorate are just sheep
desperately looking for a kind shepherd.
Nobody seems to recall that a shepherd fleeces the flock every year and
send the youth off to the slaughterhouse. If you will recall her "pitbull"
statement, you might wanna think about the flock. Pitbulls do what they do
and that is why they aren't ever used for herding sheep.
She did run with the guy who stated he would keep us in Iraq for a hundred
years if he had to.
My recommendation? Throw her back into the dog yard.
much of a choice. I could claim she was a woman and she was/is hot, but
the truth is, I failed to dig deep enough.
I can say with all truthfulness that I didn't vote for the McCain-Palin
ticket. Perhaps this was a mistake, but I don't think so. It was
Republicans that started this current mess and I won't be conned into the
idea that the fools that embroiled us in fake, but costly armed conflicts
have the capacity to extract us.
So why my anger with myself over darling Sarah? I allowed myself to be
conned. She trotted out all her motivations after being sworn in. If you
know another person's ethos and motivations, they will do just what is
predictable. Nature always outs itself.
Sarah ran on the "out with the ash and trash" ticket. She was gonna set a
new standard for Alaskan politics. I won't go into the messes she made in
Juneau or her machinations behind closed doors (secret e-mails).
Here is my big beef. She got elected to the governorship, bailed out to
run for the Veep ticket, lost and then quit the governorship. She was a
fraud.
Recall her famous speil about the "difference between a hockey mom and a
pit bull"? "Lipstick."
All I could think of was a bitch in heat, screwing every dog in the
neighborhood and then leaving lipstick stains on the mauled bodies of
little children.
Ah, but why the title of this rant?
With money in her pocket from a book deal, Sarah will rise again. She,
with the adoration and monies of the Republican party, will make a run for
the White House. And I know that the American electorate are just sheep
desperately looking for a kind shepherd.
Nobody seems to recall that a shepherd fleeces the flock every year and
send the youth off to the slaughterhouse. If you will recall her "pitbull"
statement, you might wanna think about the flock. Pitbulls do what they do
and that is why they aren't ever used for herding sheep.
She did run with the guy who stated he would keep us in Iraq for a hundred
years if he had to.
My recommendation? Throw her back into the dog yard.
Read My Lips ... We have This Under Control
Everyone who knows me knows I'm a financial news junkie. First thing in
the morning is the gold and silver spot prices. It ain't that I have any
holdings, it is just that metals are a barometer of the economic
conditions.
Then a quick cruise around the web to see what the talking heads are
peddling. Every day, it is green shoots, mustard seeds and some other
indicators. I recall the oil indicator on an old Pontaic Tempest I had. It
signaled low oil pressure right after the big bang and sparks.
But these people were hired for their expertise, right? Nope, unless you
catagorize expertise as encompassing stage presence and optimism.
I trust the media, NOT! The business of media is advertising. The
canned news (I'll get to it in a moment) is actually advertising to keep
you watching, listening or reading long enough to get to the money maker:
ads.
The news is collected at the news briefings. In effect, what shall we tell
the public? How do we phrase it? Ready? Okay let's do it and remember, no
questions will be answered.
"Welcome to the briefing. Blah, blah. Sorry, we don't have time to take
questions."
News briefings are NOT news. It is propaganda plain and simple.
The media has a vested interest in presenting it as news. Access and
advertising dollars.
Optimism is good just as long as it isn't bullshit. Lie to me and I will
never believe you again.
So just what are the facts?
Deficit, debt and finally death of our economy.
The root causes?
Congress and their addiction to spending our capital on votes. The Federal
Reserve Act was the tool. The voters for voting to take money out of the
public coffers for their sacred cow crap.
What's next?
Here is a fairly realistic scenario:
"The Day the Dollar Died" John Galt http://johngaltfla.com/blog3/2009/11/18/the-day-the-dollar-died/
How and when will it end?
Unknown. Each possibility is dependant upon the next mistakes made. Just
as natural processes can wear a mountain down, so will time erode the mess
we freely voted for.
No sense running, you'll just be broke, tired and in unfriendly
surroundings. Nobody will accept the pretty toilet paper in your wallet.
If you don't know who John Galt is, you have my condolences.
the morning is the gold and silver spot prices. It ain't that I have any
holdings, it is just that metals are a barometer of the economic
conditions.
Then a quick cruise around the web to see what the talking heads are
peddling. Every day, it is green shoots, mustard seeds and some other
indicators. I recall the oil indicator on an old Pontaic Tempest I had. It
signaled low oil pressure right after the big bang and sparks.
But these people were hired for their expertise, right? Nope, unless you
catagorize expertise as encompassing stage presence and optimism.
I trust the media, NOT! The business of media is advertising. The
canned news (I'll get to it in a moment) is actually advertising to keep
you watching, listening or reading long enough to get to the money maker:
ads.
The news is collected at the news briefings. In effect, what shall we tell
the public? How do we phrase it? Ready? Okay let's do it and remember, no
questions will be answered.
"Welcome to the briefing. Blah, blah. Sorry, we don't have time to take
questions."
News briefings are NOT news. It is propaganda plain and simple.
The media has a vested interest in presenting it as news. Access and
advertising dollars.
Optimism is good just as long as it isn't bullshit. Lie to me and I will
never believe you again.
So just what are the facts?
Deficit, debt and finally death of our economy.
The root causes?
Congress and their addiction to spending our capital on votes. The Federal
Reserve Act was the tool. The voters for voting to take money out of the
public coffers for their sacred cow crap.
What's next?
Here is a fairly realistic scenario:
"The Day the Dollar Died" John Galt http://johngaltfla.com/blog3/2009/11/18/the-day-the-dollar-died/
How and when will it end?
Unknown. Each possibility is dependant upon the next mistakes made. Just
as natural processes can wear a mountain down, so will time erode the mess
we freely voted for.
No sense running, you'll just be broke, tired and in unfriendly
surroundings. Nobody will accept the pretty toilet paper in your wallet.
If you don't know who John Galt is, you have my condolences.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
The Right to Profits
Since the dawn of civilization, we have been driven to increase our
standard of living. It is a natural inclination. Why would any reasonable
person accept poverty as a way of life? So just what are profits and how
do we gain it?
In every economic system, the basic item of value is labor. The more
accomplished the laborer, the greater the value. The problem arose with
the lack of a medium of exchange. Humans needed a way to bank the profits
of their labor and a mechanism for transporting it. A sack of grain had
value based upon the labor and cost to produce it. Initially the few sacks
of grain surplus to the family's needs could be bartered. Ah, but as is
the way of technology and labor, some farmers produced far more grain than
they could barter locally. What the system needed was a medium of
exchange. Hence the rise of precious metals as money. It was durable,
compact and scarce.
As the city-state came into being, gold was needed for the treasury. To
gain the gold, a tried and proven technique was utilized; war. Might makes
right. This led to another resource requirement, bronze. The city-state
needed bronze to make swords for their troops. The troops traditionally
used plunder as payment for their services aka labor. Here is the general
scenario:
City-state A needs gold to fill its treasury. City-state B has some. A
claims B affronted them and demands tribute. B says go to hell. War
ensues. A wins and cleans out the treasury of B, troops plunder the
civilians and under orders, seizes all the bronze for their arms
merchants. The profits go to the government and the arms merchants. The
people shouldered the costs by levies on their production of goods to
support their troops.
If ma and pa were lucky, one of their boys returned home with some bauble.
Most either died or spent the plunder on wine, women and song.
As the city-state gained in wealth and achieved empire status, more
resources passed through the merchant class. Recall that the basic unit of
value is labor. Labor effects production. Produce is inventory. Ooooh, I'm
gonna step on your foot, but I don't care. Inventory has no value until
the money changes hands. You can't eat swords, baubles or gold. Inventory
must be traded for necessities or luxuries. The merchant class traded a
medium of exchange for trade goods and took profits on each trade.
However, not all merchants had the inventory or gold to fund their
enterprise. Enter the financier. In return for granting a loan to the
merchant, the financier gained an interest in the merchant's goods or in
other words, a share of the profits.
Fast forward to the industrial age. Labor still creates value, but lacks
the inventory of tools and raw materials to produce. The factory owner
supplies the required assets and takes an interest in the laborer's skill.
Hence, the factory owner provides inventory. The products go to the
merchants for resale and the financier provides the gold to both the
factory owner and the merchant. Wars continue, but plunder is now stripped
from the soldier and passed to the entrepreneurial class aka financier. The
financier might not know squat about rubber production, but they know how
to hire the required laborers.
Luck and isolation brought us to the age of consumerism. Gold was replaced
by fiat currency. Otherwise, little changed since the latter days of the
hunter-gatherer societies. A new beast entered the picture, taxation.
Where levies were accepted during war, taxation needed no conflict. The
mantra of the empire was progress. National highway systems, airports and
a plethora of investments in the national infrastructure. Value remained a
constant, but fiat currency provided wealth accumulation by the middle
class.
Wealth demands investments to counter the effects of inflation.
---------------------------------------
In any growing population, inflation of the money supply is a necessity.
Here is why: If there are 100 workers in the labor force and 100 units of
payment, they each earn 1 unit. The next year, there are 102 workers, but
still the 100 units of payment. You tell the workers that they have to
take a pay cut. I ain't.
---------------------------------------
So we are forced to accept inflation, but we aren't forced to accept
deterioration of purchasing power. We invest. The more skilled have
greater investment choices. Those with the least are conned into insurance
under the guise of responsibility to family even after death. Many of the
early insurance programs permitted borrowing on your policy.
The labor movement spawned another evil step-child known as pension plans.
This is just old age insurance. Then our ever benevolent government had a
better idea, the 401k program. Effectively, you could create your own old
age insurance program. Homes became an investment, a nest egg for the
future.
The problems became acute. Every transaction required a financial gnome
who skimmed off a percentage. Every skim provides tax dollars. Insurance
companies required something to invest their money in. As the monies
collected required a future payout, risk had to be minimized. First it was
the broad based portfolio with some treasury notes. But, the corporate
fiduciary responsibility is to maximize the stockholders return. Enter
some risky investments.
With clever investment strategies, risk could be managed and profits
maximized. The greater the profits, the larger the investment pool gets.
More money to invest demands market manipulation. Enter the world of
futures. Initially the purpose was supposed to be securing raw materials
for future production. The world of investors saw this as a way to turn a
profit buying and selling a piece of paper with no intention of taking
delivery.
The futures market became the infant derivatives market. Risk could be
managed by insurance. Insurance is the most basic derivative. In simplish,
derivatives are anything derived from an actual trade of a tangible. The
derivative is an intangible.
Returning to the more affluent middle class, houses, 401k and other
investments became the norm. Buying a home was the way of stating to the
world that you had arrived. The world of investment only too happy to
help(?) make it happen. At first, it was your word and a handshake, but
soon it became credit scores, insurance and second mortgages. When the
more affluent had homes, investment opportunities started to slack off.
Enter the sub-prime loan programs. Risk increased, but could be managed by
pooling the assets and selling shares of the pool to investors. Pitch in
some insurance to cover any potential risk and we can eliminate moral
hazard.
---------------------------------------
Moral hazard is nothing more than risk of capital investment. In the past,
moral hazard was minimized by due diligence aka in-depth research of the
investment.
---------------------------------------
These pools of assets became the Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDO)of
today. The insurance; Credit Default Swaps (CDS). Both fall into the
category of derivatives. There exists no tangible asset to transfer
between the parties in a default occurs. The investor and the insurance
company don't hold the mortgage papers.
So where the hell am I going with this? Remember the empire? The so-called
managers have gotten addicted to tax revenues. Spend some here and secure
future votes. A wise manager needing votes will spend the money where they
can secure the most votes for minimum dollars. Others will spend it where
they can secure future funding for re-election. The empire needs money to
grow and happy taxpayers to retain those in power.
History is replete with examples of money being equated with power. Some
people have the determination, skill and luck to create wealth. Some
attempt the short-cut of crime to achieve it. The real scoundrels find a
way to manage the funds of others; either by investments or taxation.
So what happens if this paper house of derivatives fails. From near the
top down, investment losses means fewer dollars to invest, fewer dollars
for investment mean less inventory, less inventory means fewer needs for
labor and returning to the top, far less tax revenue and election day rout
for the incumbent. History shows many cases of the rout becoming a purge.
As you might recall, the title is "The Right to Profits." In order to
maintain tax revenues, the investment vehicles MUST be profitable. Hence,
the right to (maintain) profits must be guaranteed by the government. "To
big to fail" was coined by our benevolent government with we the people
underwriting failures.
----------------------------------------
It falls to each person to evaluate their perceived reality, determine
their own objectives, develop the strategy to achieve the objective and
engage the tactics they feel best suits their nature and capabilities.
standard of living. It is a natural inclination. Why would any reasonable
person accept poverty as a way of life? So just what are profits and how
do we gain it?
In every economic system, the basic item of value is labor. The more
accomplished the laborer, the greater the value. The problem arose with
the lack of a medium of exchange. Humans needed a way to bank the profits
of their labor and a mechanism for transporting it. A sack of grain had
value based upon the labor and cost to produce it. Initially the few sacks
of grain surplus to the family's needs could be bartered. Ah, but as is
the way of technology and labor, some farmers produced far more grain than
they could barter locally. What the system needed was a medium of
exchange. Hence the rise of precious metals as money. It was durable,
compact and scarce.
As the city-state came into being, gold was needed for the treasury. To
gain the gold, a tried and proven technique was utilized; war. Might makes
right. This led to another resource requirement, bronze. The city-state
needed bronze to make swords for their troops. The troops traditionally
used plunder as payment for their services aka labor. Here is the general
scenario:
City-state A needs gold to fill its treasury. City-state B has some. A
claims B affronted them and demands tribute. B says go to hell. War
ensues. A wins and cleans out the treasury of B, troops plunder the
civilians and under orders, seizes all the bronze for their arms
merchants. The profits go to the government and the arms merchants. The
people shouldered the costs by levies on their production of goods to
support their troops.
If ma and pa were lucky, one of their boys returned home with some bauble.
Most either died or spent the plunder on wine, women and song.
As the city-state gained in wealth and achieved empire status, more
resources passed through the merchant class. Recall that the basic unit of
value is labor. Labor effects production. Produce is inventory. Ooooh, I'm
gonna step on your foot, but I don't care. Inventory has no value until
the money changes hands. You can't eat swords, baubles or gold. Inventory
must be traded for necessities or luxuries. The merchant class traded a
medium of exchange for trade goods and took profits on each trade.
However, not all merchants had the inventory or gold to fund their
enterprise. Enter the financier. In return for granting a loan to the
merchant, the financier gained an interest in the merchant's goods or in
other words, a share of the profits.
Fast forward to the industrial age. Labor still creates value, but lacks
the inventory of tools and raw materials to produce. The factory owner
supplies the required assets and takes an interest in the laborer's skill.
Hence, the factory owner provides inventory. The products go to the
merchants for resale and the financier provides the gold to both the
factory owner and the merchant. Wars continue, but plunder is now stripped
from the soldier and passed to the entrepreneurial class aka financier. The
financier might not know squat about rubber production, but they know how
to hire the required laborers.
Luck and isolation brought us to the age of consumerism. Gold was replaced
by fiat currency. Otherwise, little changed since the latter days of the
hunter-gatherer societies. A new beast entered the picture, taxation.
Where levies were accepted during war, taxation needed no conflict. The
mantra of the empire was progress. National highway systems, airports and
a plethora of investments in the national infrastructure. Value remained a
constant, but fiat currency provided wealth accumulation by the middle
class.
Wealth demands investments to counter the effects of inflation.
---------------------------------------
In any growing population, inflation of the money supply is a necessity.
Here is why: If there are 100 workers in the labor force and 100 units of
payment, they each earn 1 unit. The next year, there are 102 workers, but
still the 100 units of payment. You tell the workers that they have to
take a pay cut. I ain't.
---------------------------------------
So we are forced to accept inflation, but we aren't forced to accept
deterioration of purchasing power. We invest. The more skilled have
greater investment choices. Those with the least are conned into insurance
under the guise of responsibility to family even after death. Many of the
early insurance programs permitted borrowing on your policy.
The labor movement spawned another evil step-child known as pension plans.
This is just old age insurance. Then our ever benevolent government had a
better idea, the 401k program. Effectively, you could create your own old
age insurance program. Homes became an investment, a nest egg for the
future.
The problems became acute. Every transaction required a financial gnome
who skimmed off a percentage. Every skim provides tax dollars. Insurance
companies required something to invest their money in. As the monies
collected required a future payout, risk had to be minimized. First it was
the broad based portfolio with some treasury notes. But, the corporate
fiduciary responsibility is to maximize the stockholders return. Enter
some risky investments.
With clever investment strategies, risk could be managed and profits
maximized. The greater the profits, the larger the investment pool gets.
More money to invest demands market manipulation. Enter the world of
futures. Initially the purpose was supposed to be securing raw materials
for future production. The world of investors saw this as a way to turn a
profit buying and selling a piece of paper with no intention of taking
delivery.
The futures market became the infant derivatives market. Risk could be
managed by insurance. Insurance is the most basic derivative. In simplish,
derivatives are anything derived from an actual trade of a tangible. The
derivative is an intangible.
Returning to the more affluent middle class, houses, 401k and other
investments became the norm. Buying a home was the way of stating to the
world that you had arrived. The world of investment only too happy to
help(?) make it happen. At first, it was your word and a handshake, but
soon it became credit scores, insurance and second mortgages. When the
more affluent had homes, investment opportunities started to slack off.
Enter the sub-prime loan programs. Risk increased, but could be managed by
pooling the assets and selling shares of the pool to investors. Pitch in
some insurance to cover any potential risk and we can eliminate moral
hazard.
---------------------------------------
Moral hazard is nothing more than risk of capital investment. In the past,
moral hazard was minimized by due diligence aka in-depth research of the
investment.
---------------------------------------
These pools of assets became the Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDO)of
today. The insurance; Credit Default Swaps (CDS). Both fall into the
category of derivatives. There exists no tangible asset to transfer
between the parties in a default occurs. The investor and the insurance
company don't hold the mortgage papers.
So where the hell am I going with this? Remember the empire? The so-called
managers have gotten addicted to tax revenues. Spend some here and secure
future votes. A wise manager needing votes will spend the money where they
can secure the most votes for minimum dollars. Others will spend it where
they can secure future funding for re-election. The empire needs money to
grow and happy taxpayers to retain those in power.
History is replete with examples of money being equated with power. Some
people have the determination, skill and luck to create wealth. Some
attempt the short-cut of crime to achieve it. The real scoundrels find a
way to manage the funds of others; either by investments or taxation.
So what happens if this paper house of derivatives fails. From near the
top down, investment losses means fewer dollars to invest, fewer dollars
for investment mean less inventory, less inventory means fewer needs for
labor and returning to the top, far less tax revenue and election day rout
for the incumbent. History shows many cases of the rout becoming a purge.
As you might recall, the title is "The Right to Profits." In order to
maintain tax revenues, the investment vehicles MUST be profitable. Hence,
the right to (maintain) profits must be guaranteed by the government. "To
big to fail" was coined by our benevolent government with we the people
underwriting failures.
----------------------------------------
It falls to each person to evaluate their perceived reality, determine
their own objectives, develop the strategy to achieve the objective and
engage the tactics they feel best suits their nature and capabilities.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
We need to ... or the application of PsyOps
How many times have we been presented with the phrase, "We need to ... ,". It is rarely phrased, "I need to ... ." The fundamental idea behind the "we" is psychological operations (PsyOps.) The objective is to convince others to join the presenter in their quest to effect some change in the status quo. Usually the scant evidence presented is mischaracterized, inflammatory and specifically chosen for the greatest emotional effect possible. Accuracy is strictly forbidden due to the probability that the quest would be met with "so what?"
PsyOps are totally dependent on emotional responses, guilt and sense of duty. Let us look at each of these and understand the implications.
Emotional responses have a power so great it is hard to fully grasp. Mention a harm to children and watch mothers bristle with rage. Talk against animal welfare to a vegan and stand back. The list is endless. Almost everyone has an ethos derived from the social structure they were raised in. It is usually well thought out, but lacks any supporting evidence for its existence. This is not to say that evidence doesn't exist, but rather the individual or group can't verbalize it. The ethos is traditional. These traditions are common to the members, but may very well be alien ideas to people outside the membership.
I shall present an example: Child labor. The poor children are forced to work 10 hours a day in a sweat shop. We need to do something. Bullshit! Since the dawn of time, children have had one mission in life, become an adult. It was only during the depression of 1929-54 that child labor became an issue. We (in the persona of FDR) needed to get children out of the workforce. There wasn't enough jobs to go around. Well meaning, but ignorant people invented the idea of an extended childhood and worse still, rights of children exceeding those of their parents. This should cause a bout of apoplexy. I could inflame the readership more on this example, but I won't. The HELL I won't. Here is the harsh reality, children are untrained animals. And ... most adults are trained animals.
Did this elicit an emotional response?
Then there is the guilt effect. Most people have a guilty conscience about something and usually everything. I could have, I should have, ... ad nauseum. We have been conditioned to accept guilt for every activity perpetrated by the body politic and the actions of other individuals we are acquainted with. Hence the perverted idea of responsibility for the actions of others. Much of this guilt is derived from actions we participated in as children.
A classic example is homosexuality. Most children experiment with homosexuality. Most are conditioned that this is unacceptable conduct by theologists, parents and their peers. The subject continues to be in the national news in spite of all the evidence that humans are sexual in nature and same-gender affection is normal in humans and widespread in nature. Consequently, many citizens share common guilt and abhorrence for same-gender relations. We have to protect our sons and (to a minor degree) daughters from this abomination. This is not meant to infer child molestation is okay, normal or otherwise. Rather that child-child experimentation is normal. Adult-child sexual contact is abuse by a mentally disturbed animal that in a responsible society protective of children would result in putting the animal down.
Many might tender the question of treatment rather than execution. We can't exact punishment on a mentally disturbed animal. Why not? Is there any evidence that the animal can be retrained? No? So is it the responsibility of the citizens to eliminate a real and definable threat to children? Should the citizens provide for the health and welfare of a criminal that can't be reformed? Here is my take. Death is inevitable. Our choices in life can definitely determine our lifespan. Climb enough mountains and you might fall. Drinking and driving can substantially reduce your continued existence. There is no evidence to support the premise that a molester hasn't a choice when it comes to action.
I drifted a little off the track, but choice is choice. A person might have desire and create no problem, but acting on that desire is. Consider, if you will, the desires of older men for younger women. There is a biological imperative, IE. breeding potential of a younger woman. Notice the term is woman, not child. Older women-younger men will get the woman the title of cougar. Society frowns on both of these issues in spite of it being normal. I contend that this frowning is based upon guilt. Thou shalt not look at a younger adult and fantasize.
Lastly we have the "sense of duty" aspect to consider. In a nutshell, we need to send our children to foreign lands to meet exciting people and kill them in order to defend our Constitution. What a load of crap. Yes, there is a time to fight. However the idea of "clear and present danger" is non-existent so our elected trained animals use emotive responses and future guilt to convince us of the necessity for combat operations. If we don't, our children will wear the shackles of slavery.
Shades of grade school! Better the bully than to be the bullied. You gotta learn how to stand up for yourself.
Oh well. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty and shove it on to you.
----------------------------------------------------
If this post inflames your sense of virtue, good. It means I have provoked you to think. So quit acting on emotional, guilt or sense of duty arguments. Logical reasoning is what separates humans from animals. Most Homo Sapiens fail to reach full status as humans. Many remain animals their entire life. It is unfortunate that we humans are so prone to thinking the best about others of our specie without any supporting evidence.
PsyOps are totally dependent on emotional responses, guilt and sense of duty. Let us look at each of these and understand the implications.
Emotional responses have a power so great it is hard to fully grasp. Mention a harm to children and watch mothers bristle with rage. Talk against animal welfare to a vegan and stand back. The list is endless. Almost everyone has an ethos derived from the social structure they were raised in. It is usually well thought out, but lacks any supporting evidence for its existence. This is not to say that evidence doesn't exist, but rather the individual or group can't verbalize it. The ethos is traditional. These traditions are common to the members, but may very well be alien ideas to people outside the membership.
I shall present an example: Child labor. The poor children are forced to work 10 hours a day in a sweat shop. We need to do something. Bullshit! Since the dawn of time, children have had one mission in life, become an adult. It was only during the depression of 1929-54 that child labor became an issue. We (in the persona of FDR) needed to get children out of the workforce. There wasn't enough jobs to go around. Well meaning, but ignorant people invented the idea of an extended childhood and worse still, rights of children exceeding those of their parents. This should cause a bout of apoplexy. I could inflame the readership more on this example, but I won't. The HELL I won't. Here is the harsh reality, children are untrained animals. And ... most adults are trained animals.
Did this elicit an emotional response?
Then there is the guilt effect. Most people have a guilty conscience about something and usually everything. I could have, I should have, ... ad nauseum. We have been conditioned to accept guilt for every activity perpetrated by the body politic and the actions of other individuals we are acquainted with. Hence the perverted idea of responsibility for the actions of others. Much of this guilt is derived from actions we participated in as children.
A classic example is homosexuality. Most children experiment with homosexuality. Most are conditioned that this is unacceptable conduct by theologists, parents and their peers. The subject continues to be in the national news in spite of all the evidence that humans are sexual in nature and same-gender affection is normal in humans and widespread in nature. Consequently, many citizens share common guilt and abhorrence for same-gender relations. We have to protect our sons and (to a minor degree) daughters from this abomination. This is not meant to infer child molestation is okay, normal or otherwise. Rather that child-child experimentation is normal. Adult-child sexual contact is abuse by a mentally disturbed animal that in a responsible society protective of children would result in putting the animal down.
Many might tender the question of treatment rather than execution. We can't exact punishment on a mentally disturbed animal. Why not? Is there any evidence that the animal can be retrained? No? So is it the responsibility of the citizens to eliminate a real and definable threat to children? Should the citizens provide for the health and welfare of a criminal that can't be reformed? Here is my take. Death is inevitable. Our choices in life can definitely determine our lifespan. Climb enough mountains and you might fall. Drinking and driving can substantially reduce your continued existence. There is no evidence to support the premise that a molester hasn't a choice when it comes to action.
I drifted a little off the track, but choice is choice. A person might have desire and create no problem, but acting on that desire is. Consider, if you will, the desires of older men for younger women. There is a biological imperative, IE. breeding potential of a younger woman. Notice the term is woman, not child. Older women-younger men will get the woman the title of cougar. Society frowns on both of these issues in spite of it being normal. I contend that this frowning is based upon guilt. Thou shalt not look at a younger adult and fantasize.
Lastly we have the "sense of duty" aspect to consider. In a nutshell, we need to send our children to foreign lands to meet exciting people and kill them in order to defend our Constitution. What a load of crap. Yes, there is a time to fight. However the idea of "clear and present danger" is non-existent so our elected trained animals use emotive responses and future guilt to convince us of the necessity for combat operations. If we don't, our children will wear the shackles of slavery.
Shades of grade school! Better the bully than to be the bullied. You gotta learn how to stand up for yourself.
Oh well. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty and shove it on to you.
----------------------------------------------------
If this post inflames your sense of virtue, good. It means I have provoked you to think. So quit acting on emotional, guilt or sense of duty arguments. Logical reasoning is what separates humans from animals. Most Homo Sapiens fail to reach full status as humans. Many remain animals their entire life. It is unfortunate that we humans are so prone to thinking the best about others of our specie without any supporting evidence.
Why a Blog?
This blog came into existence for the purpose of letting a small portion of the populace know that they aren't alone in their disgust. I don't particularly care if you agree or not.
The title was chosen for the specific purpose of letting folks know that if they have a sacred cow, I have just the barbeque sauce to put on it. It appears that every sacred cow came into existence from a belief system. After all, it can't be sacred unless and until a belief existed to support it. Perhaps "The Belief Barbeque Sauce Emporium" would be a more apt title, but it failed to capture the essence of the project.
My intent is to present every dumbass idea, program and belief that catches my attention. I will engage in search and destroy missions to render the sacred cows just another bit of roadkill on the highway of life. The harsh reality is that once a belief mechanism is in place, all evidence contrary to the belief is indigestible. Beliefs will not and can not acknowledge any conflicting ideas, data or proofs.
One thing that can be counted on is a strict adherence to the ideals presented in the U.S. Constitution. Any argument that begins with the idea that the Constitution is subject to interpretation based upon the notion that the framers had no idea of change is ridiculous. If we accept that argument, we must accept the idea that the framers were stupid, n, to be incapable of learning. Article IV sec.4 specifically states that we are guaranteed a Republican form of government. Thus circular reasoning infers the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and we have a representative government with the government bound by the law. Democracy is mob rule. Look it up in the dictionary.
Most of this blob will be philosophical in nature and use logical argumentation. The philosophy is fairly simple: existentialism. In simplish (a contraction of simple english), I am directly and solely responsible for my actions, words and self. No person, party or government can tender a claim to the contrary. I would further argue that unless and until direct evidence is presented that real and quantifiable harm has been caused, I am not responsible for any of your problems. Such is the nature of existentialism.
A few ideas to keep in mind.
The paraphrased "Laws of Thermodynamics."
Everything is connected to everything.
Everything has to go somewhere.
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
"The Greatest Enemy Of Knowledge Is Not Ignorance... It Is The Illusion Of
Knowledge"-- Stephen Hawking
"Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary
safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."-- Benjamin Franklin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I offer no advise beyond pursuing knowledge and wisdom. No person, party or government can steal, tax or regulate the knowledge and wisdom you have painfully gained.
How will you know if it is knowledge? Knowledge is proven by application. If it is truly knowledge, the result is known beforehand.
But how about wisdom? Ah here it gets confusing. You won't know beyond personal success. But others will look to you as a sounding board, a dissenting voice in the mob and as a constant in their life.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can think of no reason to defend my arguments. I present them without cost, therefore you can claim no wrong was committed.
All ideas presented are subject to change as new data becomes available.
The title was chosen for the specific purpose of letting folks know that if they have a sacred cow, I have just the barbeque sauce to put on it. It appears that every sacred cow came into existence from a belief system. After all, it can't be sacred unless and until a belief existed to support it. Perhaps "The Belief Barbeque Sauce Emporium" would be a more apt title, but it failed to capture the essence of the project.
My intent is to present every dumbass idea, program and belief that catches my attention. I will engage in search and destroy missions to render the sacred cows just another bit of roadkill on the highway of life. The harsh reality is that once a belief mechanism is in place, all evidence contrary to the belief is indigestible. Beliefs will not and can not acknowledge any conflicting ideas, data or proofs.
One thing that can be counted on is a strict adherence to the ideals presented in the U.S. Constitution. Any argument that begins with the idea that the Constitution is subject to interpretation based upon the notion that the framers had no idea of change is ridiculous. If we accept that argument, we must accept the idea that the framers were stupid, n, to be incapable of learning. Article IV sec.4 specifically states that we are guaranteed a Republican form of government. Thus circular reasoning infers the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and we have a representative government with the government bound by the law. Democracy is mob rule. Look it up in the dictionary.
Most of this blob will be philosophical in nature and use logical argumentation. The philosophy is fairly simple: existentialism. In simplish (a contraction of simple english), I am directly and solely responsible for my actions, words and self. No person, party or government can tender a claim to the contrary. I would further argue that unless and until direct evidence is presented that real and quantifiable harm has been caused, I am not responsible for any of your problems. Such is the nature of existentialism.
A few ideas to keep in mind.
The paraphrased "Laws of Thermodynamics."
Everything is connected to everything.
Everything has to go somewhere.
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
"The Greatest Enemy Of Knowledge Is Not Ignorance... It Is The Illusion Of
Knowledge"-- Stephen Hawking
"Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary
safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."-- Benjamin Franklin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I offer no advise beyond pursuing knowledge and wisdom. No person, party or government can steal, tax or regulate the knowledge and wisdom you have painfully gained.
How will you know if it is knowledge? Knowledge is proven by application. If it is truly knowledge, the result is known beforehand.
But how about wisdom? Ah here it gets confusing. You won't know beyond personal success. But others will look to you as a sounding board, a dissenting voice in the mob and as a constant in their life.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can think of no reason to defend my arguments. I present them without cost, therefore you can claim no wrong was committed.
All ideas presented are subject to change as new data becomes available.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)