Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login - Register]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1  ..  18    20    22  ..  44
Author: Subject: Exploitation of the global economy, the coming collapse
anotheronebitesthedust
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 189
Registered: 24-6-2007
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 12:18


I thought this was a profound speech.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/dX41SkKN0tQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>



Quote:
What if Democrats and Republicans were two wings of the same bird of prey?

What if elections were actually useful tools of social control? What if they just provided the populace with meaningless participation in a process that validates an establishment that never meaningfully changes? What if that establishment doesn't want and doesn't have the consent of the governed? What if the two-party system was actually a mechanism used to limit so-called public opinion? What if there were more than two sides to every issue, but the two parties wanted to box you in to one of their corners?

What if there's no such thing as public opinion, because every thinking person has opinions that are uniquely his own? What if public opinion was just a manufactured narrative that makes it easier to convince people that if their views are different, there's something wrong with that -- or something wrong with them?

What if the whole purpose of the Democratic and Republican parties was not to expand voters' choices, but to limit them? What if the widely perceived differences between the two parties was just an illusion? What if the heart of government policy remains the same, no matter who's in the White House? What if the heart of government policy remains the same, no matter what the people want?

What if those vaunted differences between Democrat and Republican were actually just minor disagreements? What if both parties just want power and are willing to have young people fight meaningless wars in order to enhance that power? What if both parties continue to fight the war on drugs just to give bureaucrats and cops bigger budgets and more jobs?

What if government policies didn't change when government's leaders did? What if no matter who won an election, government stayed the same? What if government was really a revolving door of political hacks, bent on exploiting the people while they're in charge?

What if both parties supported welfare, war, debt, bailouts and big government? What if the rhetoric that candidates displayed on the campaign trail was dumped after electoral victory? What if Barack Obama campaigned as an antiwar, pro-civil liberties candidate, then waged senseless wars while assaulting your rights that the Constitution is supposed to protect? What if George W. Bush campaigned on a platform of nonintervention and small government, then waged a foreign policy of muscular military intervention and a domestic policy of vast government borrowing and growth?

What if Bill Clinton declared the era of big government to be over, but actually just convinced Republicans like Newt Gingrich that they can get what they want out of big government, too? What if the Republicans went along with it?

What if Ronald Reagan spent six years running for president promising to shrink government, but then the government grew while he was in office? What if, notwithstanding Reagan's ideas and cheerfulness and libertarian rhetoric, there really was no Reagan Revolution?

What if all this is happening again? What if Rick Santorum is being embraced by voters who want small government even though he voted for the Patriot Act, for an expansion of Medicare and for raising the debt ceiling by trillions of dollars? What if Mitt Romney is being embraced by voters who want anyone but Obama, but don't realize that Romney might as well be Obama on everything from warfare to welfare?

What if Ron Paul is being ignored by the media not because theyclaim he's unappealing or unelectable, but because he doesn't fit into the pre-manufactured public opinion mold used by the establishment to pigeonhole the electorate and create the so-called narrative that drives media coverage of elections?

What if the biggest difference between most candidates was not substance but style? What if those stylistic differences were packaged as substantive ones to re-enforce the illusion of a difference between Democrats and Republicans? What if Romney wins and ends up continuing most of the same policies that Obama promoted? What if Obama's policies, too, are merely extensions of Bush's?

What if a government that manipulated us could be fired? What if a government that lacked the true and knowing consent of the governed could be dismissed? What if it were possible to have a game-changer? What if we need a Ron Paul to preserve and protect our freedoms from assault by the government?

What if we could make elections matter again? What if we could do something about this?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 5245
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 12:26


The dishonest, the greedy, and the amoral have conspired actively and passively together to bring down a great nation into decadence and bankruptcy of both the moral and financial variety..... and a reckoning is coming ....not a reckoning between the haves and the have nots.....but indeed a reckoning between the honorable and the dishonorable. That is my analysis. The "class struggle" is actually a constitutional conflict between those who believe individual liberty is a sacred gift and birthright and those who instead believe in collectivism administered by a socialist big government operating as a tyrannical directorate representing the elite, while providing bread and circuses to mobs of lowlife and leaving the main body of industrious citizens bewildered by the stupidity and tyranny of such poor management of a country, where demagoguery has become the mob psychology upon the ignorant, offering the specious lie that ethical industry and profit is somehow evil and life is a zero sum game where no one has anything for having created or earned it, but that anything gotten in life can only be gotten by wrongly taking from another whatever may be wanted or believed to be deserved. The "something for nothing" mentality and entitlement expectation is applied to virtually everything, including personal relationships which is precisely why most children are born to unwed parents and the nuclear family has become almost an abstract obsoleted concept. The world is become a dominion for bastards and what quality of society should be expected as a result is something of a no brainer. It is a sad commentary on an amoral society where right and wrong have become no longer clear matters of distinction and where everything is subject to "interpretation" by people who really believe in nothing, except that everything is subject to interpretation.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
*****




Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 12:27


Quote:
Quote: Originally posted by madscientist  
it is removal of poverty that is essential.


Ultimately this is the root of the issue. Poverty begets inability to afford contraception,


Poverty should be eleminated. The problem is that the USA is bringing in more poverty faster than it can solve poverty. Perhaps they should not bring in any more poor immigrants until they have solved the problem of inner city black ghetto poverty.

The business interests just like all those poor people because they make cheap laborers. Then they expect the middle class taxpayers to pay for training these workers, and providing education and free healthcare to their children. The middle class is being forced to subsidise large businesses. If the businesses cannot pay their workers enough to survive on and take care of their families, perhaps our countries should not be bringing in any more workers. These business interests complain about "economic reality". The real "economic reality" is that these business interests that utilise cheap immigrant labor should be taxed to pay for the full extraneous cost of their workers. If the employer refuses to pay for the workers children to go to school, there is not a real "demand" for the labor.
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 5245
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 12:42


Quote: Originally posted by anotheronebitesthedust  
I thought this was a profound speech.


You thought right :D
View user's profile View All Posts By User
neptunium
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 693
Registered: 12-12-2011
Location: between Uranium and Plutonium
Member Is Offline

Mood: meta stable

[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 12:47


you just made my point ...thank you.





“It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education.” Albert Einstein
View user's profile View All Posts By User
gregxy
National Hazard
****




Posts: 327
Registered: 26-5-2006
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 14:20


If you have ever raised children, you will see that the real problem is much simpler:

Take a child to the store and they will claim that they "need" every toy on the shelf as long as daddy is paying for it. However if you make them pay for it from their allowance suddenly they choose much more carefully....

Government workers make their profit as a percentage of the amount of money that passes through the government. So naturally they will want to maximize the money the government spends (regardless of if it produces anything useful). So it doesn't matter who you elect they are all going to want to spend money on some thing they "need".
The left will spend it "helping the poor" and the right will spend it bombing Iraq but both sides take their cut.

Finally why would the rich want poverty? They make a profit based on the "health" of the economy. Would you rather have 10% of the US economy of 90% of Somalia's?

View user's profile View All Posts By User
madscientist
Super Moderator
*******




Posts: 957
Registered: 19-5-2002
Location: American Midwest
Member Is Offline

Mood: pyrophoric

[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 14:55


Poverty brings profit. What company makes more money by paying their workers more? By driving people off welfare, cutting food stamps, dumping health services, etc. people become increasingly desperate and increasingly willing to accept low wages. Ultimately all costs in business derive from wages. The goal is to drive wages down below that of other nations, and to export cheaply produced products to their markets. This is why we are seeing such strong efforts across the globe to simultaneously drive down wages internally and protect markets from those of competitor nations with lower average pay... not at all dissimilar to the situation that preceded WWI. The only disadvantage to an impoverished nation for the rich is the possibility of revolution, which they are already preparing for - the recently passed NDAA that allows arbitrary kidnapping, torture, and/or assassination of US citizens, SOPA, etc.



I weep at the sight of flaming acetic anhydride.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 5245
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 16:30


Quote: Originally posted by madscientist  
Poverty brings profit. What company makes more money by paying their workers more?

Ford Motor Company was one of many companies who did precisely that and from the inception of that company took good care of its workers as policy.
Quote:
By driving people off welfare, cutting food stamps, dumping health services, etc. people become increasingly desperate and increasingly willing to accept low wages.
Been there, done that. It isn't a crime to be poor, and poor is simply the lot in life which is some peoples life. Being poor is not necessarily an evil which must be an enemy subdued by any declaration of war upon it by confiscatory wealth redistribution policy against those who are more prosperous, because that policy will never eliminate poverty but will cripple an economy so that everyone suffers more, including the poor.
Quote:
Ultimately all costs in business derive from wages.
No that simply is not even close to being true. Labor costs are only one part of the expenses of doing business, and all expenses must be covered by returns from productivity plus an acceptable additional amount as profit must be made or else the business fails.
Quote:
The goal is to drive wages down below that of other nations,
No the goal is to achieve a viable business, meaning that all the overhead costs of which labor is only a part, are covered by the income from production which is sold and then sufficient profit must be made to cover the effort of managing the enterprise and returning dividends upon the capital investment which was risked in the venture
Quote:
and to export cheaply produced products to their markets. This is why we are seeing such strong efforts across the globe to simultaneously drive down wages internally
Not so, it is the cost of energy and other overhead costs from regulation which is eating the revenue from production which would otherwise be available to pay workers
Quote:
and protect markets from those of competitor nations with lower average pay... not at all dissimilar to the situation that preceded WWI.
It is dissimilar because of the energy costs and an uneven unfair competition environment having been imposed upon domestic producers, which effectively subsidizes foreign producers who have no such predatory cost disadvantages imposed by regulators.
Quote:
The only disadvantage to an impoverished nation for the rich is the possibility of revolution, which they are already preparing for - the recently passed NDAA that allows arbitrary kidnapping, torture, and/or assassination of US citizens, SOPA, etc.
There is a difference between an ethical revolution declaring independence which has constructive and ethical purpose, and a simple revolt or rebellion against authority which amounts to a food riot on steroids which is declaring greater dependence upon a nanny state rather than independence from it. All those criers for there ought to be a law (fill in the blank) now have crippled an economy which is the direct result of creating a hostile environment for domestic investments and businesses ......and the same imbeciles are acting counterintuitively and dishonestly about what is the problem instead of owning it as their chickens come home to roost. The absence of prosperity and the presence of calamity is not mysterious as to its causes.

[Edited on 14-3-2012 by Rosco Bodine]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
497
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 778
Registered: 6-10-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: HSbF6

[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 18:19


So how do you encourage small business without encouraging international monopolies? Don't even try to speculate about what the government could do about it, because that won't happen. Monopolies are most favorable for those in the government (47% of congress are millionaires after all.)

Can we all at least agree that monopolies are very harmful to the well being of the general populace??

Rosco, just because I refer to "the rich" does not mean this is a simple class struggle situation.

People who have communities to support them, as people naturally lived for most of our existence, tend to be fairly happy and healthy. They also tend to have different priorities from the ideal consumer. Not coincidentally community ties between people have been rapidly destroyed in the last century. In my mind there is little chance of improvement without the reformation of strong community ties between us.

Edit:
People are definitely starting to get more and more pissed off. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46722890/ns/us_news-crime_and_co...

[Edited on 14-3-2012 by 497]




A word to the wise: NEUROFEEDBACK

http://citizenworks.org/corp/dg/s2r1.pdf
http://www.newscientist.com/mobile/article/mg21228354.500-re...
http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-414-hyperinflation-spe...

"To expose a 15 Trillion dollar ripoff of the American people by the stockholders of the 1000 largest corporations over the last 100 years will be a tall order of business."
Buckminster Fuller

"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it."
Albert Einstein
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 5245
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 19:39


What is wanted to be discouraged, limited, or destroyed is burdensomely taxed and regulated. What is wanted to have a chance to prosper or be encouraged is let alone to do as it will unencumbered or is even subsidized.

Sorry we can't agree that monopolies are necessarily harmful in an unqualified way. Monopolies are not always very harmful to the well being of the general population. Companies tend to emulate the character of those who own
and control them. Monopolies can be bad when there is price fixing at an unfair and excessive amount, and where no fair competition is allowed which would supply the same product or service at a more reasonable price. Certain monopolies are licensed, for example patents grant exclusive monopoly to the inventor of a new drug. So there are cases where a monopoly may actually be desirable though not generally in an unqualified or unlimited sense forever, even though that may happen. A monopoly is not necessarily a bad thing in all scenarios, nor necessarily unethical simply for being a monopoly, however such a scenario can more easily tempt dishonor where there is no fair competition to help keep 'em honest. Breaking up a monopoly can even cause a price increase for things where an exclusive mass market was more efficient and was not overpriced while being monopolized by one producer. Sometimes too many cooks can spoil the broth. So even a contracted monopoly may be in some things desirable.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
EatsKewls
holmes1880 (banned)
***




Posts: 126
Registered: 29-2-2012
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 19:48


I think we determined that the problem with economy and world collapse are few sociopaths and money-hungry madman who think the world is but a monopoly board.

I\'ve got Rupert Murdoch somewhere in there. Then you\'d have to list some sketchy AIPAC members, U.S. hedge fund bigs, and the oil execs.

So, do we know these \"evil-doers\" or are they impossible to track down.

View user's profile View All Posts By User
gregxy
National Hazard
****




Posts: 327
Registered: 26-5-2006
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 20:24


The reduction of poverty, spread of education and reduced population growth rate ARE what is causing hard times in America. From the end of WWII to 2000 the US had the most educated and productive workforce in the world. During the 80s the Japanese made advances and nearly took over our automotive and consumer electronics industries. In recent years, China and India are making large gains. There has been benefits to all, jobs and greater prosperity to people in Asia and inexpensive or improved products for the US. Unfortunately it also means that to keep your job you need to keep your skills ahead of a rapidly growing number of workers. Likewise there is greater competition for natural resources (oil in particular).

Fortunately, from what I have seen the education system in the US is still better than
in Asia, but you will need to work hard and take choose the correct major.

View user's profile View All Posts By User
497
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 778
Registered: 6-10-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: HSbF6

[*] posted on 13-3-2012 at 22:13


http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/new_nationwide_fema_c...

Hope you guys know a little bit about self sufficiency...

Edit
Quote:

What is wanted to be discouraged, limited, or destroyed is burdensomely taxed and regulated. What is wanted to have a chance to prosper or be encouraged is let alone to do as it will unencumbered or is even subsidized.


Yes all true, but do you really think those millionaire congressmen want the small business to prosper while discouraging price fixing cartels? This system is a nice idea, but as soon as money became connected to electability, the roles where reversed. The very tools intended to help the general population prosper are now being used to do the opposite.

Quote:

Sorry we can't agree that monopolies are necessarily harmful in an unqualified way. Monopolies are not always very harmful to the well being of the general population. Companies tend to emulate the character of those who own and control them.


Yes they do emulate the character of those who control them. How often is that not harmful though? How often do people with the average man's health/happiness in mind gain controlling interests in corporations? The way the system operates now, corporations can be assumed to generally be self interested and thus acting without regard for the greater good unless proven otherwise. Sure there are exceptions, but how many can you prove? Especially when you consider that they're all spending %5-20 of their budget simply to convince us otherwise? Come one, they do not deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Quote:

A monopoly is not necessarily a bad thing in all scenarios, nor necessarily unethical simply for being a monopoly, however such a scenario can more easily tempt dishonor


Since when did honor get anyone to the top of the ladder??? Dishonor is the name of the game except for certain exceptional cases.

Quote:

Sometimes too many cooks can spoil the broth.


Under static conditions maybe. Can you show us some examples of diversity being harmful in situations of adversity and change?

Quote:

The market does not determine what sells and what doesn't sell in the market, people's basic needs and desires for comforts and conveniences determine what sells and does not sell. The buyers determine and define the market and the producers supply that demand in a reciprocally beneficial arrangement called trade. That is business. That is how the world economy more or less operates.


You're basically implying that producers cannot or do not influence people's desires/decisions. Nothing could be further from the truth today. Would the world's corporations really waste half a trillion dollars (in 2010) on advertising if they didn't get a good return on that investment? Modern science and technology has be heavily abused to prevent the consumer from ever even learning how to make sound financial decisions. Most of the population is hypnotized. I'm not trying to say that governments should somehow try to stop such trends, that would be waste of time. But if there was a way to "wake people up" enough to see the manipulation they are undergoing, I believe they would put an end to it (at least until more effective hypnosis is developed.) Art has long been an effective way of waking people up in similar situations, but we may need newer more effective methods to thwart things like TV and video games.

As if there was much doubt about the years upcoming events: http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/rich-dad-poor-da...


[Edited on 14-3-2012 by 497]




A word to the wise: NEUROFEEDBACK

http://citizenworks.org/corp/dg/s2r1.pdf
http://www.newscientist.com/mobile/article/mg21228354.500-re...
http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-414-hyperinflation-spe...

"To expose a 15 Trillion dollar ripoff of the American people by the stockholders of the 1000 largest corporations over the last 100 years will be a tall order of business."
Buckminster Fuller

"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it."
Albert Einstein
View user's profile View All Posts By User
DerAlte
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 778
Registered: 14-5-2007
Location: Erehwon
Member Is Offline

Mood: Disgusted

[*] posted on 14-3-2012 at 10:43


Some time back I had written – but not posted – the following:
The verbal flatulence of a certain Rosco Bodine has never been so evident: full of sound and fury (apologies to W.S.), it signifies nothing unless one happens to be able to extract the (very) few words that actually express what he is attempting to say. With about the same probability as the proverbial needle in the haystack, however, the sense of something meaningful is (occasionally) there.

Ok, I take it back, partially at least! I came upon Rosco’s latest efforts. They negate the above statement. I’ll let the above stand, however, because it is still often true; only the probability has changed!

Rosco 100%, Madscientist nil; game, set and match to Rosco!

Years ago I attempted to read Das Kapital by Marx; it is the most tedious work of philosophy I have ever tried to read, which, if you consider most such works, is saying a lot. Madscientist is correct that Marx looked down upon all socialist parties of his time. He would have been horrified by the welfare state. He based his theme on analysis of the financial and political instability of the mid 1800s, particularly in France. In some ways this has continued ever since but the periods between boom and bust have lengthened – they are random, in any case.

His enemy was the complacent middle-class, the bourgeoisie, essentially created by the French revolution. He considered the “upper classes” already dead or moribund (probably correctly, at least in Europe). The socialists, to him, were merely a group of bourgeois with a mistaken feeling of social conscience. The petty bourgeoisie, shopkeepers and minor tradesmen and entrepreneurs were less reprehensible, but he was quite scathing about the “Lumpenproletariat” (lumpen=ragged in German, AFAIK) – they were the traitors, unwilling to join their fellows in The Party.

Lest I ramble too much (and suffer from the Bodine Syndrome), it may be more to the point to merely quote this summary from Marx and Engels in their Communist Manifesto:

Quote:
Nevertheless in the most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c., &c.

(The &c. &c. are part of the original).

An experiment partly based on the above was tried in Russia. We know the results. In the 1930s unrest in Hungary also gave rise to a communist regime, short lived, which managed to completely destroy the country’s currency and industrial base almost within a year. The external imposition of Russia on the various satellites of Europe after WWII managed the same there.

Socialism is merely a diluted version of the same, as can be seen by reference to the above list. Added to this, and certainly not in Marxism, are the precepts of the Nanny state: regardless of whether you care to work or not, an ever-loving State will see you do not starve or suffer unduly, courtesy of those that do work.

Systems never work based on narrow logic; society is evolutionary, yet its components, humans, really change little. There was no theory of capitalism until Marx invented it. It was a natural evolution, like most events, a gradual process as evolution always is, in spite of some modern evolutionists who see it as occurring in jumps.

The essence of capitalism is the joint venture. Its origins are probably lost in the depths of time, but financing the trading ventures of the Venetians would be an early example. Capitalism in some form or other is at least 700 years old - not something that suddenly cropped up as the evil invention of the bourgeoisie around 1780.

The growth of towns and communities (civilization in its fundamental sense) brought together those of common industry. In the UK coal mining and the use of coal for the production of iron probably dates to pre-Roman times. Certainly tin mining in Cornwall dates back to 500BC or earlier, as the Greeks attested. The so-called Industrial Revolution was merely the exponential extrapolation of a trend made possible by the mechanism of capitalism plus the emergence of technology. Explosive or exponential systems are unstable and unsustainable, and evidence of this can be seen in the boom and bust cycles of the mid to late 1800s, especially in Europe.

Is there anything new in this? It still occurs… Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose..
A new class of wealthy men was so created, those who risked their fortunes on a venture – again nothing new. It also created the wage-laborer - essentially a new class to work in the new local industries – usually from the surrounding peasantry. Note, not press ganged. Essentially, the money and prospects were seen as better than on the land, and the lure of more money worked on them as effectively as it did upon those who ventured their capital.

The key to the increased industrial output was machinery. This required iron and steel, coal and iron ore. And transportation. All aided and abetted by the steam engine and – capital and technology. The result was a rise in purchasing power of all by an unprecedented amount.

If you like any of the aims of the Manifesto list above, by all means enjoy your heavy taxation, property confiscation, etc. Note that Item 10 has happened in capitalistic societies and this seems to be the only positive item.

From some blog I stole the following (I hope not from SciMad!): read the list and honestly say whether there is not a grain of truth in it:

Quote:
Let's look at some of the lies and delusions of the liberals/socialists:

There is no such thing as black racism or a black hate crime; anything a white person does that a black person doesn't like is racist.

Homosexuality is natural, normal, and must be embraced by all. Anyone disagreeing is a homophobe.

There is no such thing as female bigotry. Domestic court is NOT biased since they have a few token men who get custody and/or child support.

Hate is not hate as long as it's liberal hate and you say you hate hate.

Government can protect you. You are incapable and incompetent of protecting yourself.
You deserve food, shelter, clothing, medical care, education, transportation, gainful employment, and entertainment as a basic right just for have been pumped out into the world.

Rich peoples’ selfishness is evil; poor peoples selfishness is not.

It is mandatory that you pity and assist anyone in dire circumstances regardless of how they got there.

Any public figure making a financial decision based on logic is devoid of compassion.


Looking at the length of the above, I find myself as guilty as friend Rosco of excessive verbosity. Mea maxima culpa!
Regards to all, as always,
Der Alte
View user's profile View All Posts By User
franklyn
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2552
Registered: 30-5-2006
Location: Da Big Apple
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 14-3-2012 at 15:10


Andrew Jackson became less articulate and eloquent the madder he became.
That does not diminish him in my esteem , the glib deceiver is more a worry.
_______

Apple is now valued at more than the entire U.S. retail sector of the S&P 500 ( $542 billion ).

A bad year for American equity trading is getting worse. Shares changing hands on all U.S.
exchanges fell 16 percent to 5.23 billion since March 9, while S&P 500 composite volume
slipped 17 percent to 2.17 billion shares, data compiled by Bloomberg show. Those are the
lowest daily levels of 2012 and the smallest totals excluding holiday weeks since Bloomberg
began tracking the data in 2008. This of course includes the depth of the 2009 crash.

Municipalities nationwide are feeling the pinch and underfunding pensions
http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/03/12/meredith-whitney-w...

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-11-14/broken-promi...

This will only worsten in coming years as the taxbase is eroded by retired workers.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-looming-us-labor-shorta...

The outlook at some point is for full employment of a reduced workforce.

.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
497
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 778
Registered: 6-10-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: HSbF6

[*] posted on 14-3-2012 at 17:11


If the mental/physical effects of stress are known, and obviously costing the US population trillions of dollars, why are stressors being ramped up from every angle of the "conventional" american lifestyle? Maybe stressed people are better followers?

infographic-stress-effects.png - 1MB




A word to the wise: NEUROFEEDBACK

http://citizenworks.org/corp/dg/s2r1.pdf
http://www.newscientist.com/mobile/article/mg21228354.500-re...
http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-414-hyperinflation-spe...

"To expose a 15 Trillion dollar ripoff of the American people by the stockholders of the 1000 largest corporations over the last 100 years will be a tall order of business."
Buckminster Fuller

"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it."
Albert Einstein
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 5245
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 14-3-2012 at 18:14


Daylight savings time is just a government mind game to keep people off balance and confused 100% of the time with nobody being ever sure anymore even what time of day it really is. In righteous protest the entire world should keep a pet rooster and fire cannons at sunrise.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
EatsKewls
holmes1880 (banned)
***




Posts: 126
Registered: 29-2-2012
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 14-3-2012 at 18:39


I don't know folks, what are the solutions here and what can we do? Talking about how things are lame is one thing, but doing something about it is another thing.

I personally do not fathom how to turn around by tens of millions of morons in this country to not elect crooks and scam artists. Reason we are in debt right now is because these same half-brained morons elected Bush Junior....twice. This is just one example. Reason we cannot better control the population here in the U.S. is because conservative inbreads believe some bearded dude from heaven is going to frown upon it. List goes on.

I think America was never truly great, it just had a lucky circumstance of population growth and having proper amount of resources to expand its growth. Now, the demographic elements are chaning and our resources are diminishing and the "Oh, All-mighty America" is going down the poopers, primarily being dragged down by the moronic people which populate this nation.

I don't think taking out the bad guys out of equation will do any good as long as the people are retarded.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
497
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 778
Registered: 6-10-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: HSbF6

[*] posted on 14-3-2012 at 19:44


There is nothing anyone can do to save it. That's not a bad thing in my opinion. An overhaul is needed.

First and foremost, learn how to take care of yourself. This means, learn how to survive what is coming, learn how to provide for and protect yourself and your family without depending on anyone. It is a challenge to teach yourself things, but all the info is out there if you take the time to look. If you learn how to enjoy learning you'll be golden. You will not regret it, that is a guarantee.

Second, just talk about the issues, inform those around you. People are good at adapting if given the chance.

Third, form communities with like minded people. A group of prepared people will always be more likely to survive and prosper than an individual.

Getting far from population centers would also be a great idea. Stockpile what you can afford to, but carefully analyze the ratio of cost now vs value after the collapse. Tools can be much more valuable than products. Knowledge will be the cheapest and most valuable thing you can stockpile by far.

Alternative energy sources will be far easier to build/acquire now than after the power grid is out of commission. There is a very real chance of a solar flare large enough to destroy the largest transformers around the world occurring this year. It is estimated that it would take 3 years to replace them... So the ability to generate a small amount of power for yourself could be extremely valuable in such an event.

This is a very valuable page for anyone interested in self preservation: http://www.futurescience.com/emp/emp-protection.html
After a high altitude nuclear EMP a shielded shortwave radio will be worth its weight in gold. They're not even that expensive either.

Quote:

Whatever the scope of the EMP attack, the longer that you can remain at home and be fairly self-sufficient, the better things will be for you. This is likely to be especially true during the first few weeks after the EMP event. In most industrialized countries, it is not customary for individuals to keep very much in the way of emergency supplies in their homes. In fact, many people who do keep many emergency supplies are regarded with some suspicion, thought to be "survivalists" or some other strange breed of humans. Disasters are frequent enough, though, that any prudent individual should maintain some basic level of self-sufficiency. Most people in industrialized countries see large-scale emergencies happening frequently on television, while maintaining the irrational and completely unwarranted assumption that it will never happen to them. It is the people who do not plan for personal emergencies who ought to be regarded with suspicion as a strange and irrational breed of human.


[Edited on 15-3-2012 by 497]




A word to the wise: NEUROFEEDBACK

http://citizenworks.org/corp/dg/s2r1.pdf
http://www.newscientist.com/mobile/article/mg21228354.500-re...
http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-414-hyperinflation-spe...

"To expose a 15 Trillion dollar ripoff of the American people by the stockholders of the 1000 largest corporations over the last 100 years will be a tall order of business."
Buckminster Fuller

"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it."
Albert Einstein
View user's profile View All Posts By User
EatsKewls
holmes1880 (banned)
***




Posts: 126
Registered: 29-2-2012
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 14-3-2012 at 21:43


I\'ll fess up right now. If there was a doomsday scenario, I\'d go back to caveman age in an instant. Without machinery, tools, and raw materials I won\'t be able to make even the most primitive middle-age utilities. Engineers, chemists, and other professionals generations before and after paved the way for me. I\'ll survive and be relatively well off, but I will not go back to comfortable modern-age lifestyle if raw materials, and means of production were to vanish. With that said, I don\'t really see that happening.

I would like to move away from the city and do my own farming and medical herbal growing. I thought Tennessee or Northern Georgia would be my lady, but first hand visit left me unimpressed with those big ugly hills and densely packed trees.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
johansen
Harmless
*




Posts: 27
Registered: 25-6-2011
Location: United States
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 15-3-2012 at 03:53


Quote:

Reason we are in debt right now is because these same half-brained morons elected Bush Junior....twice. This is just one example. Reason we cannot better control the population here in the U.S. is because conservative inbreads believe some bearded dude from heaven is going to frown upon it. List goes on.


you sound young. Banks have always run countries, financed wars and etc, not the other way around.
Who is at fault, the millions of home owners who bought houses in 2008?
Or the Banks that lended them the money?
Or is it the politicians who threw out the state's anti-predatory lending laws in 2001..
Or is it the masters who convinced Congress that "we need another bubble"
Or is it the owners who said "we need a new Pearl Harbor".
...
If everyone who is concerned about the economy today, traded 2% of their assets for gold when it was 2-$300/oz, we wouldn't have this thread on science-madness.

The apathy of Joe 6-pack exceeds your wildest imagination, but do not suggest that they should be controlled, for that has never ended well.

...

back to finance:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/here-why-fed-will-have-do-leas...


John Williams recently released an update to his hyperinflation report
http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-414-hyperinflation-spe...

[Edited on 15-3-2012 by johansen]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
GreenD
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 615
Registered: 30-3-2011
Member Is Offline

Mood: Totally f***ing high, man!

[*] posted on 15-3-2012 at 06:36


I scroll through this and all I see is rabble.

None of this actually matters.

"We" are all as stupid as "them".




ʃ Ψ*Ψ
Keepin' it real.
Check out my new collaborated site: MNMLimpact.com
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 5245
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 15-3-2012 at 09:56


Governments tend to emulate the character of the people who form the ranks of
officers and bureaucrats who serve roles in government also, and lying crooks,
control freaks, collectivists, and confiscatory commie rats all need to find another line of work.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
497
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 778
Registered: 6-10-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: HSbF6

[*] posted on 15-3-2012 at 10:29


It has nothing to do with communists, marxists, or any crap like that, and everything to do with greed, corruption, and egos.

Quote:

Given the current lack of political will by those controlling the U.S. Government to address the fiscal solvency issues, the U.S. has no way of avoiding a financial Armageddon. Various government intervention tactics might slow the process for brief periods, and the system always is vulnerable to external shocks, such as wars and natural disasters. Government actions could include supportive dollar intervention, restrictions on international capital flows, wage and price controls, etc. Effects of any such moves in delaying the onset of full hyperinflation, though, would be limited and short-lived. There is no obvious course of action or external force at this point of the process that meaningfully would put off the nearing day of reckoning. What lies ahead will be extremely difficult, painful and unhappy times for many in the United States. The functioning and adaptation of the U.S. economy and financial markets to a hyperinflation likely will be particularly disruptive. Trouble could range from turmoil in the food distribution chain and electronic cash and credit systems unable to handle rapidly changing circumstances, to political instability. The situation quickly would devolve from a deepening depression, to an intensifying hyperinflationary great depression.






[Edited on 15-3-2012 by 497]




A word to the wise: NEUROFEEDBACK

http://citizenworks.org/corp/dg/s2r1.pdf
http://www.newscientist.com/mobile/article/mg21228354.500-re...
http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-414-hyperinflation-spe...

"To expose a 15 Trillion dollar ripoff of the American people by the stockholders of the 1000 largest corporations over the last 100 years will be a tall order of business."
Buckminster Fuller

"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it."
Albert Einstein
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 5245
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 15-3-2012 at 10:41


It has precisely everything to do with fundamental principles or first principles which are outstanding and visionary ......being replaced by "new improved"
con games which don't correctly identify simple right from wrong.....and everybody is paying the price for confusion. Some of the truly most stupidass people in the world think they are "enlightened" with "more modern" ideas which somehow redefine reality about "facts of life" which they can't accept. So instead of being pragmatic and acknowledging what is true and applying common sense to dealing with reality ......a great effort is put into redefining reality and implementing whatver hare brained schemes would seem to make good the effort of redefining reality. The problem is that the fundamental facts of life kind of things won't change ......but will remain operative....even if the effort at brainwashing everyone is successful at reversing what black and white are called ....the reality of the two things will not change and gray will still be gray. Presently there is a lot of confusion like there always has been in the world particularly for people who would make things out to be more complicated than they really are, and declare that masterfully they have found the solution .....so they become the
"enlightened teacher" the charismatic leader ......the new false prophet and oracle of "wisdom" who are really just peddlers of this years new flavor of snake oil. Step right up I have what you need right here, and it's good for what ails you. And along come all the halfwits right on schedule, like P.T Barnum said ....there's a sucker born every minute.

Establishing a legally fixed value of the dollar directly associated with and redeemable for a fixed quantity of energy would cut through all the bullshit. Not that I mean to harp on the idea ....but it would fix the problem decades or more into the foreseeable future ....in my humble prophetic opinion, which really isn't prophecy where you can identify a governing mathematical progression and apply the principle and formula defining the progression to predicting a future event in the logical continuation of the series.

The Only Path To Tomorrow

Ayn Rand

Readers Digest, January 1944, pp. 88-90

The greatest threat to mankind and civilization is the spread of the totalitarian philosophy. Its best ally is not the devotion of its followers but the confusion of its enemies. To fight it, we must understand it.

Totalitarianism is collectivism. Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group — whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called ``the common good.´´

Throughout history, no tyrant ever rose to power except on the claim of representing ``the common good.´´ Napoleon ``served the common good´´ of France. Hitler is ``serving the common good´´ of Germany. Horrors which no man would dare consider for his own selfish sake are perpetrated with a clear conscience by ``altruists´´ who justify themselves by-the common good.

No tyrant has ever lasted long by force of arms alone. Men have been enslaved primarily by spiritual weapons. And the greatest of these is the collectivist doctrine that the supremacy of the state over the individual constitutes the common good. No dictator could rise if men held as a sacred faith the conviction that they have inalienable rights of which they cannot be deprived for any cause whatsoever, by any man whatsoever, neither by evildoer nor supposed benefactor.

This is the basic tenet of individualism, as opposed to collectivism. Individualism holds that man is an independent entity with an inalienable right to the pursuit of his own happiness in a society where men deal with one another as equals.

The American system is founded on individualism. If it is to survive, we must understand the principles of individualism and hold them as our standard in any public question, in every issue we face. We must have a positive credo, a clear consistent faith.

We must learn to reject as total evil the conception that the common good is served by the abolition of individual rights. General happiness cannot be created out of general suffering and self-immolation. The only happy society is one of happy individuals. One cannot have a healthy forest made up of rotten trees.

The power of society must always be limited by the basic, inalienable rights of the individual.

The right of liberty means man's right to individual action, individual choice, individual initiative and individual property. Without the right to private property no independent action is possible.

The right to the pursuit of happiness means man's right to live for himself, to choose what constitutes his own, private, personal happiness and to work for its achievement. Each individual is the sole and final judge in this choice. A man's happiness cannot be prescribed to him by another man or by any number of other men.

These rights are the unconditional, personal, private, individual possession of every man, granted to him by the fact of his birth and requiring no other sanction. Such was the conception of the founders of our country, who placed individual rights above any and all collective claims. Society can only be a traffic policeman in the intercourse of men with one another.

From the beginning of history, two antagonists have stood face to face, two opposite types of men: the Active and the Passive. The Active Man is the producer, the creator, the originator, the individualist. His basic need is independence — in order to think and work. He neither needs nor seeks power over other men — nor can he be made to work under any form of compulsion. Every type of good work — from laying bricks to writing a symphony — is done by the Active Man. Degrees of human ability vary, but the basic principle remains the same: the degree of a man's independence and initiative determines his talent as a worker and his worth as a man.

The Passive Man is found on every level of society, in mansions and in slums, and his identification mark is his dread of independence. He is a parasite who expects to be taken care of by others, who wishes to be given directives, to obey, to submit, to be regulated, to be told. He welcomes collectivism, which eliminates any chance that he might have to think or act on his own initiative.

When a society is based on the needs of the Passive Man it destroys the Active; but when the Active is destroyed, the Passive can no longer be cared for. When a society is based on the needs of the Active Man, he carries the Passive ones along on his energy and raises them as he rises, as the whole society rises. This has been the pattern of all human progress.

Some humanitarians demand a collective state because of their pity for the incompetent or Passive Man. For his sake they wish to harness the Active. But the Active Man cannot function in harness. And once he is destroyed, the destruction of the Passive Man follows automatically. So if pity is the humanitarians' first consideration, then in the name of pity, if nothing else, they should leave the Active Man free to function, in order to help the Passive. There is no other way to help him in the long run.

The history of mankind is the history of the struggle between the Active Man and the Passive, between the individual and the collective. The countries which have produced the happiest men, the highest standards of living and the greatest cultural advances have been the countries where the power of the collective — of the government, of the state — was limited and the individual was given freedom of independent action. As examples: The rise of Rome, with its conception of law based on a citizen's rights, over the collectivist barbarism of its time. The rise of England, with a system of government based on the Magna Carta, over collectivist, totalitarian Spain. The rise of the United States to a degree of achievement unequaled in history — by grace of the individual freedom and independence which our Constitution gave each citizen against the collective.

While men are still pondering upon the causes of the rise and fall of civilizations, every page of history cries to us that there is but one source of progress: Individual Man in independent action. Collectivism is the ancient principle of savagery. A savage's whole existence is ruled by the leaders of his tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men.

We are now facing a choice: to go forward or to go back.

Collectivism is not the ``New Order of Tomorrow.´´ It is the order of a very dark yesterday. But there is a New Order of Tomorrow. It belongs to Individual Man — the only creator of any tomorrows humanity has ever been granted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand)


[Edited on 15-3-2012 by Rosco Bodine]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1  ..  18    20    22  ..  44

  Go To Top