If it isn't a war, then what is it?
There is a phenomenon here, no doubt. There are some who disagree with what is happening to our culture. But using the word "war" in order to describe it , is inaccurate.
If you are going to be a wordsmith, then use words correctly.
Consequently, what is this phenomenon?
I have a few suggestions. One is coup. Another that might be considered is a mugging. A third that might be more evocative, and yes, descriptive ---- RAPE.
Yep. You can see how a RAPE would describe it. Violence or threat of violence in order to dominate and force to submit to what would not be done willingly.
If you wanted an emotional response to your words, then try using the word -- RAPE --- in order to describe it. It is utterly one sided, and it can become brutal. This would be the case regardless if you said something in protest to it or not.
EEEEEE! Aw. Don't make a fuss. Just sit back and enjoy it. Hmmm?
Saturday, February 2, 2019
Just saying it once again, there will be no civil war
The exception would be if something changes.
That change would not necessarily be cause. There is plenty of cause, already. Therefore, the thing that would cause a change is not that something happened that would be a cause. The cause has existed for quite some time. If those who are inclined to go to war are waiting for a cause, then that is not really what they are waiting for, for the cause already exists, and has existed.
What about those who keep talking about "Civil War II"?
They are not serious people. That is what this is really all about. There is no seriousness of mind.
Perhaps this reference I am about to make is not serious, but it is what I am referring to in concept, even if it is only a movie. It is Yoda instructing young Skywalker that a Jedi must have the most serious mind.
What I am saying is that the people who refer to Civil War do not have a serious mind. They have no idea of what the hell they are talking about when they say what they say when it comes to a war.
Therefore, unless such a serious mind develops, there can be no war.
That change would not necessarily be cause. There is plenty of cause, already. Therefore, the thing that would cause a change is not that something happened that would be a cause. The cause has existed for quite some time. If those who are inclined to go to war are waiting for a cause, then that is not really what they are waiting for, for the cause already exists, and has existed.
What about those who keep talking about "Civil War II"?
They are not serious people. That is what this is really all about. There is no seriousness of mind.
Perhaps this reference I am about to make is not serious, but it is what I am referring to in concept, even if it is only a movie. It is Yoda instructing young Skywalker that a Jedi must have the most serious mind.
What I am saying is that the people who refer to Civil War do not have a serious mind. They have no idea of what the hell they are talking about when they say what they say when it comes to a war.
Therefore, unless such a serious mind develops, there can be no war.
Friday, February 1, 2019
More Krypton for the Stupid
It is of epic proportions.
Why "Green" Energy Is Futile, In One Lesson https://t.co/3LvX7deTPB via @powerlineUS— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) February 1, 2019
Sen Warren apologizes for sneaking up on the Cherokee
They were called civilized because they were easy to sneak up on.
Maybe Senator Warren has somebody sneaking up on her?
Maybe Senator Warren has somebody sneaking up on her?
Thursday, January 31, 2019
Abortion
Let me mention straight out, that this may be an unusual post here.
Perhaps because I do not discuss the subject of abortion here. There are a lot of strong feelings on the subject. Perhaps I do not have that strong of a feeling about it one way or another.
That is what is unusual. I am not indifferent about the subject. At least, I don't think that I am.
This raises the a question then, as to why I do not get animated about the discussion. For instance, the discussion came up today. My eldest brother mentioned the subject, and he said that he didn't know what my opinion was on the subject. I said nothing.
Since then, I stopped and wondered why it was that I had no response to the invitation to the discussion.
Let it be stated clearly that I do not approve of abortion. Just exactly what is it then that could be done about it? Arguing about it doesn't change anybody's mind.
A thought experiment here---- what if I were 30 years old and married. My wife announces that she is pregnant, but she does not want a baby. If she wanted an abortion then, what the hell could I do about it? The law is on her side. She could go get one, and I would have no recourse on it at all.
So, what could I say that I didn't say earlier? Only that I don't approve, but I haven't much say in the matter. If a woman wants an abortion, she can get one. No discussion is going to change that, so I guess to me, it isn't worth discussing. If I were married, and my wife were pregnant, and she wanted an abortion, I could say that I was against it, but so what? She could get one anyway. Get a divorce? Maybe such a step would be even worse, who knows?
Let's just say that it isn't worth worrying about things that you have no control over. There isn't much you can do about abortion if you are opposed but to argue against it, but there are plenty of arguments out there that get nowhere.
Like I said. It is an unusual post. My reaction to the issue may give the impression of indifference. But I don't think that it is indifference. I cannot crawl inside someone else's skin and make their decisions for them. It isn't worth getting excited about. So I don't.
Perhaps because I do not discuss the subject of abortion here. There are a lot of strong feelings on the subject. Perhaps I do not have that strong of a feeling about it one way or another.
That is what is unusual. I am not indifferent about the subject. At least, I don't think that I am.
This raises the a question then, as to why I do not get animated about the discussion. For instance, the discussion came up today. My eldest brother mentioned the subject, and he said that he didn't know what my opinion was on the subject. I said nothing.
Since then, I stopped and wondered why it was that I had no response to the invitation to the discussion.
Let it be stated clearly that I do not approve of abortion. Just exactly what is it then that could be done about it? Arguing about it doesn't change anybody's mind.
A thought experiment here---- what if I were 30 years old and married. My wife announces that she is pregnant, but she does not want a baby. If she wanted an abortion then, what the hell could I do about it? The law is on her side. She could go get one, and I would have no recourse on it at all.
So, what could I say that I didn't say earlier? Only that I don't approve, but I haven't much say in the matter. If a woman wants an abortion, she can get one. No discussion is going to change that, so I guess to me, it isn't worth discussing. If I were married, and my wife were pregnant, and she wanted an abortion, I could say that I was against it, but so what? She could get one anyway. Get a divorce? Maybe such a step would be even worse, who knows?
Let's just say that it isn't worth worrying about things that you have no control over. There isn't much you can do about abortion if you are opposed but to argue against it, but there are plenty of arguments out there that get nowhere.
Like I said. It is an unusual post. My reaction to the issue may give the impression of indifference. But I don't think that it is indifference. I cannot crawl inside someone else's skin and make their decisions for them. It isn't worth getting excited about. So I don't.
Mueller shoots self in foot?
Well, whatever. There shouldn't be the need to belabor the obvious, but why not? Not enough people seem to get it. Maybe if you repeat it enough, it will sink in.
But I wouldn't bet on it.
Wednesday, January 30, 2019
The Grievance Scam
A thought just occurred to me. It seems that the greater part of Democrat strategery is set up around the notion of grievance.
Somehow or another, the grievance scam is going to be played. The election of 2016 is a prime example. The idea here to make the election outcome, which brought Trump into the White House, as something of a grievance of some kind. Trump colluded with the Russians, blah, blah, blah. If it wasn't the Russians, it how unfair the Electoral College is, and all that. In other words, they have been wronged somehow. Hillary was denied the presidency, and it is just so unfair.
But there is no grievance. Hillary lost because she wasn't good enough.
I noted that this happened with the Trayvon Martin case, and some of the other cases like it. There was no grievance in those cases.
Today, I read that there was a grievance that supposedly involved some mistreatment of a homosexual. But tapes existed that showed nothing happened of the sort that the homosexual guy was claiming.
Reminds you of the Covington kids, does it not? There has to be some grievance for them to rally around. If there isn't one, then they make one up. They all rally around it and make a big deal out of it, but there is nothing there.
It isn't the first time.
Makes you wonder what they would do if nobody cared about their alleged grievances any more.
Somehow or another, the grievance scam is going to be played. The election of 2016 is a prime example. The idea here to make the election outcome, which brought Trump into the White House, as something of a grievance of some kind. Trump colluded with the Russians, blah, blah, blah. If it wasn't the Russians, it how unfair the Electoral College is, and all that. In other words, they have been wronged somehow. Hillary was denied the presidency, and it is just so unfair.
But there is no grievance. Hillary lost because she wasn't good enough.
I noted that this happened with the Trayvon Martin case, and some of the other cases like it. There was no grievance in those cases.
Today, I read that there was a grievance that supposedly involved some mistreatment of a homosexual. But tapes existed that showed nothing happened of the sort that the homosexual guy was claiming.
Reminds you of the Covington kids, does it not? There has to be some grievance for them to rally around. If there isn't one, then they make one up. They all rally around it and make a big deal out of it, but there is nothing there.
It isn't the first time.
Makes you wonder what they would do if nobody cared about their alleged grievances any more.
Maxine Waters believes without the basis of proof
In her own words.
Now if you can get these other people to believe their own words, then you might have something.
I am referring to so-called GOP'ers, who claim to be "conservatives". All they do is talk.
The list could get longer, you know. The phenomenon of blind faith seems to be relegated to people who seem to reject the traditional notions of faith. Fancy that. I mean, if Waters can believe people who lie their butts off continually, just look what you could do with Christianity.
Even Jesus Christ Himself would be impressed ( assuming that Waters isn't lying, of course ).
Now if you can get these other people to believe their own words, then you might have something.
I am referring to so-called GOP'ers, who claim to be "conservatives". All they do is talk.
The list could get longer, you know. The phenomenon of blind faith seems to be relegated to people who seem to reject the traditional notions of faith. Fancy that. I mean, if Waters can believe people who lie their butts off continually, just look what you could do with Christianity.
Even Jesus Christ Himself would be impressed ( assuming that Waters isn't lying, of course ).
Tuesday, January 29, 2019
Suicide pact
Democracies commit suicide. Here is a sure fire way to make sure that the US commits suicide.
There's a very good reason to keep things as they are. Don't fall for the idea that there is anything more moral about a democracy.
Our system was designed to be federal in nature. Also, it is a republic, not a democracy. The following link discusses the proposed compact between the states that would grant their electoral votes to whoever won the most popular votes.
There is no provision that requires a popular vote for president. The federal government cannot force that there be one. No compact between states should be able to assume what the federal government cannot mandate.
I fear that this proposition may succeed. Just one more nail in the coffin.
There's a very good reason to keep things as they are. Don't fall for the idea that there is anything more moral about a democracy.
Our system was designed to be federal in nature. Also, it is a republic, not a democracy. The following link discusses the proposed compact between the states that would grant their electoral votes to whoever won the most popular votes.
There is no provision that requires a popular vote for president. The federal government cannot force that there be one. No compact between states should be able to assume what the federal government cannot mandate.
I fear that this proposition may succeed. Just one more nail in the coffin.
Colorado Legislature Wants To Game The Electoral College Because Trump! https://t.co/4Q6IGZMVoQ— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) January 29, 2019
Drinking the Kool-Aid, a study of Cults of Personality
Reposted:
1.29.19: 8:00 am
The previous post was about a type of cult of personality. The cult followers nearly committed mass suicide, but the crew of the Enterprise was able to intervene, and save a few people.
Why mention this?
Senator Kamala Harris, a candidate for POTUS, was said to have an affair with Willie Brown. Willie Brown was a follower of Jim Jones. The connection here is alarming. This type of cult following may be quite seductive for many.
Harris is definitely not the ticket, but don't be surprised if she does well. So many people may be ripe for such a cult to resurface and gain a large following. In fact, that seems to be what the Democrats and the left are all about.
No human is worthy of such blind loyalty and obedience.
Update: 1:30 pm:
Correction: I wrote above that Willie Brown was a follower. This is probably not 100% correct. Willie Brown probably did not fall into that category. I'd say more like an ally than follower. Even though he probably could not be called a follower, he should be accountable for defending the likes of Jim Jones.
I regret that I wrote that he was a follower without being a bit more careful about it. These connections DO have a legitimate basis for concern.
Original post of 7.24.18:
Given the Mark Sanford comments recently, it seemed well to examine this phenomenon in more detail. Nobody should want a Cult of Personality taking hold of America. Such a phenomenon on a nationwide scale would be truly frightening. People should be aware of the danger signs. In the interest of prevention of such a catastrophe, perhaps it would be wise to study it, and learn about it, and be prepared to take steps that could prevent it from happening here.
The internet is a fine tool to study things such as this. Even though some people may denigrate it, Wikipedia is a good source for a lot of topics of interest, such as this.
Let's look at the Wikipedia entry on Jim Jones, the leader of the People's Temple. Jim Jones would have to qualify as a good example of the phenomenon of Cult of Personality. Indeed, his religious "cult" was in fact a cult.
One thing that jumps out at you is that Jim Jones was an outcast of sorts. Acquaintances called him "weird". He was said to have held funerals for small animals and stabbed a cat to death. Certainly, there seems to be something not quite right with Jones.
Jones became more and more famed as time went on. He plunged himself into the civil rights struggles of the sixties. In short, he made a name for himself, and attracted a following.
One thing that seems to surface is Jones' dishonesty about his real beliefs. He disguised his belief in communism on more than one occasion. There may be mitigating circumstances for a lack of candor, but one's antenna should go up once a pattern is detected. By the way, I am reading the Wikipedia article as I write this.
The dishonesty gets rather significant, as Jones rejects the Bible. The problem here is that Jones presents himself at first as a Christian, then he rejects the Bible. Clearly, there is a pattern now of deceit on a grand scale.
Another big red flag appears, as Jones starts to preach that he is a reincarnation of historical figures. One of these was Jesus Christ. Such delusions of grandeur are red flags of mental illness.
Jones was claiming a tax exemption on religious grounds. This is rather odd when he denied the Bible, and began to denounce Christianity.
Then Jones goes to San Francisco and injects himself into politics. He is credited with helping Moscone win the Mayor's race.
A number of prominent politicians, whose names can still be recognized by many, seemed to have been taken in by Jones.
Charges of sexual abuse found its way into local newspapers. Jones decides to move his temple to Guyana. Jones would not permit people to leave Jonestown ( the name of his settlement). Jones is a full fledged communist, and patterns himself and his temple upon the examples of communist states already in existence at the time.
Jones begins to have problems, but he still has significant political support.
Tragedy is getting nearer as Congressman Leo Ryan begins a fact finding mission to Guyana. Ryan is attacked while visiting the Temple. The mission ends, and Ryan is attempting to leave. Fifteen temple members wish to leave with Ryan. Some gunmen at the airstrip where Ryan was attempting to depart start shooting. Ryan is killed, along with four others. This was a big story now.
It was then that Jones induced his colony to commit mass suicide. This is where the term "drinking the Kool-Aid" comes from. His followers drank Kool-Aid laced with cyanide.
Why did Jones and his followers kill themselves? They believed that they were being persecuted. Jones believed he was performing a revolutionary act.
After reading this summary of the Wikipedia article, do you think you can spot the signs of a dangerous cult of personality?
By the way, I have written about Jones before. What should alarm you is the tendency of the left in San Francisco and in California, to pattern themselves after Jones. The name of Podesta surfaces in my blog search. This could be really big, ya'll.
A large number of Democrats believe that Trump is a traitor. Are these people setting up a gigantic container of Kool-Aid for themselves to drink if they cannot rule over the rest of us with an iron fist?
Or shall the notion of Sanford be entertained, and examined if the followers of Trump are actually a new cult of personality?
A great deal of courage needs to be summoned in order to face the truth. The link above to the Paul Craig Roberts piece was not vetted before I linked it. Now that I have, I will state that I don't quite believe Roberts.
However, what I DO believe is that there is something really, really wrong here. People should sit up and pay attention.
Also, it is a bit disheartening to observe that people in general DO NOT pay attention when they should. This puts us all at risk.
I prefer to be optimistic. But realistic too. Sometimes it is hard to be both.
1.29.19: 8:00 am
The previous post was about a type of cult of personality. The cult followers nearly committed mass suicide, but the crew of the Enterprise was able to intervene, and save a few people.
Why mention this?
Senator Kamala Harris, a candidate for POTUS, was said to have an affair with Willie Brown. Willie Brown was a follower of Jim Jones. The connection here is alarming. This type of cult following may be quite seductive for many.
Harris is definitely not the ticket, but don't be surprised if she does well. So many people may be ripe for such a cult to resurface and gain a large following. In fact, that seems to be what the Democrats and the left are all about.
No human is worthy of such blind loyalty and obedience.
Update: 1:30 pm:
Correction: I wrote above that Willie Brown was a follower. This is probably not 100% correct. Willie Brown probably did not fall into that category. I'd say more like an ally than follower. Even though he probably could not be called a follower, he should be accountable for defending the likes of Jim Jones.
I regret that I wrote that he was a follower without being a bit more careful about it. These connections DO have a legitimate basis for concern.
Original post of 7.24.18:
Given the Mark Sanford comments recently, it seemed well to examine this phenomenon in more detail. Nobody should want a Cult of Personality taking hold of America. Such a phenomenon on a nationwide scale would be truly frightening. People should be aware of the danger signs. In the interest of prevention of such a catastrophe, perhaps it would be wise to study it, and learn about it, and be prepared to take steps that could prevent it from happening here.
The internet is a fine tool to study things such as this. Even though some people may denigrate it, Wikipedia is a good source for a lot of topics of interest, such as this.
Let's look at the Wikipedia entry on Jim Jones, the leader of the People's Temple. Jim Jones would have to qualify as a good example of the phenomenon of Cult of Personality. Indeed, his religious "cult" was in fact a cult.
One thing that jumps out at you is that Jim Jones was an outcast of sorts. Acquaintances called him "weird". He was said to have held funerals for small animals and stabbed a cat to death. Certainly, there seems to be something not quite right with Jones.
Jones became more and more famed as time went on. He plunged himself into the civil rights struggles of the sixties. In short, he made a name for himself, and attracted a following.
One thing that seems to surface is Jones' dishonesty about his real beliefs. He disguised his belief in communism on more than one occasion. There may be mitigating circumstances for a lack of candor, but one's antenna should go up once a pattern is detected. By the way, I am reading the Wikipedia article as I write this.
The dishonesty gets rather significant, as Jones rejects the Bible. The problem here is that Jones presents himself at first as a Christian, then he rejects the Bible. Clearly, there is a pattern now of deceit on a grand scale.
Another big red flag appears, as Jones starts to preach that he is a reincarnation of historical figures. One of these was Jesus Christ. Such delusions of grandeur are red flags of mental illness.
Jones was claiming a tax exemption on religious grounds. This is rather odd when he denied the Bible, and began to denounce Christianity.
Then Jones goes to San Francisco and injects himself into politics. He is credited with helping Moscone win the Mayor's race.
A number of prominent politicians, whose names can still be recognized by many, seemed to have been taken in by Jones.
Charges of sexual abuse found its way into local newspapers. Jones decides to move his temple to Guyana. Jones would not permit people to leave Jonestown ( the name of his settlement). Jones is a full fledged communist, and patterns himself and his temple upon the examples of communist states already in existence at the time.
Jones begins to have problems, but he still has significant political support.
Tragedy is getting nearer as Congressman Leo Ryan begins a fact finding mission to Guyana. Ryan is attacked while visiting the Temple. The mission ends, and Ryan is attempting to leave. Fifteen temple members wish to leave with Ryan. Some gunmen at the airstrip where Ryan was attempting to depart start shooting. Ryan is killed, along with four others. This was a big story now.
It was then that Jones induced his colony to commit mass suicide. This is where the term "drinking the Kool-Aid" comes from. His followers drank Kool-Aid laced with cyanide.
Why did Jones and his followers kill themselves? They believed that they were being persecuted. Jones believed he was performing a revolutionary act.
After reading this summary of the Wikipedia article, do you think you can spot the signs of a dangerous cult of personality?
By the way, I have written about Jones before. What should alarm you is the tendency of the left in San Francisco and in California, to pattern themselves after Jones. The name of Podesta surfaces in my blog search. This could be really big, ya'll.
A large number of Democrats believe that Trump is a traitor. Are these people setting up a gigantic container of Kool-Aid for themselves to drink if they cannot rule over the rest of us with an iron fist?
Or shall the notion of Sanford be entertained, and examined if the followers of Trump are actually a new cult of personality?
A great deal of courage needs to be summoned in order to face the truth. The link above to the Paul Craig Roberts piece was not vetted before I linked it. Now that I have, I will state that I don't quite believe Roberts.
However, what I DO believe is that there is something really, really wrong here. People should sit up and pay attention.
Also, it is a bit disheartening to observe that people in general DO NOT pay attention when they should. This puts us all at risk.
I prefer to be optimistic. But realistic too. Sometimes it is hard to be both.
Space Hippies, sixties style
Wow, they really reach.... ( sixties speak??? don't remember ) "Adam" ate an "apple", but it didn't go well.
Monday, January 28, 2019
The Highwaymen - Highwayman
The message of the song? The spirit is eternal. A mighty long time.
There was a TV program on last night that mentioned "Wolf 359". It is a real star. The amazing thing is that this star will last over a trillion years. A mighty long time. Eternity is a mighty long time.
Burial idea
Reposted:
1.28.19:
It was nearly two years ago to this day that I went into the hospital. Evidently, something was on my mind at the time. ( a bit of irony there )
Well, I am still around after two years, and I was looking back at that time again in order to find the exact date that I went into the hospital. I found this post, and it seemed to be worth posting again.
You know what? It might cost a huge amount, but if I could, this could be my final wish...
Scatter one's own ashes? No. But to make a cast out ones own bones may not be such a bad idea. Wonder if it could work?
These days, it seems like you can get cremation for a fairly low price. However, my understanding is that all that is left are bones, not ashes. Now, if the bones were to be subjected to enough heat, the results would be quicklime. If enough quicklime could be obtained, it could be applied onto a facial mask made before death.
Anyway, it is an idea...
Original post on 1.24.17:
The funeral business seems lucrative, perhaps even an opportunity exists provided that you could come up with an innovative idea. This may not be innovative, but it does have some elements to it that may not have been done before.
The Malta Treatment liquefies the soft tissues leaving only the bones. The bones can be ground down to a powder resembling ashes. Here's what may be possible: the bones are primarily made of calcium carbonate, the same stuff as limestone. When this is heated enough, the carbon dioxide leaves, which gives quicklime. The quicklime can be reconstituted back into limestone with the addition of water. In other words, the process is a closed loop. The idea is to fashion a bust of the deceased person, and cast it in concrete made from a deceased person's own ashes. The liquefied part can be stored inside of the bust. The body is still there, but has taken a different form: a form that would be recognizable to the survivors of the deceased.
The departed could be visited. It is better than a grave, which keeps the deceased person out of sight. The body is respected, which should allay religious concerns. It is technically feasible, more than likely. It could add another option to the choices available for one when that inevitable moment comes for us all. It would last for generations, perhaps even centuries. Future generations could trace back their ancestries in a more lifelike way. You could see what your ancestor looked like.
The idea could be expanded further with high tech enhancements. For example, artificial intelligence could mimic a person's personality. You could "talk" to the dearly departed.
You know what? This could work. Particularly if the price is right.
1.28.19:
It was nearly two years ago to this day that I went into the hospital. Evidently, something was on my mind at the time. ( a bit of irony there )
Well, I am still around after two years, and I was looking back at that time again in order to find the exact date that I went into the hospital. I found this post, and it seemed to be worth posting again.
You know what? It might cost a huge amount, but if I could, this could be my final wish...
Scatter one's own ashes? No. But to make a cast out ones own bones may not be such a bad idea. Wonder if it could work?
These days, it seems like you can get cremation for a fairly low price. However, my understanding is that all that is left are bones, not ashes. Now, if the bones were to be subjected to enough heat, the results would be quicklime. If enough quicklime could be obtained, it could be applied onto a facial mask made before death.
Anyway, it is an idea...
Original post on 1.24.17:
The funeral business seems lucrative, perhaps even an opportunity exists provided that you could come up with an innovative idea. This may not be innovative, but it does have some elements to it that may not have been done before.
The Malta Treatment liquefies the soft tissues leaving only the bones. The bones can be ground down to a powder resembling ashes. Here's what may be possible: the bones are primarily made of calcium carbonate, the same stuff as limestone. When this is heated enough, the carbon dioxide leaves, which gives quicklime. The quicklime can be reconstituted back into limestone with the addition of water. In other words, the process is a closed loop. The idea is to fashion a bust of the deceased person, and cast it in concrete made from a deceased person's own ashes. The liquefied part can be stored inside of the bust. The body is still there, but has taken a different form: a form that would be recognizable to the survivors of the deceased.
The departed could be visited. It is better than a grave, which keeps the deceased person out of sight. The body is respected, which should allay religious concerns. It is technically feasible, more than likely. It could add another option to the choices available for one when that inevitable moment comes for us all. It would last for generations, perhaps even centuries. Future generations could trace back their ancestries in a more lifelike way. You could see what your ancestor looked like.
The idea could be expanded further with high tech enhancements. For example, artificial intelligence could mimic a person's personality. You could "talk" to the dearly departed.
You know what? This could work. Particularly if the price is right.
Sunday, January 27, 2019
Wish there wuz some kyptonite for this stupid
Actually, stupid is a weakness. You take down Superman with kryptonite. So, if you need kryptonite for stupid, does that make Superman stupid?
Maybe you just need to eat more brain food. Either way, it's bad. I don't know kryptonite.
One commenter said it got to 109 degrees, and it was 92 in their home. Yep. It got that hot in this area last summer, and the humidity was LOW. That place was 109 with HIGH humidity. No way a swamp cooler could help much in high humidity, and with high heat.
If people want to suffer, then go greenie weenie. That's what they did in Aussie land, and Germany is going in that direction. Collyfornia too.
Maybe you just need to eat more brain food. Either way, it's bad. I don't know kryptonite.
One commenter said it got to 109 degrees, and it was 92 in their home. Yep. It got that hot in this area last summer, and the humidity was LOW. That place was 109 with HIGH humidity. No way a swamp cooler could help much in high humidity, and with high heat.
If people want to suffer, then go greenie weenie. That's what they did in Aussie land, and Germany is going in that direction. Collyfornia too.
Green Electricity Grid Collapses During Aussie Heatwave https://t.co/Wl6Rz9yTh4 via @WattsUpWithThat— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) January 27, 2019
Amusing objection to trillion dollar coin
Reposted,
Originally posted on 1.5.13:
1.26.19:
In case you are wondering about the adjournment of Congress, and ruling by decree, it might be possible to fund the government like this...
It would debase the currency, but isn't that what they have been doing all along?
............
1.5.13:
It's amusing because they're citing a difference that doesn't make a difference. To illustrate: let's look at how they do it now.
To start, how much does it cost the government to print a $100 bill? I don't know myself, so let's just say it costs a penny for each bill. That is a ratio of 10000 times its actual cost to produce--- $100/.01= 10000.
By the way, to run monetary policy, they don't even have to print the money. They can do just accounting entries. Maybe the ratio is closer to a million to 1. After all, how much does an accounting entry cost? lol
Let's say platinum's price is about $1600 per oz. That means with the same ratio, you could strike a $16 million dollar coin. Okay, that's not a trillion, but in principal, how is it different? Just to run the numbers, you need 62,500 coins of this denomination to make a trillion. Would you feel better if they had to make all those coins? It would cost the Treasury about the cost of 2 tons of platinum, or 1/10000th or their true value. Sure, they still aren't worth that much that it says its worth, but neither are those bills in your wallet nor those coins in your pocket.
You'll probably object by saying that I don't know what I'm talking about. If you do think that way, then please tell me how it is actually done. That's because that's the way it was taught to me while I was in school. Maybe the way I learned it all was wrong.
I'm not missing the point either. I suspect those of you who object are the ones missing the point. Our currency is actually worthless. It is only "worth" something because somebody in authority says it is.
They say our debt is 16 trillion, but a lot of that is hocus-pocus too.
Originally posted on 1.5.13:
1.26.19:
In case you are wondering about the adjournment of Congress, and ruling by decree, it might be possible to fund the government like this...
It would debase the currency, but isn't that what they have been doing all along?
............
1.5.13:
It's amusing because they're citing a difference that doesn't make a difference. To illustrate: let's look at how they do it now.
To start, how much does it cost the government to print a $100 bill? I don't know myself, so let's just say it costs a penny for each bill. That is a ratio of 10000 times its actual cost to produce--- $100/.01= 10000.
By the way, to run monetary policy, they don't even have to print the money. They can do just accounting entries. Maybe the ratio is closer to a million to 1. After all, how much does an accounting entry cost? lol
Let's say platinum's price is about $1600 per oz. That means with the same ratio, you could strike a $16 million dollar coin. Okay, that's not a trillion, but in principal, how is it different? Just to run the numbers, you need 62,500 coins of this denomination to make a trillion. Would you feel better if they had to make all those coins? It would cost the Treasury about the cost of 2 tons of platinum, or 1/10000th or their true value. Sure, they still aren't worth that much that it says its worth, but neither are those bills in your wallet nor those coins in your pocket.
You'll probably object by saying that I don't know what I'm talking about. If you do think that way, then please tell me how it is actually done. That's because that's the way it was taught to me while I was in school. Maybe the way I learned it all was wrong.
I'm not missing the point either. I suspect those of you who object are the ones missing the point. Our currency is actually worthless. It is only "worth" something because somebody in authority says it is.
They say our debt is 16 trillion, but a lot of that is hocus-pocus too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)