I remember hearing that song for the first time and thinking to myself
"Whew, I'm not the only one". I mean, I had never admitted that I actually think
like that because, you know, when you say things like that, people think you're a fool. :}
I don't need Steely Dan to tell me that. I wonder who they were talking about?
Ever since I thought about that - after deciding to write a paper on the theory of
taxation and how it applies to our current world, I've been chuckling, knowing I'd tell
you a story that - should anyone take what I say seriously on this site, or maybe even in
person, and someone like Bill O'Reilly were to interview me, I'm sure they'd call me a
socialist.
Crazy me, I look forward to that discussion :}
Pink Floyd - Money
The truth is, I'd have to say I ascribe more to the Mises formula, probably previously
Keynes, and I understand the political appeasement of allowing von Hayek and Friedman into
the mix, but that was the poison from long ago that's poisoning us now because it's way
out of control. It's the theory that uses economic coercion as a norm instead of a
punitive or persuasive measure without long term intended oppression or domination.
They call it trickle down. I think of it more like the application of the theory behind
Pavlov's dog. 100% carrot and stick. And you thought ur government only used on foreign
countries they didn't like.
So here's the story that I hope will cause some spirited discussion.
But you have to promise me something. You have to promise that if you read any further,
you'll read all the way to the end or I'm sure you won't understand what I'm going to tell
you.
If you aren't going to read it all, I'll see if I can find a link to 
another presidential politician's
web site that's sure to give you less fact and information than you need to know. :}
I must have been about 11 or so when I was walking through a supermarket, looking
around at all the different kinds of foods and products I'd never seen before, and thought
to myself, it's a shame things weren't set up in such a way that everybody could have
whatever they wanted or needed, and if they didn't have to worry about getting it, then
they would only take what they need.
I'd look around and see different prices on similar products, different quality, and
wonder why there would be different qualities. As time has gone on, I wonder why it costs
more to eat food that is good for you, when we should all be eating it, instead of the
common food that is depleted in its nutriitive value because of depleted soils.
For me, it becomes a discussion more like "What is Equality". I'm really
clear we don't understand what the concept of equality actually means.
But, I looked around when I was 11, and thought to myself.. after a good deal of
thought, and hearing discussions on tv and KGO about the economy and taxes... that I like
to have a little spending money, but the truth is that if I was to give 75% per cent of
whatever I earned to the government for taxes, that covered everything except my personal
luxury items, then that's not really a bad deal. And if you want to consider something
really interesting, considering the fact that the United States Government, let alone we,
as as citizens, are teetering on bankruptcy, consider the idea that if you only got paid
25% of what you now earn, and everything would be provided, that would make for an
interesting economic maneuvre and worth looking at just to see what effect it would have
on the value of the dollar in the global economy. (It isn't the right approach, but
somehow, I think it would generate some new, useful observations)
Then consider yourself reminded that I'm sharing my thoughts with you, not the
conclusions I've come to. Though, I bet the guys at the Fed would read this and say
"And this guy thinks he can be president? We can take this guy in ways we could never
take his uncle Ulysses." :} But I have a few more surprises for the Federal Reserve
Board that we'll get to later.
Having everything free is not going to happen.. at least for another 10 years. :} I
love saying things like that because in a conversation for creation, not change, you have
the possibility to say what the ideal would be in a perfect world, and then work toward
that, instead of working in response to circumstances based on momentary political
expediency.
Transformation occurs when discussing the possibility to create. Everything is
possible. The question is, what do you choose to create, build and sustain? America
has not had that kind of discussion for decades. In the current political climate, it
seems impossible to have that kind of honest discussion.
The perpetuation of stagnant ideas that do not work in a scalable manner and do not
reflect the enormity and dynamicism of population, economic and technological trends can
not possibly accurately and productively project the requirements of the future in terms
of training and empowerment in every domain of management such that the welfare of the
citizens is considered as the the priority for such planning, as opposed to the
accomodation of corporate product life cycles that benefit only the anti-trust status of
large corporations, whether such laws are enforced or not. It perpetuates a fear-based
survival mode psychology or mindset of existence that is false, inhumane, destructive and
an indicator of lazy, incompetent or unhealthy leadership.
The fact is that the implementation of so-called free-market trading philosophy is the
proof that our government is abandoning its responsibilities toward the citizens to
promote the general welfare. Further, if you study what is occurring in the military
sector, it is clear that our government, Democratic and Republican alike, is aligned on
the idea of the use of military force both to perpetuate the U.S. economy while it is used
to actualize a goal never endorsed by the American people - global military domination -
that is occurring without your knowledge.
The governemt issues reports and passes laws that noone reads. So, how would
the public have time ito inform themselves, if the Congress doesn't? That's how a nation
of loopholes is created. So much for equal opportunity and the American Dream.
Understand this: your national infrastructure is crumbling because a bunch of people
who believe they are superior to you and I are robbing our treasury in a push to gain the
upper hand in the markets that would choke any country that will not comply with their
demands. And they're using our military, the war on terror, and using constitutionally
illegal mercenaries to fight wars of conquest.
We have been in over 230 military conflicts in foreign countries since the
United States became the United States. Think about that. While the politicians extoll the
true virtues of the American people to win elections, peaceful people in a peaceful
nation, behind our backs they have caused us to be a nation perpetually at war.
Andfrequently the aggressor, despite the press reports that are nothing more than cover
stories and lies.
This is all part of the real reason why we really do need to take inventory. How can we
possibly say that we should or shouldn't reduce or increase taxes when we don't even know
what our cash requirements are?
For example, last time I checked, the United States is not a few trillion in debt, we
are closer to $300 trillion in long-term debt. Not all of that is financed by the Federal
Reserve process. But much of it is unfunded.
Every American currently owes over $500,000 in taxes for our current
debt. How do you plan to pay your share? Which lie about how it will magically
get better in 5 years will you choose to believe in lieu of the realities of the truth?
When the government reports our debt to you, they're talking in simplistic terms of
common public operations, not the fulfillment of long-term commitments, pensions and
health plans.
The 75 year plan must be more like a hedge-fund scheme set up to float a kiting scheme
that only benefits the rich. Like being at the top of a pyramid scheme. Now that the
Bush/Council on Foreign Relations military agenda is having its intended effect, the
Muslim Regime George Bush claimed Iran wanted to establish in the Middle East is actually
going to be required to repair the damage we've caused, given that Iran is, in fact, the
dominant Arab nation in that region.
Understand what I just said: we have ostensibly caused, through manipulation
and dialectic, the exact situation our government wanted to be able to present us with to
keep us in terror and perpetual war, with permanent bases in Iraq and other regions in
order to coerce the world with oil.
What part of the so-called moral highground does that conduct represent? Not the
American values we claim. And certainly not Christian values. Not even Muslim values.
Why? To force the dependence of the citizens on the government of the United States.
The OPEC attrition from American petro dollars to Euro dollars will do a great deal of
damage. The Iranians have been warning the United States for years that they would do this
if we didn't stop harming them economically.
Understand, as always in that region, we begin an aggressive dialectic that actually
sets up nations with no hostility toward us to engage in war with us or go to war against
other nations we want weakened economically and politically.
Meanwhile, the American people are told the other nations are the aggressor.
Meanwhile, Exxon made nearly 12 billion dollars last quarter. Exxon, GE and Unocal were
the benefactors and reason for the Afghanistan War. Exxon,of course, is a Rockefeller
property, who funded the Council on Foreign Relations.
Again, that's why we need to take inventory. It's been a long time since we really
evaluated our course without the deceptions of politics. And this is no time to rely on
the political favorite way of dealing with things - waiting until a disaster happens to
fix something, or patch it so that the real solution will have to be confronted by someone
else, or the service or infrastructure will simply be forgotten when it goes out of
service.
And an ownership society is not the answer.
The truth is, I doubt we need more taxes in order to accomplish about 2-1/2 times more
productivity in governement operations, especially when NOT outsourcing services and
utilities that are, in fact the responsibility of the government. Organizations like
BlackWater are unconstitutional and expensive.
This is where concentric design is concerned. A new concentric design is required
because the incremental alteration of bad ideas has now caused everything to be out of
balance and dysfunctional.
Paul McCartney Fine
Line
It's obvious there are things that have to be done in order for the basic
function of the government and us, the citizens. There are things that could be done if no
one objected. But there are ways, particularly at this juncture, to incorporate the
structuring of the next economy not just on "green technology", the boom for
which will be great but limited and expensive as the energy companies convert their
equipment and assets to servicing that industry, which they also own.. Likely, on our
current course, with irrational subsidies from taxpayers for corporations who do not need
them. It's technological extortion.
The idea of a green economy is a good one, but far from comprehensive and necessarily
satisfying to the mass of workers who will otherwise be unemployed because of economic
collapses in other economic segments. Aka, other businesses, particularly luxury items,
transportation, and durable goods, the heart of our manufacturing and export strength.
Unless you'll be satisfied to accept the job that the Council on Foreign Relations gives
you in their "citizens of the government" approach instead of a "government
of the people" approach. It's much more like Russian Communism than Democracy or the
functioning of a Republic.
You can continue to feel good about things, feel pumped up by hope and misled
into bankruptcy by the candidates in your two-party system.
Or you can put trust in someone willing to tell you the truth in order to avoid
and minimize the economic disasters purposefully created by our government and its
patrons.
And when it's all over and the bridges and roads and buildings have been sold
off to foreign countries, you'll breathe a sigh of relief when you receive the notice that
says you'll be allowed to continue to live in your own country as long as you obey your
employers' rules.
Again, I wish I was not telling you the truth.
If you think the issue of taxation and the economy in this
election has to do with rebates, stimulus packages that don't and saving a few dollars on
gas, you're going to be very upset when you suddenly find out it's actually about
determining the form of government that's being installed in replacement of the U.S.
Constitution.
The foreign trade agreements.. Nafta, WTO, GATT, all of them surender the sovereignty
of the United States to other nations, and in a big way, corporations. And your
opportunity for recourse and claims is practically non-existent.
Let's just say you think it might be okay for THAT to happen. Is it right that
it's being done without our permission? I distrust the motives of these people simply
because they do not have the integrity or honorable intentions to even inform us of what
they're doing. That makes it a conspiracy. And it's in it's final
stage of completion. A stage that can, theoretically, given a miracle, be stopped in this
Presidential Election by voting for anyone but the people in the two party system, John McCain and Barack Obama.
And, what they're doing actually is unconstitutional. There is no provision in
the constitution that gives leaders the right, power or perrogative to wage expansionist
wars. Covert or overt. The amount of money wasted on such unproductive efforts is
phenomenal.
The human toll is intolerable, inhumane and perverse. That politicians speak of
mass destruction like a joyful video game is unimageinable and morally bankrupt.
And then the only way to end the nightmare begins with appropriately having the Federal
Reserve declared unconstitutional, returning the responsibility of printing money to the
govenment, and end the oppression by usery of the citizens of this nation.
I have to make this point. People demonize Muslims all the time. But one thing you have
to respect about Muslims is that they know their faith,and they live their faith. In their
religion, usery is not allowed. In Christianity, usery is not allowed. But we do it.
Why is usery not allowed according to religion? Because if there's anything that has
ever contributed to oppression and the downfall of cultures, it's the siphoning off of
economic resources by loan sharks, financiers, and their patron politicans winning support
in return for favors. It's likely the most consistently recurring event in history.
Then, imagine how much more work could be accomplished, and how much less money would
be spent, if the politicians did not have to spend so much money on elections. And that
same money, what would it accomplish instead?
You've heard all those things before, and maybe you say "Oh man, not a tree
hugger" or something. But, forget your previous decision to give up on these issues -
what about that statement doesn't actually make sense. Other than a possible claim
that it's not realistic? Who does it benefit to have you think that way, to have given up
on that subject?
All those things said, I think you will agree that the answers to the economy are
greater than short term housing bailouts for citizens, which are important, bailouts for
corporations that are making profits from their paper losses, all of which look like the
government is giving you your money back, when all they're doing is getting good headlines
and votes, while running up a deficit that causes more interest debt.
Tax rebates, dividend tax abatement, all those things just generate more national debt.
Putting more money back in your pocket is a great idea. Stealing it from your wallet to
put it in your hand just tricks you into thinking you have something that doesn't exist.
It's absolutely mandatory that this nation have a leader NOW that is willing to
set politics aside and give the American people their money's worth. And I'm going to ask
you to take another look at the concept of economics and taxation as if we did not have a
standing economy, paradigms and political parties dividing us with half truths,
deceptions, and pretty named programs that are harmful and never get implemented anyway.
A New Economy for a New World
Eddie Money - Walk
On Water
In deciding how to annoy everyone in one fell swoop and make my point at the same time,
I started thinking of how the Council on Foreign Relations.. or let's say the lineage of
people and families that implemented the Council's original ideologies, created and
implemented Communism, Socialism, Marxism and Capitalism. Sort of like doing research on
cultures, societies and economies in real time.
We won't say, for the sake of argument at least, that there was anything wrong with
that.
Then, somewhere along the line, decisions were made (by greedy people) that capitalism
could best be utilized to ultimately re-establish an order of the world that recognized
the Rights of Kings... human Kings... like, they really believed God gave it to them, and
that their religious heritage gave them the right to have it. You could frame it a million
ways, but it always basically comes down to that. They think that their money is the proof
of their superiority.
I could name someone who is well respected... and is wealthiest thief in the world.
You'd call him a pioneer of industry. You'd probably say "I/m not worthy" in his
presence. But I've never heard one single good thing about him as a person.
And, they figured out ways to use cultures with these economic foundations and
differences in names to cause people of other structures to fear the other, cause wars,
generate huge profits, own nations and undermine governments who wouldn't play along.
I bring this up because it becomes an excellent example of what I call the holographic
nature of the universe. It's like doing a work and process flow study to see how 1 person
would do a job, and then project the human, economic and material resources required to do
the same thing a million times based on the model of production requirements for the
single unit and individual doing the work.
I'm now going to explain to you why these biases you have against the labels given to
methods of managing economies and macro-economics have caused you to choose the one that
has been justified to you by appealing to your inherent desire for freedom: capitalism.
Every one of us is a communist, socialist, marxist and capitalist, as well as having
been a recipient of entitlements in a welfare state. All before we're 5 years old. After
that, it just becomes a habit, and we are told these other ways are bad and evil because
the people telling you that benefit from having you think that way.
Please, think about this. You promised to if you read this :}
If you're a child, you're a welfare recipient. Your government - your parents - are
providing it. They are communists. They live together, raise a family, train their
families in customs and governmental/sociological behavior and economics.
You're a socialist because you pay taxes and supposedly believe in contributing to the
common good.
You're a capitalist because, instead of hunting everyday and farming, we earn money and
pay people to do all the other stuff.
And a Marxist, because you believe that you, as equal citizens, deserve your share of
the pie, or at least the opportunity to have some.
Now, explained in the contexts I've provided, is there anything wrong with considering
the economic theories? Would I be wrong to attempt to compute PI if the idea of computing
PI was invented by a Russian? Would that make me subversive? Or, would, "Who cares
where an idea came from" make sense to you?
It does to me. Our economy is based on the theories and formulas of all of these
"economic theories and formulas" simply because they are intuitive to the way we
actually conduct our lives. The art of it is, determining which formulas are appropriate
to use in what circumstances. There is a man and theory called Mises which does a good job
of expressing the ways the theories of these economic systems blended together, always
acknowledging that the system, and the government are the servants of the citizens
and the resources belong to no one and everyone equally.
People will begin to realize that my true method of repairing the economy will not be
to announce a bunch of new plans that mean nothing. It will be to streamline the parts of
the system that would actually work if the people in charge actually wanted to get the job
done. The savings would be huge.
Further, without full nationalization, it is imperative that we join the Muslims, and
the United Nations, in declaring that things like water and food and shelter are basic God
given rights, and should be available to all. Those are the foundations of life.
Certainly, there are logistics to work out, but these items should not be areas with the
priority of profit over the heath of people, animals and beings. This is an item on the
list of how we "Create the Future" that needs to be part of the all inclusive
plan.
Keep in mind, some of the things I point out are already being done. That's reclaiming
what works. And I'm not trying to promote the idea that Muslims ar good or superior, but I
would like to help end the purposefully caused public image and bigotry that if you see a
Muslim or a person of Arab descent, your first instinct should be to be afraid.
The bridges, institutions, lotteries and such are the property of the citizens
of America. Our country and our infrastructure is not for sale. I see nowhere in our
Constitution or in any documentation that gives our government the right to sell the
United States to other individuals and corporations.
I understand the concept of an ownership society. Again, it is a good concept to be
incorporated into the master plan appropriately. But my country is not for sale.
Jonathan Edwards - Sunshine
(Dedicated to George HW Bush & the Rockefellers)
Any infrastructure that has been sold, public institutions mortgaged or lottery
winnings assigned to loans of the state must be immediately returned to the control and
ownership of us, the citizens, in the care of our government. If the government does not
honor this, then I say they are breaching their oaths of office to serve the citizens.
Corporations, nations or individuals refusing to cooperate with this reclamation will be
subject to seizure and/or public domain actions.
Oil companies will no longer be subsidized in any way, and they must fully acknowledge
that the oil anywhere is the property of the nation state in which it is located. While
they are welcome to be competitive bidders for service contracts, the fact that oil has
been embedded as the stabilizing influence on our economies, the economies and citizens it
serves are more important than their profits and the control the oil gives them over world
events.
That ends now. I have no problem with them making a profit for their work. I'm not
calling for nationalization. But, I assure you, given my position, I will seek counsel to
install legislation or use executive orders to seize the oil of this nation, it's
production facilities and the operating assets and equipment of these companies should
there be the slightest hint of retaliation for this policy. Then, they can negotiate with
us, the citizens, owners of this nation, for the right to work for us again if they will
obey our rules for a change. If they give us reason to, maybe we'll even trust them again.
And we will take immediate steps to halt and reverse the negative "faux"
Global Warming effects of terraforming via weather manipulation and wars by means of HAARP
and other devices. This will then include preventing the excavation of oil in the Arctic
and Antarctic regions, as made accesible by these weather manipulation schemes until at
least such time that the natural weather and nature of this planet has had time to show us
what pattern and path it is taking to heal itself.
This is a serious and very real issue.
The Atlantic Ocean is dying due to the disruption of the Trans-Atlantic Conveyor, a
natural cooling system under the ocean. The people running the weather modification
devices only care about the natural resources they can reap by creating barren ground.
What's going on in the polar melting is not natural, and it is not caused by greenhouse
gases.
By the way, the carbon credits proposals are a farce as well.
This will save us a great deal in many domains in terms of disaster relief, lives, the
environment, business damage, insurance costs...
See... we keep approaching everything in a compartmentalized way without examining the
rippling effects that each has on the one... notice that way "the one" really is
always important to consider. By not acknowledging the rippling effects, that
compartmentalization allows for the sales - capitalism - and consumerism that causes us to
buy things we don't need. And wouldn't if we were told we didn't need to. Or because it
was the thing to do.
Did you know that those Compact Flourescent Flight Bulbs - to save you money and the
environment - are not good for you?
And then there will be another huge return/surplus in funds. Personal funds too. And
those stimulus packages. Remember, one way or another you pay for them. If we apply
windfall profit taxes without taking additional measures, how long do you think the oil
companies will take to charge us at the pump for the difference?
But the idea looks good, doesn't it? No wonder the politicians... I mean the Council on
Foreign Relations... wants you to hate Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. He refuses to let
the oil companies and the United States run his country. It really is that simple. And he
understands that the job of a government is to serve the interests of its citizens first.
Like Fidel Castro, the people manipulating us wouldn't want us to get any of those bad
kinds of ideas, like questioning the totalitarian authority of a government and its money
changers. And, oh by the way, he actually was elected fair and square. You know, that
Democracy thing you've heard of. Apparently, that hasn't happened in the United States for
decades. Maybe we ought to try it.
Once again, I almost apologize for my cynicism.. or is that truthfulness? I know it's
unusual, but if you keep me around for a while, you'll get used to it again.
Think about it. When emergencies happen, doesn't it make you feel better to know what
is actually going on, even if there's nothing you can do about it? And wouldn't it bother
you to find out you could have done something about a problem if someone had told you
before it damaged your life, family or community?
The Federal Reserve as we know it ends. It's an unconstitutional granting of
congressional authority, and is causing the very problems that the founders envisioned
when they assigned the printing of money to Congress. It's that simple. I defy anyone to
justify the debt incurred via this non-governmental organization. And, if you want to be
religious about it, it's not a Christian thing to do. Not a Muslim thing to do...
bankrupting people slowly behind their banks doesn't seem ethical to me.
I know it's not as simple as that, and yet, it is.
Zillions of dollars saved.
Next, we'll force corporations to expose advanced technology patents without violating
intellectual property rights so as to make God's ideas available to everyone when God
gives them to us, and not when it's profitable. Things like, the cure for cancer, solar
and gamma energy, brushless motors and much, much more. And even the medical miracles of
good old psychotronics. You have no idea the medical benefits available from the
technology they use to torture people. So, now we're reducing electrical/power costs,
medical costs and... drug addiction, crime, chronic pain, obsessive compulsive behavior,
depression... And they don't want you to know, because then you'd believe how it could be
used to torture people.
Barter taxation will be absolved. Herbs will be encouraged, citizens will be educated
on their use, millions and billions in synthetic pharmaceuticals that can be patented are
no longer needed. Think of it: free herbs from the garden when you occasionally need
stress relief, or hundreds of dollarsofmonth and possible lifetime addiction and causation
of other neurological disorders from unnecessary medication. Which would you prefer?
Are the choices really that hard? Ginkco improves the memory. Marijuana relieves some
symptoms of Alzheimers (wait I thought marijuana causes people to forget things...). Why
are they illegal?
Soil replenishment will increase crops and reduce the harmful effects of fertilization.
Actually recycling garbage wastes (that we are often required to separate for garbage
companies that never get recycled) will be used and applied toward building materials and
the many other uses it can be used for. Let's have no more dead zones in the ocean because
of rain run off from our rivers.
Nuclear energy as a utility will be unnecessary because of the implementation of
natural energy sources. They are not alternative . The ones we don't consider alternative
are simply the ones the profiteers selected to make money from.The supposedly new
alternatives have been with us since before the 60's ( the same time period we built
air/space craft far superior to the Space Shuttles we now use, which were built later...
another example of why we need to ask questions like, why weren't we told? The answers are
fascinating, sometimes startling, sometimes diabolical, and often a sci-fi fan's
fantasy of what heaven offers. Actually, that last part is true :} Cool stuff.
I was always thankful as a child that, as they told us,our space and R&D programs
brought us the miracles of state of the art technology. I was thankful because of one of
those marvelous things they actually did provide us with: Tang. I loved it. And
velcro. You know, the really high tech stuff they tell us about.
Sure they gave us much more. Including space based psychotronics. Scratch, save a ton,
no need for all those GPS satellites, let alone surveillance satellites.
Gee, folks, we're going to be in the surplus column here real soon.
Oh yeah, and in the meantime, if we're nice to Mexico, they'll sell us their oil and as
a bonus, their economy will grow and the result would be fewer illegal immigrants. And
then, if people decide we want to open our borders more, it would be to travel to share
and discover each others's lands and cultures in partnership instead of on the basis and
timing of when it would be best to exploit someone else's natural resources and desperate
population.
And, I have to be honest. I've never understood that we object so much to the
environmental damage done by oil drilling in our own environs, but get really angry
at other countries for not wanting to destroy their countries to supply us oil at cheaper
than reasonable prices for this finite resource. And you have to understand, just because
I believe in taking responsible care of the"property" doesn't mean I'm an
environmentalist.
If my mother told me to clean up my bedroom, and I did it, would you label me a
compulsive neat freak, if it was politically convenient and expedient? Or would you say I
did the right thing?
When Richard Nixon was being impeached, I asked more than one politician to go on
record (as a reporter) as to whether they would tell people to focus their concern on
Nixon or indict the entire party? They, these Democrats, knew what I was asking, and that
the answer I wanted to broadcast would make them say "the right thing". Me, I
wanted to force them to set a good example for Democracy in a politically turbulent time.
And they knew I would criticize them (rip them to shreds, actually) if they didn't tell
people to do the right thing. Facts and truth have a way of ripping common, ordinary
politicians to shreds like that. And the problem was, I had that politician on record
within 24 hours giving opposite opinions on the matter.
That reasoning also means it is the responsibility of a business to include the
complete cleanup, or green operation, of their business. You chose to go into business.
It's not like we don't want you. But stop coming to my pool and expecting me to spend
money because you're too self-centered to get out of the pool to go to the bathroom. I
know that business leaders know exactly what I'm telling them. If I need to tell them what
it means, I predict they won't be in business long. Particularly because if an individual
citizen did some of the things they did, we'd be arrested for destruction of private
property, poisoning and killing people and animals, etc, etc etc.
Forget all the spin and positioning. Can we talk about what's actually going on,
instead of wasting time on lies that only benefit special interests?
By the way, I'm okay with free trade. But for me, what seems appropriate is something
like "finish your dinner, and you can have dessert". That's how capitalism
should work. That should answer some philosophical questions.
Sort of sounds like the movie "Dave", doesn't it? I'd consider that a good
thing.
Most people think that people who take a different approach to things are risky. I
don't. It's like asking a child a complex question, and they just blurt out something that
isn't quite the answer but actually gives you the clue to the primary simplistic
distinction that provides an adjustment in the trajectory of the timeline in chaos theory
that allows the complex situation to evolve and resolve itself naturally, sort of
organically. A little nudge here and there. Losing a little weight. Adding muscle where
needed for what we need to do. And so on.
Imagine the rippling effects envisioned if John Kennedy understood that by teaching our
childern good, healthy physical habits when young, particularly in an age of cultures
transitioning from rural to more urban environs because of industry and population trends,
that it would translate into healthier, more satisying lives, the handing down of these
good habits to future generations and ever healthier, more abundant lives and societies.
When John Kennedy took office, he was part of the club. And then one day, he saw the
light. The real of this thing we call Camelot now. Between you and me, I'll assert that
he, like many of our leaders quietly claim, got a little visit one day from a guy named
God... because when JFK changed his mind and took another course, it was what God had in
mind. And then he was killed.
When I talked to a couple of people when thinking about "running" in 2004,
the first thing they said after learning what I wanted to speak about, the truth, they
told me I'd better get a bullet proof vest.
Isn't it interesting that we live in a culture where there is an acknowledged
ever-present threat that if you speak out against the government you'll just get killed?
Think about it. Does that actually fit with your definition of what freedom in America
means? And, if it doesn't, why do you tolerate it? What is stopping you from doing
something about it? Politically generated fear. If they do something different, they might
make it worse.... how could they make it worse?
I probably shouldn't, but I'll mention that if anyone thinks this is bluster, I'll only
say that I've already given word to appropriate intel people that if it takes living in a
bunker to make sure these changes get implemented, then make sure that is a possibility. I
don't mean to be histrionic, but you should be able to understand the implications of what
I am proposing. I do. Sure, it was the psyops guys, but who do you think they are?
Three Dog Night - Sure
As I'm Sittin' Here
You may think I said all those things to complain about corporations and such. I
actually didn't. I wanted to exemplify the simple common sense ways to balance a budget
and generate fact and foundation from whence to proceed on the building of the future
created by the conversation centered around what we want our lives, families, communities,
states, nations and worlds to look like.
Not what we're offered by people and corporations committed to saving our money for
themselves.
And how can you make matters worse when you create an atmosphere for a real
conversation - not tolerating spin and political slogans - and conduct that conversation
that unifies and generates concensus? What politician in America does that? Please also
see The First 100 Days for my plans and ideas
about how to actually do that.
You may think that all sounds new agey and cosmic and all that and communicate it in
terms like that... but the fact is, all you'd do is prove that there's a reason you want
to diminish the truth and importance of what I'm saying in order to distract us from your
ulterior motives... and then I'd ask you to disclose which conspiracy you're apparently
involved in that would make you want to hide any truth... and if you're not in such a
thing, maybe then we can agree to have an intellectually honest conversation.
It becomes as simple as this. If you decided you wanted to run your life without debt,
and you made money, ok money, but you had to budget your purchases instead of being able
to purchase anything whenever you want so long as you were willing to pay outrageous
interest for it... if you had to choose between the luxury (yes, luxury) of paying someone
to mow your lawn or keeping your house, what would choose?
But, if doing so for a few years now meant having a comfortable retirement soon or in
20 to 50 years, wouldn't it be worth it?
I don't believe it's legitimate to raise the retirement age so that politicians don't
have to admit they've been incompetent in relation to their oaths, promises and publicly
stated standards regarding the management of your money - as if I was only referring to
Social Security. It's bad enough they have you believing that the purpose of life is to
work and make money, have kids and die in wars.
Joseph Campbell writes that most people live the last 1/3 of their lives waiting to
die. Not just waiting, hoping to die. Not suicidally. But hoping that they will be
relieved of the suffering of their lives. Believing that leaving this world would be
better than remaining. Being relieved of the anxiety of what their lives would be like
when they are no longer able, willing, or caring enough anymore to work. To be useful
human beings in a world designed to exploit the creativity and exhuberence of youth.
In a world designed by God to be joyful from the first day to the last. If you believe
in and understand just a little about God, then you know that is true. There is no
suffering in His image. It certainly occurs. It wasn't God's idea. The phrase "no
pain no gain"... who convinced you to believe that? What do you tolerate
because you believe that?
I hope you find it interesting that a person who really believes in separation of
church and state would cite God in an economic essay. The reason: if you understand what
God had in mind, and you think he's pretty good at designing things, then maybe you'll
understand and accept that using His paradigm as a model for government - the objective
administration and the facilitation of the empowerment of the citizens - heavy emphasis on
administration, with emphasis on citizens who get satisfaction from service, and
discouragement of celebrity politicians in lieu of legitimate public discourse that is
actually considered.
And a governement and media that provides us more than a puppet show of our elected
officials and CFR trusted and promoted public spokespeople and social leaders saying what
they're told to say to distract us from what's really happening in government and
industry.
With all of these things in mind, I am the first to admit that I am disappointed that I
can't give you specific plans and numbers. I assert that anyone who says they do will
later be proven wrong simply because they never pass laws like they promise because they
think of how it should be, talk about it, and then find out that the people they go along
with won't really allow it, but it sounded so good, and they wanted to win the election,
so they went out and said it was great anyway.
Sure they can pass a flurry of laws to make it look like "see, we did this stuff
fast", but it's always stop gap measures... nothing ever compreshensive.
Here's the fun part about solving the "social issues" that noone wants to pay
taxes to pay for.
I know I could make one phone call and set off a chain of events that would prepare the
United States ngo's to handle these issues of homelessness, poverty, hunger, child care
and so much more ... so that when we got the budget reports in and evaluated where we
stood... we could say "go", and have more than the 1 national summit on
prescient issues, empower people and ngo's to actually resolve these issues in ways that
are proven to work... all without passing a law or the need of the approval of Congress.
Sooner or later, I assume they would want to be involved in all this, and would join us.
I don't mean to seem precocious or smug, but when I started the non profit I started in
2001 or so (which, by the way, for the record, I am no longer part of for legal reasons
having to do with fear of retribution for my comments on this web site on the part of the
board members - and it's okay) the entire idea was actually based on the premise that I
saw how the New World Order was being implemented, and that it relied on citizen
dependence upon the government.
So, frankly, I designed a master plan for a union that generated the closest thing to a
government within a government as I could without breaking the law, for the purpose
of giving participants the freedom that the NWO plan required that citizens be stripped
of. Namely, community oriented development not requiring government approval, mass
generation of locally, privately owned credit unions, promotion of and packaging of
"green" product lines, home made and organic and natural product production and
distribution...
And I have to admit, I always forget that they actually wouldn't like that, even though
I would have taken Universal Health Care, Alternative medicine and energy, and all that
kind of stuff they want to make headlines with and not actually do.. I actually
thought they might see the value of my services in light of their disdain for having to
waste their time on the issues of the ordinary people while trying to engineer their
global military and economic conquests.
I'm not joking. I actually proposed it to them like that. :}I don't think George liked
the idea (although he did invoke the Taft-Hartley act when I told him to).
Another almost apology for the cynicism. But at least it's good to have remembered that
these attacks on me are not just because they don't like me :} It's because, in
retrospect, I realize that's the same way organizations like the Black Panthers, Hamas and
other terrorist organizations started. Innocently, passionately finding a way to tend to
the needs of citizens who are ignored by their government. In this case, almost all of us.
And, what I had in mind was much more like a combination of trade unions, health care
plans, banking and a publishing company... after writing that, I'm beginning to see more
and more why the corporations and government don't want you to vote for me. :}
The problem they have with me is that when I recognized their immediate Psyops on me, I
decided to do this all myself and not let others get involved so other people wouldn't get
hurt. They had no group to infiltrate, militarize and set up for a crime in order to
disrupt it. So they decided to use military weapons and incapacitate me instead. Still
didn't shut me up. Came close.
The reports I get say that the government would save in excess of $5 million per year,
if not 50, if they just stopped harassing me. I'm serious. If they stopped harassing the
names of the people I have in my email file who are being harassed, we'd likely save $5
billion or more per year.
You tell me if that much money is worth spending on people like me who keep talking
about this thing called the Constitution and stuff like the truth and facts and treason.
Who benefits by keeping people like me quiet?
Now we're talking reducing the budgets of the military and Homeland Security. Why?
Because, as the Rand Corporation (who I always thought about working for, but I didn't
have a college degree) recently agreed with me (what I've been saying since September 11,
2001, or shortly thereafter) is that the use of the term "War on Terror" is
counter productive, and that terrorism should be treated more as a law enforcement issue.
Why? Here's why I've been saying that for years.
The words War On Terror as a national policy and global declaration is, unto itself,
terrorism... it is psychological warfare.
I'm not defending Iran when I say this. But if the superpower of the world declared you
a terrorist state and part of an axis of evil, and waged war against one of the nations in
that axis, as the leader of Iran, you would have to bulk up your military power to defend
your nation. It's your job.
So they do that. Even though they weren't harming us, and we provoked them. But now
that they ARE building advanced technology systems, maybe weapons, maybe not, the Bush
Administration and some news people would have you believe that we need to prove our
righteous role of vanquishing the bad guys, who we just happened to set up to look bad so
our guys could get away with lying and take us to war in order to control the world's oil.
How many millions have we spent engineering that? And the covert world war we are
waging in over 130 countries? What do we gain by causing hostility all over the world?
All the while, that $500,000 per person tax liability grows.
Shaggy
- Hope
Think I have an unusual or risky approach to economics and taxation? What do you call
what's been going on for the last 100 years? And look at who the advisors are in the
two-party candidates lists of advisors.
It's the same old people who have lead us to this moment. The Bushes and the
Clintons... all they have is new figureheads in Obama and McCain. Everything else is the
same. Even the basis for their war policies is the same. The bogus war on terror to cover
the military domination of oil that we don't and shouldn't really need.
Greed destroys Democracy many ways. So do egos out of control. And I'm not talking
about mine.
Think of all this. Think about it some more. And when you tell people about this site,
tell them about what I say, and that I may be crazy, but like other people say about him,
he's the most rational insane person you ever met. And he likes to have fun. And he likes
flowers.
And he has this idea about global peace and abundance for all....
And then ask yourself if all this is crazy, or just a possibility you gave up believing
could ever possibly happen, so you stopped thinking about it and called it silly to save
yourself from ever revisiting the pain you feel when you wonder why it all has to be so
complicated and hard...
And why, as James Campbell says, people spend the last 1/3 of their lives waiting to
die, to be relieved of the suffering some liar told them was simply a normal part of life.
And if only a fool would say that, then I'm glad to call myself a fool. Proud of it.
I'll wear it like a badge.
We could have matching badges.
