Do you like US President Barack Obama more or less since he took office?

The reasons it isn't that simple are the lack of means to proportionally release money into the public, and the mostly the uneven rates by which street-level money leaves the public sector.
On one hand, closer to my static population based model, we have government employent, defense contracts, and such. On the other hand, more fluidly relating to your inflation/recession concerns, we have money issued in accodance with loans, for everything from boats to businesses. People get loans in anticipation of creating and purchasing more, warranting the existence of more money. The increasing problem has been that loans have been made for escalated aquisitions which neither produce or consume anything. Restricting loans to actual producers &/or consumers of real goods would help. An alternative would be to extend the gov't jobs concept and print money for loans for all employment.

Much of this stuff is fortunately self correcting. If there's too much money, it gets taken out of the street level with $400 poodle pedicures and $2 million art auctions.

I don't know if I've said this before, but the key to examing a valid economic system is to first remove money from the equation entirely and look at the scene as if from mars. Is it posible for us to have abundant colleges and build a whole new free enrgy infrastructure while feeding and clothing ourselves? Sure it is. We have the people and materials. Anyone who asks 'Where will the money come from?' is shortsightedly missing the point, and dooming our planet to the fallacies of taking theoretical abstraction as representational fact, for instance worrying that it will put our grandchildren in debt. What debt? Why should what we do now have any bearing on them. In physical fact they would be far better off if we made energy systems rather than sitting on our asses all day making and playing video games, watching parked cars, and being on one end or the other of a telemarketing call.

Our current system mostly rewards the smarter greedier game payers. Today I was approving a non-disclosure agreement a client sent me. I already tried talking him out of the unnecessary untrusting nuissance, and realized today that he was unwise for even playing such a game because I could out-lawyer him and his patent lawyer, having much deeper experience drafting such agreements in the first place. The public buys into a lot of conventional pageantry which isn't always meaningful or advantageous.

> Consider yourself in such a situation. I presume you have some college
> educated career. If you enjoy what you do, you'll probably continue
> to do it anyhow, even though you still only make as much hotel maids.


Why do you presume this? In fact, you flatter me. You might be shocked if you knew my actual history.
I do enjoy what I do, which currently is driving as a medical courier. I enjoy driving despite the many boneheads on the road.

Economics seemed to be a topic college students would be more inclined towards, especially when you can convey your position rationally.

On the other hand, my brother sounds like an engineer, and in a sense is, and covers such subject matter himself even though he never made it through algebra.

I don't like driving, maybe on quiet mountain roads, but that's about it. Arts, music, and engineering is my gig - inventing my solar paragliders and such. I don't care if I make or money not as long as I can keep doing it.

> Economics seemed to be a topic college students would be more inclined
> towards, especially when you can convey your position rationally.
>

From what I've been seeing and hearing for most of my adult life, economics seems to be an area where an ability to communicate rationally presents as a handicap. Take Greenspan, for example. A very smart man. Very cautious in his words when he was Chairman at the Fed. One of the big shocks to me was that he ever consented to be chair of the Fed. Ideologically, at least in his younger days, he was an avowed enemy of central banking. He used to hang out with Ayn Rand and her group. It was an even bigger surprise to me when he expressed how shocked he was recently at the failure of the free market to regulate itself. I just don't understand what made him believe we had a free market in the first place. I'm not really sure there has ever been a truly free market on this planet. Free enterprise is like the weather. Everyone talks about it, but no one ever does anything about it. In the US, things are usually loose enough to allow for a great deal of creativity, but not always. One of the things I do like about Obama is that he seems willing to invest in some of that creativity.

> On the other hand, my brother sounds like an engineer, and in a sense
> is, and covers such subject matter himself even though he never made
> it through algebra.
>

I'm pretty much an autodidact and a dilletante. I read almost anything, especially sci-fi, history (not just historical novels, but history texts as well) and lately programming manuals.

> Arts, music, and engineering is my gig - inventing my solar paragliders
> and such. I don't care if I make or money not as long as I can keep
> doing it.

Heinlein was an engineer as well, specializing in linkages for controlling lifting surfaces on military aircraft. I believe he held several patents in that area.

What kind of music do you like. Up until my divorce, I was almost totally into classic rock and folk, almost exclusively pre-1975. After the divorce, I've mostly been listening to Classical music, some jazz and blues.

Catastrophic oscillations can occur in any feedback system. The economy is no different.

Contrary to mentioning a moment ago that systems are fortunately somewhat self-corecting, anyone thinking the economy would self-regulate is an ideologue nutcase. There are two many unknown variables to get past crude theory, and even many of the known variables, human nature and tiered nature of our leveraging capabilities really point away from any self-regulation. It's like saying anti-trust laws don't need to exist because new competition will always arise. That may be, but it doesn't account for the logarithmically increasingly ability of the top to monopolize the scene. Self-regulation is pure wishful thinking.

If I had time to waste I'd write software Monopoly Game modeling software which tweaked various rules to emulate different types of socialism, money printing, open/closed systems and such. I suspect self-stabililizing systems would really turn out to be rarities. If they can't exist in simple theory without supressive social-engineering, my faith that they occur naturally is much less.

An unregulated market benefits the most wealthy, who tend to be who influential economists hang out with, so any propogated self-delusion in the matter is generally in their personal collective interests.

This page: http://ereiam.com/foundation/arts/music/songlist.h...
has download links for my songs.
Jazz, blues, bluegrass, but mostly experimental expressionist stuff with heavy sitar influence, plus some Velvet Underground and surf. Juilliard grad stuff that most people won't even be able to hear or understand. It's also a bit goofy and dark. One song there was recorded on a digital instrument I invented.

Robert Fripp was probably most influential to my own style.

I'm mostly into listening to women inbetween folk and punk with virtuoso playing and uncommon composition, ranging from Mia Doi Todd to Siouxsie and the Banshees.

> What debt? Why
> should what we do now have any bearing on them.

Now, you and I may think of this debt as a theoretical construct with little in the way of "real world" liability behind it, but our creditors do not. Who are those creditors? Well, holders of US Treasury bonds. Which includes many of the banks which are in trouble right now. Also, the Federal Reserve Bank itself. When the Fed decides to inject currency directly into the economy, they buy US treasury bonds. That's part of the internal debt structure. More disturbingly, foreign governments the world over also buy US Treasury bonds. I was listening to NPR news a couple of days ago, and according to their sources, China holds about $1,000,000,000,000 in US Treasury bonds. That's a trillion dollars. A lot of money. If you think of a trillion seconds, and calculate what length of time that would be, you have approximately 31,688.088 years. China would probably take a very dim view if we told them that debt did not "really" exist.

As I said earlier we would do much better over all, I think, if we were just to tie the amount of money in circulation to the actual amount of goods and services available, and issue debt-free currency. The currency after all is just a symbol. Just because we arrived at the concept of money through real commodities such as gold or silver doesn't mean it has to stay that way. Through our current structure of debt-backed notes as currency, we are unfortunately trying to hang on to that concept of money beyond the point where it is sustainable.

Well, we both seem to realize the debts are abstractions on paper made real only by peoples enforcement and surrender to them.

China was a fool to gamble on our prolonged integrity. Yes, in theory they partially own us. Our four top collapsing banks each have 20-40 trillion in debt, with an average of 1.2T in real assets to back them up. $1T isn't too much in that context.

By loaning money for expenditures (production or commodities) we do somewhat tie into goods and services, and gov't employ & defense also ties into service. Without issuing it as debt, there's no assurance it's really intended to produce value. Debt IS money. Our banks own trillions in client debt. Just like money, debt is only good as someone will back it up. What we lost in our economy is the faith that it will be backed up eventually. This is why the USSR collapsed. The ingenious thing about a debt based economy is that it's not backed up by gold or something governments don't have in the first place, it's backed up by business and consumers. It's not our government, but the public which hasn't come through in recent years. 'We' printed money with nothing to back it. Non-productive capitalist speculators were the worst culprits of all. The mistake of the banks was allowing us to do so. Sure it's invasive social control, but to have an economy with a solid foundation, banks should have turned down loans for bubble speculators and consumers, and only loaned to tangible goods and services producers. - that would satisfy your request that it be tied into goods and services. That it's issued as debt is inconsequential. Debt and money are the same thing. Interest is another matter though. That too is roughly tied into 'anticipations' of an exponentially increasing means of production and consumption. The interest should be lower when less is being produced, but I think we do the opposite. Oh wait, that actually works out too, since it's interest which takes excess money back out of the economy (theoretically).

Speaking of economic models in fiction, Philip K. Dick had a wild one in which in the planet's religion, based on early days of scarcity made it a sin to waste goods. They switched to robotic manufacture, but the robots could only produce tons of goods, not limited amounts. The planet was run like an inverse taxation welfare state on something like ration coupons. The idle rich could just slowly wear out chess games, but the poor were forced weekly to prove they had worn out tons of underwear, golf-clubs, and radios.

While the USSR advertised the virtues of industrialization, it's crippled industrialization failures were no accident. Marxism-Leninism saw the impeding eventual failure of an economy based on perpetually escalating capitalism of goods and services, and sought instead to stabilize the economy through scarcity. That our economy lasted as long as it did was beyond their wildest dreams. They envisioned a much lower ceiling on what could be produced and consumed. They came from an age where books, toys, and furnishings lasted a century.

> Debt and money are the same thing.

This is true in terms of the kind of economy we have today. It was not always true. You mentioned earlier that any economy can cycle out of control no matter what backs the currency. That is true up to a point. Bear with me a moment here.

Once upon a time money was gold or silver or copper. When this was true, the statement that money and debt are the same was not true. Yet even this commodity-money was subject to inflation. When a ruler wanted to spend money he did not have there were two choices available to him. The first was the simplest. He could order the goldsmiths minting the money to clip just a little bit off of each coin produced and use those clipped pieces to produce more coins. This practice was called, ingeniously enough, coin clipping. The problem with coin clipping was that the practice was easily detected by weighing the coins. When merchants saw the weight on the tendered coin was short, he would demand some extra copper or silver to make up the missing value, and so inflation was born.

The other choice was more subtle. The issuing authority could alloy the gold with copper. This was a little harder to detect until that Greek "Eureka!" guy, whose name escapes me at the moment, realized you could tell if gold was alloyed by comparing the amount of water it displaced with it's weights in water and in air. This gave merchants an additional assay tool, specific gravity, to determine the true value of a given amount of coin.

Now, inflation was possible with gold coin, but only to a limited degree. Short of flat-out counterfeiting with some base metal such as lead, the kind of hyper-inflation possible in modern times could not happen under this economic model unless huge amounts of gold began appearing everywhere, more gold than could reasonably be exchanged for the available productive output. This did happen a time or two in history, most notably when the Spanish conquistadors brought back Inca and Aztec gold to Spain.

Both paper currency and fractional reserve banking were born in Renaissance Italy. People used to store their gold with the local goldsmith, for a modest fee. The customer got a receipt signed by the goldsmith stating that the bearer of this receipt has a claim on X ounces of gold in my possession, signed Goldsmith. Rather than schlep over to the goldsmith for larger purchases all the time, the people began exchanging these warehouse receipts with each other (paper currency). Fractional reserve banking began when the goldsmith realized that at any one time, only a very few people would want to exchange the receipts for the gold in his care. So the goldsmith began writing receipts for gold he did not have in his possession, in order to do some private investing of his own, loans, or to buy a share in a cargo ship or something of the kind. Thus, fractional reserve banking actually began as a deliberate fraud perpetrated by crooked businessmen. When this fraud became institutionalized as a legitimate practice, that is when our modern, debt based economic model became possible.


As for China being foolish, I don't think so. That trillion dollars worth of Treasury notes gives them a pretty big stick if they took a mind to use it. You've heard in the news the past few weeks I'm sure how the administration is kind of pussy-footing around with China on the subject of human rights in Tibet. That Chinese-held terabuck in US obligations is why. Suppose we were suddenly to get harsh with China on Tibet. China then decides to show us a thing or two and dumps those Treasuries on the open market for ten cents on the dollar. Sure, it would impact China's economy, but they are in a position to be able make it up quickly with a potential consumer base about three times the size of ours. The US dollar begins a precipitous decline in value. Now, this may seem paradoxical, but the early stages of disastrous hyper-inflation actually feels a good deal like a sudden flush of prosperity. As the dollar declines, US goods become very attractive overseas. US factories are choked with orders and rush to fill them, hiring workers at wages that seem GREAT at the time. Business picks up, wages everywhere go up, there is plenty of work and plenty of overtime. Old debts, those accrued before the tiff with China, become remarkably easy to pay off quickly. This encourages new debt, which won't be so easy to pay off because A) the prices of the goods you bought were higher than they used to be and B) because the Fed, in an effort to control inflation has begun raising interest rates. By the time everyone realizes that prices are going up a lot faster than wages, it is too late. Next thing you know, you are spending $6,000,000 bucks to buy a stamp and write your Congressman a very stiff letter...

"coin clipping" - Hence those ridges on some coins.

"As for China being foolish, I don't think so. That trillion dollars worth of Treasury notes gives them a pretty big stick if they took a mind to use it." - That's presuming we honor those notes. If not for Obama getting elected, I thought we headed for the crapper, with the big guns taking the money and running, while the rest of the nation went bankrupt, and China wondered if it were worth the trouble to go to war with us to collect it's dues (probably not).

The recent news scandal is that an AIG exec was on the bailout committee, that they decided to bankrupt Lehman, and only afterwards decided to bail out AIG. As I see it, the differences aren't huge. Bailout or bankruptcy directly or indirectly gets paid by the public. In a bankruptcy, companies assets (Lehmans debt holdings) gets transferred to it's creditors anyhow, so it's not like Lehmans debtors are off the hook like bankruptcies of their own. And then the other scandal is that the AIG bailout is really only a less direct umbrella for tons of other bailouts anyhow. ..So the only consequence of the first scandal is that Lehman execs lost their job while AIG execs kept theirs.

Things like inflation were once a self-correcting system of balances on the international market, even after we lost the gold standard. The problem now is all the speculative mark-ups. It's not that we have no gold standard, it's that we have no production, goods or services, value standards what so ever with this sort of banking business going on.

I've been observing prices and have noticed it's neither quite a recession or inflation patern, but rather a 'times are tight - what the market will bear' pattern, in which grocery prices are escalating while prices for luxury goods fall.

I've explained many times elsewhere that the US is slipping into becoming just another third world country. That's not the whole story either though. Rather it's that the world is becoming a single globalized 3rd world country with an elite controlling class. Class, not geography, is beginning to matter more.

I think that was Archimedes who came up with the density trick.

shoot, I don't really know I guess. I didn't vote for him BUT I think he is a good man and I think he means well.

> "As for China being foolish, I don't think so. That trillion dollars
> worth of Treasury notes gives them a pretty big stick if they took
> a mind to use it." - That's presuming we honor those notes.

You have to be careful here. In fact, what triggered the inflation of the German mark in the Weimar Republic was that Germany defaulted on post WW I reconstruction bonds. That is also what triggered the wave of banks in the US becoming insolvent at the beginning of the Depression, as US banks were holding quite a few of those German obligations.

> If not for Obama getting elected, I thought we headed for the crapper, with
> the big guns taking the money and running, while the rest of the nation
> went bankrupt, and China wondered if it were worth the trouble to
> go to war with us to collect it's dues (probably not).
>

I don't actually pretend to know what's going to happen. I am still holding onto the hope that Obama is one of the smarter guys we've saddled with his job in the past few decades.

> It's not that we have no gold standard, it's that we have no production, goods or services,
> value standards what so ever with this sort of banking business going on.
>

I can pretty much agree with that assessment.

> or inflation patern, but rather a 'times are tight - what the market
> will bear' pattern, in which grocery prices are escalating while prices
> for luxury goods fall.
>

A few weeks ago, I actually noticed a small drop in some grocery prices, not many. The one that stands out for me is Manischewitz Whitefish and Pike gefilte fish. When gas was around $4.00 a gallon, this had gone from about 8 bucks a jar to 10. A while after gas prices came back down, it was back to 8 bucks. Though, last week I bought a jar of it for $1.85, which I do not understand at all, unless the store is not going to continue ordering it.


> I think that was Archimedes who came up with the density trick.

That's the guy! Thanks, it was bugging the hell out of me that I couldn't remember the name.

Obama does strike me as smart and caring, but I don't know what games he plays with who, and neither him nor the public may be ready to replace a system they don't realize can't be fixed.

It's interesting to follow the amount of fuel involved in any product from conception to delivery.

I'm trying to work Achimedes and Midas into a joke and not having much luck here.

Where does your gefilte fish actually come from? The Baltic? Our fishing industry is an environmental crime itself. While the oceans are depleting beyond recovery rates exponentially, they still haul stuff in and throw out everything which isn't what they aimed to package. One of my invention ideas is robotic lures and spears to catch just the fish in question. Oceanic fish farms are promising. The main thing fish farms need, I think, is a better feed supply, diverse more flavorful recycled waste like fish heads and such.

> Where does your gefilte fish actually come from? The Baltic?

No, most likely it's caught from the Great Lakes. Not sure about the pike, but likely that comes from the same area too. They are both freshwater fish. Plain gefilte fish, the cheaper variety, is made with carp and whitefish, but I hate that stuff. Carp tastes really nasty.

You're probably right about the feed for fish farms. I have noticed that farm raised catfish, for example, do not taste nearly as good as the catfish I catch myself from a lake or river.

Catfish are my favorite for flavor, although a fresh rainbow trout is excellent too.

I like fish of all kinds, except carp. My favorite freshwater fish is pickerel or pike. From the ocean, my fave is cod. Bluefish runs a close second.

I've only been ocean fishing once, for Barracuda off of Catalina Island, but that was tasty.
Oh, I've gone crabbing wading in the tide pools, and prepared fresh abalone with tire iron, 2x4, and wood stove.
Good to meet you.

Good to meet you too. I've certainly been enjoying our conversation.

> >
> I'm mostly into listening to women inbetween folk and punk with virtuoso
> playing and uncommon composition, ranging from Mia Doi Todd to Siouxsie
> and the Banshees.

Siouxsie and the Banshees are awesome.. So are Switchblade Symphony, it is too bad they are not together anymore. Beki Bondage is good, but haven't found a lot of her stuff.. The Mediaeval Baebes are also a great group.... For more "classical" music check out Bond...

I'll have to check them out I guess.

I do not like Obama as the President, he is a radical socialist/communist

> I do not like Obama as the President, he is a
> radical socialist/communist

Why? Because he cut taxes for the Middle Class? Ended "Black Site" prisons? Installed a playground on the White House lawn? Actually engages in diplomacy? Because his wife and the Queen of England seem to genuinely like each other? Because they got a hypo-allergenic puppy?

Frosty, open your eyes...you are a product of the dumbing down of the youth of America

OK, so the person who intentionally avoids further education is going to accuse me of being dumbed down. You have NO sense of irony do you?

I have a lot to say about "higher education" and it isn't good. Much of higher education is a business, run by communists.

Have you ever considered medication for your paranoid delusions? Just asking. You remind me a lot of that guy who climbed the Texas bell tower with high powered rifle. Except you're too entrenched in outdated gender identity, so you'd probably make your husband do it when you finally snap.

I'm sound mentally...I have to stay strong as I can be for the family. I have my faith, it makes me strong, and I'm in for the fight with the enemy within. We will win in the end.

My husband has a loaded revolver, we both know where it is. He kiddingly told me, "don't get any ideas of killing me after watching Cold Case Files". I told him if I were going to kill him, I'd done it years ago. But, I would never, that's not me, I have no right, it would be cowardice, the good Lord keeps me in line. I would have to answer to him. We have had guns around here for 48 years, no problems.

I think much of the killings happening today are doing so from the use of drugs, prescribed, or illegal. They proved that most of the killing rampage on college or elsewhere, are due from prescribed drugs. They're drugging our youth to be complacent.

> I'm sound mentally...

I have (however long you've been on SC) years worth of evidence to the contrary.

> I have to stay strong as
> I can be for the family. I have my faith, it
> makes me strong, and I'm in for the fight with
> the enemy within. We will win in the end.
>

I hope not. We've already seen what can happen in a country where fanatics like you are put in charge. Look at pre-9/11 Afghanistan.

> My husband has a loaded revolver, we both know
> where it is. He kiddingly told me, "don't get
> any ideas of killing me after watching Cold Case
> Files". I told him if I were going to kill him,
> I'd done it years ago. But, I would never, that's
> not me, I have no right, it would be cowardice,
> the good Lord keeps me in line. I would have
> to answer to him. We have had guns around here
> for 48 years, no problems.

Apparently you misunderstood what I was saying. I meant that when you finally go off the deep end, you'd be too chickencrap to go on a murderous rampage in the name of your fake God yourself and you'd make him do it.

> I think much of the killings happening today are
> doing so from the use of drugs, prescribed, or
> illegal. They proved that most of the killing
> rampage on college or elsewhere, are due from
> prescribed drugs. They're drugging our youth
> to be complacent.

Pharmaceutical companies only have one motive; profit. They are over-medicating us, and giving us crap we don't need, but it's not a plot to take over the world, it's a plot to have enough money to buy ten yachts instead of "only 9." Of course, if we did anything to fix that, you'd denounce it as evil Communism. So basically, you dog about the problem, but your religious indoctrination prevents you from accepting the solution; regulation. An FDA not appointed with people friendly to the industries they're supposed to be watch dogging. Studies done by people educated at those schools you hate so much, because you fear knowledge.

It's just like bigots like CK who hate Mexicans coming over here, but he also tends to denounce pretty much every common sense solution there is. "No, let's not fix the problem! Then who would I have to blame all my problems on? Don't fix the immigration problem, just let me hate them and advocate killing them!" It's ideology trumping reality and common sense and basic decency.

I don't think like you, I would not go on a rampage against innocent individuals, that have caused me no harm.

I am against ILLEGAL peoples, with their drugs, coming into my home, my country. I think LEGAL immigration should stop also.
You say we should fix the problem? What do you propose to fix the problem? We can't save the world Frosty. We have people invading our country, killing Americans, stealing from us. What do you propose? At this point in time, I wouldn't hesitate to protect our country.

Are you willing to take in 50 illegals, into your home, give them shelter, food, medical, education...the list goes on., are you willing to pay for them? QUIT asking the American taxpayers to pay for the world. I don't hate Mexicans or anyone else, but I feel they need to take responsibility for their countries, and their care. These people are riding on the coattails of European whites. They need to fix their own countries, otherwise they come here, and this country will become as the one they've left, poverty stricken.

> I don't think like you, I would not go on a rampage
> against innocent individuals, that have caused
> me no harm.
>

I wouldn't either. You see, being a non-believer does not make you immoral. In fact, I, the atheist, has never committed murder, or rape, yet I could given time names HUNDREDS of Christians who have.

> I am against ILLEGAL peoples, with their drugs,
> coming into my home, my country.

Not all of them are drug dealers/users. many are desperate people who have lost their homes and jobs do to rampant unchecked capitalism.

> I think LEGAL
> immigration should stop also.
> You say we should fix the problem? What do you
> propose to fix the problem? We can't save the
> world Frosty.

True, but closing ourselves off to it won't work either. You'd have to be mentally retarded to think that just shutting down the borders will fix everything.

> We have people invading our country,
> killing Americans, stealing from us.

Cite your source.

>What do
> you propose? At this point in time, I wouldn't
> hesitate to protect our country.
>

Except you want to "protect" it from everybody and everything, threat or not. That's not defending your country, that's just being an butt-hole.

> Are you willing to take in 50 illegals, into your
> home, give them shelter, food, medical, education...the
> list goes on., are you willing to pay for them?

If they don't kill people (yes, some immigrants don't kill people. I know it's hard for a racist chicken like you to believe), work hard, send their kids to school instead of to a life of crime, sure.

> QUIT asking the American taxpayers to pay for
> the world. I don't hate Mexicans or anyone else,
> but I feel they need to take responsibility for
> their countries, and their care.

You make it sound so much easier than it is. Your attitude is the same one we had towards Germany after WWI, and look where that led; over 6 million innocents slaughtered, that's where! Get your head out of your ass! The world is not broken off into autonomous sections. Borders are just lines on maps. If India and Pakistan nuke each other, that radiation will float over here eventually, and no amount of prayer, or anti-Mexican walls will stop it!

> These people
> are riding on the coattails of European whites.

Who stole, raped, pillaged, and conquered; much the same thing you are accusing Mexican farm workers of doing. Are you familiar at all with "projection?"

> They need to fix their own countries, otherwise
> they come here, and this country will become as
> the one they've left, poverty stricken.
>

Again, not as easy as you are trying to make it sound. Not that you care. Facts never matter to your kind. Just take for example how many times you say the Bible has no contradictions in it, even after I give you a list, with chapters included so you could, if you wanted to, look it up for yourself. But no, it's easier to just continue to act like you know everything and are always right because 4 white guys poached the philosophy of a Palestinian rabbi and built their own religion on it.

> I have a lot to say about "higher education" and it isn't good.
> Much of higher education is a business, run by communists.

That's a classic line, kind of like churches run by atheists.

It's more like education is run by business people and communists who are at odds with each other. I'm hoping the communists win.

Because the economy is down, so is enrollment. This will considerably hurt our future national economy. Smart nations make sure education is free (communism) to ensure their nations economic success (capitalism).

You can't go complaining about both communism (sharing) and big business (self-interested competiton of ruling giants). That leaves nothing but anarchy. Perhaps though, anarchy is what you want. No schools, no organizations at all (or at least not one's involving expenses). ..or church rule. We saw all the wars popes caused though.

Churches too are either run as communism or big business. They tend not to have any democracy though beyond votes of confidence/no-confidence as measured by attendance and contributions.

I'm for private enterprise, Communism kills creativity, individual freedoms.

Where does it say that Christians are to stand by and be trampled? Christians have to be smart!

I do not believe in unchecked capitalism. I do believe in honest free enterprise.

I'm not saying there aren't many illegals that just want to live free, work, and so on, but if they're going to come here, come in legally, and not go on the dole. We can't take in the world. They have no right to come in here and steal jobs, and go on the dole. They have no right to steal our future generations future..they have no right to this.

Soon, if the borders aren't shut down, Americans will have to do what the government won't do..protect them, shoot to kill.

You say you'd be willing to take in 50 illegals...how are you going to pay for them?

Borders are quite easy...people just have to have discipline, and not cross them. There are borders.

What a crock...where did you hear all the junk about Europeans, the communist schools? If anything, they brought some civility to a barbaric world.

Frosty, I feel sincerely sorry for you, only when you mature, that is if its not too late, will your eyes open.

Civility? Realy? The Europeans brought civility? Is that what you call genocide, theft, and rape?

Good Europeans did bring civility to third world nations.

> Good Europeans did bring civility to third world
> nations.

Yes, at the point of a sword.

At least at the college level, every classroom is unique to the teacher teaching it, whethar it's an English, computer programming, or sculpture class.

Socialising education in no way kills creativity or individual freedoms, except for the tax paying aspect of it.

Quality education (and fire departments, and every thing else) are much cheaper when bought collectively rather than every interested individual paying for services offered by individuals or small businesses.

I am a small business person, and am much for the creativity it offers, but people working at NASA are doing much the same sort of thing I am in spite of the bureacracy. I've worked in big business before, and like so many others, find that even in such environments, people tend to forge their own particular job positions.

What you are really complaining about is centralized control. Big businesses, large socialised organizations, and even socialised nations can operate through either centralization or decentralization. Capitalism or socialism implies neither.

IBM went so far with decentralisation as to make each department, like the accounting department, a separate company.
Socialised organisations like colleges do much the same thing, with each department choosing it's own curriculum and operating style.

You have this fear of secret monolithic control organizations. They exist, but that doesn't mean they are everywhere that they could possibly exist. Far from. The ones which do exist are mostly private enterprise, not communism.

The things you feared most, Soviet and Chinese communism, no longer exist or are on the way to becoming as capitalist as we are.

The one thing you fear which continues to be a real threat to human freedom is the IMF and WTO, but it's time may be over just like our giant US banks. It over extended it's power, collapsed under it's own greedy corruption, and this is giving other nations an opportunity to escape from it's clutches.

I have a hard time saying if central regulation is really a bad thing or not.
In Europe they've outlawed things like lead soldered circuits and strange foreign fruits that prove to be unhealthy.

Here in the US we don't even forbid cosmetic companies from using ingredients like lead and phthalates.

Which is more important, the rights of individuals to buy dangerous products, and of desperate workers to work in deadly jobs, or protecting millions from slow quiet deaths to save industry profits?

The implications of your ideal small business rugged individual society would be a return to snake-oil salesmen everywhere. Collectivization and standardization of legal ethics has made up for a decline of the individually self-responsible community ethics of a century ago. Without having the ethics of a century ago, removing the democratized centralization of today would mean deadly mayhem.

A century ago, people conformed to the standards of some imaginary entity 'society', and if they didn't, a physical entity 'the grape vine' would catch up with them. Except in small towns, or aside from karma, there is no such thing as a physical society entity. We do though have micro societies, like our co-workers, classmates, or the few small shops we visit ona recurrent basis, but even then our interactions are usually on an immediate person-per-person basis. Things like reputation and social standing hardly exist anymore unless you're a famous member of high society.

The people who could make your rugged individualism communities work smoothly do not exist anymore. People are sheep. Of those who forge their own way, I doubt the ethics are nearly as high as a century ago. Asking everyone to forge their own way again would be like swimming in a shark tank.

A century ago children were taught somewhat to look how to serve society. Today society doesn't exist in the same way it did then, and it's a very rare person today who factors 'serving society' into any decision what-so-ever aside from perhaps recycling. Well, that's a good thing that has evolved, come to think of it. Serving society may no longer exist, but serving the planet exists now and did not exist a century ago.

Anyhow, I'm suggesting that for your preferred libertarian models of business and government to work, you would also have to resurrect the concept of serving society.

Kristal Rose, I want sovereignty for this nation. So what are you suggesting? For us to bow down to socialism/communism. To me, socialism is nothing more than communism, just different wording.

You talk of serving society. What society? Legal or illegal. Should I reward an illegal society, where some people don’t have good behavior, overbreed, and we should pay for them? Just because some people overbreed, are immoral they expect us to take care of them, pay for shelter, food, education, medical. I’m more for individual responsibility. Also, I don’t feel new immigrants with older members should be entitled to Social Security or Medicare, their families should pay for them.
I believe in helping those get over a rough spot at times, those that are truly in need. Many churches, and volunteers used to do good work. It is complex I know.

I don’t believe in diversity, multiculturalism, intermarriage. No where in history has a nation been strong, free of conflict when diversity was present. But, then again, this is what the enemy within wants, racial strife…no one wins ultimately. I want peace, harmony. I know you disagree with my ideas, but feel what is best served for our country is no diversity.

You always write a good post Kristal Rose, but could you make more, but shorter. I’m having trouble with my computer, can’t copy and paste.

I'm referring to your ideas of a return to community businesses, and returning to a lack of government intercesion in interpersonal affairs. I'm saying that people for the most part don't have the ethical concepts ingrained in them anymore to make that sort of society still work. And as you point out, it never was such a society in the first place. Churches once held a prominent position in policing civic morality.

Diversity, multiculturalism, and and intermarriage won't be going away no matter what sort of govermental social system we adopt.

What I started addressing was whethar or not higher education was a big business or communist organization, and whether such agencies were centrally controlled or decentralized. It's a bit of all of that.

We've had our arguments many times before on what the ideal form of post-industrial socialialisation is.
I see it as us having two choices: Either things are dirt cheap because they are mas-produced a billion units at a time, cost $1, and no one has work, so we have to subsidize everything, or we dismantle big business and socialist government, and everyone works, and those $1 items like Flash drives cost $80 instead.

Sharing the exponential benefits of a mass society makes more sense to me than everyone forging their own way.

> He was an arsehole, only a bigger one now... He still is a liar, crook
> and very corrupt.

I totally agree. I can't stand Obummer or anything about him.

> I WANT HIM TO FORK OVER HIS REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE. HIS GRANDMOTHER
> SAYS HE WAS BORN IN KENYA. AND HE HASN'T BROUGHT FORTH ANYTHING SAYING
> HE'S A NATURAL BORN AMERICAN. SO HE'S LYING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
> ONCE A LIAR ALWAYS A LIAR.JUST LIKE A CHEATING SPOUSE. I DIDN'T VOTE
> FOR HIM, AS YOU MIGHT GUESS, HE HAS NO MILITARY BACKGROUND. THERE'S
> ALREADY BEEN A COUPLE ATTEMPTS ON HIS LIFE, AND I HOPE HE'S WEARING
> A BULLET PROOF JACKET.AND THE STIMULUS PACKAGE IS RIDICULOUS AS ARE
> ALL THE BAILOUTS. THOSE COMPANIES SHOULD DEAL WITH THEIR PROBLEMS
> AND SHUT THE "F" UP. OH AND THE WAY HE TALKS TO THE PEOPLE, IS LIKE
> HE'S TALKING TO IDIOTS., SOOO CONDESCENDING. . HE SHOULD OF JUST BEEN
> A TEACHER. YOU HAVE TO TALK SLOW , TO TEACH AND BE UNDERSTOOD. I JUST
> HATE BEING TALKED TO LIKE I'M AN IDIOT. I AM NOT AN IDIOT.

Obama (or should I say Barry Soetoro?) hired a law firm to keep his birth certificate and college records sealed. It certainly doesn't take a genius to figure out that there's something he is hiding and doesn't want anyone to know; it's very obvious. If he has nothing to hide, then why wouldn't he provide his birth certificate and put the whole debate to rest? It's because he was actually born in Kenya. There are literally dozens of lawsuits challenging his eligibility and Chief Justice Roberts is reviewing at least one of them that I know of. It would be great to see him get impeached and everything he has done would be null and void. I don't agree with any of his views, interests or anything on his agenda such as: socialism, increased government size and control, gay marriage, no limits on abortion, using taxpayer money to fund abortions overseas, taking guns away (they will never get any of my guns), rescinding the regulation that protects the conscience of health care providers, limiting free speech on the radio and internet, massive cuts to the military, making veterans pay for their own health care, control of the internet, stimulus packages and bailouts (which have strings attached leading to government control (socialism)), socialist tax plan, unlimited immigration and destructive policies, totally removing God out of our society (which they have done far too much already), closing Guantanamo Bay, total disregard for the Constitution and the list goes on and on. Obama/Soetoro is so obsessed with socialism and expanding our government and its control. Barry Soetoro (Obama) is leading us right into the North American Union and socialism (just like the European Union), which is already happening and just hasn't been announced yet. The only difference is that we’re about 20 years behind Europe. His idea is for government to take over everything and do what he tells us to do (or what he reads off of a prompter that someone else has written for him). We're in really big trouble!!!!

'Promote the general welfare' is in the first sentence our country was founded on.

You accuse Obama of total disregard for the Constitution? Dude, where were you during the Bush Administration? Not opening your eyes, leaving the house, or talking to anyone other than the dust bunnies would be my guess.

And either of us did much differently? So what did you name your dust bunnies?

> Frosty, open your eyes...you are a product of the dumbing down of
> the youth of America

Very well stated!

> I have a lot to say about "higher education" and it isn't good.
> Much of higher education is a business, run by communists.

I totally agree. More than 70% of the millionaires and billionaires in this country have no college degree at all. Many of them have never even taken one college course and have people with degrees working for them. The statistics prove that a college degree is not required to succeed and be wealthy.

College is geared for people with an IQ of 120. If you're smarter than that, you can learn faster being self taught. It's a long wait for people who are brilliant enough to figure out things they could be doing right away.

> |> I have a lot to say about "higher education"
> and it isn't good.
> |> Much of higher education is a business,
> run by communists.
>
> I totally agree. More than 70% of the millionaires
> and billionaires in this country have no college
> degree at all. Many of them have never even taken
> one college course and have people with degrees
> working for them. The statistics prove that a
> college degree is not required to succeed and
> be wealthy.

Cite your source.

Thank you John. The sad thing is the youth don't realize they've been dumbed down. I met a Ph.D graduate from U.C. Berkeley, and she admitted as she grew away from the Univ. life, she started reevaluating things, and her life, she asked herself, how could she have been so duped by the communist professors? She said she finally grew up and away from their false teaching. I was impressed with her story.

You're right John! I remember a young car mechanic who invented a gasket for a car, and the patent was sold for $13, almost $14 ,million dollars...he used his ingenuity, he became a millionaire. Good for him.

You can't go comparing UC Berkeley to the rest of the university realm, any more than you go presuming experimental cello music or steel-drum punk rock to be representative of music at large.

Making money with patents has far more to do with expensive battles between lawyers than ingenuity.

I've invented some 1300 popular inventions, but can't afford to play the patent game, nor do I think it would be moral to do so. The patent realm is more a battle-field than anything useful.

For your one guy who invented that gasket, there are probably 100 other guys who independently came up with the idea and are now forbidden from doing anything with it.

I'd be a multi-billionaire if I had a patent on everything I came up with. I invent a few new useful things every day.

> You can't go comparing UC Berkeley to the rest
> of the university realm, any more than you go
> presuming experimental cello music or steel-drum
> punk rock to be representative of music at large.
>
> Making money with patents has far more to do with
> expensive battles between lawyers than ingenuity.
>
> I've invented some 1300 popular inventions, but
> can't afford to play the patent game, nor do I
> think it would be moral to do so. The patent realm
> is more a battle-field than anything useful.
>
> For your one guy who invented that gasket, there
> are probably 100 other guys who independently
> came up with the idea and are now forbidden from
> doing anything with it.
>
> I'd be a multi-billionaire if I had a patent on
> everything I came up with. I invent a few new
> useful things every day.

Logic won't work on that women. She reminds me of the real hardcores in the JFK Conspiracy group. Now look, I know that we didn't get the whole story from the government on that, but that's as far as I'm willing to go with it. The type I'm talking about however, if Jesus floated down from the clouds right in front of them, all glowing and stigmata-ed and all that, and said just one thing, "Oswald worked alone," they're response would be "Well what the fudge does he know? He lives way up there in the clouds with his Dad. What can he know about the real world?" LJD would be much the same way if God herself told her she was being an idiot. "Well what the fudge do you know? You're just God, you've never talked to someone who knew someone who said that all college professors were Commies!"

You're right. I've been trying to explain things for a long time.

I've just thought up a new point, though I'm sure that would be lost or her too, and that is that college prefessors are commies in the same way that all police and firefighters are commies.

It just now occurs to ask myself why. My guess is that she was the victim of a church which felt it's membership threatened by college education.

It's unfortunate that some churches, consciously or not, have to stoop to creating an enemy, to create an identity by which their members can rally together in fear. I don't think she's been a church-goer for quite some years, or get's it all second-hand from Minute-Men, but some entity definitely left their mark on her.

She's closer to McCarthy than neo-nazis are to Hitler. This in spite of my telling her to look around and observe that there are no more communists. A sizable few people with Christian or humanitarian communist sentiments perhaps, in every walk of life including government and colleges, but no actual communist establishment anymore, public or covert. But as you say, it's like JFK, or perhaps weapons of mass destruction, no sign of them is just a greater clue as to how powerful the conspiracy must be. There's nothing you can do with that sort of logic.

To make matters so much worse, it's not even some conspiracy, it's 'the enemy'. It's all lumped in with one's darkest fears to scary to examine in the light of the day and find empty, combined with the notion that the same is pervasive and nearly omnipotent. I can't think of many more tragic ways to live than that. - The whole belief mechanism at it's core defends itself from examination. You'll recall that similar church thinking is against psychology as well. Fear must be perpetuated, not examined and understood.

I have an unfortunate suspicion that people who's religion is founded on fear, would probably live in fear if they believed Jesus had recently returned too. I don't really know for sure though. I try to avoid people who live in fear, religious or otherwise.

The more I think about it, the more messed up those religions appear. If Jesus did show up, they'd be looking forward to the armageddon wrath upon their evil oppressors, the people they could have lived in greater harmony with if they hadn't had such self-wrought exclusive righteous persecuted isolation. Maybe it looks different, and has hidden virtues if one lives in the thick of it.

Years ago, I took an entrepreneurial class. I agree with you on patents....it's a joke. The teacher talked on patents, and said if you have a good invention, put your invention on the market, and plan on making the most of your invention, for a year. Most money is made in the first year.

I have had many ideas, but never pursued having them developed, too busy raising a family.

There 150,000 patents filed every year, and 350,000 patent lawsuits pressed every year, at a cost of about $400,000 each. Pretty much any mechanical, industrial, or electronic detail thought currently possible is owned by someone unless the idea is more than 20 years old, so to make anything new legally, you have to pay others.

You might invent the electronic accellerator pedal, but have to strike deals with or get sued by the inventors of "accellerator pedal with lubricated hinge", "accellerator pedal with return spring", "accellerator pedal with non-slip surface", "accellerator pedal which doesn't scrape floor", "accellerator pedal with proportional tension", "method of converting angular position into voltage resistance signal", "flexible durable method of wrapping wires", "method of attaching sockets to insulated wires", etc. etc. etc. - You can't really invent even the simplest of things without involving dozens of of other patents, and it costs 10's of 1000's just to find out what existing patents go into your own idea.

Those are all gray areas, so you then have to take your chances that you won't lose your home anyhow over the method you chose for molding rubber into your metal pedal.

10,000 people might come up with the idea of making an electronic accellerator pedal, but only a company like Bosch or Honda will have the money to patent it securely and face all those other people whos patents they may infringe. Those persons might have sued Fred Gravenstein, garage inventor of the "electronic accellerator" because it infringes on their "accellerator pedal with enclosed hinge", but if Bosch makes the claim, they won't face them in court.

So what I am saying is that America is not the land where anyone with ingenuity can make their own way. It is the land where lawyers and big money get their way at the expense of everyone else.

Our big companies are at war with countries like India and Canada which make it illegal to patent anything of medical value.

And then you have Montsanto, which is striving to have a patent on every sort of plastic or fluid, as well as every form of plant and animal, or process involved in the continuing survival of the human species. It's the inevitable result of creating a legal system of competition.

I really think it's time to dismantle the patent office, and go back to people inventing things in secret for a quick year's production, and if they build the best or cheapest product, indefinitely.

The other problem with todays world is that it's too large. If you want some product like a keychain which beeps if you leave your purse or camera somewhere, there are probably a dozen companies making it already, but you'd never know because they can't afford to advertise to 7 billion customers who are busy getting ads and catalogues for several other million products. The average american gets sent 70 catalogues per year, which hardly makes an incidental dent in peoples knowledge of existing products. A company today can research and not even discover till too late that they have a competitor already making the same thing.

It would be neat if we were the Thomas Edison country you somewhat imagine we live in, but we aren't. Edison today would have looked like Dupont or Monsanto.

Edison wasn't really much of an inventor anyhow. Like the modern way, he mostly bought up other patents (including the light bulb) and painstakingly improved upon them with non-out-of-the-box engineering skills until they were refined for marketability. His primary invention was turning patents into commodities one could capitalize upon, which kind of makes him the grandfather of patent trolling.

I'm fond of Ben Franklin, who really was an inventor, though not my favorite. That would probably be Tesla.

> College is geared for people with an IQ of 120. If you're smarter
> than that, you can learn faster being self taught. It's a long wait
> for people who are brilliant enough to figure out things they could
> be doing right away.

College might be good in some ways, but getting a degree is basically a license to work for someone else. I know more than one wealthy business owner without any college education who has people with bachelors and masters degrees working for them. A lot of people think you need a degree to succeed and it’s not true, but that’s what we are programmed to believe.

The youth have been dumbed down in this country for a long time. We are taught and programmed to believe that you need a college education to succeed and that simply isn't true. That's an impressive story from that Berkeley graduate. I've heard similar stories regarding false teachings in colleges and universities.

Good for him is right. A simple idea or invention can make a person very wealthy.

Higher learning institutions are just breeding grounds for communism. To make an honorable living, one does not have to have a college education.

I appreciate ingenuity, being creative....if a person has wealth due to his/her creativity, and morally, and legally right, I think it's great.

I know quite well it's a myth. Back when I did programming employment, my head hunters revealed to me that I with my A.A. was being proposed as a candidate along with those with masters degrees.

I've attended college for 27 years now, and talked with a great many specialists who did very little college, and quite frankly, my opinion of a degree as a credential has become quite low. Colleges haven't taught self-motivation for nearly 3 decades now. If I interview someone with decent accomplishments and little college, I know I have someone who can get things done. If they just have a degree, all I know is that they have a general unapplied knowledge base.

If you want a job for a large corporation where you will be interviewed by an HR person unfamiliar with the work to be done, then yes, a degree is a ticket to work.

And yes, those wealthy business owners you speak of are able to identify just what knowledge they need, and don't waste their time studying statistics of plankton or theories of childhood development.

Don't get me wrong, I'm both a knowledge junkie and a fan of community college as a place for people to share their creative interests.

A Ph.D. is mostly just proof that you can write a thoughtful formal citationed research paper. If I'm hiring a programmer, their making a near-finished internet fantasy game in their hobby time means far more to me, and I could give similar examples in almost any field except secretarial work, where a degree with good grades would be rather indicative.

What do you call an honorable living? One at least needs the self-taught equivalent of a college education to get a decent job today. The factory and field jobs are gone. Most of the retail jobs have been replaced by larger more efficient stores.

Can you machine inlayed guitar fretboards, design computer chips, set up movie stage lighting, edit videos, program billboards, run national internet routers, monitor wine-making chemistry, survey parcels, .. I could go on for years.

I suspect you are unfamiliar with some cultural changes that have occurred over the last 30 years. People do not start as mail clerks and work their way up to becoming engineers or administrators. Jobs are hired directly from those already educated for the position. Paid internships (teaching the parts scrubber how to tune engines and install clutches) do not exist anymore. If you want to be a mechanic, you better have graduated from an automotive college or at least miraculously learned all the computer diagnostic specifcs and such yourself somehow before interviewing. Internships do exist, like in the computer gaming industry, but surprise surprise, it means working without pay for three months - on top of already having a degree in computer graphics. Employers no longer pay to train people like they did in your age.

With all the competiton for jobs, it's either a person who got a degree in horticulture, or the person who fortunately learned a great deal about flower care and has documented experience who gets the job selling flowers.

If by 'honorable job' you mean cleaning, packing shipments, or frying hamburgers, yeah, there are a few of those jobs left, but it's usually the immigrants who didn't go to american colleges who get those jobs. Perhaps highway workers and oil workers can get by without college education still, but I rather doubt it. I expect that they are at least expected to have two year degrees in engineering, so that employers can at least trust that they can calculate the length of a hypotenuse or read directions on welding equipment written in Kelvin temperature measurements.

I know you like to cite your father as a reference as to what is possible. What he did in his day pertains to perhaps one in 10,000 people trying to make a living in America today.

As far as forging your own way goes, doing anything unique today requires massive education. Perhaps you don't need to go to college to get it, but you still need to be blessed with a ton of knowledge and talent to rise above 50,000 other people in that field of development.

As a typical example of self-motivated entrepreneurship in this age, look at Bill creating SurveyCentral. Perhaps 30 of us pay him $5/year, a whopping $150/yr, and the market wont bear much more than that, and yet I expect he even relied on a bit of college education to get where he did in this venture, though entirely self-taught was possible.

Oh, let me add one more thing, Survey Central is vastly more a breeding ground for communism than anything I've encountered in my 27 years of attendance in California community colleges (granted, I didn't go to UC Berkeley or Santa Cruz).

An honorable living is a job that is legal and moral.

Obviously, there has to be some education, but NOT higher education. My former son in law took a two year course in junior college, and he’s now holds a position in a company, makes $150,000 a year. A person does not need a four or six year degree to make an honorable living.

Unfortunately, the big corporations have tried to fix it that people feel they NEED OR WANT a higher education….all the more time they have to indoctrinate you.

I read an article in our local paper, by a professor in a college, and he agreed, people don’t need anymore than a 2 year degree in college, or community college. Education is a big business, the NEA has a grip on people.

It’s very sad when people choose to put unreasonable profit, over a Godly conscience. Many have lost their conscience…to name one.. the medical community.

I have seen the cultural changes in this country, and I don’t like it. The Ted Kennedy, Immigration Reform Act of 1965, opened the gates to people (third world cultures) that are culturally different, have no faith, will not assimilate, will not abide by our laws, will not learn our language. They want to change us, take away our culture. A body with two or more heads, makes for a monster. A monster has been created by the enemy within. We MUST STOP LEGAL IMMIGRATION. The reason Americans are having to struggle is because of open immigration from third world nations…it has to stop. We need to deport those that are here illegally. By saying this, does not mean I dislike anyone, but from a practical viewpoint, it has to stop. We can’t take in the world.

Yes, my father was a bright, self taught man, he was creative, constantly wanting to learn. He learned out of necessity and he was impeccable about his work, a perfectionist in whatever he did. He believed if a man does a job, it needs to be done right. I am/was proud of him for who he was. He was a person of strong faith. He believed in personal responsibility. He never went to college…had only an 8th grade education.

I would hope Survey Central was not breeding grounds for communism….a deadly choice. As communists, you lose freedoms beyond words. I’ve known and presently know people that lived under communist rule…it’s not nice. Don’t be misled. What you and other young people need to do is fight to stop immigration, legal and illegal. The problem is we have allowed ungodly people to take the helm of this country…this has to be changed.

Most any job I would consider or think about requires a great deal of education, so I don't really think about how prolific jobs which do not are.

The trend since the 80's has been that jobs involving physical labor go overseas unless they simply can not be done elsewhere. Likewise with simple communication jobs. When you are on the phone with customer service or sales, you are likely talking with someone in India, Argentina, or the Phillipines. These days even the person taking your order at drive-thru hamburger stand could be in one of those countries.

This leaves jobs in art-direction, engineering-design, and business-administration, each which typically require degrees involving consumer psychology and such.

As far as Survey-Central goes, I bring it up for comparison because you are are member here and quite familiar with things people say here. I'm saying that you will hear much less recommendation of communist concepts here than you will ever hear in college class rooms. If higher education is an intolerable communist influence on our youth, then we definitely need to get rid of SC. If you find SC tolerable in this respect, then you don't have to worry about what colleges are teaching.

They are teaching some other things you in particular might find objectionable though, for instance genetic pre-screening of fetuses. It isn't said in the same paragraph perhaps, but what is inferred by this practice is that abortions will occur in response to genetic defect findings.

And sure, education for education's sake has existed as long as education itself. It become a self-perpetuating industry is just the logical extension of that in today's societal structure framework.
And also, half of a typical person's education typical education probably is not necessary for the individual involved, but it is necessary for progress society. If 20,000 people are taught horticultural and rocket sciences, and only one student amongst them is inspired, catches on, and becomes a pioneering horticultural or rocket scientist, that is better than our society breeding no new pioneering scientists. Likewise with the arts and such. Education serves society as a whole, not just the educated individuals. A white person may not need to know anything about black or hispanic or asian culture to do their job, but all our black, hispanic, and asian citizens will benefit from business or private interactions with this person if they do have such cultural familiarity.

For what it's worth, the primary influence that I am aware of in class curriculum is industry. For instance the local software companies will discuss their needs with programming instructors, and express that it's not so much new computer languages they need taught to students, but how to collaborate on software production.

I was recently in a robotics program funded by NASA.
One of our main sub-campuses was built by the gaming and movie industries like Disney, Dreamworks, and such.
These beneficiaries have no interest in teaching communism. Far from it. They are looking for colleges to breed employees and managers. The scientific laboratories of advanced colleges are businesses themselves.

The closest thing to your concern is probably people getting advanced degrees in philosophy to become book review TV hosts.

There is an ideological movement amongst college curriculm planners today to shift towards teaching pride in the craftsman arts like brick-laying and carving doors, rather than purely cerebral studies like design and admin. This is probably the closest move towards communism, uplifting and promoting the common trade person rather than creating an elite class, that colleges have ever considered.

I might add that the purpose of higher eduaction has always been to create an elite class. Mao and the USSR both pretty much denounced it, and limited it mostly to trade schools. They might permit classical violin lessons, and were all for engineering, but they definitely weren't into intellectuals discussing philosophy, politics, or abstract art and poetry with each other.

Oh, on two more points:

Ungodly people at the helm? You think Bush or Clinton were immigrants, or weren't church goeers? I'm guessing the average immigrant is a lot more godly than Bush, if such comparisons can even be made.

The second thing, don't you realize it's already a global world? Haven't you seen products advertised as 'free trade'? The idea there is to protect the wages of people in other nations. The trend will only continue until every nation is held to the same yardstick by everyone equally. People have moved on from protecting local US ecology to protecting things like Madagascar rain forests. Likewise other nations are urging us to adopt the Kyoto protocol and such. When people make appeals about investment in science or the arts or healthcare, or drug laws or ecological packaging, it's increasingly addressed on an international level. Most of our products come from other nations except our agriculture.

If we were to open our borders wide open at this point, things wouldn't look considerably different. People follow the jobs and the jobs aren't here anymore. Our socialised healthcare is worse than most industrialised nation's; there's no reason to come here for that. Our college isn't socialised like in other nations, and costs much more if you aren't a citizen. One could come here for the freedom to be an entrepreneur, but on an international market, one is better off staying where they are and employing locals for cheaper, and just selling on the international market. Compared to 40 years ago there is no tide of people dying to come here. Except for Mexicans, most who wish to do so and can afford to do so, probably do so already.

Most of the world has no more desire to move here than you have to move to Sweden or France, nor really more incentive to do so these days. The average American would fare better moving to Canada, but you don't see that happening, do you? Probably the main reason today that Mexicans move here is that this is where their relatives live.

People from places like Oregon and Washington come down to California searching for work. The reason they can do so is that comparatively, California businesses are based on international and national trade, and has a support network foundation, thus we can expand to suit any population in proportion to the growth of the international economy, which is grawing as 3rd world nations increasingly become mainstream consumers.

The last reason to move here was that we had a disproportional share of the worlds wealth, but as busineses have internationalized and we are hit by recession, that's decreasingly the case too.

To rephrase all that, it's not that immigrants are coming here for any particular resources or opportunities, it's simply that they are migrating here. The Eskimos, Hopi, and Olmec, the South Sea Islanders and Mayans, had it no better at their destination than in Turkey or India. Peoples on the planet simply migrate at times.

~

If you look at our history, it was almost as likely that this nation would have become a modern industrialised nation of native americans speaking French and Spanish. The American revolution was won by a narrow margin, with troops mutinying and such. It was mostly just a war between land owners and the monarchy, and the majority of colonists were indentured servants with nothing to gain either way. Since Britain could just as easily make their colony revenues doing all the taxation on the Europe side, they didn't cling too hard. One incentive for land owners to go to war here is that England forbid our crossing into native territory, which is why it was just the 13 colonies till then. If we hadn't purchased Florida and Louisiana, things still would have been quite different here. The America which exists today is largely the result of an economic geographic chess game played by a handful of aristocrats. Until the homestead act and westward movements, which were also decisions of those aristocrats, it can't really be said that there was any populist movement to become what we became; no more populist than our choice to go to war with the Phillipines, Korea, Vietnam, or Iraq. Gold fever and Mormons hoping to create their own nation had much to do with things. Gold fever was as much a random bubble as the Dutch tulip bubble of 1631 in which black tulips went for a years wages until the market crashed a few years later and black tulips were no more special than yellow roses.

What i am saying is that the nature of the world is largely governed by a handful of pivotal random quirks and unexpected movements for no good logical reason. It's unrealistic to expect the world to necessarily evolve to become anything in particular at all, but it is unrealisitc to expect it stay the same as you are hoping for.

> What i am saying is that the nature of the world is largely governed
> by a handful of pivotal random quirks and unexpected movements for
> no good logical reason. It's unrealistic to expect the world to necessarily
> evolve to become anything in particular at all, but it is unrealisitc
> to expect it stay the same as you are hoping for.

Yes, the only real constant in the Universe is change. Marx, Engels and Hegel may have gotten a lot of things wrong, but I think there is much to be said for their formulation of dialectical materialism. The basic formulation here is {thesis + antithesis ---> synthesis}. This can be seen in the form of US society today. Much as people worry about the US "becoming" a socialist/communist nation it became a moot point in 1913-14 when significant portions of Marx's Communist manifesto were ratified into US law, specifically the Federal Reserve Act and the income tax. What evolved from that was our modern industrial economy. This created a backlash back-to-nature movement with the hippies playing a large role. The continuing evolution of that movement can be seen in mainstream grocery stores today. Most large grocery stores have organic produce sections and even in the main aisles you can find organic brands of pasta and canned vegetables and such side by side with the more industrially produced goods.

Kristal Rose.....a Good post…....I do understand.

It is for just the subjects you mentioned about experimenting with nature, embryos, and such that I dislike the sciences. They’re messing with things they need not mess with. It’s evil.

I ask you why has our world changed so much? This country didn’t need to go into other countries for our needs. We shouldn’t have allowed some of our money grubbing corporations to give our work to other nations. And we shouldn’t have allowed all the worker visas for people to come in here and take away our jobs and land. It’s all confusion, and evil. You might say whether we like it or not, it’s here.

We’re in a one world order, the Beast, and we’re in trouble.

Our schools should never have been under government control. Education is the tool of our government, the enemy and special interests.

My niece’s husband said in his business, he’s noticing because of the American home foreclosures, the Chinese are buying them up. I resent this well laid plan by the enemy within. Our economy failing was a well laid plan.

I believe in borders, and I don’t believe in multiculturalism, it serves to hurt everyone…it’s the work of Satans minions.

Good post

I guess I want a peaceful place, be with people I understand, believe as I do. I don't want for much, not a lot of material things, just harmony with people of my kind, those I can communicate with. I guess this will not happen with the world we have today. My life is almost over, but I fear for my future generations, they'll never know peace, harmony in a nation/world of enemies. But, I tell my children, grandchildren to be as good as they are, try to get along with people, keep with their own, and NEVER forget the faith.

Yep.

I got an A+ on my essay test on the dialectic, even though I had to write it quite cleverly to not reveal that I couldn't recall at the time which was which, the bourgeosie and the proletariat. Thu USSR had it's hippies too.

The example I gave is isn't nearly 'experimenting with embryos'. It's simply informing young women that they now have the option of finding out if their baby will be born normal while still in the womb. The school doesn't offer any opinions on the matter. Smart women though, armed with such knowledge, will conclude on their own that they can have an abortion if their baby is deformed or has some incurable disease.

Genetic science is something separate not taught at community colleges at any experimental level.
Genetic engineering is not significantly differently than cross-breeding and grafting, just on a smaller level, like replacing steam circuitry with electronic circuitry. If you have a problem with one, you should have a problem with the other in theory too.

"This country didn’t need to go into other countries for our needs." - Perhaps not, but it's why we briefly became the super-power you were proud of.

The government doesn't really set what is taught in college. At most, they decide which course topics qualify for transfer credit, and set registration/tuition policies which affect if the 'junior colleges' are truly 'community colleges', teaching things like dance and pottery to the locals, or are more along the lines of 'transfer colleges', encouraging students to merely take prepatory courses and move on. My preference is for community colleges, benefitting people who just want a sweeter life without a need for an advanced degree in something.

They (the government) do however pretty much spell out to the letter what is taught in K-5 classrooms. I am opposed to that myself. I'd rather trust teachers to decide that for themselves as they see fit, based on their students. It's why I decided not to become a teacher. I'm really good at explaining things to kids, but grade-school teachers don't have that freedom anymore.

Of course the Chinese are buying us up. That wasn't any collaborative plan, that was an economic war, a lot of greedy speculation, and our side lost the war. The USSR lost a similar war with us in which we bankrupted them competing to create nuclear weapons. We told the Japanese we'd adopt digital television many years ago, let them tool up their factories, then changed our minds, nearly bankrupting them.

These people have no unified 'enemy' plan. They gamble against each other while the risk falls upon the populace. That's slightly different. Companies had no more intent to go bankrupt than I did.

With international economics being what they have become, borders in today's age really only come down to one issue, multi-culturalism or not.

There are more people who believe seggregation is ungodly. It comes down to whethar you are an OT or NT thinker in that respect. I was watching a show about the black scientist who unlocked the secrets of synthesizing hormones. A scene in the show reminded me of something I would otherwise have forgotten, a sign at the Woolworths lunch counter when I was seven years old specifying the colored area. I'm glad those days are over. I've enjoyed having black neighbors and business partners, from Africa even, much more interesting. Preventing such friendships would be satanic in my book. They had kind ideas themselves, to foster the software industry back in Africa. You always say those nations should pull themselves up. They can't do so if others hoard the resources, which includes modern education.

Really, if we offered free college, or with low-cost loans, to foreign guests, there wouldn't be nearly as much need for foreigners to move here. Instead we do quite the opposite, charge them an arm and a leg for a modern industrial education unless they become citizens. As much as you dislike our higher education, it's the last remaining reason why our nation has a global advantage. The people who learn to make money in an international economy learn it here, and thus tend to base their headquarters here, live here, spend their money here, and create the trickle-down economy like maids and flower shops here. This trend is on the decline though. If republicans have their way, colleges would privatize, and we would have to go to China for college courses in the latest technology and business skills.

- Is this really what you want to have happen? Quite frequently you suggest policies in the name of anti-liberalism which support the very things you are against, the aspects of neo-liberalism I am against myself, which has me wondering if your group complaining of covert manipulation of the public, is quite right, as demonstrated by them being the ultimate deceived pawns themself.

If people are free to move around to pursue opportunity, neither government nor industry can lock people into class circumstances and exploit them. Closing borders puts all the power in the hands of leaders. That's what he USSR did. You needed travel permits to go anywhere. Suppose your neighborhood became a slum. Wouldn't you be outraged if you weren't allowed to move to better a better home or job in a neighboring city or state? You're proud of American freedom, then set out to prevent it. Very strange.

Many would say though that your suggested policies have the opposite of the effect intended.. That nurturing any desire to remain amongst your own kind detracts from harmony rather than creates it.

I was watching a show on a famous black chemist. When he bought a nice home in a nice neighborhood, someone tried burning his place down. If the neighbors wanted to live in harmony, they would find that their new neighbor was college educated, a worldly business person with similar interests as their own, and far more like them than some white factory worker. Fortunately the other neighbors gathered together to publicise their acceptance of his family.

You could easily have been living in harmony. You chose not to. You could have joined knitting or pottery circles or book clubs with those sharing similar interests. Instead you joined John Birch, and anti-immigrant groups, people who have never lived in harmony.

If I were St. Peter at the gate, listening to your laundry list of worldly complaints, I'd be painfully laughing at the struggle you created for yourself. I know you mean well, but it seems to me that you have turned most of the opportunities for the life you wanted here upside down all by yourself. I've done quite a bit of the same myself. The joke is kind of on us mortals, it seems. You let your thoughts on what should be stand in the way of what was actually available.

Suppose for example, when you got to heaven, it was finally confided to you that there never was any 'enemy'. How did that concern for the 'enemy' affect that life of yours? I'm guessing it caused you much undue stress, yet gave you much sense of purpose. You really wouldn't have been who you are without it.

Actually we are probably better off for it, otherwise you might have fought something tangible instead. In retrospect (as if this were my life, I guess) you've spent your time fighting phantoms, the enemy, immigrants, communists, quite a few things which may have never existed in the first place, or may have never become the problem you feared occcurring. You will never find out while you are alive if any of this was justified or not. It's a curious choice of life.

Clearly your non-adaptive stubborness has cost you at times, like in your righteous marriage concepts. You may claim to seek harmony, but your actions indicate you chose a weary battle instead. The decision rested on you, not on the nature of the world. The world is full of people living in harmony who did not have to join John Birch to achieve it.

When it's all said and done, you have no cause for misgivings, no fingers to point. The world was full of alternate teachings besides those of your parents religion, and god never came down from a cloud affirming your choice. Your life was always your choice, even though you always wanted the comfort of god or community specifying those choices for you.

Like with most people, I agree with half of your battles, disagree with the other half. That's what keeps the world spinning. Most important to me is that you tried to do it with kindness when directly in communication with anyone. None of us had an actual guidebook except our hearts and minds, and considering this, the world has been a relatively pleasant and entertaining place anyhow. Our misgivings about it are all our own.

Kristal Rose, received this from a friend in Illinois...food for thought....thought you might enjoy

A German's View on Islam
A man, whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II, owned a number of large industries and estates.. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism.

"Very few people were true Nazis,' he said, 'but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen.

Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come .. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories".

We are told again and again by 'experts' and 'talking heads' that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace.. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant.

It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectra of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.

The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave.. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder or honor-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers.

The hard quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the 'silent majority,' is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.

China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a war mongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.

And who can forget Rwanda , which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were 'peace loving'?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany , they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.

Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.

As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

Lastly, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes this email without sending it on is contributing to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand. So, extend yourself a bit and send this on and on and on! Let us hope that thousands, world wide, read this and think about it, and send it on before it's too late.

The first thing the fanatics will do to the silent majority is to disarm them.

I'll try to answer your post....behind on my posts....

I'm not into sending long posts, sorry, I hope to answer your post, as short as possible.

You say our groups, such as the MinuteMen, and The John Birch Society are wrong....I don't agree, our groups are of the 6% hopefully that will save dumbed down America. They said it was only 4 to 6% of the Americans that won the Revolutionary war, way back when. Americans have become so politically correct, it’s sickening. White people are afraid to say anything because they don’t want to be labeled racist. Poppycock. I believe in the Bible, and it said we will have enemies….and we must be on our toes….Genesis 3:15.

When I say what I say, about being separate, wanting to be with my kind, I mean race, not class level. I could strike up a conversation with a CEO or a janitor, they’re both important. I don’t care what walk of life a person comes from. I believe if people make their living honorably, morally, and legal that is what counts.

I prefer my culture, language over other peoples. And, I assume they feel the same about theirs, which is okay. I prefer living in peace, with people who are not volatile, mean spirited. I don’t like the things that other cultures live, I don’t like the drive by shootings, knife fights, gangs (cowardly) ganging up on one person. I don’t like the style of pants hanging down to the knees, the girls, looking slutty, both boys and girls looking either like gangsters, or slobs. All of these things have been introduced into my culture, by other ethnic groups. I’m not saying all ethnic people are unruly, because I know many that are fine people. I know one Mexican man in our group, that was adopted and raised by a German couple. The man is such a gentleman, he identifies himself as a German, grew up with impeccable English, manners.

In saying what I’ve said, I don’t dislike other people, I just prefer to live with my own, and there is nothing wrong with it. I don’t call people names, am always courteous, cordial, however, I will try to fight to save our culture, our way of life, our values, standards. I believe in good manners, being polite, respecting your elders, the list goes on…but I’ve seen over the last 40 years, such a corrupt change in our society…an ungodly one…an unstable one.

Less. This isn't based on anything meaningful in particular, just that his speeches have gone less 'persony' and more 'politiciany', if that makes sense.

> Less. This isn't based on anything meaningful in particular, just
> that his speeches have gone less 'persony' and more 'politiciany',
> if that makes sense.


Oddly, I've grown to like him more. Again, not based on any one policy in particular. It's just that he seems to be pissing off everyone equally, left, right and center. Someone who pisses off everyone can't be all bad...

I've been a peace activist. None of this is news to me. Thanks though.

500,000 people marched in the streets of LA against the war and the news made a motley crew of 400 campaigning for the war appear similar in size. Not being silent is hardly enough. We are about to invest in billions of dollars of F-22 fighter jets, even though no known enemy against whom jet fighters would be useful is known to exist. Congressman Kucinich stands alone in offering the voice of reason against this. Our congressmen have had their chance to hear the voice of reason, they have had their chance to hear public opinion. I don't know what's to be done about it, but nothing apparently obvious, that's for sure.

I am guessing that you have no problems with Irish, English, Germans, French, Dutch, Swedes, Italians, Polish, and other white cultures.

There was a time in America when those groups all felt about each other just as many Mexicans, Chinese, Russians, Vietnamese, and such feel about each other. No, I take that back. They probably aren't nearly as concerned about each other as the whites here once were with each other. It's mostly just those whites who became a single group who feel that way about them. Eventually there will be no more distinction between Mexicans and Vietnamese than there are between French and Swedish ancestry Americans today.

This a little off the subject, You may be interested in watching these videos....Milton Frieman....



Kristal Rose, there will never be peace under man's rule, NEVER. We have enemies as mentioned in Genesis 3:15. Of course, we'd all like peace, but there are those in this world that don't like us, are jealous. I don't like war, feel we should protect ourselves, and protection our borders, but so far, to no avail.

I wish you the best! God bless!

I am for peace, like our culture, language, our Biblical roots. Yes, I do prefer being with people of my own, less confusion. I like order. I do not dislike others, I just prefer to be with my own.

With the earlier immigration, to this country, they were mainly European or "white" people. They readily learned English, adapt to our culture. They had health checks, had to have sponsors, didn't go on the dole. But, with the immigration to this country from third world countries, we've let in people that go on the dole, have no sponsors, don't want to learn English, no health checks, do not respect our laws, some have no faith. This is confusion, Satan's work.
The biggest mistake this country did was open the gates to peoples that will not assimilate. Because of numbers, I think we need to shut the gates to everyone.

It always takes two parties to fight.

There is no one with a combination of planes and aircraft carriers except maybe NATO that we could need to defend ourselves from. The only use of our jet fighters is to attack other nations, for domination, not defense.

I think it's really just about money for contracts, but there are so many better ways to spend billions of dollars here.

You don't see Vietnamese bringing their oxen for rice farming. Everyone assimilates no less than ever before.

Immigrants didn't go on welfare way back when because no one did back then. You have to have proof of citizenship these days to do so. No one wants to be on welfare. It pays less than minimum wage, which still isn't enough to live on.

I'm sure it's true that those on welfare are primarily people of other races, but that's because employers discriminate against them, not because they don't wish to assimilate.

Lets say the existence of two consumers makes a $3000/mo job possible. One consumer only makes a $1500/mo job possible. There are two possibilities, the two can each have $1500/mo jobs, or one can have a $3000 job and pay $700 in taxes to support the other consumer who makes their job possible. $1500 no immigrants, or $2300 supporting an immigrant. Obviously that's a simplification, but we benefit from importing an underclass. It's like selling our products to 3rd world nations without having to pay shipping fees. It's also like hiring cheap overseas labor without the overseas part. As long as $700 is better than a person had in a 3rd world country, everyone wins. Eventually though the immigrants go to college and fully assimilate, and their success as affluent citizens thus requires leveraging against fresh immigrants. Our CEOs and bankers rake the success of these assimilated citizens. Every one wins, but it's a pyramid scheme requiring a constant fresh supply of immigrants to exploit. If you think the recession is bad now, it's nothing compared to what shutting down the borders would do. Why do you think they're open in the first place? For sake of our economics.

There are two types of countries which don't bring in immigrants: Communist countries which support people equally instead of relying on exploitation of classes, and rich nations which do all of their 3rd world exploitation outside of their borders. They generally don't discriminate anyhow, except on one qualification, money. If you make $500k/yr, have a masters degree, or own a prosperous company, you can move on in.

We are a capitalist nation. Our entire economic system is built on requiring a steady influx of fresh underclass. I know you like capitalism, but that's the cost it comes at. It always has been that way here. At first it was indentured servants and immigrants, then slavery, then educated industrialists exploiting the uneducated. Thats pretty much where it still stands. As the gap between skills of those here and immigrants decreases, the number of immigrants we have to bring in increases. The only known alternative is communism; shut the borders and make everyone the same class before the rich bankrupt the poor. What you are complaining about can't be helped. It's as much the product of physics as ideology.

You have two choices, government regulation (lock-down) of wages and prices, or flexibly evolving exploitable underclasses. Old-fashioned small-town america resembled a wage/price lock-down unless it relied on an underclass moving in. Early non-immigrant american factory towns had an element of standardised wages going, and our answer to that was to make our children the working underclass.

It's a no-win situation. From what I know of you, amongst what is possible, I believe what you would prefer is a system in which everyone pretends they have freedom of mobility, but in fact wages and prices are locked-down by tradition and everyone knows their relative place. My preference is communism, but I would even prefer pure amorphous capitalism without discrimination above that. You don't like change. The only way to prevent change is to deny freedom of opportunity. You want to pretend we have freedom but not have it. It's a pretty common desire.

I have mixed feelings. I do believe that some war is for profit...which is a sin, when it is instigated, playing one against another. Unfortunately, I feel wars, are being used in setting up for the one world order. Yet I feel we should protect this country, and we're not. I support our troops individually.

I am not well knowledged on the subject, but what I can see, I don't like. The enemy within has taken over this great nation without firing a shot...just as Khruschev said. But, we'll fight back...and win....it may take time, but we'll win.

If any nation were most guilty of trying to create a one world order, it's the US. At one time it was Great Britain, but they pretty much gave up on that by the 60's, and were out of that picture by the 90's.

I think one of our problems in the US is that to some large secret degree the defense industry via the pentagon and individual lobbying of reps runs this country. Unlike presidents, their term never ends. They've had a long time to guarantee their position in the infrastructure.

Every president publicly says we will protect 'our interests', by which they always mean 'our access to other nation's resources'.

More so though, it means we will protect the interests of folks like GE, Microsoft, or whomever makes the most money here or funds candidates the most.

As I was just mentioning to cp, history has always been a history of commerce. There's no secret enemy. Follow the largest financial interests, and the picture is usually clear.

Old communist nations, or the new China, are basically just more large financial interests. They were competitors to western financial entities. Now the trend is financial entities with no allegiance to any nation, but controlling all nations as they can exert power in their interests.

No one in power today gives a hoot about ideology. They see the world as labor, consumers, resources, and expenses, which they run if possible. It's pretty simple really.

I believe in sovereign nations, trading amongst themselves. I think problems start when you trade around the world, cross borders. I feel smaller townships are the best, taking care of each township by their own people.

You say we're making money in bringing in the underclass...who is making money? You? Me? I don't think so.

I don't know what the answers are except, people should stay in their own borders, fix their own problems, but that is impossible in today's world. People should have listened heeded God's Word.

Yes, I do believe in capitalism, or better said, free enterprise...it can work, when working with Godly people.

To me, capitalism in the wrong hands, and communism are almost the same. Someone in higher places, are living high on the hog, while the rest are enslaved. There is dignity in labor. Labor and management need each other.

I don't believe we need an influx of illegals or foreign peoples to make this system work, because all it does is confuse things.

I believed what Australia did years ago was good, kept out foreign peoples, only allowed those people in of like kind, had skills...and didn't go on the dole. I know a young Aussie girl, that said ever since they started letting in foreigners of not like kind, they're having problems. I guess the liberals infiltrated through intermarriage into Australia, and their immigration policy....big mistake.

I want a simple, peaceful life...now we have to fight for it.

Power is the word of the game, and day. Yes, it's pretty simple.

at least it's a way of uniting everyone for a change...

> Yes, I do believe in capitalism, or better said, free enterprise...it
> can work, when working with Godly people.


Free enterprise, a noble idea and I would love to see it. But, it has never existed except as a noble sounding phrase. Today, the closest you will come to seeing free enterprise in action is on the black market. But even that is dominated by criminal organizations and cartels with their own agendas. So, again, I say free enterprise has never really existed.

"You say we're making money in bringing in the underclass...who is making money? You? Me? I don't think so. "
Anyone making more than minimum wage is benefitting from immigrants, whether those immigrants are working or not. Ive worked out the math on that. Of course anyone making more than us is likewise indirectly exploiting us as well.

"To me, capitalism in the wrong hands, and communism are almost the same. Someone in higher places, are living high on the hog, while the rest are enslaved."
I can't imagine how they could be similar. If it's true communism, no one is living above another.
How can capitalism be in the wrong hands? The basis of capitalism is rising above others at their expense. There is no other form of capitalism. Are you saying you want limits on capitalism? That after a person makes more than a million dollars/yr they should stop trying to rise above others? That is what are exponentially increasing taxes were meant to accomplish, especially because a 30% tax would make a person on minimum wage starve to death, yet a 70% tax on a person making $3M/yr has little consequence. As you probably know though, the rich manage to avoid taxes.

"I don't believe we need an influx of illegals or foreign peoples to make this system work, because all it does is confuse things."
This is actually easy to explain by an example most are familiar with. The borders shut is what you would call a 'closed system'. Open borders is an 'open system'. The board game Monopoly is a perfect example of what capitalism looks like as a closed system. Eventually the poor lose everything, and the top capitalist owns everything. In an open system, it's still always heading in that direction, but while the rich drain the poor, the poor become the middle class and drain the new poor. If we had shut the borders, someone like Rockefeller or Chase could have owned the whole nation by now. As is, immigrants have increased the size of the economy, our middle class profits off them as both labor and consumers, and Rockefeller and Chase profit even more from our profiting off of them, instead of having to bankrupt us.

Most nations have depended for centuries on exploiting poorer nations. Today it's simply more efficient to exploit a poor nation within your own borders instead, or rather it makes no difference, at least on an economic level. It's like GNP (Gross National Product) has been replaced with GMP (Gross MiddleClass Product), which we sell to our own nation instead of other nations now. The idea is still the same, those with more make money off of those with less.

I understand Cprasky. I guess I dream of what could be or the way I would like things....but in this world, as it is, won't happen. But, I think we should try to make things better for our future generations. I'll fight to the death for a good change...and Obama has not got it....he's a socialist/communist...an evil religion.

"...and Obama has not got it....he's a socialist/communist...an evil religion. "

and yet he's the closest we've come in decades to your idea of cutting down on immigration. Bush may have come up with a wall, but Obama is the first president ever to suggest that we cut down on internationalization of american businesses and fareign trade which doesn't benefit americans, and concentrate on strengthening american business instead.

I just noticed yesterday that even L.A. is going back to a relatively small town atmosphere in which people have resumed the practice of offering services, sale items, and rentals in public notices on telephone poles.

Obama is a member of the Muslim world, is a Muslim, he and they don't have our best interests in mind.....he wants to steal from us to pass our wealth around the world. He's a puppet for the one world elitists.

Genesis 3:15....

> Obama is a member of the Muslim world, is a Muslim,

Except he isn't. Liars go to hell, doesn't your Bible say that?

> Except he isn't. Liars go to hell, doesn't your Bible say that?

Actually, the Bible contains no prohibition against lying in general. The only prohibition against lying is to not bear false witness against another, a very specific sort of lie.

Obama is, and will always be a Muslim.

You are, and always will be, an ignorant racist liar.

Now you're living in a fantasy world. Obama is not a muslim, and even if he were, so what? Muslims, jews, and OT style Christians have pretty much identical beliefs.

He compromises with big business, but at least is so kind as to explain to the american public that america has come to be run by big business, and any new plans a president may have have to work around that.

Muslim extremists and one-world businesses are at war with each other. He can't be the puppet of both. Muslim extremists are violent for the exact same reasons you have, preventing being controlled by a one-world economic government. Why do you think they targeted the World Trade Center?

Please, at least think straight before making your paranoid accusations.

You might as well be accusing animal rights activists of killing our cattle.

Obama is trying to put us in a position to have trade negotiations with other nations without having to just dominate them through war. You may not us want trading with other nations at all, but it sure beats the failed Bush strategy of bullying everyone.

I put up with your religious ideology when the facts support it, but not when the facts run contrary to it.

If you continue on like this, you'll reach a point in your life where no news of the world will sway your beliefs, and people will find it useless to even talk with you, as many already have. I suppose as you get older that this would be easier on you than keeping up on things and evaluating them, but it's not current reality, as is often the case with senior citizens. You're heading towards a day where you'll be convinced of impending doom no matter what good news people may bring to your senior center. Sounds to me like a miserable way to go out, and it may be worth changing your philosophy while you still have your wits about you.

It doesn't? Wow.

My you look nice today.

Awright honey, you've had your fun!
Tell me what you think next year!

Kristal Rose, Obama is nothing more than a mouth piece for the one worlder elitists, and a Muslim. He is being used, as well as the minority ethnic. The only reason he is in office is because of election fraud, and the elitists wanted the minority ethnic vote.

Simply put, the have nots of the world want what the haves, have.

I am not paranoid, I'm not the one that is on drugs. Many of the government college educated people since the 1960' have been loaded down with junk food, taking drugs, couldn't think straight if they tried, they were/are easily influenced...they just don't know it.

The enemy within did a number on the drugged people, easy to manipulate and became..... 2Timothy 3:1-5.

What this country needs is a coming back to its Biblical roots, good standards, values, and let them be heard.

This gets funnier all the time. So you're telling me that the 'have nots' have the power to rig our elections?

You're telling me that after 9/11 some secret cabal felt they could get the vote and trust of the american public by running a muslim for president? Wow, those guys are devious.

I've been telling you for years what I would do if I were president, things like national wind/solar power or putting an end to smoking, and this guy comes along and offers as much.

I must be on Twinkies, because it seems like we have the first president since Carter operating in the public interest.

Perhaps you should find some OT style commune to retire to. I'm sure such folks are mostly left alone like a history exhibit unless they start making bombs or building a militia.

BTW, the have nots wanting what the haves have is what you could call capitalism. You don't seem to be too big on the communist alternative. You have a choice, liberty or lock-down. You can't have it both ways at once. You seem to want a world where only whites may seek opportunity, while at the same time blaming cultures for not taking care of themselves. You are full of impossible ideals for society and conspiracy theories that have neither motive nor plausable means behind them, then spend your life battling for these absurdities. You have right to your values, some of which I agree with, which I agree are not being met, but your picture of the world is off kilter, like a person sure there's a conspiracy against forests, unaware that you live on the moon now.

Our planet is shaped by it's collective values. You can only stray so far before you are living on your own planet.