Moonlapse

The Federal Reserve has more in common with the Reichsbank in that it, or the Reserve Banks, doesn't carry 100% gold reserve for issued notes, as the Bank of England did, for the sake of elasticity. Depends how you interpret Abe's words. I interpret them as meaning that the purpose of government was to do for people that which they literally cannot do for themselves, not what they have failed to do for themselves or did but lost to misfortune. However, this still supports the Fed's role, IMO, but not most social programs. I'll agree that it wasn't an exact copy, but it was used as a model in the 19th century reforms and subsequently adapted.

Is that how Roosevelt WOULD have put it? Which one, Teddy or Franklin? Actually, as a capitalist, I prefer laying on my backside collecting dividends and clipping coupons. Sorry 'bout that. I'm referring to Franklin and his Economic Bill of Rights.

Just ask yourselves, do you want to live in a place where your life and all the challenges that accompany it are your own responsibility, or do you want a universal utopia at the cost of real freedom? If you eliminate hardship from life, whats the point? How does one build real self-esteem? If you take the prescribed path, you might suceed with a minimal ammount of challenge - but did you make your own way or did you just step in line and put your mind to sleep? Did you find your own meaning for your life or did you just take the one handed to you? Right to pursue happiness, not a right to happiness as Roosevelt would put it.

There's a little something called 'Code of Silence'.

Indeed. The biggest hinderance that I see is the game of political pull.. and this has a lot to do with big business. However, many of the biggest businesses originated from a standing start and succeeded under a person who had not inherited the wealth - Sam Walton, Bill Gates, etc. An exception that I would mention is the corruption of police when it comes to illegal drugs. They are incredibly valuable due to prohibition. I have a family member that witnessed this type of corruption first-hand as a policeman, so I tend to believe the commentary on the subject.

'Quick Edit' uses Javascript, which is executed by your browser. If you use IE, make sure you have all the Microsoft updates.

I believe that German was once considered to be one of the 'official' languages of the U.S, but would you please relate what these borrowings are? Reichsbank 1876 > Federal Reserve System 1913 Old Age and Invalidity Insurance Law 1889 > Social Security Act 1935 Survivors' pensions for widows 1911 > Mother's Aid (the foundation of modern U.S. 'welfare') 1935 Centralized compulsory schooling ~1871 > Centralized compulsory schooling 1918 Edit: The U.S. Army was reformed in the late 19th century and included principles established by the Prussians. These are standouts, there may be more but I haven't delved for them. At the time, Prussia was looked to for innovative solutions for 'utopian' social management. Despite any justification for this bureaucracy, its roots are more uncomfortable than most realize. It certainly was not envisioned by our founders. In fact, they warned against it.

Much of our current system was borrowed from the Deutsches Reich.

There is quite a lot of stuff orbiting in the Kuiper Belt.

Energy... are you referring to Enron? Enron was never really privatized. They recieved upwards of 600 million dollars in corporate welfare. The free market didn't create Enron. Here's something to chew on, the Clinton campaign recieved $100,000 from Enron in 1996. Guess who came to their assistance when the Dabhol project in India met resistance... The point is, when you hear the word privatization... it usually doesn't mean privatization. It means government-backed monopoly. Keep this in mind when you consider energy and telecom. Now, consider the current competition between Intel and Qualcomm to establish widespread wireless broadband coverage. Are they massively funded by taxpayer money? Regardless of who comes out on top, consumers benefit from their work.

The Underground History of American Education I know that you are alread aware of this, but I thought I'd post it here as well since I find it relevant.

Ahahaaaa!

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

Firefox. Aside from the aforementioned aspects, I love useful plugins.

http://www.businessplanarchive.org/ An excellent use of history! BTW, I still hate grass. I love the rain, but the weeds are just going crazy!

What is happening? The same thing that has happened for thousands of years.

I work with a man from the Philippines. He had lived in a rural area where constant hard work was necessary just to make a living, and being able to 'save up money' wasn't even a concept. His family moved to the U.S. on credit when he was highschool age. He has no college education and he's not fully literate, but he owns a nice home, rents out another home, invests money, owns several expensive vehicles, and run his own small business at night while working at the place I do during the day. This is the return he is able to get for working as hard as he did just to get by in a rural village. He doesn't understand the people here who complain about our economic system. In fact, the biggest obstacle for his small business is finding people who can consistently show up to work and follow very simple instuctions, despite the fact that he pays higher than average wages with a monthly percentage of total revenue on top of that.

I wouldn't call it a conspiracy, per se. Many people played a part in it, not just the ultra-rich. They believed in a popular vision of utopia where people are more like perfectly cooperative ants or bees rather than individual humans seeking their own meanings in life. The intent, for the most part, was not malicious in any way - it was an attempt to guide society towards a particular ideology. The goal is not to keep people completely illiterate, since some basic level of literacy is required to function in society. In fact, we even have "Advanced Placement" and "Gifted and Talented" labels for those who are able to thrive in the managed heirarchy of a school environment. According to the writings of many of these activists, the scenario to be avoided is one where factory workers and coal miners become people who love literature and supposedly get spoiled by being intellectually stimulated. It supposedly creates unrealistic expectations from their lives. Sort of off topic here, if you read any of Robert Cialdini's stuff on influence, you'll be amazed at how easily most people can be unknowingly manipulated by advertisements, salesmen, and especially by 'authority'. I don't have any thesis or real evidence, but I feel that much of this can be contributed to school environment - in the sense that these natural tendencies to be infuenced are fostered instead of dispelled with a truly intellectual education. I think that if you dig a litle deeper into this weight of capitalism on your consciousness, it will relate much more to the contradictory non-freedoms that have now been packaged with it.

Another thought... do you have a crawl space beneath the house? Is there a furnace down there?

Even better.

Do you have a dog or know someone with a dog? You might use its superior olfaction to your advantage...

Personally, I love it when I'm pushed to back up what I believe. Well, what's your particular definition of Capitalism? I can't agree or disagree. If I base that statement on my own definition, I disagree because I believe that a truly free-market economy is a manifestation of individual liberties. Based on my own definition, which I believe is the original meaning, Capitalism has to do with economics and is separate from politics. Capitalism as a system of government is a perversion of the original idea. No one is obligated to give anyone a job. In a free market, you find a job you want or you create work for yourself. There are actually PLENTY of jobs, but things like complacency and the fact that our nationalized school system is THE primary gateway to any decent job creates undesirable conditions, IMO. You speak of illiteracy and 'hypnotic' allure of consumerism and their consequences... if you like I can show you a LOT of stuff that shows that this was the indended effect of our public school system, a system focused primarily on behavioural adjustment and not rigorous intellectual education, implemented in the late 19th/early 20th century. This was partly successful due to major funding from Rockefeller and Carnegie. That is not Capitalism, that is not a separation of economy and state, that is not democracy. "In our dreams...people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present educational conventions [intellectual and character education] fade from our minds, and unhampered by tradition we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or men of science. We have not to raise up from among them authors, educators, poets or men of letters. We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians, nor lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen, of whom we have ample supply. The task we set before ourselves is very simple...we will organize children...and teach them to do in a perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way." - Rockefeller Education Board, 1906

Pick up an 'idiots guide to investing' book, then talk to a few financial advisors, and start planning things now. Starting now instead of when you're comming up on 30 (like me, doh!) will put you far ahead of the game. It WILL come in handy when you want to further your education, make a down payment on your own house, take a European vacation, whatever...

Despite the fact that they are required for quick, semi-accurate communication of generalised systems of belief, I hate 'isms'. The intent for almost every political idea summed up with an 'ism' is arguably positive. However, good intentions have little to do with the methods. All these labels aside, I'm against any system that uses government as a means to social/economic ends, whether its under a newspeak label of Capitalism or Communism. My aversion to the many interpretations of Communism is the prevalent theme of government intervention. On this premise, i'd say that the U.S. government has its 'Communist' aspects, regardless of the fact that we have a somewhat free-market economy. To me, Capitalism isn't rule by corporations, that's not even possible without the intervention and support of a government. To me, its allowing people to work and produce and have businesses and compete however they chose, under a goverment designed only to prevent the violation of rights (how rights are defined and what is covered is a whole other issue). If a person wants to run his family and business according to 'Communist' principles, so be it. If he wants to do so on other principles, so be it. Just don't use the goverment as a way to enact these priciples in order to shape society/economy/etc as you see fit. This is what has happened to the U.S. - and not democratically. Politicians can and will be bought. We may democratically elect a representative, but political favors and money inside the goverment have far more potential than democratic will. The concept of laissez faire, in my mind, goes both ways. Neither should have control over the other. American politicians really have very little accountability, considering their influence.

I'll have to review some stuff, but I recall that the Natufians? buried ancestors in the plaster floors of houses and decorated skulls with plaster...