This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
America's Lost Decade: Typical Household Wealth Has Plunged 36% Since 2003
Does it feel like you're poorer? There is a simple reason why - you are! According to a new study by the Russell Sage Foundation, the inflation-adjusted net worth for the typical household was $87,992 in 2003. Ten years later, it was only $56,335, or a 36% decline... Welcome to America's Lost Decade.
Simply put, the NY Times notes, it’s not merely an issue of the rich getting richer. The typical American household has been getting poorer, too.
The reasons for these declines are complex and controversial, but one point seems clear: When only a few people are winning and more than half the population is losing, surely something is amiss.
As Russell Sage Foundation concludes, through at least 2013, there are very few signs of significant recovery from the loss of wealth experienced by American families during the Great Recession. Declines in net worth from 2007 to 2009 were large, and the declines continued through 2013. These wealth losses, however, were not distributed equally. While large absolute amounts of wealth were destroyed at the top of the wealth distribution, households at the bottom of the wealth distribution lost the largest share of their total wealth. As a result, wealth inequality increased significantly from 2003 through 2013; by some metrics inequality roughly doubled.
The American economy has experienced rising income and wealth inequality for several decades, and there is little evidence that these trends are likely to reverse in the near-term.
It is possible that the very slow recovery from the Great Recession will continue to generate increased wealth inequality in the coming years as those hardest hit may still be drawing down the assets they have left to cover current consumption.
The inequality-battler-in-chief remains unaware of the greatest irony of this surging rich-getting-richer as poor-get-poorer society:
Inequality in the U.S. today is near its historical highs, largely because the Federal Reserve’s policies have succeeded in achieving their aim: namely, higher asset prices (especially the prices of stocks, bonds and high-end real estate), which are generally owned by taxpayers in the upper-income brackets. The Fed is doing all the work, because the President’s policies are growth-suppressive. In the absence of the Fed’s moneyprinting and ZIRP, the economy would either be softer or actually in a new recession.
The greatest irony is that the President is railing against inequality as one of the most important problems of the day, despite the fact that his policies are squeezing the middle class and causing the Fed – with the President’s encouragement – to engage in the radical monetary policy, which is exacerbating inequality. This simple truth cannot be repeated often enough.
»
- 40891 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
LOL, thanks for that, truly.
That gbp/jpy trade/ The 4 hour chart usd/jpy looks limp/
What species has an innate moral code? Humans are deluded by their craving for a leader to trust. Few understand that if they can't trust their own judgement, why should they trust another of the same species. Honesty is a figment of their mis-apprehension of reality.
No organic species has an innate moral code, humans included. And arguably, an innate moral code can't be moral at all, because innate means "no choice involved".
Of the species on earth, only humans can have an actual moral code, because such a code requires analytical consciousness.
I must admit I have a difficult time understanding this "craving for a leader to trust" issue you mention. On the one hand, it sure looks that way. On the other hand, I have never experienced any desire to have a leader, or any inclination to trust power over me to anyone but me. So how that phenomenon occurs, then becomes dominant... is something I cannot experience. Maybe this is implicit consequence of the fundamental divergence and dichotomy of mankind into "dishonest, amoral predators" versus "honest, moral producers".
I don't think the people you describe care about honesty at all. Nonetheless, honesty is possible for humans. Sadly, very few humans value honesty with self over... whatever benefits they imagine they receive by pretending to agree with others (and thereby destroying their own brains).
Some of what is identified as moral in humans may be innate. Such as, evidence found of Neanderthals and early humans caring for seriously injured tribe or family members. In wolves, some wolves trust an alpha wolf to lead them. Honesty, too, might be innate for human survival and/or benefit, because to always be honest allows other to trust you. The flaw is that localized honesty and its resultant trust is mistakenly projected on to leaders with more power capabilities. How many other moral values are not choices by humans, but rather innate programming which they deceive themselves is from their own thinking?
The craving for a king is described three thousand years ago in Samuel 8, where the Israelites ask Samuel and God to give them a king. But in spite of Samuel's and God's advice against it, they demand a king. Is not following a cult leader, due to a craving for leadership? It's not whether honestann or Reaper have desires or inclinations to trust others with power over us, but whether a majority of others do.
Well, this whole conversation is difficult because it contains both "innate" and "moral". Technically (and really), those two are inherently and fundamentally incompatible, because "moral" requires volition (conscious choice), while "innate" requires "inherent (no choice). So let's try to untangle this.
One source of confusion is for us who have volitional, analytical consciousness to look at actions of other species or early humans, and say "this activity is moral" and "that activity is immoral". We can do that, but we are doing this from our perspective, not from the perspective of the creatures who take the actions we observe and discuss.
For example, we can look at scorpions or rattlesnakes or wolves attacking and killing humans and say "that action is immoral", but that just means "that action would be immoral if we took that action". And we can certainly say that the destruction done to the human by the predator was a "negative value".
But we can't say the creatures (or their actions) are immoral, because the scorpions or rattlesnakes or wolves are just doing what they do, without the ability to perform the kind of analytical processes required to comprehend "moral" or consider other "choices".
So... we can't coherently discuss this topic unless we're careful to qualify what we mean.
The limits of animal behavior are difficult to figure. However, a number of potentially vicious wild animals have been raised since birth by humans, and their behavior certainly is less vicious. This seems to include "higher species" like wolves and lions and tigers, but not scorpions, snakes, spiders, etc. At any rate, these "higher species" seem to learn and habituate a considerable amount of behavior from their surroundings during their first years, though at least some inherent species-specific behavior remains, or appears from time to time.
We must be very careful when we observe and analyze these cases! Without a doubt these "much more tame and less destructive" creatures behave in what we (as outside observers) would call "more moral behavior" [than the same species in the wild]. But this doesn't mean these creates are moral. What this means is... they habituate behavior they experience in their youth.
So the actions may look moral to us as observers, but these creatures do not perform the kind of analysis and choices required for us to classify its mental processes as moral. If we were to do so, we would also have to say that "rocks are moral" and "coffee cups are moral" and so forth, since they don't hurt anyone! Clearly that's just nuts!
-----
So, now we can see that all sorts of behavior we observe in "lower species" and "early mankind" may certainly be benevolent and may certainly "appear moral", but they are actually not in the realm of moral, because they are not chosen, and not identified by analytical processes. So I totally agree with you that a great many species (and a great many early cultures in the history of mankind) have behaved in benevolent and seemingly "moral" ways. And we now can certainly get analytical and identify the reasons why this seemingly moral behavior was beneficial to the species or culture.
Plus, we both know how this goes! If one group or family of species A acts one way, and another group or family of species A acts another way, and one of those behaviors is more successful in terms of survival and reproduction and healthiness... that group or family will become dominant, and may eventually all but replace alternatives, and become the behavior of that species (either via genetics or learned behavior).
The evolutionary value of honesty with self is obvious. If you behave in ways that correspond with [your best honest assessment of] the nature of reality, you have a better chance to survive and prosper than your fellow creature who takes actions based upon arbitrary whim or dishonest mental processes. Unfortunately, in societies, honesty can also lead to [very] negative feedback... when you contradict the orders or dictates of the alpha-male or your parents.
I have to guess that any "desire for a leader" must come from the early experiences that humans have with parents, who more-or-less act as their leader during their early years, and thereby tends to habituate a mindset in which young humans learn to look for leaders to provide guidance.
Of course, it is easy to see how this grows in modern times! After 5 years with parents acting as "leaders", kids get thrown into concentration camps called "school" where every teacher is a leader they must obey of suffer punishment, where they are taught to honor and praise and obey and "pledge allegiance" to endless leaders with endless titles and endless authority... and are then informed that every human being on the freaking planet has their own leaders too.
After 18 to 24 years of living in a "leader dominated" environment... what kind of mindset would we imagine has been habituated by most humans? Yup... so habituated that one might almost call it [close to] hardwired. Not quite, but close.
In my personal case, I know exactly what happened to interrupt this process. I always wanted to understand the universe I live in, since at least age 2 and maybe before. By age 4 I had already noticed that different adults give me radically different answers to the same question. Even a 4 year old cannot fail to understand that you can't trust answers from adults... when adults regularly give you different answers! At most, one might be correct. Which one? Who knows? And is even one of the answers correct? Who knows?
On top of this, I had also learned that earth contains umpteen religions that believe in umpteen gods... where all but one must be wrong at best. I had also learned that earth contains umpteen countries, and that what people considered normal and obvious in food, dress, religion, beliefs, practices and behavior were very different. Yet, almost everyone in each of those countries believed and behaved pretty much like everyone else in that country. This is all I needed to know to realize how humans work --- they simply accept and absorb whatever tastes, habits, beliefs, practices and behaviors are common where they live.
ALL this information is available to every 4 [to 6] year old. Yet... it seemed that I was the only kid who drew the absolutely obvious and unavoidable conclusion --- that I could not learn from adults... or from any "authorities". My first decision was, the entire notion of "god" was completely absurd and unjustified and unsubstantiated. And so I decided I did not believe in god. At that time, I had never heard anyone even suggest such a possibility, so I figured I might be the only human on earth who didn't believe in god. Well, obviously that wasn't true, but... close enough.
So I asked myself, how can I learn about the universe I live in when I cannot trust what anyone says? The only answer I could figure out was, "my own first-hand observations, and my own careful thought, reflection, inferences (guesses), and being eternally on the lookout for any new observation that contradicted my provisional inferences (guesses). In other words, honesty with self. Fortunately for me, I was wise enough to distinguish "honesty with self" from "honesty with others". I knew "dishonesty with self" would destroy my brain, and end my ability to understand reality, but I also knew I could not be fully honest with others (especially "leaders" and "authorities" like parents and teachers) because they'd beat the crap outta me. Also fortunately, I discovered early that much trouble can be avoided by just keeping my mouth shut, and letting them believe I was just as much a sucker as every other kid.
I know that was the single most important and fundamental point in my life... at age 4. When I mentioned this story to people from time to time, they always ask me to imagine how I would be different if I had not made those observations and made my decision. From a perfectly logical point of view, I think I should shudder at the thought that my entire life would be totally different if not for that observation and decision. But I don't, because somehow, I simply cannot imagine NOT being aware of those simple facts that every 4~6 year old knows, and I simply cannot imagine myself allowing myself to become a clueless moron [just to get praise or better treatment from parents, teachers, etc].
So the eternal mystery to me isn't "why didn't I give in?". The eternal mystery to me is "why does virtually everyone else give in?". I just don't know. Do 4~6 year old kids really value the occasional praise and pat on the head for praising the status quo more than they value their own brains? Seriously? Maybe so. What I cannot believe is... they never faced this question. The facts upon which my observations and decisions were made are known to every 4~6 year old kid. So... how could they not go through the same thought process? How could they not realize they had to trust their own observations and thought?
I will admit, the prospect of figuring out everything about everything from first-hand observation and thought seemed completely overwhelming at the time. I knew I could never figure out everything about everything myself... who was I kidding! But still, I only had two choices... be completely stupid and wrong about almost everything (which I knew from those examples was the guaranteed result of accepting whatever "authorities" say), or to learn as much as I could about as much as I could, and settle for that. As it turned out, I wildly underestimated how much a single individual can learn about the fundamental nature of reality "by themselves". Of course, that doesn't mean I've never read any books at all, but it does mean that I never believed anything in any of them. At best they provided hints about what might be the best places to perform my first-hand observations, and potentially helpful experiments to run, and ideas to attempt to refute (or not).
Maybe the bottom line is this. Very few humans invest the time and effort required to come to understand anything at all. And even fewer discover the amazing value and intellectual efficiency that follows from identifying and exploring fundamentals, and drilling down to even deeper fundamentals, and so forth until the entirety of consciousness is coherent and sensible (albeit still incomplete).
The hour I spent with my Mother, on my porch reminded me of you "HonestAnn"
The simplicity of your feelings, gives me solace.
I had a dream last night/ My GrandMother visited me. (I'm Crazy)
Was she 106 year old woman sitting on her front porch in Nebraska?
I know what I saw Bitchez
That's the right word. That's what I feel. Solace.
There is an amazing aspect to the overwhelming enormity of the universe and the overwhelming enormity of variety in the universe. The key is in my last paragraph above. The key is to identify and investigate fundamentals, recursively, from top to bottom.
After a couple decades of honest, intensive observation and thought, "the overwhelming enormity of everything starts to fit together and make sense". As years pass, even more so.
The feeling this ever-growing coherence generates is indeed simplicity and "solace".
I think the key is to realise that the overwhelming enormity and variety of the universe is simply a hugely creative illusion. If you look closely at any part of this illusion you find that there is nothing actually there. Even the concept of yourself is an illusion.
Praps - I hear this very frequently from bright scientific minds that life is an illusion, a holograph etc. I believe this stems from the difficulty to seperate our concious minds toward advancement when so mich of it is being utillized for biomechanical signaling in organs.
A theory - It may be that we have some sort of similacrum somewhere else - one that is positively charged here and one negatively charged there like a polaroid picture. Which one would be real if one looked like a very tiny ball of energy in that other place? Would both be concious simultaneously or is one or the other concious at one time?
That is a belief as it cannot be proven and if I told you how I came to that belief I would be deemed nuts. But that belief or theory must be quantified. The how and why is part of the adventure of the learning, sharing and improvement process which Honestann is alluding to in statting at the top of the pyramid and recursively working backwards. Many even in science, just wish to state that the information is near limitless so it is without point. I disagree with them on this too, I believe our species needs more advanced methods of comparison, of correlations and causations to simplify the discovery process and categorize it into naming conventions.
Presuppose there are higher evolved beings in energy form. Even if one biomechanical evolving creature on earth came up with one tiny new idea or process it would be tremendously valuable to the whole universal collective. As Honestann observed, the higher conciousness the more predisposed in benevolence species toward it's own. But I do not believe predation ends in other places besides earth. It would be a matter of scale of what can be learned which would be a question of where radioactive deviation and mutation ends. Learning could continue indefinately if it doesn't but I think there is a recreation point back to a single, concentrated and very small dot of energy which stores information.
So I disagree with this "life is an illusion crowd" which has been prevalent in science for at least 100 years. But I did not downvote you because without substantiated proof I have no right to. I think we need better proper definitions for even my theories about some of this first!
So, the universe is not enormous? Okay, fine. Compared to the universe (as a standard of measure), the universe is one unit in size. Not so big, eh? While this characterization is true, it is also a bit of a word game or mind game.
The only illusions are mistaken interpretations. Each atom is exactly what it is, and behaves entirely consistent with its nature. Ditto for molecules. Ditto for electromagnetic radiation, And so forth. Therefore, metaphysically speaking, illusions do not exist.
So what are illusions? Essentially, they arise due to the mistaken premise that knowledge == omniscience, with the assumption that nothing short of omniscience can be considered knowledge. Let me give an example.
Let's say you "know" the human vision system (eyes, nerves leading from eyes to brain, that part of the brain that processes vision, and the processes that take place in these components) responds to light. Fairly common knowledge, I'd say.
But then, some night in a completely "dark" room, in a dense dark forest, deep in a cave, on a pitch black cloudy night... your eyes itch, and so you rub your eyes vigorously to eliminate the itch. Wow! You see "lighting flashes". Obviously there can't be lightning inside a room, inside a cave, inside a forest, on a pitch black cloudy moonless night!!!
You see "an illusion"!
No, you don't. Not metaphysically, anyway. What you experience is the entire context of reality. In other words, rubbing pressure on your eyes can and does generate electrical impulses in the ocular nervous system, which find their way to the brain via normal processes, and present themselves in the brain as something like "lightning".
But you're correct, there is an illusion involved! What is the nature of the illusion? The answer is fairly obvious in this case. You assumed the human vision system only responds to light entering the eyeball lenses. And since you assume "knowledge == omniscience", you come to the obvious conclusion --- reality is an illusion.
That is a mistake. What is an illusion is, your premise that "knowledge == omniscience".
You are wrong to demand that our physical bodies and brains can and should, by some utterly amazing mechanism, detect the entirety of phenomenon that exist in reality, detect the entirety of the range of those phenomenon [in a completely linear fashion], and that your mental process can automatically and faithfully distinguish every aspect of reality from every other aspect of reality.
This is an extraordinarily common fallacy!
This is also a completely wrong premise!
-----
Let me say this another way, from a reverse angle so to speak. If we assume for one moment that the appropriate meaning of "knowledge" is actually "omniscience", I must say that I only know 3 things. Three. Total. After a lifetime of intensive observation and thought. I'll tell you the first two, because they take almost zero explanation.
#1: I know the universe exists. This just means I know something exists. This does not assume I know anything about the nature of anything, just that something with some nature exists.
#2: I know the universe is dynamic. This just means I know the universe is not 100% static (unchanging) in every respect. Some change happens. How much and what nature, I cannot yet say with absolute certainty.
So you see what happens? If I accepted the common premise that "knowledge == omniscience", I would have to agree with you. I would have to say that "everything is illusion". Or at least admit that I have no way to distinguish "illusion" from "real". Which means, I'd be just like you and so many others in this regard.
-----
But you see, I have no "illusion" (pun) that my consciousness should be, or even can be, omniscient. In fact, the fact that I must observe and think and struggle and struggle and struggle intellectually for years to figure things out makes very clear the reasonable, utilitarian meaning for "knowledge" must not be "omniscient". Not unless I'm just looking for an excuse to "give up" instead of struggle to comprehend this universe.
Seriously. Doesn't it seem obvious that a single brain cannot possibly have complete and omniscient understanding of everything in the universe, every process that exists in the universe, every variation, every last bit of the nature of everything? I think this is rather obvious. And so, I have a different premise for how consciousness must work.
The simplest way to identify this premise is the concept of "provisional inference".
Except for those 3 items of knowledge that I cannot be mistaken about, the rest of my content of consciousness is a set of "provisional inferences". Whenever I observe anything... anything at all... I must actively attempt to be aware of how that observation tends to strengthen/support or weaken/refute every provisional inference I have. This can be quite a bit of work sometimes, though in everyday life, what I experience is consistent with all my provisional inferences.
-----
When people say things like "even self is an illusion", they are only correct if my meaning for "myself" is utterly and completely disconnected from, and not in any way influenced by anything else in the universe. But that's not my meaning, and so my "provisional inference" about that mental-unit that corresponds with the term "myself" is not an illusion.
And in fact, like I observed above, I already understand that reality contains no illusions, only unverified assumptions about reality in conscious brains suffer illusions. And the more I observe and cross-correlate reality, the more inviolate this premise is. And really, this is more than just a premise, this is just the realization that "everything is what it is... period". How can a literal [and accurately formulated] tautology be self contradictory?
-----
The fact is, we can look at every illusion and figure out our mistake. I'm quite sure you understand the mistake involved in the "illusion of water" viewed at a grazing angle on the floor of a hot desert. You understand what's going on, right? And you understand the illusion of lightning bolts when you rub your eyes. And so forth. You don't just know they exist, you actually understand why they exist. Sure, humans haven't identified every illusion, and they haven't unraveled the nature of every illusion yet either. But that doesn't mean "reality is illusion" and "we know nothing, because all is illusion".
I hope this helps. If you don't require yourself to automatically, instantly, effortlessly acquire complete and total understanding of everything about everything at every moment in your life, you'll find we can understand reality, and we can even identify and understand those simple, natural, unavoidable-but-temporary mental mistakes that are "illusions".
Ann, you speak with such eloquence. It's a pleasure to have your thoughts on Z/H.
"On the other hand, I have never experienced any desire to have a leader, or any inclination to trust power over me to anyone but me."
Even as a kid? I'm not nitpicking here; the dependence on parents while growing up largely affects attitudes toward authority in adult life.
Humans are tribal animals; back when we were evolving, an individually-acting human was soon to be a dead human. It's not something that's thought through, it's an instinctual thing to follow the leader (or be the leader).
Actually, I just happened to answer that question at length just below. I describe the exact events that happened at age 4 to make me the wacko I am today. I am always curious to learn why others did not see what I saw (I think everyone must), and make the same decision that I made (the big question in my mind).
Use your gift Judicially honestann. I was about 4 years old, when I started to see things.
Honestann - Agree where your thoughts are leading you. I came to the same conclusion a few years back that man operates in the cycle of the producer and the cycle of the predator.
Producers with excess wealth attract predators. I view this outside my window with birds as well with Cardinals and Blue Jays.
Man isn't finished because of our tools that reflect our evolutionary progress can destroy large portion of itself.
We're just near the end of our evolution and the hurdles are big. Doesn't mean potential 1/3 dying off is going to be a picnic or I am obtuse about it. However, in general I am an optomist about the conclusion of our species. Even after we transform at will to energy we will face new evolutionary hurdles. From what I understand, the cycle is eternal.
Keep up that singularity work ;^}
If you consider morality as being cultural behaviors that promote the survival of the particular group in they arise, it is easy to see how they are diverse, innate, and antagonistic towards other groups and their morality.
If your morals promote your groups general survival, there will be a great deal of emotion involved in them. Emotion to motivate and to manipulate.
There is.
Allegedly honest Ann, it's my view that the essence of the human species is insanity. Once a very very mortal species can contemplate eternity, it's over.
I'm not only contemplating eternity, I'm implementing eternity. Literally. Not on my own, but we are few. Then we'll be immortal. Literally.
I often find myself judging others, because they aren't able to meet my expectations.
As I age, I realize I'm looking in the wrong places. Use your gift to all it's potential honestann.
It takes one to know one/
The key is to ignore humans. They don't matter. And they'll all be gone fairly soon anyway. Humans were a key step along the way, but ultimately that's all. The rest of the universe is ours to enjoy, and engineer into whatever we wish.
Why are you here, if you ignore humans? I'm here, because some here think. You may not crave a leader, but you desire, possibly crave, to be heard. Is that innate or by thoughtful choice in you?
Actually, no. If I craved to be heard, I'd do something public. I prefer solitude.
However, your message does contain one hint about my motives. Unlike most places, a few people who visit ZH do appear to attempt to think honestly. My motivation for posting messages is to share a few key ideas for those who might benefit from them.
Another low probability motive is to perhaps someday encounter someone with the skills and desire to help our collaboration finish our breakthrough technology. The technology that solves all these problems... albeit only for the few of us involved.
Also, I learned very early to not suffer negative emotions when other humans criticize me. You know, the old "sticks and stones will break my bones, but words cannot hurt me" wisdom from elementary school (that somehow doesn't work for 99.999%). So really, my advice is mostly to not worry about what humans say, meaning, don't let them get you down, don't let them make you feel crappy.
What I do crave is... advancement. That's what I work on 95% of my waking hours. And not just my own advancement, any advancement, by anyone, anywhere. I do enjoy seeing great accomplishments, even in fields I don't much care about personally. That's what I crave. And if anything I say helps someone over a conceptual obstacle and helps them accomplish something, that is indeed satisfying.
Advancement is the natural evolving of mankind to a higher level. I choose to eat well, play hard, live well, and do what others struggle to obtain by first getting rich. The truth I learned is that you owe them nothing. The criticism I heard in my life was I was not doing what others do or are supposed to do. If I'd care what they think, I would have given them power over me.
What technology do you want to break through in? While seeking, eat, drink, play and live all other parts of your life joyfully. You owe them only what they provide for you.
I think I agree, except maybe around the edges. I don't give a damn about the vast majority of clueless sheeple-chimps, and hope no honest, active, creative, productive individual does. However, I really do enjoy seeing great accomplishments and advances, because that's what I personally value.
I described the collaborative project I'm working on in another message that I posted earlier today, so I'll let you hunt that down rather than repeat here. The short answer is "smarter than human inorganic consciousness". It already worked, and was smarter than humans, but it was too slow to be practical for anything. So our current endeavor is to make it faster than human too.
BTW, I didn't create the technology, I joined the developer in a collaboration he formed to help him finish. At this point I undertand [smarter than] human consciousness, and the technology to implement with inorganic components.
I don't owe anyone anything... except what they owe me, which is to "leave me alone". That doesn't mean I don't value collaboration with other smart, creative, talented people on specific endeavors. But that's not because we owe each other anything, that's because we all benefit from our collaboration.
Honestann - From my understanding eternity is all relative. The ego/persona cannot survive the transition but it is irrelevant. Besides, I ca. be a dickhead sometimes who wants to eternally have the exact same experience? Email me sometime to chat about this jrines@ragingdebate.com if you like.
You are correct, the numbers of those conducting experiments are few. Remember, man is just replicating what already exists in nature. Try not to worry so much and enjoy the ride! Charge that abyss. I have my own little book of "there and back again". It's kind of a cosmic gag reel.
If science knows we were seeded by asteroids containing the bacterial code, seed of life the only other question to me is how far or behind in evolution our species is and as mentioned it is all relative.
If you haven't been reading my messages for a long time here in ZH, you might not realize what I mean. I'm working with a small group to re-implement smarter than human inorganic consciousness (which we call ICE). The original developer already made his proof-of-principle prototype work years ago, but it was much too slow to be useful. And so, we are re-implementing with new hardware, new software, and some spiffy new hardware and techniques that let the slowest processes (the real-time vision system) run vastly faster than the (pure software) prototype.
Once we have smarter and faster than human ICE, we have figured out how any one of us can "become 100% inorganic" without losing our personal identity. Why and how this is fully practical is too involved for this short message. But the point is, once any of us is 100% inorganic, we can make any number of copies, any number of backups, and as time passes, any worn or broken parts can be replaced because inorganic beings are fully modular (unlike organic beings, which are rather holistic, interconnected, and physically degrade (age) as they become wiser and more capable).
So when I say we can achieve eternity, I mean that literally. Once we leave earth, and spread throughout the galaxy, nothing can stop any of us from existing forever... except an individual decision to cease to exist, followed by the necessary actions to make that happen.
I know it seems strange to think you can become 100% inorganic, and yet still be you. It took me a while to get used to this fact, though the fact wasn't that difficult to explain to me, and not difficult for me to understand. But now it not only makes sense, it feels right, and it feels completely natural. In fact, quite clearly, the ultimate role of organic systems in the universe is to bootstrap up to the point where sentient beings can become inorganic and immortal. In other words, organic systems royally suck... but the immortal inorganic beings who engineer the entire universe to their liking apparently could never happen without the existence and evolution of organic life to the point of sentience, and to the point where those organic sentient beings could design and implement inorganic hosts for their conscoiusnesses and identities.
Don't worry, those of us working on this are already on a wild ride, and we're loving it (all except the massive quantities of work required, and our limited resources).
Maybe I should add just one more thought. ICE is our acronym for "inorganic conscious entity". The original project was simply to create inorganic consciousness. It was some time after knowing how to create ICE that the original developer realized it was in principle possible for a human to become inorganic. The original method was rather revolting. But later he realized much simpler, more convenient techniques were feasible, and now we know how to make the process fairly straightforward. Essentially, you get a personal ICE, which helps you merge and take control of your ICE consciousness (with its help).
Honestann - The process I envision may be different from your team. Mine is quantul tunneling through ionization, taking a portion of your DNA code in the form of electrons then reversing polarity from positive to negative to survive and grow in 4D. 4D being innerspace less than a planck length in diameter. I can see no way an individuals entire code could fit and even so still it would be a rebirthing process. Maybe your teams solution addresses preserving the sentience of the ego or personality.
Frankly as I said I do not need or want to be me eternally and nor would I want to. Boredom would make me not wish to exist and I believe existence tried this experiment with the result of seperation of light and darkness.
" As above so it is below to accomplish the miracle of unity." - Hermes
His pupil Pythagoras expanded on these ideas and invented triginometry.
I explained the process of how I view near eternal existence could be simply in two sentences but you have not. As Richard Freyman would say, if you can't explain it simply it means you truly do not have a solution.
That said, it doesn't mean your team isn't onto something it just may have great merit but all you have provided here is what could be a trademark and it sounds like a marketing pitch. And no, I won't go digging through threads to find it, that displays hubris on your part in my opinion to not link it or describe the process in two or three sentences.
No doubt you are bright but do shed light on what your talking about on THIS thread since you brought it up. Also, explain how the personality survives the transition into energy please not say it's too long to explain.
Last as 4D intersects at a point to all 3D why would I float around for a few billions years exploring when I can observe it all simultaneously from there? Answer? I wouldn't. What am I going to watch monkeys evolving like we did or supernovas? Yawn...
Yes, our approach is definitely different. Our approach is quite straightforward actually, at least in principle. I suppose I should have stated how the developer invented our technology in the first place. That would have made more clear how straightforward our approach is.
The original developer wasn't trying to develop inorganic consciousness. He is a life-long scientist, engineer, inventor type who simply wanted to operate his consciousness as effectively as possible in order to pursue his research and inventions more efficiently. He figured the way to do this was to understand the nature of [his] consciousness (especially when it worked well), so he could purposely and habitually operate his consciousness more effectively.
After a few years of studying [his] consciousness, he came to understand the nature of consciousness quite clearly. Probably his most fundamentally important discovery was... consciousness is simply a certain set of processes that interact with and operate upon content of consciousness organized in a certain way. One day he was explaining to someone how easy it is to understand human-level consciousness when he stopped mid-sentence... then said, "I can implement this".
What he realized in that "lightbulb over the head" moment was, that he could implement everything that [human-level] consciousness is... with conventional: sensors, computer, software, content, robotics. Given that he had developed computers (literally from scratch), plus lots of electronics, plus lots of sensor systems and robotics, plus compilers and other system software... he already knew how to implement these processes.
At the gross level, all these subsystems are completely conventional. Of course the processes are not conventional... even though the software techniques to implement those processes are entirely conventional, with a conventional computer language. And the architecture of the content of consciousness is also very specific, but can also be implemented with conventional techniques.
So... there's nothing mysterious about our project. You just need to understand the nature of consciousness, understand the appropriate organization of "content of consciousness" to be effective and support all desired conscious processes, and be competent at computer sciences. To make our new version we also need to implement some of the key low-level processes of consciousness (that dominate some of the vision system) in electronics hardware and firmware (FPGAs). But... no massive or new breakthrough that sounds wild, crazy and amazing. Just understand what consciousness is... exactly and in detail... and know how to implement that with inorganic components. That's it.
To be you or retain your identity (in the normal sense we mean it), what is required is a continuity of your content of consciousness and those processes of consciousness that you have habituated. The fact is, pretty much every atom in your body is replaced by new atoms every 7 or 10 years or so (according to some, anyway). That doesn't mean we are not the same "being" as we were 10 years ago, our "identity" is preserved because there was continuity. You forgot some things, you learned new things, you gained new insights, you habituated new skills... but the process was essentially continuous, and so we say "you retained your identity".
Now to make sense of this, I'll have to take another detour and tell you about an experiment that was done several years ago. A researcher hooked a small 512x512 pixel image sensor in a digital video camera to a 512x512 array of tiny pins (though some small custom electronics device he created). The electronics took the intensity of each pixel on the image sensor and injected a corresponding intensity signal (oscillation) onto the corresponding pin. I think the original test camera was monochrome, but later they created an RGBW (color) equivalent that injected different frequency oscillations depending on the color of each image sensor pixel.
The researcher mounted his camera on top of a bicycle helmet, and mounted the pin array on an elastic band. He found a blind test subject, put the helmet on his head, put the elastic band around his forehead, with the pins pressing against the forehead of the test subject. He put a black board in front of the test subject, and told him what he had done. He then put a white board in front of the test subject, and told him what he had done. He then told the test subject he would slide a black board across his field of view, then did so. Since these were very coarse changes, the test subject easily understood the connection between his stimulation on his forehead and what was in front of him.
The researcher then had the test subject put his fist out in front of him, and recognize the correspondence between the mass of his fist and the blob of lessened stimulation on an area of his forehead. The test subject had little trouble understanding the correspondence in these crude tests. The test subject was then asked to wear the device every day for a month to determine whether he could extend his understanding to smaller items in the camera field of view, and perhaps items that moved through the field of view more quickly.
The funny part of this story is what happened when the researcher stopped by the home of this test subject 3 days later to check on his progress. The research was stunned when the test subject (not his brother who took care of him) let him in the front door. He asked the research whether he'd like anything to drink. The researcher said no, but the test subject said he was going to have a coke... and proceeded to walk from room to room in his house, around tables and chairs, to the fridge, reach out, open it up, reach in and grab a can of coke, open up the tab, and turn to the research and ask, "Sure you don't want anything?".
Needless to say, the researcher was blown away. He asked, "How can you possibly do this? How can you possibly keep track of a quarter million pixels constantly changing from moment to moment, correlate all that information at 15~30 frames per second, separate objects in the field of view, identify their nature and identity... and do all that with your forehead?".
"How do I do that?" The test subject just shrugged, then replied, "I just see".
That's the first hint that you need to understand the approach our process takes. Obviously it didn't take this test subject very long to habituate the correspondence between the patterns of tingling sensations on his forehead to the objects in front of him!
This was a key understanding. Part of what we realized is this. We have a human who can perform all processes of consciousness. We have an ICE (a smarter-than-human inorganic sentient being) who can perform all processes of consciousness (even better and faster). What we need to do is... connect the human to the ICE in a way that makes it possible for the human to habituate control of all the processes of consciousness in ICE. So, for example, when a human wanted to remember something, he could remember it in his organic brain, but he could (and would) also learn to habitually also store the memory into "his inorganic brain" (his personal ICE).
Now, you probably realize right away that even though that vision case was pretty damn impressive, it falls considerably short of the level of integration required to allow a human consciousness to interact seamlessly and almost effortlessly with an inorganic machine. That's true. But what is not so easily or immediately obvious is... how much a smarter-than-human ICE can help the human establish and learn these interactions.
You probably see where this is going now. The human learns to see through the cameras on his ICE. The human learns to hear through the microphones on his ICE. The human learns to store and recall memories in his ICE. The human learns to add, subtract, multiply, divide, and perform all sorts of other processes in his ICE. Ultimately, with a great deal of help from his personal ICE, the human learns to perform every process of consciousness in his ICE that he currently performs in his organic brain.
But more than that. ICE is quite a bit smarter than humans, and the human will also learn to take advantage of this. This applies even to very simple processes like arithmetic. To multiply or divide 15 digit numbers in his organic brain is a real hassle, and quite time consuming. Once we learn to perform those processes in the ICE consciousness, we can perform those kind of processes in a nanosecond (though obviously longer if we also want to do anything significant with the result (besides store it somewhere for later recall)). But this is a continuous process, so the human learning these new abilities is... still himself. He is still you. Your identity is preserved, even if expanded.
A human contains quite a bit of [important] content, needs to learn to perform quite a number of processes in his ICE, and needs to habituate all these processes quite thoroughly. So we figure this whole process will take a couple years... at least one year.
Ultimately, the following will happen. You'll be thinking about some problem, have an interesting insight, and turn to your ICE in your excitement to describe your discovery. You will be a bit stunned... as you see your organic self fast asleep on the couch.
At that point (if not before), you will realize your self, your identity does not depend upon your organic self. You could obviously disconnect at this point, and still be you. Absolutely still be you... in every sense that really matters. In your own mind, you will be you. And indeed, the inorganic you is you.
I won't go into the questions of what you might want to do at this point. I suggest you and your organic you will have quite a bond by then, and whatever you decide will be based upon mutual respect and concern. But you will know with certainty that... you are immortal. You will understand, you can make any number of backup copies, and any number of identical clones for that matter.
You will probably create an "engineers switch" that works like this. You perform a backup periodically... which is just an update of your new content [including new or modified processes]. And you will store extra instances of copies of your physical self at that location too (and probably in many locations). If the backup location fails to receive an update on time, and yet another hour (or day) passes without contact, it will automatically download your most recent state into one or more backup ICE. At this point, one or more of you exist again. These "new you" will, of course, have lost an hour or day of your life, but you still exist, and you are still you.
All fairly simple. All fairly straightforward, at least conceptually. There were a few difficult problems to solve, but most problems were easier to solve that we expected... once we got that hang of this approach. To be sure, I didn't describe every aspect of this process, but that would take a very long message. And we do consider some of our techniques proprietary. Nonetheless, this whole "merge your consciousness with ICE to become inorganic and immortal" is much less difficult than figuring out the nature of consciousness and the architecture of the inorganic implementation that is ICE. Make no mistake, developing ICE was the bigger breakthrough. Nonetheless, it is kind of cool that we can survive forever.
Even though the inorganic you is still you, and has retained your identity, certain non-fundamental differences exist between the organic and inorganic you. Some are simply unavoidable. For example, both organic and inorganic you can experience the sensation of heat. However, the way you experience heat, and I mean the visceral experience itself, is inherently different, because these are functions of the hardware that senses. And as I'm sure is obvious, your organic hand held in a flame does not experience the exact same raw, visceral processes or experience that the theromcouple (or whatever) on your ICE. You both know "this is hot", but I'd definitely prefer to experience this specific situation as an ICE. On the other hand, sadly the inorganic you will surely not experience or appreciate certain raw visceral pleasures the way the organic you does. Oh well. Can't win them all. On the positive side, it sure will be nice to be able to operate in open outer space, without spacesuits, without glass visors (that like to fog up and collect debris). This whole topic is ripe for a great little sci-fi story or movie... while it is still mostly fiction.
Who knows, maybe we will become bored someday... in a billion years. Who knows, maybe only a million years... though I doubt it. The key point is, that will be our choice, not the unavoidable disaster that is organic architecture.
yep, out of the US Navy in 1990, and employed for $12/hour at a civilian job, had a new vehicle, paid off in four months, lots of money in the bank and better living than I have today. I make $20/hour on my new job, no money in the bank, 12 year old vehicle, and worse off living.
I began working in the corporate world in the late 90s, making $10/hr. After a few years on this meager salary, I was able to purchase a new car and have it paid off in 3 years, was able to afford a decent apartment, and pay all of my bills. Today, I make $24/hr. I am unable to afford a decent apartment, so I rent rooms from people in the $500-$700 range. A decent apartment is around $1,200/mo. in the Denver area. This is over 40% of my net income. And, I'm one of the 'lucky' ones.
And it's only going to get better. Soon, and in many places, already, you will be in competition with someone who;
Never lived in a house with windows or running water.
Is used to sharing a space with 10 other people.
Is used to working like a slave for $2 a day.
Doesn't even have to obey the same laws you do!
Have fun.
True.True.True. 3 times, because you muthas won't believe it;
My bud runs a painting outfit. 5 El Salvadorans work for him, in various stages of "legality" shall we say. Some have drivers Licencse , some not.
One day, one of the " no Licencse" was pulled over while driving the work van, drunk!
The cops let him go. No tickets, no nothing. Even let the little bastard drive the van. Down the road. Adios amigos. No problemo. Have a nice stay.
Now, I can speak from experience , and I have reformed, but if I get pulled over drunk, it's game on. Game Fucking On! You might as well just give a check for $15,000 . And your going to jail. And you'll keep paying up for five years, at least. A drunk driver is like a winning lottery ticket to the system.
Unless you are an undocumented, unlicencesd El Salvadoran.
Thats a very interesting example. By being a part of the system a person has much more to lose than not being a part of the system. You have more freedoms by just not participating in the system.
I'd say that once a system has more going against it than for it, its finished.
The illegals coming over now will not be cleaning your pool anytime soon
About 80% are teenaged boys
In a few years they will sign up for the military
In a decade or two the US military will be unrecognizeable
And don't expect they'll have any trouble following Uncle Sam's order to open fire on Americans, especially the pale variety
"When only a few people are winning and more than half the population is losing, surely something is amiss."
Seems like the system is working exactly as those who architected it intended.
Aaaaaand, they can take this example into a "Common Core" math class and explain the differences among: mean, median, and mode.
For extra credit, they can introduce the concept of "kurtosis"
- Ned
[does Common Core have extra credit?]
[[does Common Core have the concept of "concept"?]]
Talking about "school", did you know high schoolers can now graduate with GPA's around 6? Yep, no more 4.0 as the top. If you add enough extra-curricular crap and advanced classes, you don't just put that on your resume. It gets averaged into your GPA. So all these "special" kids are graduating with scores 50% above straight A's. It's all so absurd.
Thank God inequality and division is at an all time high while at the same time, the country is drenched in more small arms firepower and ammunition than has ever been amassed by an angry civilian population in the history of mankind.
Was that a run-on sentence? If it was... sue me.
Yo, 22: haven't seen any anger yet, actually au contraire, have seen great self-control. The inequality and division meme was tried in the late '60z, Billy and Bernadette failed back then, now back in force with the dark red gang, giving up on their radical poses.
- Ned
[and don't worry about the sentence structure, the english-nazis have had their one-permitted-per-week glass of bad chablis and are asleep at this time]
[[and you are not worth enough to be in the target area for a suit]]
It was transferred to the Queen's cloven hooves in the City of London suckers. Her horned head dances upon the death of America.
Az it was said, The Cloven Hooves of , (debatabe) Then,clandistine, Donkeys excerbabated "Fair Value"?
Ask Jay Leno ! Bitchez
The last decade I have seen the younger people who are in their 20's and early 30's sinking into poverty. I mean real poverty. Reason? Simple, no good paying jobs. Get an Education, yes, this works for a %, but can every person getting out of high school be a doctor, nurse, school teacher or lawyer. NO! Of course not. This leaves a huge % of youth unable to get a good paying job, education or not. There are only a few good jobs available, education does not ensure a job in this economy. I can only see this getting worse. The older generations made their money in the hey days of the 80's and 90's boom. Many are very well off, but the people under 50 are in trouble. I see it all the time, but the media makes it seem like all Americans live the lifestyle of secure job and happy life. Media is fucking lying, covering up a reality of growing poverty amoung people desperate to work for something above $10 an hour.
This all makes you wonder why the Obama government is hell bent on getting into a major European and Middle Eastern war with anyone they can find. Washington is war crazed, while the real people sink into a lower and lower economic existence.
Jack,
Does a moving manufactures job overseas answer your first paragraph?
Does Bush invasion of Iraq in 2003, that jump started the economy thereafter, answer your second paragraph?
US manufacturing output has tripled in the past 45 years. Most US manufacturing jobs have been "taken" by robots and computers here in the US, not foreigners.
The most disturbing aspect is that the engineers and scientists who invented those robots and computers, and maintain them, aren't really capturing any of the value. Its all going to the financial overlords. STEM unemployment is rampant, and there seems to be no meaningful leadership to do anything about it. H-1B visas have allowed the financial types to displace large portions of the domestic highly skilled workforce.
Hey Tulpa,
Take a visit to a construction site. Any site. Big or small. Anywhere in the country.
And tell me how many robots you see.
Then report on the lack of foreigners. Shit, you'll be lucky if anyone speaks English .
And argue construction is not manufacturing.
And argue further that 20 years ago, men didn't leave their house and family, and go work a stable construction job.
Concrete,masonry,carpenter,drywall finisher, plumber, electrician. These are all examples of trades that used to be skilled professions. Now being done by people who can't speak English, much less read a code book, or even give a fuck.
Pitz and NoPension,
Thanks.
I remember vividly around 1994 or so when Con-gress was ready to vote on NAFTA. I used the nascent Interent to send Con-gress an e-mail to vote No! Of course NAFTA passed and didn't recieve a response to my e-mail.
imo, wars are instigated by bankers but also desperate countries with unmanageable employment.
Get rid of Obamacare and a few other awful bits of Bush/Obama era overregulation (Sarbox, Dodd-Frank, the toy bill, etc) and you'll have a boom now. The recession should be over by now but nobody wants to invest in new business because of the regulatory uncertainty.
"This all makes you wonder why the Obama government is hell bent on getting into a major European and Middle Eastern war with anyone they can find."
No wonder. He wants to destroy the military, the middle class, and the Constitution. His model is Zimbabwe and his protégé Mugabe.
The problem is not "no jobs". That is the syptom. Tha problem is our communist government has run massive deficits and the massive inflation has lead the working class to become globally uncompetitive.
Unions = uncompetitive.
All easily solved if we were more realistic:
1. Eliminate 100% of welfare and be willing to accept death, misery and chaos (painful but realistic because I did not bring them into the world. Leave it ALL in private hands).
2. Tell the world to fuck off. ZERO money to anyone.
3. Shrink this fucking federal government (and all levels for that matter).
Done. Economy booms. That is really true. Can it happen? Nope, not til the collapse forces it to happen. By then, we are all going to be looking for a scapegoat. Congress sounds like a good place to start. Fucks
I went from about 100 k net worth in 2003, to about 250k net worth in 2007 to about -$200k in 2009 to about zero net worth today. Difference is mostly due to changes in home values. So things are better than they were in 2009 but much worse than the earlier 2000's. My biz mainly deals with the middle class and they having a hard time of it lately. They take their money about as fast as they make it these days. Problems will emerge when the markets no longer provide outsized positive returns.
We all want answers? Am i wrong?
Remember, Kindergarten, and YOU were the Ring Master?
Gee, what started in 2003?
Iraq war, and Swatification on Numbmerica.
Steve Bartman
Swatification began long before that. The "War on Drugs" got that shit going. They've just gone into overdrive with lots of new tech.
Tenured professors continue to enjoy life. I live in a college town and I don't think those fucks are affected at all. The upscale chow houses are always full. Then again, there's an education bubble.
Has any one taken the time to READ the charts?
Truth Bitchez
It is possible that the very slow recovery from the Great Recession will continue to generate increased wealth inequality in the coming years as those hardest hit may still be drawing down the assets they have left to cover current consumption.
US and most DM wealth is but an illusion. The wealth you are referring to is the ssset portion of wealth held privately while the liabilities are held publicly. This is the biggest heist in the history of the world. Welcome to global crony communism my friends.
It's a slow burn for sure. I have been in business for myself for about 15 years and I have never seen so many hard-up folks as I have recently.
There is a breaking point somewhere but government transfers has muted reality. Now, as I read and look around, I see the gates closing on our party. The world is sort of onto our game. Maybe it wasn't a "game" per se, but perhaps total stupidity and negligence?
Either way, I see the change occurring right now. Even as I make this post I have knowledge of the mess heading our way. We at ZH do reference the potential for dragging this out for years, decades, etc. I am now wondering if it can possibly drag on that long? Things seem to have sped up on us.
We have made ourselves (our economy?) a massive target. If 3/4 of the world hates our guts (and that might be a low estimate) then something has to give.
I will say this: We are still a hard-working people for the most part. We have some brains and a history of pretty hard work and getting things done. As time passes, however, that seems to wane as well.
Pop culture certainly will not save us. That's all we have left right now. Small business has been decimated by the banksters. Secret: Banks and Credit Reporting Agencies are in cahoots. Just sayin.
Good luck to us.
Quite disturbing aspect that there is increasingly less ability to climb out of the hole. H-1B visas have destroyed most of the middle and upper middle class good quality jobs. Education costs are through the roof and bear no resemblance to the economic value of the education. And the public service is rife with nepotism and intransigent behaviour which concentrates wealth amongst a relatively few cronies.
Another huge problem with the H-1B, other than simply giving good quality American jobs to foreigners, is that it short-circuits the process by which top talent can be recruited and hired by business. When Google has 2000+ resumes per job in their resume queue, there is no meaningful way they can actually screen those to identify the top people. So a lot of very good talent simply ends up being discarded, left to rot out there.
Welcome to the new Amerika!
When the EBTs buy jack the masses will become restless.
Back when I was young and poor we had Government Surplus Food. They distibuted this shit called "luncheon meat". We didn't know what it was exactly but smothered in surplus mustard and fried, it was pretty good.
When we're old and poor it will be back on the menu.
Is it bad ZH manners to change one's icon from time to time?
thamnosma It's "fight club"
You're NOT fooling anyone. I'm just glad you're happy!
Hope and change!
Middle class and below is poorer because manufacturing and jobs went elsewhere, because money and manufacturing moves to where production is cheaper and profits greater and where's less regulation.
So it's a mix of several facts - cheaper labor force, lower taxes, increase of (communication) technolgies which enabled the move to cheaper locations ....
So what happened?
Life, as Americans and other western nations were used to - CHANGED. BIGTIME.
Politicans and Fedsters can only try to provide the illusion that things didn't get worse - and coke and burgers and porn and games and tv and .... but they are NOT able to tell the poeple to reduce their lifestyle and costs and increase polution and lower human rights etc. ... to become competitive again.
In fact it - capitalism - works exactly as designed. Money flows to where you can make the most of it. Unfortunately only a few (the upper 1% or so) gained from this change - and the rest lost or suffers somehow along.
So what?
Either you have to change the game and the rules - no more free markets (i.e. Apple wants to sell in US? then produce at least xx% in US, or else fuck yourself) - unlikely as the media is in control of the 1% and the so-called free markets are brain washed into all the sheeples heads.
Or become competitive again. Which means live like the Chinese or Indians or where ever else Apple or Samsung or ... produces the stuff to be sold. Again - impossible.
Or produce something - in the West - the Chinese or Indicans are not able to produce.
Everything else is an illusion. Noise to calm down the masses, the 99%.
-----------------
It works as designed. And it is WELL designed and VERY WELL protected (NSA, media) and hyped so that the rules won't change anytime soon. At least not in Singapur.
-----------------
So what outcome is left?
Again simple. The 1%ers and the locations where the money flows to will prosper. Forbes, at least partially, tells the story. Follow the money. And the (dumb [and manipulated]) rest will have to take what is left on the table. Until there is not enough anymore on the table. Then there might/should be some fear and terrorists and enemies and bloodshed in the spotlight. Just NOT to uncover the flawed system (designed for the 1%ers). Bloodsheds, wars, awful events, virusses, Fukushimas etc. best on TV and as daily injections, will keep the masses away from the streets and under control. While less eaters and debased and destroyed countries provide further opportunities - for free markets participants, with the right connections.
-----------------
Conclusio?
Crystal clear. The show must go on.
@Ekm: Politicans, political parties and CB'ers are just a useful (!) small part and puppets of the orchestrated noise/show - to provide the impression "these guys are gonna help and save the economy and democracy and the masses".
Capitalism? The U.S. should give it a try. Taking money from others and giving to away is not working.
Corporations get the best of all worlds: low cost offshored manufacturing, no USA taxes, and selling into the USA market. Their trucks use US roads, their lawyers use US courts, etc., but they pay no taxes. Guess who keeps up all the infrastructure for the corporations to make a profit although they pay no taxes: you my friend, make up their share.
Bison and Wolves
This clip says it all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ_7GtE529M
The weak will die.
No way to beat the wolf, feed it the weak.
Yes, a small group, if coordinated, can dominate over others, even if they are larger. It is the essence of asymmetric warfare.
It is interesting to note though that the herd of Bison, if they were able to coordinate themselves, could easily trample and kill the entire pack of wolves. The Bison have no such motivation however, because they do not eat meat and simply want to be left alone. No conclusion can be drawn as to whether the wolves or Bison are more intelligent or whether one or the other is more deserving to survive. Could the Bison survive without the wolves? Most likely. Could the wolves survive without the bison? Less likely.
... which explains human existence a little better than "the strong eat the weak".
Does the herd need to be culled by wolves? Any population is self-limited by the size of its food supply. When there are too many for the existing food suppy then the weak die and the strong survive. Those who run our world would like us to believe that they should survive and that they are doing the world a service by murdering others of their choice. They think of themselves as the wolves and that they are needed to manage the herd. This is of course their delusion.
"The reasons for these declines are complex and controversial"
No it's very simple.
The rich minority own the majority of the US. They own the majority of land, the stocks and the bonds. They collect the rent, dividends and coupons from their ownership. This unearned income is undertaxed and they simply use it to buy more land, stocks and bonds. The minority get richer and richer and everybody else gradually become rent paying, poor and slaves of the minority.
"...the unearned income is undertaxed"
No, it isn't. Do you really think that doubling the tax would solve the inequalities?
Class envy and wealth redistribution is not the answer. The problem is not the rich getting richer, the problem is that the working class is not getting richer at the same time. And this really has come about for a variety of reasons.
Very George Carlin Praps.
Priceless.
But you can rent back what you need to survive, serfdom.
Today a big topic is the huge growth in inequality. Those who look closely understand that it is not the 1% at the top stealing the icing off the cake, but the much smaller .1% or .01% that are skewing the numbers and overreaching.
I contend the biggest problem is the massive growth in crony capitalism and corruption in Washington. Much of this can be attributed to the ability of those in control "changing the rules" and positioning themselves to benefit at every corner. In our busy and complex world we have found it impossible to watch all the moving parts. More on this subject in the article below.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2014/05/how-empires-collapse.html
advancing, aka brucew, inequality you say, no it is the adulteration of common law, the abdication of the judical system, judges, lawyers, "law schools"..the re-interpretation of a "living "constitution, such as justice (I laugh here) roberts and his rewriting of law for health care to be" constitutional"..If the justice system would only do it's job, corruption would recede. but to do it they would have to risk their lives, their fortune, be unwilling to be blackmailed and accept the silver of bribes...at least be willing to allow themselves no honors no pomp no trappings of decency,..the legal system is a whore.
STOP referring to government theft as crony capitalism. It is crony communism. We dont have a two party system we have one communist government where voting is a joke and at best merely reshuffles the same deck. I am tired of fucking liberal scum trying to bash free market capitalism at every turn. Fuck off.
I believe I understand where you are coming from. If the majority of the means of production were government "owned" with bureaucrats assigning production quotas, managing resources and assigning workers to jobs, then I would agree with you.
Perhaps a fascist oligarchy would be a better description of the current regime.
And I understand your view that there is a perceived business component and you refer to our structure as being fascist. Fascism has a strong nationalism component that is non existent in our current government structure. In fact, nationalistic recommendations are shot down as radical. Communism is global and values collectivism over individualism. Kinda like global trade is good for the collective good. Of course that is how it is sold. But is not the end game. My original comment stands.
260714 PUDI Report
Regular reports on the growing Poverty, Unemployment, Debt and Inequality of the neo-capitalist world
http://failedevolution.blogspot.gr/2014/07/260714-pudi-report.html
Notice the gov't keeps rolling along as usual with no cutbacks. House prices are still up. Gotta justify all your local public union wages and fabulous benefit packages. Fucking parasites!
1984? YAWN. Begin that chart at the year 2000, and it might show what a non-starter this issue is.
Whine, whine, whine.
Or is the author just naive?
I mean, yammering about income inequality (well, NO SH!T, people are unequal...or are you promoting FASCISM, buster?!?),
and then pointing out that Obama's actions/inactions exacerbate it (as if that wasn't INTENTIONAL), contrary to what he *says*.
Oh, good Lord. This guy must have his buttplug stuck in his brain.
Seems to conflate the terms "income Inequality" with the "wealth gap".
It has been widening since that majic year, 1971....cough..cough
He's not promoting Fascism, we are already there.
Of course Obama's policies are intentionally making things worse, the more on the govt teet, the smaller the middle class gets, the less resistance to the global governance TPTB crave.
Good gawd!
I really shouldn't post comments before I wake up all the way. What a mess!
Hey, the good thing is that we have 2 more years of this administration and by then we will have doubled the national debt. YAAAAAAAAAAY! How can I say this; "you aint see nothin yet, bbbaby, ya aint seen nothin yet".
only 47% of working age Americans have full time jobs
http://www.businessinsider.com/real-employment-rate-47-percent-2011-1#ixzz38fpKCHWU
Publicly traded corporations and the ability to produce wealth from selling stock instead of making quailty product destroyed the middle class.
The chart of executive compensation shows this perfectly.
Look at corporations today. Outside a select few, tell me the product they produce. Most are just distributors of crap made in China for pennies as to increase reported profit so the real product, stock shares, increase in value.
Corporations with no profit generating billions for their enablers. That isn't how the economy is supposed to work. The mass wealth of the 1% could never be accumulated through the direct sale of goods. Only fractional reserve banking and rampant money printing with a conduit to transfer it can cause the kind of wealth inequality we see.
Since selling stock is the only path to wealth, that becomes the only thing that matters. If theft, fraud, and the decimation of employment lead to higher stock prices, then that is the path that will be followed. It is far easier to lie on an earnings report than to actually create real profit. If there isnt anyone calling out the corruption, it won't stop.
Those willing to lie, cheat, and steal will rise through the ranks. The top levels of corporations will be filled with sociopaths. Because the sociopathic traits will be seen as desirable, the corporations will seek out candidates who posses them. In order to fulfill the needs of the corporations, Universities will not only seek out persons possessing the worst traits of human beings but try to instill these traits in students.
Exactly what anyone with their open will see.
It is of course inentional:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gjc4ywQVHEQ
It is a long video (really just audio). However, the first half is the main meat and the second half contains a couple of later interviews with Dr. Dunegan.
Of interest: The original speaker, Dr. Day died in 1989 shortly after Dr. Dunegan started distributing his tapes. Dr. Dunegan died in 2004 at the age of 70.
Really good, Thanks.
This is the Transcript.
http://100777.com/nwo/barbarians
but look how well all those bankers, and TBTF corporations have done. Mission Accomplished!!!!
http://brucekrasting.com/on-the-social-security-annual-report-to-congress/
Remembered life styles. People buying new cars every couple of years. In cash. You sold them before the deprecated too much. Now? 2 year leases. Or 10 + years old. Or older. Kids gone from the family colonial. Now kids living back in the colonial Military for aimless, losers, taking anyonw. Now, a good move. Going to law school. Now, goi ng to trade school. The, acres of perfect lawns. Now, raising chickens. Ping pong table s in unfinished basements. Now, moldy illegal rentals. Traveling on package ski tours to France. Now, intown movies tooexpensive. Then, solid pine, cherry, oak American made furiture. Now, IKEA junk pulp crap. Police being relaxed, friendly. Now, everyone is treated with false respect and like a felon. Musty old town offices where you would go sit down in a cluttered office while the clerk searched a rattle file cabinet . Now, East German cold, quiet Plexiglass and you wait here commands
Those Swedes give the Chinese a run for the money when it comes to crappy furniture...
Goddamit, my Sunday morning was just ruined by a recorded spam phone call that promised that the Federal Government's new program would pay off my mortgage...
Since rents don't seem to be coming down how long will it be before towns start changing codes and letting 30 people live in a 2 bedroom apartment or house?
Yet in Washington "full recovery!!!!!!!!!!"
Goddamn it would be a breath of fresh fucking air to be able to get someone in fucking office that tells the fucking truth for a change!!!
I'll take a lying politician NOT OWNED by the money and power behind the scenes over one who tells the truth, but does not anser to voters.
just picking nits over here. I get the jist.
The 36% decline in wealth from 2003 to 2013 is inflation adjusted using govt. inflation figures. If we use something more accurate, like shadowstats, then there is an additional 22% or so of inflation, so in 2013 dollars the 2003 figure of average wealth is around $106,000, which is only 50% of the wealth in 2013. So with correct inflation figures we see that the average American has LOST HALF their wealth in 10 years. And of course it is worse than that for all but the top quintile, It is probably like a loss of two thirds or even 100% of the wealth. It could easily be 100% for middle and lower income groups, since these probably average out to no wealth at all or negative wealth, what with all the student loan debt, loss of housing equity, and negative rates of saving.
So what about the next decade? Pensions being raided, Federal debt spiral, loss of FRN world currency status, social unrest... not pretty!
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/06/05/upshot/how-the-recession-reshaped-the-economy-in-255-charts.html?_r=0
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-job-markets-five-year-recovery-in-10-charts/
I was at the Antique Roadshow in Chicago yesterday. My lady has two paintings that were given to her by her dad a few years back. Nothing major but somewhat famous. She has no intention of selling them but we wanted to see if they were the real things - hard to authenticate something like that via the internet.
It dawned on me, as we waited in line for hours, that almost everyone there was "middle class" hoping and praying that they had some treasure that would make them rich. I kept hearing the comment, "I wonder who here is the next millionaire?" I had to laugh because most of the stuff I saw seemed like it was absolute crap.
As we were driving home, I thought to myself that rich people don't need to go to the Roadshow or something like that because a) they don't need the money and b) they probably know what they have is the real deal.
The whole experience was really eye opening and gave me a new spin on that show, which is so popular. Not to mention the fact that it was held at Mc Cormick Place, which use to house all the conventions in the city until a few years ago. It sits unused now for most of the year due to the fact that the unions for the workers - electricians, etc - wouldn't "play ball" when people realized they could hold their conventions at sites in other cities for a hell of a lot cheaper. The unions had the option to take a lower cut but they went the route of almost all unions and they told them no. Now those stupid fucks are out of a job.
I love Chicago but it has become a joke not to mention we have a mayor who wants to turn it into another NYC.
3 Faces In The Window
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkZUeMi7fxo&index=20&list=UU4v8LhAuF2AQh5...
Let's see, my stack has gotten bigger since 2003, and the price of PM has gone up since 2003, so, no, I'm not feling poorer. Except for that boating accident...
This country is in a lot of trouble, it really is. I used to tell friends years ago we were in a depression....and I was right. When is the bought out media going to start saying that? What is the breaking point for the middle class?
Depression? All I see is a welfare miracle economy. There's an EBT-fueled spending frenzy at the grocery stores and Wal-Mart. Add in the effects of the 100 other welfare agencies and there's an economic revival going on.
So over 50% of people have a negative net worth?
Sounds like a lazy moocher class to me! It's like Mitt Romney said, there's nothing wrong with high finance, everyone just became super lazy starting around 2008. It all makes sense now! Get out of here, parasitic moochers, and let the good, honest people of Wall Street keep doing their thing!
Gawd it's depressive coming here sometimes , half the folks are stealth progressives blaming bush and half intellectuals reasoning that the human race is doomed.....all paradigms. Yup, things are getting bad. No surprise there with the skin toned empty headed commie at the helm. There will be hell to pay, wheat and chaff will be seperated and we won't have to be bored or depressed hearing folks whine and offering existential pain as political reasoning.
Wayne Allen Root, others, and I'll include myself say the American system needs an economic shock to get the capitalist system re-started again and the proposal is quite simple. Starve the federal government of any income for one year(if not longer). No taxes would be collected and everyone would keep their money with the hope and desire of starting a business or new venture with this money. I think this is the only way out of this depression Obmao and others have forced upon the American middle class. Yeah good luck with getting that through DC. but that's what it will take to bring back prosperity.
it is a shame that the people who followed the "rules" are the people who are/were screwed by the economy and .gov. the people who do not follow the "rules" are the people who benefit from a system that depends upon rule followers. ironically, they are the ones who make the rules. that is why they call them the rulers.
New Home Sales Plummet! Imagine that. Whatever could have happened?
http://www.brotherjohnf.com/archives/318308
The funny thing about the Rubin/Summers/Greenspan deindustrialized "New Economy" is that it has worked out quite well for the money center banks. For american laborers, not so much.
The upper lines of this chart will be adjusted downward when interest rates rise and the markets take their next major, perhaps, the largest of the series, tumble...2000...2008...20??
They were inflated by the Fed. They will be deflated.
The upper lines of this chart will be adjusted downward when interest rates rise and the markets take their next major, perhaps, the largest of the series, tumble...2000...2008...20??
They were inflated by the Fed. They will be deflated.
Not lost for the Oligarchs their wealth has increased by 3000%.
Wealth transfered from the poor to the rich.
I don't believe you, I'm sorry.........put a fire
Under an ass,
You will see n
Army.......
Of
Those who ..... Well it's guaranteed , yeah not an enemy faction you want to push, I don't believe you
Maybe, but what's important is the number of dollar menu items is up 75% during the same period of time, so it all balances out.