Boycott the Beast

[SteadyMercury]

dear, liberals destroyed the family and schools.

My family is destroyed? Hmm I never knew, I better call my sisters.

 

[Dad2three]

there is no such thing as Republican economics.

Republican economics would primarily be capitalist economics while Democrat economics would primarily be be socialist economics. Now perhaps even you can understand why Republicans opposed ACA while Democrats supported it.

Simple enough?

Yes, simple (and wrong) is your middle name Bubba


(Re-)Introducing: The American School of Economics

When the United States became independent from Britain it also rebelled against the British System of economics, characterized by Adam Smith, in favor of the American School based on protectionism and infrastructure and prospered under this system for almost 200 years to become the wealthiest nation in the world. Unrestrained free trade resurfaced in the early 1900s culminating in the Great Depression and again in the 1970s culminating in the current Economic Meltdown.


Closely related to mercantilism, it can be seen as contrary to classical economics. It consisted of these three core policies:

1. protecting industry through selective high tariffs (especially 1861–1932) and through subsidies (especially 1932–70)
2. government investments in infrastructure creating targeted internal improvements (especially in transportation)
3. a national bank with policies that promote the growth of productive enterprises rather than speculation

It is a capitalist economic school based on the Hamiltonian economic program. The American School of capitalism was intended to allow the United States to become economically independent and nationally self-sufficient.



Frank Bourgin's 1989 study of the Constitutional Convention shows that direct government involvement in the economy was intended by the Founders.

American School economics - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Republican economics would primarily be capitalist economics while Democrat economics would primarily be be socialist economics. Now perhaps even you can understand why Republicans opposed ACA while Democrats supported it.

Simple enough?

Third World countries. One of the things they all had in common was a small, very rich elite, small middle class, and a large lower class. They also shared very low economic growth as a result. This has been known for at least 50 years. The US has been going in this direction for at least the last 30 years as we have gradually de-industrialized and government policies (such as trickle down economics) have promoted the shift of wealth from the lower and middle classes to the economic elite


Conservative Economic Theories Just Don't Work

Why should we trust Conservative Economic Theories? They have been wrong almost all the time.

http://spccis.spc.edu/dstump/SocialJustice/dxs/Conservative-Economic-Theories-Just-Dont-Work.html



A good deal of what our founding fathers were doing at the dawn of our country was extricating themselves and their colonial fortunes from the corruption of Britain's worldwide banking heresy. Many of our framers warned repeatedly of international banking, monetary fixing, and fiscal treason of banks.

Our democracy experiment has been reduced to a straw man as worldwide MIC and banking gangsters divvy up the spoils of the planet.

We need to get money, lobbying, and revolving door employment out of the US political system. And if the SCOTUS is going to try and stop that then we need to elect enough reformers to amend the constitution.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Conservative Economic Theories Just Don't Work

China just switched to them and instanlty eliminated 40% of world poverty. See why we say 100% stupid. Is any other conclusion possible?

 

[Treeshepherd]

What would you say about a drug that literally causes you to go blind and be anti-social? That's essentially what the iPhone does.

This word "literally" I think you're taking it where it isn't meant to be.

The only way an iPhone literally makes you blind is if I stab you in the eye with it, and even that I'd have to do twice.

Some would argue modern social media (enabled by gadgets) has made socialization change, not go away.

Don t give up your eyes for an iPhone - MarketWatch

There's a new term called 'screen sightedness'. There's a lot of research showing that kids are going cross eyed, or suffering from severe eye strain. WebMD calls it computer vision syndrome.
Computer Vision Syndrome

I don't want to single out the iPhone. My point is more general; that technological advancements are don't necessarily translate to improvements in quality of life. The view that life gets better, automatically, via technological advancement, is the philosophy of Hegel. That view fell out of favor after the World Wars. After 60 years of peace in Europe, it's creeping back. People today tend to be Hegelian.

I'm 45. I have a pre-internet mind. I was raised my humans, as opposed to digital media. No on demand programming. The Atari got boring after an hour, so my brother and I would go outside and play whiffle ball.

Have you ever seen a baby crawl across the carpet, pull himself up beside a coffee table and poke at the photo on a print magazine because he thinks it's an interactive touch screen?

My future grandchildren may have a neural graft microchip instead of an iPhone. Technology brings both life and death.

 

[SteadyMercury]

And none of those is "literally" going blind as you said, and smart phones provide a different kind of socializing.

I'm 46, same pre-internet mind. My Kindle has 287 books on it right now, that thing has made my love of reading so much more convenient and cheaper, especially with as much long-term travel as I do.

I love my Roku too. We don't watch TV enough for cable to be worth it, cut the cord and go with streaming on demand, Netflix + Amazon = under $20/month.

 

[Treeshepherd]

And none of those is "literally" going blind as you said, and smart phones provide a different kind of socializing.

I'm 46, same pre-internet mind. My Kindle has 287 books on it right now, that thing has made my love of reading so much more convenient and cheaper, especially with as much long-term travel as I do.

I love my Roku too. We don't watch TV enough for cable to be worth it, cut the cord and go with streaming on demand, Netflix + Amazon = under $20/month.

I read a great article in the WSJ called "Your eReader is Reading You". Yes, I still read paper newspapers. Anyway, your Kindle phones home regularly, reporting on which books you read, how fast, whether you finished them, etc, etc, etc.. Amazon has been able to determine that the most appealing male protagonist to a female reader has the following attributes; green eyes, slightly hairy chest, Euro accent, etc. 18,000 Kindle readers underlined this line from the second Hunger Games book- "Because sometimes things happen to people and they're not equipped to deal with them."

Hunger Games (if you read all the thanks for contributions on the inside cover) is a book that was seemingly written by a committee. Literature is becoming data-driven, engineered, rather than a product of a singular vision of genius.

To the larger point of Big Data. Everyone says, "who cares, I'm doing nothing wrong".
But, if you're like most people you're highly susceptible to marketing. The science of studying brain activity (neuro-marketing) in tandem with analysis of Big Data gives gives Big Brother unprecedented powers to sell the public on the next celebrity president, the next 'humanitarian war', the next bailout, the next scary fiscal cliff, and the need for domestic surveillance itself.

The internet has redefined socialization, as you say. So did the Borg.

And just to be clear, I realize that I'm a hypocrite.

Your E-Book Is Reading You - WSJ

 

[SteadyMercury]

I read a great article in the WSJ called "Your eReader is Reading You". Yes, I still read paper newspapers. Anyway, your Kindle phones home regularly, reporting on which books you read, how fast, whether you finished them, etc, etc, etc.. Amazon has been able to determine that the most appealing male protagonist to a female reader has the following attributes; green eyes, slightly hairy chest, Euro accent, etc. 18,000 Kindle readers underlined this line from the second Hunger Games book- "Because sometimes things happen to people and they're not equipped to deal with them."

I get WSJ and Arizona Republic on the doorstep every day too, AZR is my breakfast paper and WSJ lunch.

My Kindle reports nothing back to Amazon, the only tracking they've got is what books I've downloaded from their site and when.

Hunger Games (if you read all the thanks for contributions on the inside cover) is a book that was seemingly written by a committee. Literature is becoming data-driven, engineered, rather than a product of a singular vision of genius.

I doubt this is true. I've not read Hunger Games but there are thousands and thousands of authors out there with books available for consumption by e-readers, unless you can prove your claim that literature is becoming data driven with more than some thank you on the cover I remain skeptical. Was the author acknowledging others for actual writing it or for existing work that inspired author's story? The latter is quite common and always has been. I saw the movie The Hunger Games and first thing I thought of was she ripped off that Japanese movie Battle Royale, but overall was a decent movie.

The internet has redefined socialization, as you say. So did the Borg.

Heh heh so a random scary comparison is supposed to accomplish what in your argument? Are you suggesting any evolution to socialization is inherently sinister and with only negative impacts? I don't use a smart phone and am not attached to twitter/facebook/etc. but I can certainly acknowledge the benefits of online socialization, we've met quite a few people who we consider good friends through online social connections and I've got nothing but positive to say about the experience.

 

[Treeshepherd]

The WSJ article I linked refutes your claim that a Kindle does not mine data. Maybe there are different types of Kindles.

What I suggest is that tech advancements are a mixed bag. You gain something, but you also surrender something.

I don't expect to win an anti-internet argument on the internet, especially since I'm a hypocrite. I swore I'd never get an iPhone that spies on all my movements and e-activities. But, I had to get one to remain employed. That's how they get you. In 10 years, you'll have to get a brain chip to be employed.

" delusion and misconception flourish everywhere. More than ever men seem to be slaves to a word, a motto... The gods of our time, mechanization and organization, have brought life and death. They have wired up the whole world, established contact throughout, created everywhere the possibility of cooperation... At the same time they have trapped the spirit, fettered it, stifled it. They have led man from individualism to collectivism. But with this unguided insight man has so far succeeded only in realizing the evil that is in every collectivism, the negation of the deepest personal values... Will the future be one of ever greater mechanization of society solely governed by the demands of utility and power?"
Huizinga (1872-1945)

 

[SteadyMercury]

The WSJ article I linked refutes your claim that a Kindle does not mine data. Maybe there are different types of Kindles.

I don't care what that article says, I never turn on the wifi of my kindle so it is impossible for it to communicate with Amazon. I buy it, turn it on to update the software to latest, then permanently put in airplane mode. When I get books I download it as an azw file and transfer it over USB cable.

Reason = I often get books from public library and have accidentally returned stuff before done when it realized 14 days are up, if leave wifi off it never removes borrowed books so can consume at my leisure.

What I suggest is that tech advancements are a mixed bag. You gain something, but you also surrender something.

Definitely agree here.

I swore I'd never get an iPhone that spies on all my movements and e-activities. But, I had to get one to remain employed. That's how they get you.

Hah I've resisted the call of the smart phone, and in great irony I'm a software developer who works with UIs that are compatible with smart phones and tablets.

At the same time they have trapped the spirit, fettered it, stifled it.

This is what I don't buy into. I see more avenues for creativity open up via technology, and more avenues for expression and exposure.

 

[Treeshepherd]

What I suggest is that tech advancements are a mixed bag. You gain something, but you also surrender something.

At the same time they have trapped the spirit, fettered it, stifled it.

This is what I don't buy into. I see more avenues for creativity open up via technology, and more avenues for expression and exposure.

More avenues for creativity. For example, it has never been more easy to publish a book.

On the other hand, we have never been more bombarded by mass-culture. That's why I call this the copy and paste generation. The WWII generation invented swing and big band. The 1950's invented rock and roll, rhythm and blues. The 1960's were transformative. The 70's yielded punk and reggae. Our generation saw the inventions of metal, new age, techno and hip hop.
What do the millennials produce? Recycled material. Why? Because evolution happens in isolation, like on the Galápagos Islands. We live in an environment bombarded by mass culture. The only way to evolve from here is to adopt bio-machinery.

 

[Treeshepherd]

I messed that post up, because I'm a tech caveman.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. Why? Because evolution happens in isolation, like on the Galápagos Islands.

Rubbish. Blacks, for example, have been targeted by the liberal's crippling welfare programs and are evolving backwards but that is not in isolation.The Chinese just adopted capitalism and a minimal safety net and have averaged 10% growth for 30 years that eliminted 40% of the world's poverty. Thats very positive evolution but it does not mean all Chinese are suited for the new system.

 

[Treeshepherd]

Ed, are you a fan of the Chinese political system? It's interesting. I know quite a few people who have travelled there. I wouldn't step foot on their soil. Their system disgusts me.
They don't invent anything. I try my best not to buy anything from their sweatshops. Furthermore, they have a bankrupt sense of humor. Also, their average income is half of the citizens of Mexico, if that. China is a powder keg, waiting for a match.

 

[SteadyMercury]

The WWII generation invented swing and big band. The 1950's invented rock and roll, rhythm and blues. The 1960's were transformative. The 70's yielded punk and reggae. Our generation saw the inventions of metal, new age, techno and hip hop.

What do the millennials produce? Recycled material. Why? Because evolution happens in isolation, like on the Galápagos Islands. We live in an environment bombarded by mass culture. The only way to evolve from here is to adopt bio-machinery.

Wow so you really think every generation until this latest one produced original music material?

I bet anything previous generations said that about our generation. Nothing you're saying is original in any time frame, people like to believe their generation and the past was better and these newfangled devices are silly and all this new cultural stuff isn't as good as their fond memories when music was really good and authors really knew how to write.

Sounds like you're taking personal preference and attempting to use it as a meaningful barometer.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Ed, are you a fan of the Chinese political system? It's interesting. I know quite a few people who have travelled there. I wouldn't step foot on their soil. Their system disgusts me.

That is interesting, what does refusing to step on their soil to interact with people who are in that system through no choice of their own accomplish? They have such a long rich history, so much to see and learn.

I try my best not to buy anything from their sweatshops.

Whatever you do, don't open up your computer and look inside.

 

[Treeshepherd]

Yes, I think that every previous generation has produced an original form of music.

I might be wrong about that. I am not wrong about saying this; no previous generation has ever been more bombarded by mass-culture.