I’ve always thought this line of thinking to be exaggerated. Do you not think there are any eternal truths? Is there absolutely nothing which we have gotten right? — Pinprick

If you mean Absolute Truth, then I would say these do exist but are not intellectually accessible. Intellectually, you can have near-truths (like it is immoral to kill another) but most truths are reasonably personal and change constantly.

All things knowable are in constant flux because what makes up all things knowable are in constant flux...

Governments in the US have taken a huge hit since the Reagan tax cuts of the 80's, so you are wrong there in the long term. — LuckyR

From what I have read since the 80's (and anecdotally), government employees now far out earn the private sector (plus generous benefits). It used to be just the opposite (you took a government job for the security, not the $).

When I was first in practice, teachers were among the poorest patients I saw, now they are among the wealthiest (of regular working folks). Here in CA, many, many government employees make incredible amounts of money.

Government is much like religion, pay no taxes yet still they never have enough.

Those who know they are egoist, however, do not accept their nature, eventually destroy the worlds of those who know and accept what they trully are" - This is the story of humanity. — Gus Lamarch

I suppose everybody has their own story. Thanks for sharing.

The example given here by Synthesis, blatantly reveals what I call the "Negative-Egoist" - those who do not accept their most intrinsic principles and values in their individuals because they do not want to categorize themselves as egoists - the same ones that instead of transforming themselves in their own motivations and goals, decide, out of resentment, to infer their bitterness - unconscious as well as consciously - on others - -. Lamenting it or not, with God or without, nothing changes the practical truth that the overwhelming majority of all humanity was, and remains being beings consumed by the most dread and evil blight of all: — Gus Lamarch

Hey Gus, can you titrate that down to a short sentence of two so I can understand what you are trying to say?

I want to soar to the unknown, unchartered skies to see all the new panoramic perspectives and angles. — Jack Cummins

I think your in the right place. :)

Enjoyed the conversation, Jack. Good luck and look forward to chatting again soon.

Of course, but we should acknowledge that no one had or has sufficient control for the situation to be handled ideally, or perhaps even halfway well. With total global cooperation the virus could theoretically be eliminated within a month, but that’s a fantasy. If the pandemic were ignored in the interests of avoiding an economic downturn, that too is a fantasy. Many would refuse to work, shop, recreate, etc. in hazardous situations, or would be unable to do so. — praxis

As always, your only option is the play the hand you are dealt. The system is very broken for a number of reasons we are all familiar with, so not being able to put partisan politics aside caused many difficulties. From shutting things down to money allocations to the response to the BLM/ANTIFA protests and rioting, there was a dramatic lack of leadership.

If you look at other crises this country has faced over the years, generally speaking, people did the right thing (and even people came together for a bit after 9.11).

Funny thing is that nobody in the government lost anything
— synthesis

I don’t know what you mean by that. It could be argued that Trump lost the election because of the pandemic, for instance. — praxis

Nobody in government lost their jobs. They all got paid on-time, every week.

And probably Trump did lose the election because of the pandemic. Politicizing this kind of disaster was truly despicable. The lust for power simply knows no bounds.

It is a false assumption to refer to the response in the singular. — LuckyR

You are absolutely correct, but in general, and for this conversation, the overall winners are governments and corporations, the losers, small business and individuals (just like its been for the past 50 years).

The funny thing is, Jack, even if you are able to eloquently provide the latest and greatest explanations of this, that, and the other thing, how long does it take before an even "better" version becomes popularized. It's a treadmill from which there is no exit.

But we are human (first and foremost) and find it nearly impossible to resist seeking affirmation for our creative ego-driven realities. Everybody's out there saying, "Believe me, because I am right!"

What's the chance that anybody else out there with completely different experiences is going to believe that you are anything but delusional (at best). They simply can't believe that everybody doesn't think as they do.

And then there are the truly evil people in this world who exploit all of this for fun and profit.

We humans have a long, long way to go...

The most wonderful day of my life was when I finally realized that there was no way to "figure it out." Things are the way they are for reasons that the human intellect is simply incapable of accessing. Imagine how much of a relief this must be when you are no longer consumed with analysis. Even better is not having to prove to anybody else that you are right!!

The ego is not our friend, instead, it is a taskmaster of unmatched intensity, a force that refuses to give up until we figure out that it is our own self that we constantly fight while projecting such battles on some innocent who happens to be in the line of fire.

Accepting reality (even our perception-altered reality) is a hell of a lot better than trying to play God.

If you have a theory about how lockdowns are somehow being used as a method of manipulation I’m interested in hearing it. — praxis

First off, we'll know a lot more about what went down five years hence but everything the government does (or any other institution, for that matter) is to effect some sort of policy. The decision to essentially shut down an entire country is so draconian that nobody would have thought it possible a year ago.

2020 was a complete shit-show for all kinds of reasons (mostly because of political polarization). The lock-down caused massive disruption in all things health and economy related. Tens of millions of people were adversely affected while (as is always the case) the elite prospered. This just doesn't happen by chance.

Things are the way they are because that's the way they are designed. I am not saying the pandemic was any kind of plot, but the reaction to it could have been handled MUCH differently. The handling of the economy could have been MUCH different. Again, there are tens of millions of lives that need to be put back together. There are unbelievable numbers of people with mental and emotional issues and the financial toll has been incalculable.

Funny thing is that nobody in the government lost anything. Most corporations seemed to have weathered the storm OK. The FED threw trillions into the stock market for those that have a presence.

There's a reason why the very few have almost everything. Call it manipulation or whatever you like, the reality is that there is massive corruption in this system and has been for decades.

You just happen to be more forthcoming in a forum that pits ego against ego.

I've participated in these discussion groups for decades and it never fails to amaze me how attached people are to their own thinking (when deep down inside they know they have no clue).

I have always suggested that we little we can know happens before our intellect kicks-in to "personalize" reality. Once the thinking begins, all hell breaks lose in our minds and we start spouting off all kinds of non-sense.

Yes, I understand your general take but you mention miscalculation and my interest is your previous claim of manipulation. — praxis

Would it be government if there was not a generous helping of each of these?

I think we're all in the same boat.

Experiments in human manipulation are going on all around us, but I’m curious what you mean with the lockdown. — praxis

I believe that when the costs of the lock-downs are fully revealed, it will be seen a policy miscalculation without precedent. Vulnerable populations should have been advised to be extremely careful, but everybody else should have gone about their business.

This was a massive over-reach of government power designed to initially aid the hospital system but turned into a catastrophe as many politicians went for the power-grab thinking they knew better than the collective wisdom of society.

Almost all Americans, conservative and liberal, support policies that tend to increase their power. — Asphodelus

The bottom-line is that people want something for nothing, so when it comes to political affiliation, pick your poison...liberals who want their free stuff from the government or conservatives who want their stuff (gratis) from manipulating "free" markets.

Yeah if you ever find a cure for philosophy please let me know. — emancipate

The cure for philosophy is acceptance (via seeing things as clearly as is possible). As a matter of fact, it's the cure for pretty much everything.

Imagine the energy and time saved by not always fighting against (every damn thing).

I have been wondering this afternoon, if perhaps my question is completely ridiculous. It could be that lockdown is sending me crazy in even asking about how important it is to question being right, or even wrong. Perhaps I am overthinking, or have I raised a question which is uncomfortable to even think about? — Jack Cummins

What question isn't ridiculous? The nature of thinking in and of itself is pretty absurd in that reality stares us right in the face yet we refuse to accept it, instead substituting our own version so as to satisfy previous misconceptions.

If this era will be known for anything, over-thinking it will probably be right at the top. Thinking is a tool, but one that only helps point the way. Understanding the limits of the human intellect is much more important then the moment to moment transient nature of what we can know.

And the lockdown is a grotesque experiment in human manipulation (IMO).

By 'God' I mean a person who is all-powerful (omnipotent), all-knowing (omniscient) and all-good (omnibenevolent). I take it that possession of those properties is sufficient to make one God. I do not want to debate this, it is just to tell you what I mean by 'God'. — Bartricks

Equal amount of good and bad in everything.

Has any human concept fostered more compassion and more suffering on this planet than God?

However, the whole question of the emotional relationship with our personal systems of belief was one which I was thinking about as I lay awake, unable to sleep last night, so I thought I might as well offer it as another one for people to think about. — Jack Cummins

I am not sure what you might mean by an emotional relationship with your own thinking, but I believe the key with any thinking is to let it come and let it go each moment realizing the impermanence of all things knowable.

Then you don't have the time to emotionally attach to the deceased.

I want to know WHY people choose to go on — Darkneos

Take complete responsibility for yourself through constructive activity (proper diet, regular exercise, work hard, pray/meditate, and sleep well) and your life's meaning will reveal itself in time.

These are the words of the sages passed down through the millennia.

My country has been effectively bankrupt since WWII, doubly so since Thatcherism. Before the pandemic, we were still the fifth largest economy and had the fourth highest growth. So yeah... never going back. There are few alive who recall an economy not based on debt. — Kenosha Kid

I would bet that if you had a currency printing press in your basement that there might be a few bogus bills floating around in your wallet, as well.

This is exactly what was expected when the politicians allowed (viz., were paid off) the most vile members of society (bankers) to print money out of thin air. The fact that they destroyed the entire global economy was as predictable as knowing that the sun is going to rise in the eastern sky in the morning.

We've gotten somewhat off-topic. Irrespective of whether working women is best for the children, best for the father's, best for the mother's or best for society, it is absolutely best for the market, and yet the market has always resisted. The market does not act in its own long-term interest willingly: it has to be forced to do so. — Kenosha Kid

If you look at Western society, in general, you see narcissism on a massive scale. Despite all the various reasons for this, the results are pretty clear...make your life about your 'self,' refuse to take personal responsibility, and things are not so wonderful for you.

It's interesting than an entire movement has arisen around this mind-set (the institutionalization of blame) where the market has supplied these folks with all kinds of rationale for their pitiful behavior. And the whiners have piled on in record numbers.

Success in life is about getting your act together by taking responsibility for your own actions and refusing to engage in the blame game. It's hard work and more hard work after that. Life is what it is at whatever time you happen to be alive. Either you deal with it, work hard and prosper or you blame everybody else for your refusal to do what needs to be done.

Even if one isn't an investor, it's actually important to understand the possible perils in this economic situation and that things aren't going to go the way as before as we are in quite new territory. How deflation and a possible crack up boom will turn out is something we may see. — ssu

I and many others have been following this since the 70's. How it has possibly gotten to this point is beyond me. Obviously, there is no way to pay back the debt (and hasn't been since the 80's), but as you probably know, countries never really intend on paying back debt. They deal with it by inflating it away and/or rolling it over (forever). It is rumored that the BoE never paid off their original debt from 1696. Wouldn't doubt it.

The take home lesson here is that all systems are designed by the few in their own interests. It has never been any other way. The political system is simply a way to keep the masses distracted and their appetites somewhat satiated via the crumbs flicked off the Elite's banquet table.

No "-ism" is going to change any of this.

The optimum arrangement for raising children is, in other words, context-dependent. The Victorian values you espouse would have been no use 20,000 years ago and are of no importance today. — Kenosha Kid

Studies overwhelming suggest that children raised in two parent homes are more successful in every possible category. It comes down to what's more important, the children or the parent, and it's become quite clear that (in the U.S., at least,) children have been made a much less of a priority over the past generation or two. The mantra was always to sacrifice (not necessarily financially) so your kids could have it better than you did. What happened to change this is under intense scrutiny in the social sciences.

I am more than happy to see women increasingly empowered to choose for themselves whether to stay at home, work, take it in turns, or go it alone as they see fit, not as conservative men think they should see fit. — Kenosha Kid

Here's the problem (especially with professional moms). I have known and worked closely with over a dozen highly successful, dedicated professional moms over the years. Every one of them were over-worked and completely burned-out trying to be the super-woman that society tells them they should be.

Almost every one had a horrible marriage with out semi- out of control kids. But they all live in nice neighborhoods, in very nice homes, drove nice cars, and are miserable. This is a huge problem among Western professional women, and I am sure it is common among all women who are trying to do it all.

The great thing about empowerment is that empowers people to do the thing you'd like to see them do. Most women this empowered might well proceed as per Traditional Family Values: after all, it's what appears normal. But the flip side is that those for whom such outdated values don't work don't have to abide by them. We call this freedom. — Kenosha Kid

Yes, and people should have every right to make these choices. If you believe you can have it all, go for it, but remember, live by the sword, die by the sword.

And one more thing. Almost every society that does not make "the family" and its needs THE priority, fails. And it's exactly what you're seeing in the West today.

Remember, women and families existed before Karl Marx. If you choose to see everything through this filter of class struggle giving way to identity politics, then why bother engaging in discourse?

Talk from your own experience. I've read Marx and all the rest. No need to re-hash their stuff. How do you feel about this from what you have experienced in your life?

This is sounding like an argument for not empowering certain people. — Kenosha Kid

People need to empower themselves by choosing that path which makes the most sense for themselves and their families.

why do we think that perpetual inflation is good? — ssu

Thank you for the very short history of the previous several decades, and although I could comment on a number of things, no need to beat a dead horse.

Of course, inflation is simply a tax on the masses and a nifty way of shrinking ones debt for the government.

The FEDs 2% inflation target is like saying that we wish to confiscate all of your wealth...eventually (which is exactly what they have been doing for the last century).

Miguel, it seems like people have a tremendous amount of time and energy invested in their own appreciation of society and how it should operate.

Just like there were people in the USSR who believed that things would improve if the government just did a little more, there are people everywhere who would rather hand their lives over to some nameless bureaucrat and allow him/her to decide what is best.

One might think that after the past several millennia of authoritarian control that people would be universally ready to be free, but not so much. As it turns out, most want mommy and daddy to tell them what to do.

It would be difficult not coming to the conclusion that empowering the individual is the best hope for mankind.
— synthesis

Which individual? If you mean all individuals, that's a group. Unless those that are not empowered are just a random sample, it's difficult to avoid groups if you want to empower people. — Kenosha Kid

Empowering the individual means providing the greatest opportunities to work towards financial independence. All systems (groups) want to do just the opposite, create as much dependence as possible.

People actually empower themselves through persistent hard work.

This is why you must do whatever is possible to have the smallest government possible. Government is at best, treacherous, at worst, the Devil, Himself.
— synthesis

As I recall it, left to their own devices the private sector failed to empower women until equal rights and opportunities legislation forced their hands, and even then they opposed it when they could. Women in the workforce has turned out to be one of the biggest economic boons for the private sector: twice the recruitment pool, which keeps wages low and prices high for twin-income households. — Kenosha Kid

The "private sector" is millions of different interests. You speak as if it was just one voice. Women joining the workforce had many issues surrounding (and still does). It would be hard to defend the thought that kids are better off with working moms than ones who are able to stay at home. Complicated issues, for sure.

And (to large part), it was government policy (going off the gold standard in '71 which led to outsourcing and enormous trade deficits balanced with worth-less FIAT currency) that began the trashing of the American middle class in 70's that forced so many women going to work in the first place.

Another example of capitalism failing to act in its own interests. — Kenosha Kid

As previously mentioned, it's a miracle that human beings (in groups) can accomplish much of anything besides beating the crap out of each other.

I don't get that was specifically said that Jack, although perhaps that is the intent. I do read the wish for a "ruling-class hero" (instead of "working-class hero," get it? :smile: ) to rise to lead us to salvation, as it were. — Pantagruel

Spartacus is dead so I really don't see any other super-heroes types arising to the call anytime soon. What's needed is several adults from the Elite class (nobody will listen to anybody else) to get together and tell it like it is, that is, the system is terminally broken and what needs to be done to fix it (e.g., re-institute real money, no FRL, normalize interest rates, drastically cut the size and scope of government, pay as you go, term-limits across the board, etc).

Personally, I would also revoke all corporate charters and re-issue new ones only as non-profits and good only for 10 years (like the good old days when they understood how corporations would metastasize if given the chance).

I am rather wary of your concern to protect the plight of the ruling class. To what extent do you believe that they are suffering? I would think that any revolutionary movement would be to aid those in poverty. — Jack Cummins

Killing the geese that have been laying your golden eggs seems like a poor strategy. If I were one of those folks, I would have a pow-wow with a bunch of my contemporaries and suggest that we fix what's wrong so this ruse might continue for a few more decades.

Seems like having a few billion put away might tide them over until the system once again is hitting on all cylinders (and the masses chill again).

I'm uncertain about this "ruling class" and those who are a part of it. I've some familiarity with the working class, the middle class and the upper class, but this is apparently another class altogether. Is it anything like "the master race"? — Ciceronianus the White

Master race? You must be watching too much TV.

I am referring to the elite in government, corporations (and to a lesser extent, the thought-leaders in the professional and administrative classes), you know, the folks who actually make all the gears turn.

The purpose of the thread is not to convert people to capitalism, but to discuss the benefits of pluralism in keeping capitalism sustainable. — Kenosha Kid

It would be difficult not coming to the conclusion that empowering the individual is the best hope for mankind. Groups are organized to essentially screw-over individuals, and little more.

This is why you must do whatever is possible to have the smallest government possible. Government is at best, treacherous, at worst, the Devil, Himself.

In order to understand capitalism, you need to put aside your socialist sensitivities.
In capitalism, people are expendable. It's about living for an idea, even if the person living for that idea dies in the process. — baker

The system is Nature, not capitalism. Yes, people and every living organism on this planet are expendable. This would seem to be a fairly basic truth, no?

If there was a better system than capitalism, believe me, the greedy bastards that run this world would be using it to their advantage. Remember, the best way to steal is in broad daylight, in full view of everybody.

There has not been an economic crisis since the recession of the early 90's (and even that one was semi-bailed). I am talking about a proper depression (people jumping off of buildings, etc.).
— synthesis

Forgetting the 2008 Financial Crisis and the recession? (Ah yes, I do see the small blip of the 1990's recession) — ssu

There hasn't been real economic growth in this country since the 60's. It's mostly debt, counterfeiting, and statistical gymnastics designed to make the majority think that what they are seeing with their own eyes is a phantasm.

2008 was simply an interruption in the flow of money that caused all kinds of reciprocal havoc. Nothing that couldn't be fixed by pouring trillions into the system.

And you really don't believe government statistics, do you?

There is too much socialism in this system now. Add more and it will become even more inefficient. This system desperately needs to cleans itself by going through a massive recession (depression) which will allow it to at least work the best it can. Right now it's a complete farce, a combination of mafia politics and corporatism.
— synthesis

Such as..? Actually, this is derailing ssu's thread. It would be welcome on mine though if you want to grind it out, old man :p — Kenosha Kid

Such as?? Old man,eh? You'll will be me soon enough!

Thanks for the uplifting (if somewhat simultaneously condescending) presumption of youth, I'll take it. :) — Kenosha Kid

Not much you can do about your age. You speak like the bright young person I am sure you are.

I'm well aware that the capitalist clergy take all the credit for progression in technology, medicine, worker's rights, and social investment while championing parties that have to prop up a capitalism that, even in its Moore-esque law of exponentially increasing dubiousness of conduct, cannot support itself. I guess capitalism in the west can take credit for bringing people in the east out of poverty, as ssu frequently points out, but that's no more sustainable than anything else capitalism comes up with. Ultimately it's fortunate that, for now, debt is a lucrative industry, since right now it is debt that keeps that poverty line low. — Kenosha Kid

People who are in favor of capitalism (and I've debated this for centuries, well, decades, anyway :) understand the contradictions. Personally, I believe that all systems are horrendous, but some are worse than others. I also understand how inherently unfair this system appears (and especially over the past 20 years) but that's because corruption is completely out of control. It's like the entire Western world is a banana republic.

There is too much socialism in this system now. Add more and it will become even more inefficient. This system desperately needs to cleans itself by going through a massive recession (depression) which will allow it to at least work the best it can. Right now it's a complete farce, a combination of mafia politics and corporatism.

The gold standard is not directly related to fractional reserve banking, as you can have both. The gold standard only limits the primary currency, but banks and everyone can work with derived currencies just fine. But the gold standard does of course have an effect on the domestic money supply since it makes it much more apparent should virtual currencies run out of hand. — Echarmion

Just as important is that under a gold standard, international trade is balanced in gold. Had this not changed in 1971, this would be an entirely different global economy. This was the single policy change that destroyed the Western middle class (sent their manufacturing jobs to low-wage Asian countries).

:rofl: Yeah, as if a good economic crisis has ever led to a change in economic policy. Not in recent history at least. Crises compound stupidity because when people are confronted with change, especially unwanted change, they cling to what they know. — Benkei

There has not been an economic crisis since the recession of the early 90's (and even that one was semi-bailed). I am talking about a proper depression (people jumping off of buildings, etc.). This is what is needed to clear out the dead wood (write of trillions in bad loans, redistribute capital to productive enterprises, and normalize interest rates (better yet, get rid of the FED altogether) .

IOW, allow the system to work!

We are already at the point where, for many countries, the benefits of capitalism are waning. My generation is effectively poorer than my parents'. The number of unemployed people and people in poverty is rapidly growing. Life expectancy is starting to fall, and not because of Covid. It is little comfort that the Chinese are doing so well, though more power to them.

It is only promising that there are fewer people in poverty if that is sustainable, and capitalism does not know the meaning of the word 'sustainable'. A better sentiment might be, "Yeah, but it was fun while it lasted" ;) — Kenosha Kid

You need to widen your perspective a little bit. Most young people act as if the ten years they can remember the the entirety of human history.

We happen to be in a low point, no doubt, but these things are cyclical. You need to study up on your economic cycles and history, in general. And believe me, socialism is not going to save anybody more than the time it takes to destroy whatever generated the wealth it absconds.