So, You Want to Know Why We Have No Money for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid?

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

[sigh] The reason the medicare spending has increased is because so many (like Me) cannot find jobs, have gone through Their savings, have fallen to the bottom and... NEED HELP.

So you have the right to vote yourself a standard of living at the expense of others?

Right? No. But Human compassion and the desire for Those who need help to get it. As for "standard of living... Gee. Enough food to eat (in roach-infested, filthy lodgings, with zero entertainment budget) and health care (which is below standard for those on assistance).

Would You rather see starvation and illness run rampant? Then help no One.

You -need- it, right? It's not your fault, right? You are simply protecting yourself... right?

Not all the time do *I* need it - but when I am ill, yes. If something life-threatening comes along, yes. "Protecting" Myself? More like having options should I fall ill.

Extortion is still extortion - "taxation without representation is tyranny" - ring any bells? How are financially secure individuals being represented, here? They are expected to pay - to the government - so that other people can spend it on paying compensation to those who are jobless or underemployed for their financial burden.

Hey, I'm all for not paying in - PROVIDED the Ones opting out NEVER ask for help. People like Me would be screwed, I think, if They opted out. I once made $60,000 a year. My luck turned bad and I now live on assistance. $325 rent per month, $200 food stamps, $58 for everything else (TP, toothpaste, shampoo, laundry detergent, supplements, soap, tissues, etc.) plus medicare. If an opt out was available and I opted out, I would have nothing.

You can have all the popular support for it you want - it's still extortion as you are using the threat of the masses to take the property of others.

While I agree that unless there is an opt-out available it is extortion, I still say that I would rather the streets not be filled with the dead and the dying. I hold great compassion for My fellow Humans. I know that luck is the greatest factor in success and failure in life (read Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers to get a sense of just how much luck is needed) and cannot fault these People struggling for Their lack of success. (Not saying some few made poor choices, but most tried Their best and failed because luck was not on Their side.)

You misinterpret the article. It speaks of HOSPITAL fraud. I agree that the system is set up to allow for that - fraud on the part of medical establishments. We might never be able to control for that. But to think that because fraud takes place We are better off eliminating the help People NEED is foolish.

I'm going to present you with some facts that you are not going to be able to face. The current system is unsustainable. The Baby Boomer generation is retiring. It will not be long in this country before there are only 5 working AGE individuals to every one retiree (and with unemployment as ridiculous as it is and no end in sight - that figure is only made worse). Social Security goes into the red in about three years - that means they start paying out more than they take in. While there is a "trust fund" for social security - it is merely numbers on paper - no hard assets exist - so any money paid out by social security that is not taken in within the same fiscal year has the exact same impact as deficit spending.

And I'm going to tell You that there is a solution. One that has been hidden and suppressed. In order to see how it would work, One must understand the intimate link between money and energy (They don't call it "currency" for nothing). We use money to account for meaningful energy expended. If we released the hidden tech to draw on the sea of energy that We swim in, We will eventually remove the cost of energy from everything. And what's left is free. With the addition of robots to do everything no One wants to do but needs to be done, Human energy will no longer be needed to do the sweaty, dirty, boring, repetitious, or otherwise repugnant work, freeing all of Us to live as today's elite, and to be creative.

Remove the "work ethic" (since Humans no longer would NEED to work) and put in place a "Betterment ethic." This will encourage Us to seek solutions to problems, and with everything needed free, the (perceived) BEST solutions will be implemented - not the cheapest or most profitable.

By 2025, there will be no U.S. at the current rate of federal spending. The dollar will be in hyper-inflation by that time. I am only 23, and in my lifetime, I have seen prices on most commodities quadruple. I remember soda from a vending machine running 25 cents, gasoline at 89 cents (and my mother cursing creation over it), and $50/week could feed our family three decent meals per night.

Oh, inflation exists, indeed. But I don't think the US will survive as long as You give it. 2015 would amaze Me. But understand that the "price" of anything is irrelevant in its absolute. What matters is its relationship to average income. If one makes 100 a month and an item costs $10, it is IDENTICAL to one who makes $1,000 a month and has to pay $100 for the item in question.

It's buying power that matters - NOT what a price is today (or in the past).

That "waste" number comes from whom? What do They consider "fraud?" How was the number arrived at?

"Waste, Fraud, and Abuse" are often tied together - which generally mean any expenses that do not go toward the health and care of a Medicare member. This does not account for unnecessary treatments and procedures (such as reviving 95 year old women undergoing a heart-attack or allowing for surgery when relevant statistics show little difference between success rates of surgery and other forms of treatment).

Again... Where are the numbers derived from? If They know it's fraud and waste, They can go after it. If They are guesstimating... I want to know HOW They came up with Their numbers.

The American Hospital Association (AHA) RAC Survey reported that through the first quarter of 2011, the RAC program has identified 26% of the selected claims as erroneous. The AHA reported that complex medical record reviews yielded an average overpayment amount of $5,469. In total, the AHA says that RAC programs have identified overpayments by Medicare adding up to $167 million.

I've seen larger and smaller estimates.

So have I. And agenda seems linked into the estimates. Those who want to get rid of help for Humans in need give the highest numbers and Those who feel Humans deserve compassion and dignity give lower numbers. Either way, 167 million is a small price to pay for Human compassion and dignity.

Knowing what I know, I would say 98% plus on medicare NEED HELP.

That doesn't change the fact that the system is currently unsustainable. Even if we were to remove everything BUT entitlement spending - we would still be spending into a deficit. That means cutting the military, funding for highways, etc.

And I agree that there is waste and unscrupulous behavior - but it's rather "baby and bath water"ish. People in this poor excuse for an economy are desperate and NEED HELP. What would it say of Our Humanity if We thew Them to the wolves in an effort to make sure others (NOT on services) didn't abuse the system?

You would cut funding for 98% because the hospitals and doctors commit fraud?

I would cut funding because it is unsustainable. Period. The country cannot continue to support such a system. Either you prioritize your spending and stay together as a nation, or you spend your country into ruin and watch it collapse around you.

Or... You eliminate the need for money and raise ALL Humans' standard of living by releasing method to extract the free energy all around Us. For more on this, read My threads:

The End of Entropy - the foundation - read first

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Ethical Planetarian Party Platform - the structure

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Here's a simple schematic for drawing on the plenum ("dark"/Zero Point/"vacuum"/Radiant/Orgone/...) energy:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


And My novella showing things in actions:

The Abundance Paradigm:

media.abovetopsecret.com...

I'm not really all that opinionated on the matter - if we collapse, I get to shoot at people and make things explode. I'll deal with it. If we make changes and survive as a nation - I get to have a family and provide them with a decent living without becoming a warlord in the process.

I'm going to accomplish what I came here to do, either way. Your all's stupidity isn't going to do much more than determine my means.

Hmm. What did You come here to do, I wonder... And I find it highly amusing to be called "stupid." It was not Me who kept this farce going when We had overunity since at least the 1950's. My point is that it seems unsustainable when the economy is crapping and there are fewer jobs than job seekers by a long margin. This means more with no means. Your estimates are based on the economy staying the same - but if jobs were available People like Me would be working and paying into the system rather than taking from it.

Let the 98% die because They could not afford to be screened early, could not afford to discuss things with doctors, etc.

Medicare is aimed, primarily, at the populations in their retirement ages. By that time, preventative screening isn't just unnecessary - it's often a health hazard in and of itself.

That may be so... But others who are on medicare are the disabled (any age) and People like Me who have applied to over 35,000 jobs in five year, lost everything, and now are scraping by on assistance. Plenty of younger individuals on medicare - especially now in this economy.

Further, an unsustainable system is simply that - an unsustainable system. You must bring the costs under control or lose it entirely. That is the reality of the situation and you're going to experience the consequences of these irresponsible expenses in one way or another.

I agree bringing costs related to fraud and such should be minimized. I don't agree that granny should be tossed from Her bed because no One will pay for it. Or Suzie with MS. Or Harvey with a disabling birth defect. I cannot turn My back on unlucky Humans.

And meanwhile We are spending ten times that (a guess, inclusive of black budget) to kill People in other countries, to invade and occupy other countries, and other assorted evil. Yeah, Let's keep those few frauds out of medicare so We can continue pushing Our collective weight around on this planet like the bully We seem to be.

You've no clue, do you?

DoD spending for the 2012 fiscal year is slated for about 557 Billion dollars. By time you add in other defense related spending (including veterans benefits and retiree pay that should be included with other government-employee expenses like everything else) the total comes up to 882 billion dollars. This includes spending on classified programs.

LOLOL! I admit I have no clue on the precise amount of black budget spending, but I think of those trillions that have gone missing (and hushed up in the media) I suspect the funds made it into black budget projects. I doubt, therefore, the figures You give, and suggest whoever came up with these figures did not have access to all the information - or did and "fixed" the numbers to suggest little spending..

Total spending on Medicare/Medicaid is some 618 billion dollars (that's Medicare and Medicaid combined). However, there is an additional 530 billion dollars allotted for programs giving aid to 'state-funded' medicare systems (and a few other 'income security' payments).

That brings the total up to about 1.15 Trillion spent on Medicare, Medicaid, and related programs. Though this does not include Social Security or some of the other entitlement programs.

Whoa. Social Security is NOT an "entitlement" program. Look at most ANY paystub and You will see PAYMENTS for that security deducted from the gross. We each and every One of Us have PAID for goods that You must think should go undelivered. "Gee. We took Your money with promises of security at retirement...but...You're just asking for ENTITLEMENT and so We're taking it away."

Right.

As for the total... When We can "lose" the same amount from Our coffers, without an outpouring of concern and investigation... It's hard to take even a trillion dollar price tag too seriously.

Really, you can spin the numbers any direction you want. The fact of the matter is that 2.2 Trillion of our federal budget is dedicated to subsidizing incomes and 'quality of life' expenses for individuals and families in this country (call them by their respective individual titles and costs if you want - their net effect is the same). The entire budget is only some 4 Trillion with a 1.4 Trillion in deficit spending.

How did We lose that trillion plus? There is gross mismanagement in all parts of government. And would eliminating world aggression, control and occupation help? Would eliminating the Fed? Would eliminating the need for money?

Seriously, I cannot see the Human compassion in arguing that it's OK to spend money killing Humans instead of saving Them. Like war, aggression, and bullying are worth more than Human life. How sad if You think that is true.

Budgets aren't about compassion. They are about numbers.

Right... But cutting death-related expenses seems far the better choice than life-related expenses. Human choices rather than inHuman ones.

Further - you have this illogical view that government spending is going to help people. Healthcare costs have swelled outside of historical growth trends since the implementation of Medicare and other government-funded expeditions into Healthcare.

A poorly managed plan can do that. And government spending DOES help People. I would be frozen dead in an alley three winters ago if I received no help.

You also make the illogical conclusion that cutting government spending is going to harm people.

??? I made no such "conclusion." I conclude that cutting MILITARY spending over MEDICARE will help. Cutting MEDICARE over MILITARY spending WILL hurt People. As I said, if the help was not there, I would be dead.

I am merely telling you exactly what the problem in this country is.

Your perception of the problem...

It has nothing to do with defense spending and everything to do with an overall spending problem.

Huh??? It has to do with spending, military, services and otherwise. Where to cut spending is the question. I say military spending. Cutting Human services over military spending is...inHuman.

Politicians have spent far too long just buying those they do not agree with. Earmarks and funding appendages to 400 pages of legal double-talk are the way to get hesitant people on-board with a bill (fund some cowboy music festival in their district or something - just get them to shut up and sign the damned thing). The fastest growing segment of the budget is entitlement spending - which currently accounts for well over half of all government spending.

And that could have a great deal to do with the tanking economy. As People find Themselves unable to find jobs, and They lose everything, They fall into that net. Thank the powers that be that the net is there. You would remove the net to ensure We can pay Haliburton for creating the crap We use to throw Our collective weight around on this planet.

START with military spending, and then move to services if need be.

Military spending has risen - but is not projected to do anything but decline over the next decade. Federal health care spending, however, is expected to double by the year 2020 and account for 8.8% of GDP.

Expected based on present trends. Trends change, and if Our economy were to boom again (I doubt I will see that), the economic issues would lessen and projections become meaningless.

That. Is. Un. Sus. Tain. A. Ble.

Period.

In fact, money systems are pretty much unsustainable in the long run. Let's get rid of the need for money. You may want to check out my "Who are 'They'?" linked in My sig.

reply to post by Amaterasu

Right? No. But Human compassion and the desire for Those who need help to get it. As for "standard of living... Gee. Enough food to eat (in roach-infested, filthy lodgings, with zero entertainment budget) and health care (which is below standard for those on assistance).

So, you feel that you are being compassionate when you take the property (income) of another person and give it to someone you deem in need of it?

Would You rather see starvation and illness run rampant? Then help no One.

You're backwards.

I do what I can to help people. As much of an arrogant prick as I can be - I will bend over backwards to help people, and go without on my own behalf to help another. My dream is, one day, to have my own 'empire' - of sorts - dedicated to helping those with potential but no means to achieve their goals in life. I want to have the resources at my command to give back to this world.

But that is what I want to do with -my- life, -my- home and lifestyle.

I may not think very highly of someone who stalks about their mansion as a bitter, paranoid hermit - but I do not see it as my right or responsibility to use threat of force, government, or tax code to make him share his table.

I see him as a resource - a person who can potentially be convinced to exchange his wealth for something I can make or do. I'll roll on the ground and bark like a dog if it so moves him to toss money in my direction. Or I'll build him another wing onto his house, write him a novel that leaves his heart of stone a pile of mush, install an entertainment system or home network.... a person with money is a person waiting for something to spend money on, generally speaking.

If I want that person's money so badly - I should at least be considerate enough to offer up something in exchange. This isn't the post-apocalypse where we can justify stealing from anther person as survival.

Not all the time do *I* need it - but when I am ill, yes. If something life-threatening comes along, yes. "Protecting" Myself? More like having options should I fall ill.

What happened to being part of a health care union?

Hey, I'm all for not paying in - PROVIDED the Ones opting out NEVER ask for help.

A sudden reversal? And here I thought you had more integrity.

These people are hurt - losing their jobs... starving... just look at the eyes of their children as they beg for food on the street.

People like Me would be screwed, I think, if They opted out. I once made $60,000 a year. My luck turned bad and I now live on assistance. $325 rent per month, $200 food stamps, $58 for everything else (TP, toothpaste, shampoo, laundry detergent, supplements, soap, tissues, etc.) plus medicare. If an opt out was available and I opted out, I would have nothing.

Everyone should have some kind of insurance plan. Whether it be a generous savings account, an insurance company, some kind of union (which is, actually, what an insurance company is) or a benevolent benefactor - your insurance is your responsibility. I don't see it as my right to force someone into what I see as a responsible decision.

While I agree that unless there is an opt-out available it is extortion, I still say that I would rather the streets not be filled with the dead and the dying.

Because people would simply die without the government pumping money into them.

I hold great compassion for My fellow Humans. I know that luck is the greatest factor in success and failure in life (read Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers to get a sense of just how much luck is needed) and cannot fault these People struggling for Their lack of success. (Not saying some few made poor choices, but most tried Their best and failed because luck was not on Their side.)

Luck, huh.

A pretty pathetic excuse. And let me elaborate before you get too defensive.

It is true that life is full of many factors that reside well outside of our control and ability to predict. However, all events fall within probability. If you're driving a car - you should probably have some kind of insurance plan on it. If you live in a region hit by hurricanes - you should probably consider that insurance, as well as have an evacuation plan and kit(s).

You manage your risks in life and balance your wagers. Life is like a game of roulette - you place your bets and wait for the marble to fall. To the average person - it's a random system. To my procedural mind - it's nearly impossible to walk away from a roulette table with less than I started.

It's all about managing your losses while optimizing your gains. Don't bet on a red square and the black suit. Don't place large amounts on low-odds, use your high-odds to cover your low-odd gambles.

Life is also full of opportunities you can choose to take or leave behind. Many people just don't take many opportunities. For example - I could be out making connections and acquaintances on base as well as in the civilian population while I'm on an extended annual training stint. Instead - I'm on here telling people they are wrong.

People and connections make life what it is. I think I've talked about this before... I forget what threads I have and haven't lectured about it already.

Remove the "work ethic" (since Humans no longer would NEED to work) and put in place a "Betterment ethic." This will encourage Us to seek solutions to problems, and with everything needed free, the (perceived) BEST solutions will be implemented - not the cheapest or most profitable.

Fleets of robots still need to be maintained. Metals still need to be produced. Etc. Robots are a manpower-multiplier, not a manpower replacement. Further - implementing robots will not necessarily reduce or eliminate the costs involved with the production of everything. Sometimes it's just cheaper to have a guy out there picking stuff off the vine than it is to have an entire field of machinery attempting to do the same thing.

I'm not saying you are wrong in what you are suggesting - automation is the key to a lot of cost-reductions and quality-improvements... but it's not a silver-bullet solution.

It's buying power that matters - NOT what a price is today (or in the past).

Inflation is often an indication of a loss in purchasing power. Particularly when you have minimum wages established by the government.

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

Right? No. But Human compassion and the desire for Those who need help to get it. As for "standard of living... Gee. Enough food to eat (in roach-infested, filthy lodgings, with zero entertainment budget) and health care (which is below standard for those on assistance).

So, you feel that you are being compassionate when you take the property (income) of another person and give it to someone you deem in need of it?

I deem it compassionate to help Those in need, yes. As for taking from others, as I said, I agree that's extortion if there is no opt-out. But even under the present system, helping others instead of spending on military pursuit is an infinitely better option than the other way around.

Would You rather see starvation and illness run rampant? Then help no One.

You're backwards.

I do what I can to help people. As much of an arrogant prick as I can be - I will bend over backwards to help people, and go without on my own behalf to help another. My dream is, one day, to have my own 'empire' - of sorts - dedicated to helping those with potential but no means to achieve their goals in life. I want to have the resources at my command to give back to this world.

But that is what I want to do with -my- life, -my- home and lifestyle.

I may not think very highly of someone who stalks about their mansion as a bitter, paranoid hermit - but I do not see it as my right or responsibility to use threat of force, government, or tax code to make him share his table.

I see him as a resource - a person who can potentially be convinced to exchange his wealth for something I can make or do. I'll roll on the ground and bark like a dog if it so moves him to toss money in my direction. Or I'll build him another wing onto his house, write him a novel that leaves his heart of stone a pile of mush, install an entertainment system or home network.... a person with money is a person waiting for something to spend money on, generally speaking.

If I want that person's money so badly - I should at least be considerate enough to offer up something in exchange. This isn't the post-apocalypse where we can justify stealing from anther person as survival.

As I said, extortion is not the best solution, but within a system of extortion (income taxes!), We can do better by helping Our own than killing Others.

Not all the time do *I* need it - but when I am ill, yes. If something life-threatening comes along, yes. "Protecting" Myself? More like having options should I fall ill.

What happened to being part of a health care union?

Such as...? And how would I pay for this? (Medicare is a "health care union" of a sort...) If I have nothing, I cannot join any option that costs money.

Hey, I'm all for not paying in - PROVIDED the Ones opting out NEVER ask for help.

A sudden reversal? And here I thought you had more integrity.

I reversed nothing. You fail to comprehend what You read of what I wrote. I said I am for cutting MILITARY first and services as a last resort - within the system We presently have. If We want to imagine a better system, that's all good and well, but while We're at it, Let's not be robbing from the poor to pay the rich (robbing health care to support unimaginably profitable war suppliers).

These people are hurt - losing their jobs... starving... just look at the eyes of their children as they beg for food on the street.

What are You on about here? (And if You want to see starving children, work at the homeless shelter for a while.)

People like Me would be screwed, I think, if They opted out. I once made $60,000 a year. My luck turned bad and I now live on assistance. $325 rent per month, $200 food stamps, $58 for everything else (TP, toothpaste, shampoo, laundry detergent, supplements, soap, tissues, etc.) plus medicare. If an opt out was available and I opted out, I would have nothing.

Everyone should have some kind of insurance plan. Whether it be a generous savings account, an insurance company, some kind of union (which is, actually, what an insurance company is) or a benevolent benefactor - your insurance is your responsibility. I don't see it as my right to force someone into what I see as a responsible decision.

I agree. And I lasted two full years before I could no longer pay rent and was evicted. I never in a million years would think I would have issues finding employment for over FIVE FULL YEARS. I expected six months max when I was first laid off in 2006. But the years have drawn on. What is Your solution for when the savings, unemployment insurance, and benevolent benefactors (the gov't?) are all gone? Working in a position with no unions prior to being laid off?

What do You do for the ones who barely scrape by on what They make and cannot save or pay for insurance? Mandating each is responsible for Their own insurance is a VERY unequal mandate. If One is rich...insurance is a mere crumb on the plate. And if One is in the middle somewhere it is an annoyance, perhaps, but doable.

But... If One is very poor, this punishes One. This says that They aren't a worthy Human just because the luck of the draw landed Them in poverty. Gee. Can't afford to eat if You buy insurance? Too bad, so sad.

How ugly is THAT?

While I agree that unless there is an opt-out available it is extortion, I still say that I would rather the streets not be filled with the dead and the dying.

Because people would simply die without the government pumping money into them.

Eventually, yes. If I had nothing to pay rent with, I would freeze in the winter. And there would be hundreds of thousands in that same boat. I would have no food but the meager portions at the food pantry - and there would be many more in line for the little that's there (presuming food stamps were cut with the rest). So... You bet People would die - of exposure, of starvation, of disease and illness. In massively greater numbers than We see at present.

I hold great compassion for My fellow Humans. I know that luck is the greatest factor in success and failure in life (read Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers to get a sense of just how much luck is needed) and cannot fault these People struggling for Their lack of success. (Not saying some few made poor choices, but most tried Their best and failed because luck was not on Their side.)

Luck, huh.

A pretty pathetic excuse. And let me elaborate before you get too defensive.

Finding a job in this economy that will pay the bills is luck. Finding one that can cover insurance, too, is phenomenal luck.

It is true that life is full of many factors that reside well outside of our control and ability to predict. However, all events fall within probability. If you're driving a car - you should probably have some kind of insurance plan on it. If you live in a region hit by hurricanes - you should probably consider that insurance, as well as have an evacuation plan and kit(s).

If You drive a car but barely can pay for gas, adding insurance becomes problematic. If You have a house but the money coming in just covers food and utilities, You are likely not to buy insurance.

You manage your risks in life and balance your wagers.

Agreed, as far as One has control. BUT, You seem to think that everyone should pay for something most cannot afford. And like I said... My luck in finding a job has been tremendously poor, being 50+ and competing with a dozen to 50 twenty-somethings and thirty-somethings for each position.

Life is like a game of roulette - you place your bets and wait for the marble to fall. To the average person - it's a random system. To my procedural mind - it's nearly impossible to walk away from a roulette table with less than I started.

LOLOL! I had to laugh. You may not be aware that My father was one of the foremost gambling mathematicians in the US before He died. The odds of leaving a roulette table even are very slim, and the odds of winning even slimmer.

Losing at the table is the likely outcome.

And life is NOT like a roulette game - in that:

1. In roulette One knows all the parameters.
2. One has the same opportunity as any other player (no One playing comes with only certain bets available)
3. No One can opt out on a round and jump in on the next...

Life starts Us all on VERY unequal footing - most have little opportunity and a few have great amounts of opportunity. You make it sound as if We all start on equal footing, but We don't. The luck of the draw in where We were born alone determines much about the opportunities available to Us.

It's all about managing your losses while optimizing your gains. Don't bet on a red square and the black suit. Don't place large amounts on low-odds, use your high-odds to cover your low-odd gambles.

Yeah... IF You're lucky to have the chips to bet with in the first place.

Life is also full of opportunities you can choose to take or leave behind. Many people just don't take many opportunities. For example - I could be out making connections and acquaintances on base as well as in the civilian population while I'm on an extended annual training stint. Instead - I'm on here telling people they are wrong.

Life is NOT "full of opportunities" for the greater part of the population. Few opportunities present themselves to those downtrodden. Because You were born with the skills and abilities You have, because You were not arthritic, for example, military opportunity was available to You.

People and connections make life what it is. I think I've talked about this before... I forget what threads I have and haven't lectured about it already.

Remove the "work ethic" (since Humans no longer would NEED to work) and put in place a "Betterment ethic." This will encourage Us to seek solutions to problems, and with everything needed free, the (perceived) BEST solutions will be implemented - not the cheapest or most profitable.

Fleets of robots still need to be maintained.

Maintenance robots - and People who love to fix robots (plenty of Them!)

Metals still need to be produced.

Yeah... Robots to mine, robots to purify, robots to alloy, robots form the metal... And any People who love to do that sort of thing (not so many as love fixing robots)

Etc.

Please go on. What fills this "etc?"

Robots are a manpower-multiplier, not a manpower replacement.

And why couldn't they be for any necessary work no One wants to do (or not enough People want to do)? And there have been MANY MANY jobs that are now done by robots that once Humans did. So clearly they CAN be "a manpower replacement."

Further - implementing robots will not necessarily reduce or eliminate the costs involved with the production of everything.

Alone, You are correct. It is not the robots that cause the costs to drop to nothing. It's the adding of the plenum ("dark"/Zero Point/"vacuum"/Radiant/Orgone/...) energy. The energy is the important thing. Robots just make it unnecessary to force labor (via wages) of Humans in any capacity.

Sometimes it's just cheaper to have a guy out there picking stuff off the vine than it is to have an entire field of machinery attempting to do the same thing.

More and more, as robotics skyrockets, there never will be a "cheaper" Human to do that.

I'm not saying you are wrong in what you are suggesting - automation is the key to a lot of cost-reductions and quality-improvements... but it's not a silver-bullet solution.

And I will say again, without the addition directly of what money represents (meaningful energy expended), We will worry about poverty, war (virtually all wars have been instigated to enrich the war suppliers - who usually supply both sides), haves and have-nots, luck, hunger, and other ills.

It's buying power that matters - NOT what a price is today (or in the past).

Inflation is often an indication of a loss in purchasing power. Particularly when you have minimum wages established by the government.

Again, I agree. If the minimum wage from 1964 was honestly adjusted for inflation it would be about $17.50 an hour... But if One is compensated for inflation in One's pay, inflation becomes meaningless. That was all I was saying.

reply to post by Imhotepsol


Wont happen, military spending is a big repub support thing..

Originally posted by Imhotepsol
I did a quick search to see if this was already posted, I was surprised nothing came up.

I came across this article today dealing with how defense funds are appropriated - its an excellent insight into where your money is going America. If you want to do something to help your county dealing with this might be a start.

I strongly urge everyone to follow the links below and read about where a good portion of your $649 billion dollars in Defense Appropriations is going. I also urge you to take special notice of the wording "Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs," and ask yourself why these programs are under the Department of Defense. I didn't direct my Congressional representative to give the DOD money to do medical research, did you?

Link

That money is spent on the development of prostetics, and research relating to the treatment of SEVERE flesh wounds. A lot of the treatments used nowadays were developed in the military, it's a good thing. Having said that, how much of that money is actually used for that specific research and not siphoned to something else I don't know.

I have a friend that goes to the VA for ALL his medical as he has a rare disorder that the doctors at the VA hospital are a lot better at treating.(VA teaching hospital staffed by UCLA)

A while back he got a letter from Medicare that was a summary of all his treatment paid for by Medicare.(the VA bills medicare for non service connected treatment)

On his bill only a 1/4 of his bill was for treatment by the VA. 3/4s was for treatment of someone else by non VA doctors.

Someone got a copy of his Medicare card and has been using it for there medical treatment.

His biggest fear is during a medical emergency where he gets taken to the nearest hospital that they may use his Medicare number and get this other persons medical records (his SS# is also being used by this other person on there medical records)and try to treat him using them.
This could be fatal for him.

Under Obamacare all your medical records will be able to be brought up on any hospital computer anywhere in the US. even someone that is using your number to defraud medicare

Oy, this is getting ridiculously long, here, Amaterasu.

I posted before I finished replying to your previous post - I got a little rushed.

Again... Where are the numbers derived from? If They know it's fraud and waste, They can go after it. If They are guesstimating... I want to know HOW They came up with Their numbers.

Medicare and Medicaid, by law, have 30 days to pay any and all claims made. This is why such large amounts of money are lost - an estimated 20-25% of all medicare claims are either erroneous or downright fraudulent. However, there are so many claims and such little time to pay them that it's months or even years after the fact that the fraud is discovered.

Read the CBS article I posted - it elaborates upon this considerably. They are going after these criminals who bill medicare for support equipment and other kinds of things (it's not uncommon for a warehouse to be bought and used for a few months, claiming to be a supplier of home aid products or something of the like) - but it's so easy to avoid capture, and such a lucrative business (you can make hundreds of thousands in a few months - practically enough to retire on), that it's just a bugged game of whack-a-mole with no end.

The others sit in billing errors - billing units and prescription units are two different things. A lot of times a pharmacy will (by mistake or knowing exploitation) bill in the wrong way and simply get more money than they should. Other times, surgeries are done that are completely unnecessary - in that same article (same one that mentions the erroneous billing of prescriptions), there was a huge number of claims against medicare for colonoscopies on individuals over the age of 75 - which is not just unnecessary, but potentially damaging to people of that age.

And I agree that there is waste and unscrupulous behavior - but it's rather "baby and bath water"ish. People in this poor excuse for an economy are desperate and NEED HELP. What would it say of Our Humanity if We thew Them to the wolves in an effort to make sure others (NOT on services) didn't abuse the system?

We need to get rid of government involvement in the health care industry. The more things government pays for - the less freedom we, as individuals and families have. That's all there is to it.

We don't necessarily have to end it overnight - but we certainly need to make it clear that entitlement spending is completely unsustainable and it's time to close the curtain. If states see fit, they can start up and fund their own programs that are not to be subsidized by the federal government.

Or... You eliminate the need for money and raise ALL Humans' standard of living by releasing method to extract the free energy all around Us. For more on this, read My threads:

.... Despite my reservations on the veracity of your assertion, it would not end our budget problems - nor would it eliminate the need for money. Money is a representation of one's contribution to society - their skills, assets, effort, conduct, and how it is perceived by the individual paying for their services. It will always be with us.

Perhaps there will be a day when food is like water from a public water fountain - but I don't expect we will see that extend to much more than that in society.

Here's a simple schematic for drawing on the plenum ("dark"/Zero Point/"vacuum"/Radiant/Orgone/...) energy:

I've seen many of these claims before, and never seen much come of them.

But let's not get into physics discussion, here. I'm not of the opinion a method for achieving over-unity has been discovered, and have not been too impressed with the arguments that have attempted to demonstrate otherwise. Mostly because so few claim to have replicated the acclaimed effects, and no one has really demonstrated these devices functioning.

Regardless, a "we just need to release the secret technology that will solve our problems" doesn't really constitute a solution to our problems. It's like if you were to walk up to me and demand I reveal my vagina. I can't reveal what I don't have, despite whatever allegations get thrown my way.

I figured I'd just use that to see if it got any kind of a reaction... see if anyone was paying attention.

Hmm. What did You come here to do, I wonder... And I find it highly amusing to be called "stupid." It was not Me who kept this farce going when We had overunity since at least the 1950's. My point is that it seems unsustainable when the economy is crapping and there are fewer jobs than job seekers by a long margin. This means more with no means. Your estimates are based on the economy staying the same - but if jobs were available People like Me would be working and paying into the system rather than taking from it.

It's honestly best described as a dream. But, simply put, I'm here to create the single most powerful consolidation of technological, industrial, and computational capabilities. To lead a 'corporation' (for lack of a better word) that can keep up with my rate of learning and curiosity.

That may be so... But others who are on medicare are the disabled (any age) and People like Me who have applied to over 35,000 jobs in five year, lost everything, and now are scraping by on assistance. Plenty of younger individuals on medicare - especially now in this economy.

Think laterally. You're not illiterate and clearly quite affluent in typing. That makes you superior to about 95% of everyone else using a computer. It will be a while before I'm ready to start a business venture - but I keep a mental and physical list of people and handles to contact when I do - start calling in favors, talents, opinions, etc.

Have you ever considered publishing literary works, or trying to? I'm not saying it's going to put you up in a mansion - but it is something. I write in my spare time (may as well - I'm can't get my internal dialogue to shut up for anything) - I go on learning-binges through the web, dabble in programing and graphics design. At the very least - I have a wide range of skills that someone may just let me hang around at their house in exchange for those skills. That... or I'm a boy scout - I can forage like any self-respecting monkey.

I agree bringing costs related to fraud and such should be minimized. I don't agree that granny should be tossed from Her bed because no One will pay for it. Or Suzie with MS. Or Harvey with a disabling birth defect. I cannot turn My back on unlucky Humans.

No one is saying you have to. But it is not the government's responsibility.

LOLOL! I admit I have no clue on the precise amount of black budget spending, but I think of those trillions that have gone missing (and hushed up in the media) I suspect the funds made it into black budget projects. I doubt, therefore, the figures You give, and suggest whoever came up with these figures did not have access to all the information - or did and "fixed" the numbers to suggest little spending..

The trillions were over the course of decades, if I remember correctly. Further - it's not really clear what "2 Trillion went missing" really means. More than likely - it simply means it was unaccounted for - given to commands that shouldn't have been receiving it, reimbursing travel claims that it shouldn't have... there are a number of possibilities. However - the budget is the budget. This 2 Trillion exists within the stated budgets over the corresponding years. It does not mean that there was 2 Trillion in additional spending.

As for what they went to - like I said - it's anyone's guess. It's more than likely errors in paperwork, payroll, etc. It is not uncommon for DFAS to suddenly pay us $4,000 for no reason other than it's the 1st of September, 2009 (or whatever). Then we have to call and ask what bone-headed nonsense they are trying to pull (because it means we simply won't get a paycheck at some point in the future, once they figure out they made a mistake) and straighten it out.

Now imagine that same type of climate, only dealing with multi-million dollar radars, reduction gear assemblies, etc. So, I suppose it's no wonder $2 Trillion went missing. No one ever seems to know what the hell is going on, anyway. Ask three different people what's going on, and you'll get nine different answers.

Whoa. Social Security is NOT an "entitlement" program. Look at most ANY paystub and You will see PAYMENTS for that security deducted from the gross. We each and every One of Us have PAID for goods that You must think should go undelivered. "Gee. We took Your money with promises of security at retirement...but...You're just asking for ENTITLEMENT and so We're taking it away."

It is government spending the individual is entitled to by basis of being - it is an entitlement program. The problem, however, is that Social Security has always been an accounting trick - so to speak. There is no trust fund. There's no account with any hard assets in it. It's simply numbers on a piece of paper representing the number of dollars taken out of circulation and placed in reserve for re-issue later.

Once the Social security system fails to bring in more money than it is spending, it ceases to be deficit-neutral. In effect, the U.S. begins printing more money and further contributing to inflation. It then becomes deficit spending. Even before it becomes "bankrupt."

In all honesty - I pay into the system, but I never plan on using it. I will be surprised if the U.S. is still around by time I'd be eligible to draw social security - much less if social security exists.

How did We lose that trillion plus? There is gross mismanagement in all parts of government. And would eliminating world aggression, control and occupation help? Would eliminating the Fed? Would eliminating the need for money?

Ending world aggression? How do you plan to do that? I've got a few doomsday concepts - they would certainly destroy our petty little problems .... but you seem to have this idea that if we simply bring our military home and downsize, everything will be okay and the world will be better for it.

Right... But cutting death-related expenses seems far the better choice than life-related expenses. Human choices rather than inHuman ones.

Killing is a human instinct. Don't fool yourself. Had you a child - you'd kill to protect that child. Maybe you have a love/relationship - maybe you don't - but every one I've been in, I would have killed to protect her (and would have vanquished my own soul to protect).

You have to stop and see what is important in life and do what is necessary to protect that. You have to know yourself, know your dreams/ambitions, and be able to put that into perspective to make an honest and resolved choice. I make no attempt to judge another human being's soul.

A poorly managed plan can do that. And government spending DOES help People. I would be frozen dead in an alley three winters ago if I received no help.

Why should anyone help you? The government has programs for that, right?

I'd never let another person to die from neglect (unless they were adamant about being left alone to die). I'm a hospitable person who, despite my militant outbursts, enjoys being a nurturing influence. That said - it's not a government responsibility or priority. People should take care of people. I get no warm fuzzies looking at my paycheck and seeing the taxes taken out. I do get warm fuzzies to have the opportunity to cook for someone - or to cook for a 'family' (mine is dead and/or dispersed - I simply don't cook anymore because I am so used to cooking in large portions that it's depressing to cook individual servings). I enjoy knowing I helped someone.

??? I made no such "conclusion." I conclude that cutting MILITARY spending over MEDICARE will help. Cutting MEDICARE over MILITARY spending WILL hurt People. As I said, if the help was not there, I would be dead.

Current deficit spending is at 1.4 Trillion. Total spending on medicare/medicaid and related is 1.2 Trillion. Total spending on the military is less than 900 Billion.

even if we cut -everything- from the military - just... stop having a military and Veteran's benefits/compensation/etc - we'd have over 500 Billion in deficit spending. Which means we would have to cut Medicare spending in half to balance the budget.

Sure - there are other areas to trim from - government employee payments/pensions/etc. You can't seriously have a discussion about balancing the budget without placing Medicare and Medicaid up on the table. Yeah - defense spending is going to be on the table, too - I'm a military guy and have seen where a lot of the waste is. We could probably shave 20% off of the budget without adversely affecting current capability and readiness. Structural changes to encourage efficient spending (rather than use-it-or-lose-it concepts) and to further reduce operational costs (such as relying on a reserve force more than state-side active duty) would go a long way.

But the simple reality is that we cannot escape some very dramatic changes to Medicare/Medicaid - no matter what we do to the defense budget.

Your perception of the problem...

There is no perception on this. The numbers are right there on the page.

Huh??? It has to do with spending, military, services and otherwise. Where to cut spending is the question. I say military spending. Cutting Human services over military spending is...inHuman.

The government isn't supposed to be human. It is supposed to be functional.

START with military spending, and then move to services if need be.

You don't seem to understand. The U.S. Federal government is overspending itself by about 50% of its revenue. The entire CONCEPT of government spending has to be addressed. We are simply trying to pay for every whim that we can think of - and it's destroying us.

Defense is part of the Federal Government's responsibilities as indicated in the Constitution numerous times - notably in the Preamble and the role of the President as Commander In Chief. Health Care is not. "Income security" is not. In fact, it is a power reserved to the states that is not even supposed to exist at the federal level, Constitutionally speaking.

But even under the present system, helping others instead of spending on military pursuit is an infinitely better option than the other way around.

But that is not your decision to make.

Technically - that decision belongs to Congress.

As I said, extortion is not the best solution, but within a system of extortion (income taxes!), We can do better by helping Our own than killing Others.

When did we forsake ideals and principles? There is no time like the present, and no present like time (can't take the claim for that one).

What are You on about here? (And if You want to see starving children, work at the homeless shelter for a while.)

It's simply inhuman to turn your back on someone who needs help... even if they did opt out of an insurance plan. And what about their families? The children don't really have a choice, now do they? What about the wife of the foolish husband? Who is going to take care of them when he gets hurt and has no insurance and loses his job?

.... You see where I'm going?

You are willing to let emotions dictate your reasoning now, and will do so with many other issues, rather than choosing to seek a functional solution.

Finding a job in this economy that will pay the bills is luck. Finding one that can cover insurance, too, is phenomenal luck.

Strategy and risk management. I'm a computer, electronics, and avionics person. In my place of residence, there's zero demand for it. I'll turn wrenches at a factory, mop floors, etc. You've got to think ten steps ahead and five steps to either side.

If You drive a car but barely can pay for gas, adding insurance becomes problematic. If You have a house but the money coming in just covers food and utilities, You are likely not to buy insurance.

Then you'll have to prioritize. All there is to it. What do you need and what can you do without? Who can you ask for help?

Half the time, people I know around town won't let me walk anywhere if I'm out without my car for some odd reason. They're almost offended when I don't ask them for help and it's obvious to them I could certainly use it. I've been raised not to ask for help from people (not any sort of specific direction - my parents were just never the type to ask for help) - but at the same time, I get kind of upset when people don't ask me for help and, instead, walked five miles in a heat wave or something - so I don't know why I feel so guilty when asking for help.

Agreed, as far as One has control. BUT, You seem to think that everyone should pay for something most cannot afford. And like I said... My luck in finding a job has been tremendously poor, being 50+ and competing with a dozen to 50 twenty-somethings and thirty-somethings for each position.

The reason much of it is so expensive is because of direct government involvement. Although the 50+ aspect complicates things considerably. People are usually trying to mesh their career and retirement together at that point, not looking for employment, in general.

LOLOL! I had to laugh. You may not be aware that My father was one of the foremost gambling mathematicians in the US before He died. The odds of leaving a roulette table even are very slim, and the odds of winning even slimmer.

It wasn't an 'official' roulette table (it was one designed for home parties and such) - but I did have a 'system' (or ... philosophy). I walked away with ten times what I started with (wishing it was actually money). I won't pretend to say I worked it out mathematically - I worked it out by intuition. I randomly chose a number and simply applied an inverse-hedge 'stack' on top of it - varying my outside bets (IE - bet on the color of my single, or the odd/even state).

Now - it's my understanding that there's a temporal aspect at work, here - over billions of trials, you might see the house edge as expected. It may have simply been the low number of trials (in the hundreds) and evading the initial risk of catastrophic loss. I've yet to really try at a casino - mostly because I can't ethically justify that at the moment. I'm chewing into my savings account at the moment while seeking more gainful employment in my civilian side, so I don't really feel right dropping $100 on a roulette table.

Though I have had "remote" experiences in my life - seemingly gaining knowledge about another person's surroundings or memories that I can't explain. So - who knows.

Life starts Us all on VERY unequal footing - most have little opportunity and a few have great amounts of opportunity. You make it sound as if We all start on equal footing, but We don't. The luck of the draw in where We were born alone determines much about the opportunities available to Us.

what I mean is that you have to analyze the situation and take your risks as responsibly and intelligently as you can.

At least I didn't try and tell you life was like a video game. I had to hold back a laugh when I was at a friend's graduation and the Valedictorian's speech included that statement. (in his defense, he was trying to make the point that when you 'lose' a level, you try again... me, I'm just wondering where the reset button is).

Yeah... IF You're lucky to have the chips to bet with in the first place.

You've always got chips. Just may not be what that table is playing with.

Life is NOT "full of opportunities" for the greater part of the population. Few opportunities present themselves to those downtrodden. Because You were born with the skills and abilities You have, because You were not arthritic, for example, military opportunity was available to You.

Every moment of life is an opportunity. A friend of mine once passed on her father's words one day when she was having a particularly unfortunate string of events: "Just think of it as a character defining moment." - As a hobbyist author - it rung like a bell. I'm always thinking of how characters would behave in a situation or what situations would best challenge a character.... pulling myself into that third-person perspective... who am I? What are my goals? How would I behave in this situation?

Or, to extrapolate a little, "What could I be doing right now to be who I am rather than what I act like? What can I be doing to fulfill my dreams?"

My parents both died before I was 22 and I have two younger brothers that are of minor age. My father did not have a will, and as amazing of a man/father he was... I and my brothers are all that is left of him (spare for a few little things here and there).

Every day I look in the mirror and know what I had the potential to be by this age had I not let my parents' passing consume me. I let about four years of my life drift right on by.

So, I don't really need to be lectured about equal and unequal opportunity. It's what you do with what you have and whether or not you are meeting your potential. Nothing is going to bring my parents back, give me back the time I lost to my own stagnation, or hand me the vibrant and amazing dreams I have. I haven't exactly had a home in over a year. The ball is in my court, as it always has been - and I can either choose to do something with it or stand around like a deer in the headlight (being me - I'll do something awkwardly and still have the deer-in-the-headlight look).

But this is... hideously long.... I think we get where each other are coming from, for the most part. It's just a difference in priorities.

Originally posted by Aim64C

Or... You eliminate the need for money and raise ALL Humans' standard of living by releasing method to extract the free energy all around Us. For more on this, read My threads:

.... Despite my reservations on the veracity of your assertion, it would not end our budget problems - nor would it eliminate the need for money. Money is a representation of one's contribution to society - their skills, assets, effort, conduct, and how it is perceived by the individual paying for their services. It will always be with us.

Because this is the purpose of My life, to make this understanding as clear as possible, I will explain and illustrate.

If We begin removing the cost of energy down the line in all goods and services - including Human energy in things no One wants to do via robotics - what is left is free.

To illustrate, think of the first farmer and the first miner. Each sees something They can put Their energy into and maybe find some gain - either socially or materially - whatever. That sun, soil, air, water? Free. That vein of metal? Free. It was the (Human) energy that was expended that Others "paid" for (with something of Their own (Human) energy.

As trading and bartering and such became problematic, unable to trade what One has for what anOther has because the Other doesn't want what One has, money to represent this (Human) energy seeded, and blossomed. As We put Our energy into obtaining the oil and the coal and the gas (which is technically just sitting there free - with a legal mirage We call "ownership" the rules of which We adhere to of Our own choice) it enters into Our energy structure for meaningful expenditure, which generates product which in turn generates money.

But the foundation of money, as economist Jeremy Rifkin has pointed out, is energy expenditure, whether Human or otherwise. Add robots, the Interweb, plenum energy, three Laws*, a Civil Code (Do not do unto Others that which You would not want done unto You, treat the planet organically), widespread awareness of what We CAN do if electrogravitics is released publicly... We Humans can work wonders here on Earth.

* The three Laws:

Do not willfully hurt or kill another Being*

Do not willfully take or damage another Being*'s property

Do not willfully defraud another Being*

* where "Being" is defined as any One who can ask, or by proxy another of the species can ask, for One's rights.

Perhaps there will be a day when food is like water from a public water fountain - but I don't expect we will see that extend to much more than that in society.

You do know that We are fully capable of feeding everyOne of Us on this planet at least three times over and that the problem is a "distribution by profit and not by need" problem? Supermarkets throw out hundreds of thousands of TONS of food each MONTH. But it was delivered to them in hopes of a sale and went bad before sale. If it had been delivered to someOne hungry instead, no One would be hungry.

Here's a simple schematic for drawing on the plenum ("dark"/Zero Point/"vacuum"/Radiant/Orgone/...) energy:

I've seen many of these claims before, and never seen much come of them.

Not yet, but it's coming. That image was done by Me and My husband is the inventor behind the ideas.

Because I was taught (as much as One can teach a toddler) electrogravitics, and I remember when My father - who had been telling Me all the wonderful things I would see in my life (flying cars, antigravity "jet" packs, houses floating, cities floating...and We would have all the energy We could want) - came home and told Me it was secret and We couldn't talk about it for a while. How long? He didn't know. Why? Because They want it secret..."for now."

But let's not get into physics discussion, here. I'm not of the opinion a method for achieving over-unity has been discovered, and have not been too impressed with the arguments that have attempted to demonstrate otherwise. Mostly because so few claim to have replicated the acclaimed effects, and no one has really demonstrated these devices functioning.

Considering that I do believe physics will be the only way out of no-other-solution problem, I think it is vital. And I have enough evidence to suggest fully that not only do Humans have overunity on this planet, We have had it for over fifty years.

Regardless, a "we just need to release the secret technology that will solve our problems" doesn't really constitute a solution to our problems.

It is KEY, actually. Otherwise We will see collapse, riots, martial law, FEMA camps filled, and other very ugly things. The Amero and the slavery(wage or outright) of the Human Beings on this planet will continue.

It's like if you were to walk up to me and demand I reveal my vagina. I can't reveal what I don't have, despite whatever allegations get thrown my way.

Your analogy is inappropriate. It's more like asking You to show Me Your 1886 Silver dollar - one of which You do not own. Just because You don't see anything convincing You does NOT follow that, as a male has no vagina, there is no hidden and suppressed technology unavailable to You. I may not have the silver dollar Myself, but I have held it in My hand.

Hmm. What did You come here to do, I wonder... ...

It's honestly best described as a dream. But, simply put, I'm here to create the single most powerful consolidation of technological, industrial, and computational capabilities. To lead a 'corporation' (for lack of a better word) that can keep up with my rate of learning and curiosity.

[smile] Sounds awesome. Mine is to eliminate the need for money. We have the basic infrastructure and adding plenum energy would make products cheaper and cheaper and cheaper... We would move to the skies and out of the cities. Mine is to free Humanity from slavery unto a life of choice - of how to live, where to live, what to live on, and mostly the ability to choose to follow One's bliss and not be required to abandon it to make money.

That may be so... But others who are on medicare are the disabled (any age) and People like Me who have applied to over 35,000 jobs in five year, lost everything, and now are scraping by on assistance. Plenty of younger individuals on medicare - especially now in this economy.

Think laterally. You're not illiterate and clearly quite affluent in typing. That makes you superior to about 95% of everyone else using a computer. It will be a while before I'm ready to start a business venture - but I keep a mental and physical list of people and handles to contact when I do - start calling in favors, talents, opinions, etc.

I have applied for jobs in graphics, editing, video production, art direction, courseware design, personal assistant, secretary, administrative assistant, data entry, assembly line work, chicken plucking, writing, and more. I am limited to jobs where I am not required to be on My feet more that about 1/2 hour at a time, as I have a rheumatological disorder. So... I am either not local or over qualified or the cute 20-something got the job. (That chicken plucking job - a 20-something got THAT one, too.)

Have you ever considered publishing literary works, or trying to? I'm not saying it's going to put you up in a mansion - but it is something. I write in my spare time (may as well - I'm can't get my internal dialogue to shut up for anything) - I go on learning-binges through the web, dabble in programing and graphics design. At the very least - I have a wide range of skills that someone may just let me hang around at their house in exchange for those skills. That... or I'm a boy scout - I can forage like any self-respecting monkey.

I have a self-published book - cowritten with My husband (all My work says "by Amaterasu") - and have the better edited, complete image-set version available here on ATS for free. Information is linked in My sig.

I agree bringing costs related to fraud and such should be minimized. I don't agree that granny should be tossed from Her bed because no One will pay for it. Or Suzie with MS. Or Harvey with a disabling birth defect. I cannot turn My back on unlucky Humans.

No one is saying you have to. But it is not the government's responsibility.

No. It's Mine. I must raise awareness of what We can produce on this planet with what We have but keep hidden from most.

Ending world aggression? How do you plan to do that? I've got a few doomsday concepts - they would certainly destroy our petty little problems .... but you seem to have this idea that if we simply bring our military home and downsize, everything will be okay and the world will be better for it.

By removing the need for money. Virtually all wars have been instigated covertly by war suppliers. Money is the name of the game. Lives are irrelevant to These who orchestrate things on this planet.

Right... But cutting death-related expenses seems far the better choice than life-related expenses. Human choices rather than inHuman ones.

Killing is a human instinct. Don't fool yourself. Had you a child - you'd kill to protect that child. Maybe you have a love/relationship - maybe you don't - but every one I've been in, I would have killed to protect her (and would have vanquished my own soul to protect).

Protecting Those We care for is instinct. War is a product of money moves.

You have to stop and see what is important in life and do what is necessary to protect that. You have to know yourself, know your dreams/ambitions, and be able to put that into perspective to make an honest and resolved choice. I make no attempt to judge another human being's soul.

Important in My life: The Humans on this planet.
Myself? I know Myself quite well. My ambition is to spread the word about what We have in Our collective hands at this unique point in Our (known) history. It could be daunting, but I will not choose that reaction. I forge on. My only judgment on anOther is based solely on whether that One obeys the three Laws. As long as that is the case, it's live and let live. (And I think One IS One's "soul." Consciousness is "God."

The rest of Your response was intelligently written and You're right. I think We see each's side here and disagree in places (agree in places, too). [smile]

For those of you on this board whining about not "authorizing" or "consenting" to the way our government is spending our tax dollars....You did consent to it by either voting or, in a lot of cases, NOT voting. I think it's an implied contract written in tiny print on the back of your voter registration card.

You see, we vote for a person we feel will best represent our interests. Sometimes they vote the way we want them too (seldom), other times they use their best judgement and vote for what they think is best. That's our Republic for which we stand! So, to get into office, a politician will tell you anything you want to hear. In some cases, they'll tell one group they promise to lower taxes but, in the same speech, will tell another group that they need to increase revenue. They are tricky, especially if you don't research a particular candidate or, in most cases, you just vote along party lines.

If they don't do what we want them too, we vote them out and elect someone else. In every case, majority rules...except in the Presidential election which is based on the electoral college.

Have a great night, or for some of you, good morning.

reply to post by Amaterasu


Eh - I'll pick my battles, and just cede the over-unity/anti-gravity/etc debate. I'm not convinced the solution lay in a warehouse or classified file somewhere, and believe the most practical solution lay in my own theories on the subject (and aforementioned 'corporation' ... I still can't quite find a word that accurately describes what I envision - almost more of a paramilitary society; like a self-funded and self-researching/developing/manufacturing military). It's been an area of interest for me for a long time - and I plan to put many crazy ideas to the test.

I suppose the best way I can think of to convey my intentions is to simply give an acoustical reference for the tone of my 'mission statement.' : www.youtube.com... - Aptly named "Declaration of a God" (Or "Crying of a God" - I've seen both used). I seek to understand the universe and be able to manipulate it in ways second only to the Creator, itself (presuming such can even be addressed as a personality). This track, to me, conveys a sort of commanding and invulnerable overtone. It says: "You really need to pay attention, now. Whatever this guy's about to do, it's not going to be big." Certainly, it appeals to my ego.

You do know that We are fully capable of feeding everyOne of Us on this planet at least three times over and that the problem is a "distribution by profit and not by need" problem? Supermarkets throw out hundreds of thousands of TONS of food each MONTH. But it was delivered to them in hopes of a sale and went bad before sale. If it had been delivered to someOne hungry instead, no One would be hungry.

It's not really all that simple... it would make sense for food approaching expiration to simply be offered up for charitable purposes - possibly even free distribution. But, why should I pay for food when I can simply wait until it's free?

One of the more interesting concepts I've seen along the lines of a "free-market" solution to charity is 'Jonathan's Card' - a social experiment involving a Starbucks card being shared openly - people are free to use and add money to the card: www.huffingtonpost.com...

Stark recently uploaded the barcode from his mobile Starbucks card onto the Internet. A user can download the image to a smartphone and use Stark's card to make purchases at Starbucks coffee shops--even if the user doesn't have a Starbucks card of his own. Though users they aren't required to put more money on the card, they're encouraged to chip in at will.

The project, which apparently started with $30 on July 7, has expanded in recent weeks. By August 8, more than $3,664 had been added and used through the card, according to GOOD. That's potentially a lot of free coffee for Jonathan, but it's also a lot of free coffee for others, too.

UPDATE: Stark has told the Huffington Post that $9134.47 has passed through the card to this point (August 10). While he does not know exactly how many people have added to or used the card, the balance has gone up 600 times and down 924, suggesting that perhaps close to 1,000 have had at least some use of the card.

Projects like this show a lot of promise for the idea that people are, in fact, able to organize successful charitable programs without government oversight or intervention. Perhaps the most interesting concept with this model of a 'social program' is that the balance can never go below zero and go into a deficit. The impact of over-use of the card will be immediate and, being the internet - I'm sure if the card ever hits a zero balance, there will be a rapid "hey, more of you people using this need to pay into it" declaration passed through the community.

It probably would be difficult to get such a concept to work for healthcare - but it would be interesting to see how similar efforts in regards to food/sustenance would pan out - particularly with cooperation from grocery stores to only work with food items (sort of like food stamps).

By removing the need for money. Virtually all wars have been instigated covertly by war suppliers. Money is the name of the game. Lives are irrelevant to These who orchestrate things on this planet.

Eh, wars don't have to be about money. It can simply be from having an intolerance of another ideology. We see this in the middle east and developing in the U.S. (collectivism versus individualism). Money often plays a huge part in wars. Wars tend to be very effective at rallying support around a common cause. Food suppliers back their side, engineers/mechanics as well, and many people simply "make things work" rather than worrying about the money usually necessary. Wealth is simply contribution to the community - wealth can be generated by wars - particularly wars of survival that rally people to a common cause.

That said - conflict is certainly a tool that can be and is used by various parties around the world to further their own agendas. Even a child knows how to utilize conflict to manipulate a situation - how many kids will be told "no" by their father, only to go to their mother and try to get a "yes?"

The rest of Your response was intelligently written and You're right. I think We see each's side here and disagree in places (agree in places, too). [smile]

I think just about every human shares a rather similar sense of right and wrong - human beings do not like seeing each other suffer (I would call someone who did genuinely derive satisfaction from others' suffering demonic, as opposed to human). It's just a matter of priorities and what people feel is ultimately going to lead to a better world that people disagree on.

Originally posted by Feltrick
For those of you on this board whining about not "authorizing" or "consenting" to the way our government is spending our tax dollars....You did consent to it by either voting or, in a lot of cases, NOT voting. I think it's an implied contract written in tiny print on the back of your voter registration card.

Um... When Our "votes" are counted by machines with proprietary software - can You really say that ANY of Us have a say in anything, voting or not?

You see, we vote for a person we feel will best represent our interests.

And the machine may or may not credit Your vote properly. (Also, We usually have little to go on as to whether someOne will represent Us as We expect. Glad handing is prime in running for office - sound out who One is talking to and say what They want to hear.)

Sometimes they vote the way we want them too (seldom), other times they use their best judgement and vote for what they think is best.

And the question that then is begged: best for whom? The corporations in whose pockets They sit? Or for the People, who are supposed to be the Ones whose interests are served. 99 times out of 100, it's corporate interests that are served.

That's our Republic for which we stand!

It's what has become of the Republic. "Voting" machines with proprietary software were not in the plan, nor were corporations and their influence away from that of the People and into special corporate interests.

So, to get into office, a politician will tell you anything you want to hear. In some cases, they'll tell one group they promise to lower taxes but, in the same speech, will tell another group that they need to increase revenue. They are tricky, especially if you don't research a particular candidate or, in most cases, you just vote along party lines.

Well, this is surely true.

If they don't do what we want them too, we vote them out and elect someone else. In every case, majority rules...except in the Presidential election which is based on the electoral college.

Except more and more, with "voting" machines that easily can say We "voted" any way the corporations want it to go (Let's face it, a vote-counting program can easily be small, simple, straightforward, and should be available to all to evaluate and understand - NOT proprietary and hidden), We, the People, are losing the control We should have.

So... Demand to see the code of every machine that is supposed to count votes - or insist on a paper ballot.

reply to post by Aim64C


Have You read Free: The Future of a Radical Price by Chris Anderson? It's a very enlightening book.

I am guessing that economics is not Your strongest suit... I have been studying economics for most of My life - 40ish years for sure (I am nearing 55). I was in banking for 14 years. Through this study, it has become clear to Me that the biggest reason overunity is suppressed and hidden is because it would take economic power away from the elites and give each of Us power over Ourselves but no others.

I figure if *I* can see this, They know it too. (In fact, I had reached the same conclusions about the very intimate relationship money and energy have - they are two forms of the same thing - before I read Rifkin's work, Entropy wherein He says exactly that.)

And knowing what I know of technology hidden, I can do nothing but work for the greater good of All in promoting and enlightening others.

Thanks for Your input, and I don't know if this..."corporation" of Yours will function without money - if not, We're at loggerheads.

reply to post by Amaterasu

I am guessing that economics is not Your strongest suit... I have been studying economics for most of My life - 40ish years for sure (I am nearing 55). I was in banking for 14 years.

 

Originally posted by Amaterasu *
I am one of the many that rely on food stamps. When one is laid off and five years goes by (despite applying to over 35,000 jobs), money runs out and one might find oneself homeless (I did) and then falling into the (not so gentle and caring) hands of the System.

I am going to hazard to guess that economics isn't your strong suit. Seeing as you applied for over 35,000 jobs with no hires in return, you being in the banking industry and all...

reply to post by Amaterasu

You may not be aware that My father was one of the foremost gambling mathematicians in the US before He died.

I thought he built spaceships?

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Tell me why my father, who was an electrical engineer working for one of the top aerospace companies in the 1950's...

Originally posted by Amaterasu
My father's work as an Electrical Engineer at one of the foremost aerospace companies... I would guess most of the UFO's We see are black ops in action.

Originally posted by Amaterasu
It is happenstance that there is an Interweb. It is happenstance that I was born to the father such that I have personal knowledge of plenum energy.

Originally posted by boncho

reply to post by Amaterasu

I am guessing that economics is not Your strongest suit... I have been studying economics for most of My life - 40ish years for sure (I am nearing 55). I was in banking for 14 years.

 

Originally posted by Amaterasu *
I am one of the many that rely on food stamps. When one is laid off and five years goes by (despite applying to over 35,000 jobs), money runs out and one might find oneself homeless (I did) and then falling into the (not so gentle and caring) hands of the System.

I am going to hazard to guess that economics isn't your strong suit. Seeing as you applied for over 35,000 jobs with no hires in return, you being in the banking industry and all...

Boncho, darling... Understanding economics does not magically open doors. We have been through this before. I am in a college town competing with 25-50 people for every job out there. And I am NOT local to most of the web posted jobs I applied to. Also, knowing a lot does NOT increase One's luck.

You, My spooky friend, have it in for Me, don't You?

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by Amaterasu

You may not be aware that My father was one of the foremost gambling mathematicians in the US before He died.

 

I thought he built spaceships?

My father was a multitalented man. [shrug] He graduated from Cal Tech, went into aerospace as an engineer, and when He wasn't working, He followed His bliss, which was gambling mathematics. In the capacity as an electrical engineer, He was called to testify in court regarding the stuff His company was working on before they were bought piecemeal in the 90's (He started in the early 1950's and retired before the company was broken up).

Also, in His retirement, He was invited to speak at gamblers' conventions in Las Vegas to talk about the math angle.

In fact, I suspect He had the blackjack system figured out before Thorpe published Beat the Dealer, but He wasn't out to write books. He was out to grasp the math and see if He could devise a winning strategy. When BTD was published, it turned out that My dad said He had already worked out the system. (He would come home from work and spend hours dealing BJ hands and taking copious notes...)

So lay off Me, Bonch.

reply to post by Amaterasu


Most of your argument is based on paranoia about voting machines. Your suggestion is for voters to demand to see the "code" or demand a paper ballot.

First, what good would it do to demand to see the "code" if I don't really know what I'm looking at? Couldn't they just show you the correct code so you'd vote? I guess you're suggesting that we all get computer programming degrees before voting...come on...really? Even if the correct code was in the machine and all was legit, couldn't they just say the votes came out the way they want? How deep does this "rabbit hole" go?

Second, with a paper ballot, couldn't they just count it for the other person? I mean, if it's a huge conspiracy, who's the wiser? After the election, will you demand to see all of the ballots? Couldn't they just replace the ballots voting for the other person to show that the majority voted the way they wanted?

Next you'll tell me that FEMA has hidden camera's in the voting machines so they know who voted and how. This way they know who to round up and stick in the camps.

Our votes count, unfortunately there are losers and winners. Lately, people have become sore losers and cry FOUL and CONSPIRACY when their candidate loses. I blame this on soccer being promoted by TPTB. They are conditioning us to believe a tie or losing is okay. Heck, sometimes they don't even keep score because they don't want kids to be disappointed! Now, anytime a person doesn't win, they complain and demand a recount or "do over."

reply to post by Feltrick


Eh, this is a conspiracy-centric community. Everyone likes to find all kinds of elaborate ways to connect dots.

As far as voting - I don't really think it's much of an argument: "It's all a scam and doesn't matter, so I'm not going to participate" is simply a self-important delusion that serves no purpose. Perhaps it is a scam and it doesn't matter - someone refusing to vote is -really- making a statement... those damned powers that be will learn!

It makes little sense to -not- vote.

In either case, my largest grievance with the way things are done in the voting process revolves around the "win/lose" competitive aspect that has been applied. Somehow, we have gotten the idea that a representative somehow "wins" an election and thus gets free run of the office. I have heard, many times, "I don't like what he's doing, either - but he won the election..."

It's silly - our representatives are representatives and need to take into consideration the concerns of all of the people in their district - not just the people who voted for them, and not just their party line. That's what a representative does. We are not electing a dictator to an office of the republic - we are electing a representative. This whole "he/she/it won, and we have to put up with what they do" needs to stop. Kick them out of office mid-term if they get out of line.

As for Amaterasu's whole deal about over-unity... it simply makes no sense for companies to cover up this technology. Power companies could produce vast amounts of power for greatly reduced cost (virtually no fuel costs) - the owner of such technology would simply overtake the rest of the power industry in a heartbeat, before industrial espionage could close the capability gap. The nation hosting that technology would become the single wealthiest and most powerful nation on the face of the planet, even if it was Somalia.

Nuclear fission - one of the most secretive of all industrial capabilities ever developed and deployed - filtered into civilian use within years. Radar followed a similar cycle, as have composites originally developed and used for fighter aircraft.

Further - the military invests millions of dollars into research projects involving fusion - as do many other companies (also investing in things like wind, solar, geo-thermal, and other renewable sources)... yet it's all for naught, as we already have the penultimate of power-plant systems - a discovered over-unity effect with a solution to harness it?

It doesn't add up.

I would be willing to believe the argument that some DoD research facility has a fusion reactor that nets power production, somewhere, and are investigating ways of improving efficiency/yield - but that's about as far as I'd go. Oil companies, the defense department, powers-that-be... whatever - they don't have over-unity. It would, essentially, allow any group of people to become gods among men in so many different ways that it would be impossible to resist deploying it, and impossible to conceal. Enough people have to know about it and be involved in the cover-up for there to be at least one of them ambitious enough to try and forge their own empire utilizing that capability - which would only spread from there.

And what this has to do with the current U.S. National budget... I am not quite sure.

Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by crimvelvet

 

I guess that when it comes to politicians, it's "Do as I say and not as I do."

For ten years preceding my retirement, I was 1 of 8 labor trustees along with 8 trustees from management who were in charge of administration and investment strategy for 4 multi-employer trust funds. These funds provided for Health & Welfare, Pensions (defined benefit), Retirements (defined contribution), and Vacation funds respectively. Their collective assets exceeded 500 million but because we were "union" and not-for-profit, the rules governing our benefit trust funds are mandated under the ERISA act. Under those regulations, we were not even allowed to do so much as to co-mingle funds much less utilize them for any purpose other than to provide benefits for the beneficiaries of the trusts.

Again I say, "It's unbelievable what these people have done with our money!" They sure as hell wouldn't allow me to do that with your money. By the way, our union trust fund is healthy, fully funded and making my pension payments like clockwork. IMO, unions are the only thing the working man has going for him.

Under ERISA were you not required to invest a certian percentage of the funds into Treasuries? That is mandated under most plans. Even with all the turmoil, Treasuries still stand worldwide as the safest financial asset in existence. Do you think SS should be investing in stocks instead? Should they be buying the bonds of private corporations, or of cities, states, etc instead? Should we instead sell the treasuries to China and have the cash just sit under some huge mattress? Buying Treasuries is the only logical investment solution for Social Security. That strategy has worked out pretty well over the years as Treasuries are worth more than at any time in the last couple of decades. The downside is that from these interest rate levels the SS trust fund will make it's lowest return in decades.

The real issue with Social Security was faulty life expectancy calculations from many decades ago. People that make it to retirement age live 10-15 years longer than they were suppose to. That has to be made up for somehow. There are several pretty easy fixes, none of which leaves everyone happy. You can raise the retirement age(1-2 yrs for those under 50), increase the income threshold subject to SS tax, phase out benefits for the wealthy, etc. None of these would be earth shattering to anyone, so in reality Social Security is really easy to fix. It won't be fixed by cutting benefits or raising ss tax rates. Nor is it some huge thorn in our side, as it currently pays for itself.

Originally posted by Feltrick
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

Most of your argument is based on paranoia about voting machines. Your suggestion is for voters to demand to see the "code" or demand a paper ballot.

I would hardly call it paranoia. There have been a number of tests that returned suspicious results. Exit polls where machines were used were skewed all outside of the margin of error - a probability in the trillions to one of happening randomly.

First, what good would it do to demand to see the "code" if I don't really know what I'm looking at?

[sigh] If YOU can see the code, that means someOne who CAN grasp what it's doing can look, too. I did not mean every Person should go an look at the code in the machine They're using. Really. Is that what You thought I meant? Or are You being dim purposely? My point is that the code for Our voting machines should be transparent. We should know (or have the opportunity to) what code in Our voting machines is doing.

Couldn't they just show you the correct code so you'd vote? I guess you're suggesting that we all get computer programming degrees before voting...come on...really? Even if the correct code was in the machine and all was legit, couldn't they just say the votes came out the way they want? How deep does this "rabbit hole" go?

Ooops. I guess You really are struggling.

Second, with a paper ballot, couldn't they just count it for the other person? I mean, if it's a huge conspiracy, who's the wiser? After the election, will you demand to see all of the ballots? Couldn't they just replace the ballots voting for the other person to show that the majority voted the way they wanted?[/quot6e]

With a paper ballot, when in question, a recount can be done. Yes, figures can be recorded incorrectly, but the evidence still exists. With the machines and digital voting, there is no way to recount. None. It says Jo Blow won, well then. Jo Blow won. Never mind that the code gave Jo Blow 60% of the votes even though 5% of those who voted actually voted for Jo.

Next you'll tell me that FEMA has hidden camera's in the voting machines so they know who voted and how. This way they know who to round up and stick in the camps.

[shrug] They may. I have no evidence of that, but They may. I DO have evidence that the machines with their proprietary code do not record properly but in ways the machine makers want.

Our votes count, unfortunately there are losers and winners.

Our votes count IF they are properly recorded. I'm saying that proprietary code is asking for Them to take over Our votes. A vote-counting program should be simple, small, and available to any who would look. NOT complex, large, and hidden.

Lately, people have become sore losers and cry FOUL and CONSPIRACY when their candidate loses.

Heh. That would NOT be Me. I have had no candidates I found supportable. But I have found evidence of bogus vote-counting software by virtue of the grossly skewed exit polls.

I blame this on soccer being promoted by TPTB.

And I blame the voting-machine programmers...based on the evidence.

They are conditioning us to believe a tie or losing is okay. Heck, sometimes they don't even keep score because they don't want kids to be disappointed! Now, anytime a person doesn't win, they complain and demand a recount or "do over."

And sometimes such recounts prove that the first count was incorrect...

Be that as it may, if *I* wanted to be able to put anyone in office I wanted, *I* would write insidious software and hide it under an "intellectual property" umbrella. Just like evidence very strongly suggests is being done. And if *I* can think of that plan, I am sure They can too. And if You think there are none in this world so motivated as to write code that "votes" the way They want...You are a bit naive.