A person who is to psychologically unstable to own a gun should also not be able to drive a car or have access to knives, hammers, etc.

On _very_ rare occasion, someone decides attempt to kill a lot of random people.  (Most of what we see in the news these days are phony events engineered to try to achieve a policy change.)  These people tend to choose to try to use a gun because that is what is most easily available to them.  If somehow it was exceptionally difficult to obtain a satisfactory firearm and ammo, then other methods are available and would be chosen.  In some areas bombs are more commonly used for this purpose.  Occasionally poison is used.  Should these techniques come back into favor Americans would be longing for the good old days when guns were the weapon of choice.

Beyond that, military weapons are used in armed conflict, and there are a lot of pockets of armed conflict around the world.  There is no way to arm one's crazy proxy forces (e.g., the so-called ISIS) and not have the goodies make it on to the black market.  Where do you think that all of the grenades showing up on the streets of Sweden are coming from?

You are not understanding what I am saying.  I'm saying that of the total population, the number of people who died from smallpox was 200/100,000 back in the 1700's during periods when the virus was periodically rampant among human populations.  Populations who lived differently than most of us today in terms of sanitation and other life-ways.

This is a highly relevant figure because the rate of getting stuck with big pharma's needle which certain people want to see is 100,000/100,000...or perhaps slightly less since they don't plan on giving it to their own kids.

If the rate of vaccine damage (anaphylactic shock, peanut allergies, Guillain-Barre, meningitis, etc, etc) vastly exceeds the frequency and/or magnitude of the ill effects of the condition the vaccine claims to address, then using it makes no sense.  At least not for the purpose for which the vaccine is marketed.

FWIW, like most 'anti-vax' people, I am not really against vaccines per-se.  They can work, and they can make sense.  The problem is that currently they are not being used honestly or in a rational manner and I blame the lobbying efforts of big pharma and the influence of super rich eugenicists for this.  Or at least I don't disregard this influence.

---

A different medical condition is cancer.  My own grandparents got the condition at a rate of 100,000/100,000.  Three of them died from it after a long, painful, and expensive period of time.  The fourth lost a leg, but it was cured and she died of other causes.

I've read estimates of the average value of an American cancer patient to the medical industrial complex as low as $30,000 and as high as $1,000,000.  It's no wonder that no 'cure for cancer' has yet been found.  And it would not surprise me at all to find that various highly promoted elements of our society are contributing to the cancer rate.  That includes vaccines.

Important point for those considering this route.

I can only speak from the perspective of the U.S., but as a rule of thumb, if you can make someone money here they will pay you.  But you have to get your foot in the door.  Many professional fields are closed off by regulation.  That is to say, you cannot legally practice without the right government issued paperwork, and that is impossible to obtain without a college degree.  Sometimes if one is knowledgeable about, say, construction, one can get a job as a bureaucrat, but that is low paid and most who have the potential to self-educate would probably find the work unrewarding.

My opinion of education in the U.S. and in a technical field is that getting a degree proves two things.  1) one has a certain minimal intellectual capacity (e.g, can get through differential equations, etc, which is little more than an IQ test in reality.)  and 2) one can stick with something for 4 years or whatever even when it is often boring and stupid and you need to deal with various levels of idiocy.  Both of these are valuable to a potential employer.  If one can demonstrate the ability to be of value without the degree, that is just as good (and probably better to the more dynamic enterprises.)  That is usually accomplished word-of-mouth, but one does have to get their foot in the door somehow.  And, of course, have the ability to be a worthwhile asset.

Most people who have the potential to self-educate would probably do better starting a business of their own.  And most probably do.

---

Edit - follow-up:

A college degree means less and less as time goes by.  Many people who hold a degree and a government issued license to practice actually need help doing their job effectively from someone who has a few brain cells to rub together.  This is not exactly new.  In the 1950's when women were more excluded and men were the 'breadwinners', it was pretty common for the secretary to be running the show in white-collar offices and the executive for whom she worked.  Effectively she was basically the brains of the operation.  A similar dynamic is probably evolving where college educated morons will need hand-holding in order to perform.  Targeting a niche where that is practical would be a strategy.  At least as a phase of a self-directed learning program.  Just an idea.

No, I said exactly what I said.  'Mortality' means how many people died, and 'rate' is normalized to the total population.

I don't recall exactly where I got my info, but normally when I am trying to make a serious point, I do try to 'play it safe' and choose a source which is at least neutral if not biased in the opposite direction to the point I want to make.  The chart here, or one like it, is what I was using IIRC,

  https://ourworldindata.org/eradication-of-diseases

To one of your points, note that people almost always die due to a 'system failure' brought on by an ailment.  Often times something which would have been fatal in the 1700's would be easily non-fatal by something as simple as hydrating with an IV today.  So, historic 'mortality' rates almost always vastly overestimate the magnitude of a problem at today's level of medical science.

As has been pointed out here numerous times, basic nutrition and sanitation are pretty clearly responsible for lower rates of infection vs. vaccination.  Vaccination looks to me like it is mostly (but not totally) snake-oil.  Given the huge push for vaccination (similar to gun control), I find myself more and more questioning what else might be going on here.  One possibility which seems worth exploring would be the benefits to some of having all of the population having a pretty decent dose of nano-sized aluminum particles which had penetrated the blood/brain barrier and lodged within the neurons.  Given the information which keeps leaking about the use of electromagnetic methods of influencing behavior, there seems to be something to contemplate here.

This 'definition' is artificial and promoted for propaganda reasons by 'globalists' because they want a problem.  They want a problem because they have a solution.  Namely, put them in charge of the globe.  If/when that happens, all of our problems are supposed to magically disappear somehow.

Global warming climate change is one of the problems that totalitarian control by global elites is supposed to be able to solve.  And it probably would.  Once 'they' have control, the phony problem has no more usefulness so it will be magically solved.  Of course it is necessary for the elite to employ weather modification technologies forevermore...to keep us all safe, secure, and living in peace.  And if regions who play ball and compliantly ante-up their tributes get rain while regions which don't get a drought, that's what it takes to 'save the planet from climate catastrophe and keep us all safe' I guess.

"They have healed also the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace."  Jeremiah 6:14 [King James]

A fair fraction of the 'overpopulation problem' is a psyop funded by the so-called 'elite.'  They want either to have their livestock live in factory farm conditions where the cost per head of keeping them alive is minimized, or just flush them.  As technology moves forward humans are not even very useful as wealth generation tools...and humans make kind of shitty and dangerous pets a lot of times.

While I don't doubt that some countries have population problems, a lot of them do not.  My country, the U.S., does not.  Anyone to travels outside of an urban area without blinders on can see a great deal of under-utilization.  Also, like a lot of countries, we're not at a high growth rate, and many are negative.  The elite are in a panic about this because their problem is going away.  To try to keep it relevant they are importing people as fast as possible with 'open borders' and such.

There is also a religious component to some of the population related programs.  (((Some people))) believe in a prophecy whereby all the races mix and our ruled over by the ethnically pure chosen ones.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjzlKCmi8VY

And some of these people are not sitting around waiting for this prophecy to come about by the hand of God or whatever:

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jl-OJJVAEg

I wouldn't pretend to know whether Trump himself is aware of it or not, but the people controlling him plan for the current inhabitants of Israel to become "burnt offerings 2.0"

'Holocaust' references 'burnt offerings' for those who don't know.  Some Jews needed to be sacrificed to get statehood for Israel.  The Zionists and the Nazis worked under the 'transfer agreement' to evacuate the rich and healthy ones to the promised land.  A certain number of poor, old, sick, and ignorant ones actually did meet their end as 'burnt offerings' in the camps in Europe which worked out well for the Zionist and their new state.

The next phase is the destruction of Israel, a total war which will demoralize the entire world and make then accepting of the promise of 'peace'. Then the coming of a 'descendant of David' who, along with the newly formed Sanhedrin, will rule from a to-be-constructed third temple in Jerusalem.*

I know it sounds crazy, but after listening to a lot of presentations by a lot of the more radical of the rabbis, I'm pretty confident that a depressingly large number of people believe this, and believe it strongly enough to look forward to it and to try to make it happen.  Unfortunately some of these freaks have a great deal of power.  These includes the Chabad-Lubavitch followers Jared and Ivanka Kushner.  Perhaps 'The Donald' as well, but it doesn't matter because he's clearly playing ball fully with them at this point.

---

(*) This is Ver-I which is the one sold to the Jewish faithful.  Ver-II is attributed to Pike and it is that the new ruler who is presented will be in actually a Masonic/Kabbalahist/Luciferian type from their stable.  For my part I'm not sure that there is much difference.

I'd have to have a sense for how much the principles were influenced by the Babylonian Talmud.  I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of Israelis who understand the [ethic supremacist and genocidal] nature of that religion and reject it.  In that case I would certainly consider doing business with them even if they would be probably be targeted for destruction by the Zionists and thus be fairly likely to fail.

On the contrary, if the people involved embraced the teachings of the Talmud and Zohar, they are at least predictable.  All one has to do is to imagine the most scummy and treacherous actions they could take and that's probably what they will do.  That's especially problematic because my goyim status makes me fair game.  Currently this creepy sect seems to be in control in Israel...and most of the rest of the world.  They have a leg up tech-wise because they can steal any technology they want and make a ton of money selling it to the highest bidder.  If one ever wondered why their weapons systems don't seem to work for shit, this is probably why.

Maybe someone in Israel can cook up an OrganCoin to ease the financial problems associated with the organ trafficking trade?  One of the most amusing things I've seen in a while was when a mainstream news reporter accidentally did her job:

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEfELgav1Qs

Thanks for the heads-up.  Frustrating I'm sure.  If it is ever discovered how the username got hacked that would be interesting to know.

One relatively straightforward thing which bitcointalk.org probably could do would be to allow users to get a 'kill code' which, when presented, would trigger locking or destruction of an account here.  Perhaps I'll suggest it on meta.

On a non-related subject which may be of interest to some here, a few weeks ago Wells Fargo sent me a note saying that they were no longer allowing cash deposits from third parties into my bank account.  New policy.

The Talmud and spin-off philosophies.  Many of our most intractable political and economic problems here in the U.S. can be traced back to this document.  Unfortunately, many of the problems that the U.S. have rub off on others all over the world.

The push for negation or dismissal of the U.S. 2nd amendment is so pronounced that it begs hypotheses about what might be going on.  Here's another, and it is fairly relevant to monetary issues and thus related to crypto.

1)  The USD is currently a debt-backed currency.  That is to say, all dollars in existence represent a debt.  If there were no debt, there would be no money.

2)  The debt is issued by the Federal Reserve.  This is a private entity and who actually has stake in it is unclear.  There is no 'audit the Fed' program which could shed light on the issue.  The executive branch won't allow an audit, and the legislative branch won't push for it.

3)  When the Fed wishes to increase the money supply, they can do so as a 'last resort' when the U.S. government takes out more debt and issues treasuries, bonds, etc.

4)  The numbers people go by for federal dept these days is 20T with China holding 2T of that.  This leaves another 18T which 'rich people' hold and expect interest payments on.  Probably the 20T is wildly low-ball for a variety of reasons, and I don't believe that it even includes the municipal bonds and what-not.

5)  A dollar is thus a representation of future earnings of tax-payers OR a claim to the proceeds of a settlement agreement should the government default.

6)  The value of, and thus the demand for, dollars is thus based on the ability of the government to levy necessary taxes to pay off the interest (at least) of the bonds.

7)  The value of the USD is is ALSO based on the ability to enforce a settlement claim on whatever property might be adjudicated to be part of a default settlement.  One can be fairly certain that the courts will come up with a settlement that is to the liking of the bondholders, and it will probably involve forfeiture of certain in-demand assets held unencumbered in private hands.  These folks will not agree with the jewdicial system's findings.

8 )  Thus, the 2nd amendment (transcribed circa 1776) truly does work to substantively de-value the USD (born in the early 1900's.)  The value of the USD can, and almost certainly is, labeled a 'national security issue', and the deleterious effect of the 2nd amendment on it's value is thus subject to attack.  'Fair game' so to speak.

9)  The state department can thus employ the tools at their disposal to deal with what they consider to be threats to national security (usually by retaining others to perform tasks under their legally authorized mandate.)  With the recent 'modernization' of the Smith-Mundt act, these options where significantly expanded.

Brazil is responsible for some of the best on-the-street gun related gore captured on video.

One I remember is where a where a pistol wielding thug thought he would hijack a motorcycle, but unbeknownst to him, the rider was an off-duty cop who also had a gun.  Brain material splattered, and happily in this case it was the crooks.

Another was pistol armed crook holding a gun to a hostages head.  This head-shot also resulted in a dis-assembled skull of the right guy (complements of rifleman), and happily the crook didn't happen to pull the trigger on his victim in his final microsecond of his life.

Another was a cop on a motorcycle chasing down a motorcycle mounted (presumed) criminal and shooting at him with a pistol at the same time.  My hat is off to this guy who had multiple skills...and balls of steel.  Brazil seems to have a lower threshold when it comes to putting bystanders at risk compared to the U.S..

Individual cops seem to be all over the map when it comes to honesty, decency, etc.  The nature of the department they work for seems to be the biggest factor, and this nature is influenced by a handful of people in leadership.  Since higher-ups almost never seem to get in any real trouble they have the latitude to set department policy in any way they, or the people above them, see fit.

Some police departments discriminate on the basis of intelligence, and courts have ruled that they have the right to do so.  In this case they refuse to hire anyone with to high an IQ.  I fairly bright person with ethics could cause a lot of problems for operations in some of the corrupt police departments.

Making police department funding reliant on shaking citizens down via civil asset forfeiture pretty much guarantees a degradation of police forces and their relationship with Joe Public.  I suspect that that is exactly the goal of those who promote such a framework (including, unfortunately, Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump.)

A competent systems analyst will be able to predict that an armed population is incompatible with a corrupt police force which exists in part to steal shit from the public and thereby further certain social engineering goals.  The people who are out in front on the 'gun control' issue seem to be the same ones who's own existence is built around parasitizing others in society (e.g., bankers, teachers, social workers, etc.)
 

It would be fairly straightforward to 'fight to the end' in some populations who seem to have been infected with a brain eating virus.  Most EU member states who are accepting mass immigration are in this category.  I wouldn't want to try to fight to the end with 80 million Persians.  Especially not for the sole benefit of the Jewish state of Israel and their Zionist Likud party, or for the Talmudic Chabad-Lubavitch freaks.

A good outcome would be:

 - An opportunity to de-nuclearize Israel and keep them that way.  Clearly they don't have the maturity and philosophical/ethical underpinnings to be trusted with WMD's.

 - A 'big beautiful wall' on the '67 boarders.

 - Preservation of a 'homeland' for people who are more loyal to Israel than they are to the country that they live in, or who have been paid off by such people to sell out their own country.  (Re-)patriation of these.

Seems like a ethically fair and humane strategy to me, and much preferable to genocide.  The technology probably already exists to figure out a person's true disposition vis-a-vis loyalty when their actions call it into question.

As long as the new Israel has at least the same opportunities as the Gaza of today, I don't really see how the Israelis could complain all that much.

Pretty big blast in Alepo area a few hours ago.  Looks to me like an ammo dump was hit.  Probably Israel did it.  Pompeo happens to be in Tel Aviv sucking off Netanyahoo at the moment.

It would be cool if Russia or Iran would have a new policy:

For every U.S., Israeli, Saudi, Turkish, French or British bomb or missile which lands on a liberated part of Syria from now forward, Assad gets a comparable bomb or missile for his arsenal which he may use as he pleases.

Some say that Turkey and Russia are doing a back-room deal to run out both the Syrians and the Kurds and take over NE Syria for their own purposes.  Erdogan, at least, is a particularly slimy back-stabber, and Putin could well be also.  Both are suspected of being crypto-Jews and/or close relatives and/or business partners so I would not trust either.  Only time will tell.

Everyone can see that the U.S. and Israel are trying to form a Kurdistan.  The only question is at who's primary expense it will be.  Syria, Iran, Iraq, or Turkey?  For the sake of fairness and practicality I'd like to see Syria, Iran, and Iraq join forces in a special effort to protect their respective borders.  If USrael absolutely has to have their Kurdistan, make it out of Turkey.  The 'Young Turks' (Sabbateans aka, 'Donmeh') imported the Kurds (from Iran) in the first place to perform the particularly nasty Armenian genocide so it's only fair that they keep em'.

Huh?  Israel bombs Syria regularly right now.

The Chabad-Lubavitch crowd (e.g., Ivanka and Jared Kushner) and other orthodox fundies are preparing for world rule from their third temple in Jerusalem.  Raising golden calves and the whole 9 yards.

Western Europe and the U.S. are in the process of being destroyed with generations long problems (migration, vaccinations, debt, etc) and should not pose any real problems vis-a-vis competition.  Similarly, Russia is still struggling with lingering problems complements of the Bolsheviki and it will be another 50-100 years before they fully recover even if they are allowed.

China has been predicatively programmed to be the next power center for decades now, and by the looks of it the wealthy and informed have made much of their transfers there already.  The upcoming struggle promises to be between Jerusalem and Beijing.  I suspect that the Talmudics will attempt to parasitize the slant-eyed goyim as they did the round-eyed ones in times past.  They'll probably succeed if the CCP survives and they need compromise only a handful of 'leaders'.  And if the CCP falls Jerusalem might be the only game in town.  After that we find out how many of the remaining goyim 'wish' to 'serve the Jews' in accordance with Talmudic teachings, and how this desire is provoked.

It's not like Israel planned to do any actual fighting, and especially not after they got deeply humiliated last time they tried Lebanon.  Fighting Iran is what they have the U.S. for.

Israel would have to make sure they can get us to fight and stay in the fight to the end (and win.)  They have their nuclear weapons and their 'Samson option', but the costs and risks of falling back on it (targeting either a battle winning Iran or a recalcitrant U.S.) could be high.  Hopefully to high, but there is certainly no guarantee of that;  unfortunately there are a lot of religious fundamentalists who look forward to massive problems in the area to fulfill prophecy, and who knows what some of these nut-cases are capable of.

Not sure how this maps to my post, but anyway, what about the Iranian revolution?  Seems to me that the Persian people and society in that nation are doing pretty well in spite of the Mullahs.  Relatively speaking of course.  Holding off Saddam back when he was our buddy here in the U.S. and we were supplying him chemical weapons is pretty impressive to me.  If it took suicide squads, that's what it took.  At least they were able to hold their country together and not become the failed state that our crypto-Jew government here in the U.S. tried to engineer for them.  The people of Libya were failed by their more secular leader who tried to suck 'Western' cock.

As an atheist I agree with this.

As of the 20th century, at least, the brand of 'atheism' is most useful as a cover for crypto-{foo} practitioners.  Crypto (Latin for 'hidden') existence is a powerful tool which confers a huge advantage over those who don't practice the technique.  And if a crypto-{blah} practitioner gains control of the educational and media systems such that anyone who suspects crypto- methods is denounced as a 'conspiracy theorist' or whatever, the crypto- crowd can operate with even more safety and effectiveness.

As the decades drift by I find myself more and more convinced that 'radical transparency' is the only realistic solution to a lot of our most vexing problems (most of these brought on by the crypto- operating sleeze-bags.)  At the same time, technology has marched forward such that 'radical transparency' is not only practical, but in use.  Currently it is used by the crypto- crowd to obtain transparency into the goings on among the sheep flock classes.  But it doesn't necessarily have to be this way.

I read somewhere that an IQ level of about 130 is the threshold where one can be expected to be able to successfully self-educate in technically advanced fields.  I believe that Stanford-Binnet IQ ratings are imprecise in gauging features which accurately predict self-education potential, but it's probably a useful value in predicting success anyway.

My experience in the Silicon Valley tech sector substantiate the above.  I would suspect that the lower end of college educated participants was in the 120 range.  The (less numerous) self-educated contingent was probably in the 130-150 range and as a general tendency they excelled (perhaps because those who did not went back to digging ditches.)  The high end of participants tended to hold graduate degrees and I would estimate they to be North of 150 a lot of times.

The more I think back on things, the more I suspect that formal education focuses a lot on instilling certain ideas which are of benefit to a certain group of social engineers.  Their programs were successful in achieving a result.  The self-educated crowd were much more likely to be 'conspiracy theorists' when it came to unrelated political thought patterns for instance.  Also, being deficient in an understanding of certain documented procedures, the self-educated tended to 'go their own way' sometimes, and sometimes it worked out well.  But I worked mostly in 'start-up' companies.  I suspect that in the larger corporate environments it was usually a better strategy to just go with the industry standards.  'Blazing new trails' is a risk/reward ratio which doesn't make as much sense there.