Economic Totalitarianism

[trollercoaster]

I may consider your diet, I will see tonight how the bulletproof diet holds up to bjj (grappling) very taxing.

 The bulletproof guy seems to be against physical exertion, my motivation to change how I eat was to get out of this slump and back to regular training.

If it leaves me feeling light headed later, I will have to dump it for something else.

[1714999461]

1714999461

[1714999461]

1714999461

[generalizethis]

No stats on ginger? I try to eat a few ounces a day. Cheap and my body loves it   

[trollercoaster]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34377340

[bigtimespaghetti]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34377340

It's one thing sheltering economic migrants and some refugees, it's another to shut down infrastructure. It's total madness.

[Miss Fortune]

...

This thread is actually in honor of CoinCube (who started the very popular "Economic Devastation" thread).



But, that thread wanders into difficult philosophical terrain, and I am interested in hearing opinions (practical!) re what we can do about "Economic Totalitarianism":

1) The new War on CA$H (Zero Hedge is covering this tpoic pretty well)

2) ZIRP/NIRP

3) Whether any of our apparently worthless Prez candidates have any decent ideas to save our financial butts.  And who is worse (the worst).

4a) Ideas that EACH of us might be able to do to defend ourselves from abusive .gov trying to take ever-more of our hard-earned money...

4b) Where assets like BTC, "alts", physical gold, foreign real estate, "Plan B", etc. may fit in...



Ideas anyone?

I´m too old to learn to program, nor interested (in this thread) in obscure discussions of Marxism, "idiots", personal attacks, etc.

I want practical ideaz and resultz, fishez!

For me this is like imposing a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life, the individual. I think make they make it hard for some investors.

[TPTB_need_war]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34377340

It's one thing sheltering economic migrants and some refugees, it's another to shut down infrastructure. It's total madness.

Your reaction (which is abhorrent to me and shows that you and I do not have a compatible attitude) exemplifies (and I noticed a similar attitude in the videos of Germans at the above quoted link) what I am contemplating is a major difference between the attitudes of Europeans and United States' Americans. The Europeans are so in love with socialism, collectivism, fairness, social justice, etc.. that they think it is acceptable for the State to be responsible for "refugees".

Whereas, there is a segment of the USA population that thinks we should only take care of ourselves and fuck the rest of the world (the USA was historically isolationist):

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-60-minutes-scott-pelley/

I think the outcome of this difference is Europe can't possibly get organized to stop the devolution of the society into total madness, and thus it will get worse and worse until it reaches the point where a neo-nazi movement takes hold again.

Whereas, the USA will splinter and pockets of defiance will break away from the morass, such as on the state level, as well as rise of the national third party defiance as captured by Trump's polarizing 23% popularity. so the USA will be a mix of pockets that resist the morass and morasses that fail and fall away over time. Thus the USA won't descend all the way into neo-nazi hell, but Europe will.

There will be strife in the USA earlier than in Europe, but later in Europe the outcome will be much more horrific.

I don't have any vestment in Europe, but if I did I would pull it pronto.

[RealBitcoin]

Austristan and Germanistan will be quickly becoming 3rld world countries soon, increase the taxes fast to 99% to pay for the invading horde's benefits.

Then further print more money because not even the 99% taxes will be enough.


Pretty bad, and in the meantime the EU is strenghtening  , becoming a federation, stripping away all remaining rights. It will be very bad future guys.

[OROBTC]

...

TPTB is reading the USA right, IMO.  I do not know if we will split up, but there is no doubt that more Americans have more hard-ass ideas than most Europeans & Brits that I have known.

It has been this way (Socialist notions among so many there) since at least the early 1980s, when I visited friends for dinner in London.  During that period, the big issue in Europe were the Pershing Missiles, how war-like Reagan was, etc.  I was completely dumbfounded that virtually all attendees at that dinner (eight or so) ignored the menace and danger of the Soviet Union, complete ignorance...  

While I know much less about the "European mentality" rather than that here in America, I would concur w/ TBTP that their problems are not only more difficult to solve, but a real unwillingness to solve them.

*   *   *

I thought that the correct name of the country "formerly known as Germany" was Deutschistan!

I wish I had a reference, but I read an article maybe a year ago saying that before France goes majority-Muslim that a Neo-Nazi populist party would get voted in at some point.  And that future French government would "kick them all out".  

France has a tradition of being perfectly OK with very strict governments.  And even I would be sympathetic were all of France to become like Marseille.

[trollercoaster]

They just love to "suckle the teet of socialism" haha, it's painful to watch this self destruction, but the wests solutions to the problems caused by socialism is to demand more socialism, they keep throwing more fuel on the fire. 

[trollercoaster]

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/r-germany-prints-its-constitution-in-arabic-for-refugees-to-learn-2015-9

[TPTB_need_war]

bigtimespaghetti, my prior post may illicit the interpretation that I am for government control over migration and actually I am not. But there are two problems that prevent me from advocating an open border policy:

• Government subsidized welfare for all.
• Other States don't reciprocate.

As leader of the USA, I would propose that an open door policy (no visa needed, same rights as any citizen including buying land, doing business in your own name, working, etc) for citizens on countries that had the same policy towards our citizens (and which had the same separation of religion and State, same constitutional right to bear arms, and the same constitutional protection of speech, and our other core constitutional values). But this open door policy would only be in effect once all State-sponsored welfare had been dismantled, so that migrants would not have any incentive to come and leech on the system.

Also all arriving tourists and migrants would have to provide proof of sufficient funds to live above the poverty line. And any non-citizen caught doing vagrancy would be deported to their home country (and the cost of deportation would be a debt owed by that deportee, forgivable at 7 years but not before that time).

As for universal health care, I would dump it. Any one who can't pay for their own health care suffers period. Just like it used to be in the Philippines when I arrived here. I saw nothing wrong with that. Some people didn't get medical care because they didn't make it a priority to work and save for that.

Only when patients have to haggle for their own health care, can humans get serious about fighting the Monsantos and the poisons they eat and do not seem to care because they have medical insurance.

[smooth]

bigtimespaghetti, my prior post may illicit the interpretation that I am for government control over migration and actually I am not. But there are two problems that prevent my from advocating an open border policy:

• Government subsidized welfare for all.
• Other States don't reciprocate.

As leader of the USA, I would propose that an open door policy (no visa needed, same rights as any citizen including buying land, doing business in your own name, working, etc) for citizens on countries that had the same policy towards our citizens (and which had the same separation of religion and State, same constitutional right to bear arms, and the same constitutional protection of speech, and our other core constitutional values). But this open door policy would only be in effect once all State-sponsored welfare had been dismantled, so that migrants would not have any incentive to come and leech on the system.

You could limit it to people from countries having at least as generous a welfare system.

None of this would really change anything as your conditions would already eliminate virtually the entire world if not all of it, and my condition might further limit. So ultimately people would still just migrate without permission as they do now.

[TPTB_need_war]

You could limit it to people from countries having at least as generous a welfare system.

Which is essentially what the Western nations do with visa-free travel policies.

But that doesn't gain us any momentum in terms of anarchist, Libertarian values and spreading those values around the world. Trump is talking about using our trump card (our economy) to force some changes throughout the world. Some of his details seem incorrect, but if he gets good advice, he might be on to something.

[bigtimespaghetti]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34377340

It's one thing sheltering economic migrants and some refugees, it's another to shut down infrastructure. It's total madness.

Your reaction (which is abhorrent to me and shows that you and I do not have a compatible attitude) exemplifies (and I noticed a similar attitude in the videos of Germans at the above quoted link) what I am contemplating is a major difference between the attitudes of Europeans and United States' Americans. The Europeans are so in love with socialism, collectivism, fairness, social justice, etc.. that they think it is acceptable for the State to be responsible for "refugees".

I was just commenting on the course of action suggested in the article. To be clear I do not feel I owe anything to the refugees and especially the economic migrants (which I am highly skeptical of). But my views aren't going to change the collectivist action being pushed onto Europe. Ironically it's only been British (and british 2nd/3rd gen) immigrants that have expressed an understanding or concern about how this will affect Britain and Europe, which gives me some hope, despite the majority of my peers blinding following so called humane ideals.

I certainly agree there is a difference in attitude between US and Europe in so many regards, which I think in it's plainest sense ultimately stems from the ancestors of northern america striking out and leaving the old world. It takes some balls to do that. Reading some of the stories of what those people achieved is pretty humbling to me.

[bigtimespaghetti]

bigtimespaghetti, my prior post may illicit the interpretation that I am for government control over migration and actually I am not. But there are two problems that prevent me from advocating an open border policy:

• Government subsidized welfare for all.
• Other States don't reciprocate.

We are in agreement, I believe this has been covered upthread, you cannot have open borders without dismantling or significantly reducing any generous welfare. Or else having penalising status for refugees (which is how it works in the UK, refugees really are treated as such and while it is 'humane' it is not a comfortable life, thus you see many begging as it is illegal for them to work, even though technically begging is illegal too!).

Only when patients have to haggle for their own health care, can humans get serious about fighting the Monsantos and the poisons they eat and do not seem to care because they have medical insurance.

This is what I cannot get through to anyone I know from the UK (some exceptions) even some Americans I work with. Many Americans I know actually admire the collectivised healthcare in Europe. I think they will change their tune when boomers really start to drain the system if technological innovations cannot counter balance.

[altcoinUK]

altcoinUK, I am not by any means criticizing eating raw vegetables as major boost to health. And I concur with smooth that if you are facing the serious diagnosis of advanced heart disease that you did, even a radical all vegan diet for the short-term may be appropriate and I take your word for the miraculous benefits you attained from it.

(The red emphasis is from me).

Please, don't see my heart disease case as an odd and a miraculous one. Almost all heart patients as well as diabetes having the very same reversal and recovery from plant based and vegan diet. According to Esselstyn and T. Colin Campbell that is the very natural response of the body to plant based diet. The China Study of Campbell, the largest dataset ever compiled about cardiovascular diseases indicates that as well. Virtually all heart disease (and I think diabetes) patients who had the mental strength and determination (i.e. crazy enough) to go through on the pain of vegan/plant based diet experience with the reversal of the condition.

Of course you are absolutely correct in many aspects of this, mainly saying that the whole cardiovascular issue is based on genetics. Because of genetics - as you said - you probably won't experience with cardiovascular issues ever and I completely understand that (when I jumped into the conversation I was not aware that you are part of the smaller part of population who is immune to heart issues). You are absolutely right that in my case my genetics determine that my body can't process the fat which then deposited in the arteries and then the endothelial cells are damaged, and I fully understand you don't have this issue.
Still, cardiovascular diseases are the biggest killer in the US and UK. The typical audience of this forum are young males, so one would think most likely they are having no such issues. All kinds of studies indicate that the situation is quite the opposite. For instance, young American soldiers who died in combat in Korea and in Vietnam, it is estimated that roughly 80 percent of those battle casualties had coronary artery disease that could be seen at autopsy without a microscope. More recent research is the Pathobiological Determinants of Atherosclerosis in Youth (PDAY) trial. That study looked at those who had died of accidents, homicides, and suicides between the ages of 16 and 34. In that group, the disease was literally ubiquitous.

This is an epidemic which can be solved with relatively simple diet measures. But it can't happen as big pharmaceutical companies control health services, train the cardiologists, and expensive medicines sold to health services and pushed to patients. In the context of this Economic Totalitarianism thread I think it is quite relevant to point out how careless the government about citizens' life in order to keep the big pharmaceuticals happy.

Terms of the vitamins (B12) and nutritions that you could not get from vegan diet, it is possible to get them from other sources and supplements. There is an other study that points out, not one death was recorded up to date that can be directly related to vitamin or supplement intake. In the meantime there are many thousands of deaths per year as the direct result of side effects and complication of the expensive cardiovascular and diabetes medicines (and of course the many millions death as the diseases not cured).

Anyway, I think you are on the right track in taking lots of raw vegetable, occasionally some good quality fish and seafood, that's not so bad. I can't imagine how the saturated fat that found in animal products, even in dairy products could be beneficial for your MS condition but you know what you are doing. I wish the best with your recovery.  

[tabnloz]

bigtimespaghetti, my prior post may illicit the interpretation that I am for government control over migration and actually I am not. But there are two problems that prevent me from advocating an open border policy:

• Government subsidized welfare for all.
• Other States don't reciprocate.

We are in agreement, I believe this has been covered upthread, you cannot have open borders without dismantling or significantly reducing any generous welfare. Or else having penalising status for refugees (which is how it works in the UK, refugees really are treated as such and while it is 'humane' it is not a comfortable life, thus you see many begging as it is illegal for them to work, even though technically begging is illegal too!).

Only when patients have to haggle for their own health care, can humans get serious about fighting the Monsantos and the poisons they eat and do not seem to care because they have medical insurance.

This is what I cannot get through to anyone I know from the UK (some exceptions) even some Americans I work with. Many Americans I know actually admire the collectivised healthcare in Europe. I think they will change their tune when boomers really start to drain the system if technological innovations cannot counter balance.

There's a great satire book, can't remember the name. Something like Boomtown, where a blogger gets fame when she suggests boomers are paid by the government to be euthanised. It becomes a political rallying call etc. Funny read.

[smooth]

I certainly agree there is a difference in attitude between US and Europe in so many regards, which I think in it's plainest sense ultimately stems from the ancestors of northern america striking out and leaving the old world. It takes some balls to do that. Reading some of the stories of what those people achieved is pretty humbling to me

Don't forget the removal effect as well. When the boldest and bravest people with the most initiative leave, who is left?

[altcoinUK]

This is what I cannot get through to anyone I know from the UK (some exceptions) even some Americans I work with. Many Americans I know actually admire the collectivised healthcare in Europe. I think they will change their tune when boomers really start to drain the system if technological innovations cannot counter balance.

That's a difficult one. It is very unfair to tax payers that the most prescribed medications in the UK, Europe and US are diabetes and cholesterol related medicines. You know it's related to obesity. In the meantime there is the solution: don't eat the fucking sugar and saturated fat. In the meantime food regulatory authorities are completely controlled by large food corporations, so sugar, trans fats and hydrogenated oils pushed into the food in mass amount. Those make the food cheap and tasty, in the meantime that food generate a massive medical bill for tax payers.

[minor-transgression]

"This is what I cannot get through to anyone I know from the UK (some exceptions) even some Americans I work with. Many Americans I know actually admire the collectivised healthcare in Europe. I think they will change their tune when boomers really start to drain the system if technological innovations cannot counter balance."

I *think* you are trying to convince people that natural monopolies should not be nationalised.
Proving negatives aside, do you really think that the individual has any bargaining power,
at a time when he (or she) feels his life is at risk?
And if you think collective bargaining/insurance is the answer, how is that different to the
State getting involved?
BTW, I'd guess that TPTB are planning to worsen the UK system in the hope that privatised
systems can be introduced thus providing profits, and making the US system look better.