Martin Armstrong Discussion

[Pab]

I don't understand people who say that the EU crisis "is over". Either they're ignorant or they live in a dungeon for the last decade. Fortunately there are some media that are actually saying the truth about how devastating things are.

Who’s Nexit?

As many as five other eurozone countries are flirting with trouble. Could one of them be the first to leave the common currency?

Which will be the next eurozone domino to fall? With Greece enjoying a temporary lull in its apparently permanent crisis, we can take a moment to look around its neighborhood at other candidates for trouble. There are several — and the euro’s future looks far from bright.

Greece ran into trouble mainly because it should never have been in the eurozone in the first place. Its governments couldn't balance their budgets, and its economic cycle was far out of sync with those of the eurozone’s leading lights. When Germany grew, Greece shrank, and vice versa. Using the same monetary policy in both countries made no sense at all.

What other countries in the eurozone might soon face this choice? To hear the credit-rating agencies tell it, the first in line are Portugal, whose government bonds are rated as junk by Standard & Poor’s, and Italy, which receives the lowest investment-grade rating of BBB-. Each country’s government is carrying a debt bigger than its GDP, something the IMF doesn’t expect to change any time in the next five years. Spain, whose debt-to-GDP ratio is below 70 percent but may rise in the coming years, is rated BBB.

Not far behind are Ireland, whose debt burden of 86 percent of GDP is supposed to decline rapidly now that economic growth has resumed, and France, at 89 percent, where growth rates may struggle to crack 2 percent in the coming years. Both of them receive reasonable grades from Standard & Poor’s — AA for France and A+ for Ireland, with AAA being the safest of all. [...]

https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/07/30/whos-nexit-greece-eurozone-piigs-spain-france-italy/

EU crisis now just started,beging was when Euro has been created.Curruption,I am from Poland,Poland isso corrupted,there is huge money laundering ongoing,but there is no statistic for that,becouse no legal cases opened

Prosecutors and justice system is not working mostly becouse of corruption.The only onecountry who is actively fighting againscorruption is Hungary,and his leader Orban.EU developed system what is very friendly for corruption,becouse of inreasing number of local and governament administrations workers,it is so friendly for corruption enviroment,we have in Poland bigger number of administation workers than it was during red regime time,it is nightmare

[1714002939]

1714002939

[1714002939]

1714002939

[1714002939]

1714002939

[username18333]

EU crisis now just started,beging was when Euro has been created.[Plutocracy],I am from Poland,Poland isso [plutocratic],there is huge money laundering ongoing,but there is no statistic for that,becouse no legal cases opened

Prosecutors and justice system is not working mostly becouse of [plutocracy].The only onecountry who is actively fighting agains[plutocracy] is Hungary,and his leader Orban.EU developed system what is very friendly for [plutocracy],becouse of inreasing number of local and governament administrations workers,it is so friendly for [plutocratic] enviroment,we have in Poland bigger number of administation workers than it was during red regime time,it is nightmare

Sorry, mate, but that is not “corruption” (Pab): it is “business [i.e., plutocracy] as usual.”

[TPTB_need_war]

username18333, please do not falsely accuse me of supporting the plutocracy nor of not undertaking actions to realistically remove their power from our lives. The power is granted to TPTB because the people rely on industrial goods and physical protection from those who have access to those industrial goods which can kill. Up until the recent invention of the 3D printer, industrial goods required large fixed capital investments in factories, which thus required large capitalists and large capitalists required protection for their factories against those who had the power to make war. And since aggregation of capital was natural in this system, the oversupply of laborers were at a disadvantage in terms of demand the lion's share of the factories profits and as competition has driven profits down, more and more of the profits necessarily had to go to the capitalist funding the fixed capital investment to produce industrial goods. The people responded by banding together with unions and government to expropriate profits from the capitalists and the capitalists then banded together to capture the control of the governments and unions from behind the curtain. Thus handing the power to make war to the composition of government with capitalists controllers. As the capitalists were able to aggregate much wealth this way, they could not invest in more factories without causing an oversupply, so in order to get a ROI they have to loan their capital but they needed a public back stop so they could loan to any one with a heart beat and be guaranteed to be paid back. Also this situation lead to too much power in the hands of these bankster capitalist TPTB (plutocracy), thus formed new corruptions such as the investment banks Goldman Sachs which do what ever in the fuck they please running amok pleasing Satan greatly.

So then I wrote those 3 seminal essays that CoinCube linked to from the opening post of the Economic Devastation thread, wherein I explained about technology was changing the basis of finance which has the potential to destroy the basis of that morass of the Industrial Age. It was in one of those essays about the fundamental qualities of entropy that I predicted in 2010, the ultimate federalization of Europe was inescapable. And it is your lack of understanding of entropy which causes you to propose an entirely unrealistic (non-)solution of anti-money, which I will explain below. I am not going to get in a long noisy exchange with you and your bizarre noisy way of quoting by butchering content with colorization and inserting people's usernames into text in parenthesis and generally writing in a way that no one can hardly comprehend your sentences. I will explain what is and leave it for the readers to decide if I am correct.

As we move into the Knowledge Age, the relevant capital is the ability to create knowledge and no longer monetary savings because I can go start creating knowledge in my nipa hut or home office and all I need is my brain and a cheap computer. Heck one can build in the USA from newegg.com (which accepts BTC) a very powerful development computer (as powerful per core as an i7) with a dual-core Pentium with a large flat screen monitor for < $400. Even a rudimentary Rasberry Pi 2 costs $75 complete without monitor.

Thus since knowledge is owned and created by the individual (due to the Mythical Man Month not even collaboration competes with individual creation of knowledge), it can not be financed with usury. I explained the reasons in detail in my aforementioned essay. Go read it, if you want to understand.

Thus the greatest ROI will go to the creators of knowledge themselves, there is no way that the usurists will be able to grow their capital fast enough to keep up. Thus the usurists will try as they are to enforce totalitarianism to try to expropriate capital. But all they can do with this is destroy knowledge capital by destroying the knowledge creators. They can never, ever again get back their power from the Industrial Age. It's over for them. They should accept it. They have no choice.

So we knowledge creators mostly want to trade our knowledge. We want to leverage the knowledge creation of others and interopt so as to produce greater and greater knowledge making the world more and more prosperous. So how can we trade our knowledge? We could just share it for free (open source with no business model) but there are two issues to consider:

1. How do we produce/attain the industrial and physical goods we need? How do we attain land to live on? Obtain weapons to protect ourselves?

2. What is our way to incentivize knowledge creation that is worthy, and disincentivize knowledge creation that is wasteful or harmful (e.g. code with lots of bugs or poor quality)?

We must recognize that knowledge creations are not fungible. Thus how do we incentivize someone to work on a knowledge area that only a few people need? If we argue that reputation and a gift economy will be the substitute for money, then how do we concentrate reputation to incentivize the maximum division-of-labor so that experts will work on very narrow areas of knowledge that only a few people will care to even know about? The maximum division-of-labor is required by the irreversible progression of entropy towards maximum per the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

In short, we can not get rid of fungible money and still have an economy that is compatible with the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

So thus I realized that the only path forward was to create an anonymous money and network system so the Knowledge Age could flourish unfettered by the old world industrial capitalists who want to expropriate our economy because they can't compete with us any other way.

The Knowledge Age will not eliminate money entirely but it will have some major differences from the Industrial Age:

• Any autodidact can obtain capital simply by doing, no need to seek our vulture capitalists
• Knowledge capital will always be fleeting because those creating will outpace the wealth of those who are not.
• It becomes impossible to finance knowledge creation, thus the monetary capital has to be distributed by investment in those who actually own their knowledge. So the money will turn over very fast (much higher velocity of money) because no one wants to hold it for very long. You as a knowledge creator can't really leverage more knowledge than you can understand, thus utility of money diminishes rapidly the more you have. As industrial goods (and even the cloning of humans) moves towards zero margins, you can have as many physical things as you want nearly for free, so who needs to hoard money?

Thus you see the money I am creating is an anti-money of sorts, but it is done as a realistic transition from the current Industrial Age to the near zero-margin economy of the future.

Whereas the anti-money you are proposing can never get adopted because it is an abrupt assumption that we are already at the end game of a near zero-margin economy of the future.

I urge you to stop wasting your time and throw your support behind my or any other's efforts to create the anonymous money and network system we need. And please stop cluttering the threads with your redundant arguments that we all need to give up on society and becoming foraging nomads surviving on seeds, which effectively what a world without fungible money would be.

[username18333]

The power is granted to TPTB because the people rely on industrial goods and physical protection from those who have access to those industrial goods which can kill.

Plutocracy is "government by the wealthy" (Merriam-Webster); therefore, it requires some set of conditions whereunder "wealth" (Merriam-Webster) can exist. In the case of modern plutocracy, that is the manipulation of culture to condition a people to accept a money in service the service of that plutocracy regardless of the detriments inherent to the money as regards that people's interests.

[TPTB_need_war]

The power is granted to TPTB because the people rely on industrial goods and physical protection from those who have access to those industrial goods which can kill.

(I will contend your premise thus eluding the contention of your argument [whatever it was]. [Perhaps, in your next post, you will first establish your premise and, then, present your argument.])

Plutocracy is "government by the wealthy" (Merriam-Webster); therefore, it requires some set of conditions whereunder "wealth" (Merriam-Webster) can exist. In the case of modern Plutocracy, that is the manipulation of culture to condition a people to accept a money in service thereof no matter the degree whereto it behaves contrary to their interests.

I addressed your response in the rest of my post. If you are so fucking lazy as to not even read, then clutter this thread with your laziness. Fuck! People are getting tired of your shit. They really are. Elevate your discourse please.

You can't erase wealth without also erasing the Second Law of Thermodynamics, at least not until we achieve the zero margin economy or you expect people to work for no return not even reputation as I explained. Read my post for the reasoning.

[username18333]

The people responded by banding together with unions and government to expropriate profits from the capitalists and the capitalists then banded together to capture the control of the governments and unions from behind the curtain.

Governments were under the control of plutocrats from the innovation of central banking, for their endeavors (invariably?) required an appeal thereto.

[username18333]

You can't erase wealth without also erasing the Second Law of Thermodynamics, at least not until we achieve the zero margin economy or you expect people to work for no return not even reputation as I explained. Read my post for the reasoning.

"[W]ealth" (TPTB_need_war) does not exist without one to conceive it (Note: I do not subscribe to philosophical realism.); therefore, the destruction of Earth through its conversion into energy (which would not violate the second law of thermodynamics) would, necessarily, destroy all "wealth" (TPTB_need_war) (save, of course, for the conception of it elsewhere).

As well, that you would contend an objective existence to what is mere notion is, in this case, "in service of plutocracy" (username18333).

[TPTB_need_war]

The people responded by banding together with unions and government to expropriate profits from the capitalists and the capitalists then banded together to capture the control of the governments and unions from behind the curtain.

Governments were under the control of plutocrats from the innovation of central banking, for their endeavors (invariably?) required an appeal thereto.

Stop piecemealing your understanding of what I wrote. Read all the way to the end.

Of course there are many reasons the people fell under the plutocracy, including protection and road building during the agrarian Age (e.g. Rome). But that is irrelevant to the punchline of my post.

You can't erase wealth without also erasing the Second Law of Thermodynamics, at least not until we achieve the zero margin economy or you expect people to work for no return not even reputation as I explained. Read my post for the reasoning.

"[W]ealth" (TPTB_need_war) does not exist without one to conceive it (Note: I do not subscribe to philosophical realism.); therefore, the destruction of Earth through its conversion into energy (which would not violate the second law of thermodynamics) would, necessarily, destroy all "wealth" (TPTB_need_war) (save, of course, for the conception of it elsewhere).

As well, that you would contend an objective existence to what is mere notion is, in this case, "in service of plutocracy" (username18333).

Why will a person produce if they can't attain something in return such a reputation, the good feelings of a gift economy, or money?

Communism assumes people will produce just because they are ideological slaves.

You propose slavery. Can't you see you are with Marx?

[TPTB_need_war]

Stop piecemealing your understanding of what I wrote. Read all the way to the end.

If your argument has failed in part, it has failed in whole. (Hence, as one would with a mathematical proof, I stopped with the first "error.")

You have failed. You ascribe Communism as the solution. Or non-production, which is the same as Communism.

[username18333]

You have failed. You ascribe Communism as the solution. Or non-production, which is the same as Communism.

You have faltered in that you hold the Theory of Forms to correspond to anything but a flight from reality for the inability to encode reality (indeterminate, as Heisenberg demonstrated) in knowledge (determinate).

WHAT ONE "KNOWS" IS FICTION FOR THE MERE KNOWING OF IT.

Plutocracy thrives on the notion of the objective existence of "knowledge" and "wealth" when these only exist within the physical universe insofar as your brain exists therewithin to facilitate the conscious experience of them. Psychology dictates what "knowledge" is admitted widespread adoption and, through media, PLUTOCRATS DICTATE PSYCHOLOGY INTO THE VERY BRAINS OF THE PUBLIC.

What you contend about Armstrong is what of his works confirms this.

[TPTB_need_war]

You've made no argument. Do it again, and I will ignore.

(that people ascribe to a tangible reality is our choice. You can remove your body if you wish. We are not arguing your freedom to do that. We won't follow you. Address our world or we will ignore you. I don't speak for everyone, but I am confident I speak for the majority. At least we want reputation and social interaction as a minimum reward for production. Sounds to me like your life's reward is sitting alone reading books. I understand the Bible talks about forsaking the body and the wants of the tangible world and producing for nothing but the cause of spreading the word. How will we get people to work on knowledge where nearly no one interacts with them because the topic area is so narrow? Should we forsake that and the Second Law of Thermodynamics...well we can't...the Bible apparently has an error...without friction there can't be existence because the speed-of-light would be infinite and the past and present and the future would be same thus no change and no existence...you ascribe to destroy existence by destroying tangible friction... rather I choose to continue the progression towards maximum entropy in which of course the information moves to the small and out of the top-down macro...)

[username18333]

You've made no argument. Do it again, and I will ignore.

(that people ascribe to a tangible reality is our choice. You can remove your body if you wish. We are not arguing your freedom to do that. We won't follow you. Address our world or we will ignore you. I don't speak for everyone, but I am confident I speak for the majority. At least we want reputation and social interaction as a minimum reward for production. Sounds to me like your life's reward is sitting alone reading books. I understand the Bible talks about forsaking the body and the wants of the tangible world and producing for nothing but the cause of spreading the word. How will we get people to work on knowledge where nearly no one interacts with them because the topic area is so narrow? Should we forsake that and the Second Law of Thermodynamics...well we can't...the Bible apparently has an error...without friction there can't be existence because the speed-of-light would be infinite and the past and present would be same...you ascribe to destroy existence by destroying tangible friction... rather I choose to continue the progression towards maximum entropy in which of course the information moves to the small and out of the top-down macro...)

"This thing called truth... can we truly say such concepts are real? There was once a time when I held faith in the idea. But no longer. Even if such a concept can be made to stand before me, in a visible form that I can hear and touch... In such a presence that I may be capable of sensing and feeling... It's just a lie. Nothing truly exists... I see that now. Because with my power, anything can be made to exist... or to be rendered nonexistent."
— Kyōka Suigetsu (lit. "Mirror Flower, Water Moon") speaking to Kurama Kawahiru.

You can either wake up to what your "knowledge" really is (i.e., a mere approximation of existence "hand crafted" by plutocracy and spoon feed to you by its movie-esque "clone army" named "We the People"), or your can continue to "live the dream" (i.e., believe that knowledge corresponds to something other than itself); however, you cannot do both - and to do the latter is to abandon all avenues to the liberation from plutocracy's "Mirror Flower, Water Moon" (here, a sword of Damocles). (However, you will come to accept - either through breaking the spell, or at the point of Kyōka Suigetsu - that what you term "tangible" is not so in the least.)

I do too. But it doesn't change the logic. I can love people without thinking I can change what is natural. It just is. Accept it.

(Colorization mine.)

what do you suppose would be his answer if someone told him that what he had seen before was all a cheat and an illusion, but that now, being nearer to reality and turned toward more real things, he saw more truly? And if also one should point out to him each of the passing objects and constrain him by questions to say what it is, do you not think that he would be at a loss and that he would regard what he formerly saw as more real than the things now pointed out to him?” “Far more real,” he said.

“And if he were compelled to look at the light itself,

(Colorization mine.)

However, “what is natural” (TPTB_need_war ) is not, also, veridical: in the course of departure from the illusions thrust upon one, under plutocracy, from babyhood, one approaches reality as the limit of ⅟ₓ + 𝐶, as 𝑥 approaches infinity from the left, approaches 𝐶.

[TPTB_need_war]

username18333 argues that knowledge creation is merely an illusion to support the existence of wealth. I agree.

Well the prior posts I explained that existence is an illusion that requires friction.

So he can have his illusion by removing his body thus for his "soul" from that point forward past = present = future.

And we can have our illusion with our bodies, friction, reputation, wealth, family, production, competition, etc..

To each his own to choose.

If there is a God, he created us this way so we'd exist this way. I am following the plan here for the limited duration it lasts for me.

[username18333]

If there is a God, he created us this way so we'd exist this way. I am following the plan here for the limited duration it lasts for me.

And Jehovah Elohim took Man, and put him into the garden of Eden, to till it and to guard it.

For thus saith Jehovah of hosts, the God of Israel: I have put a yoke of iron upon the neck of all these nations, that they may serve Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon; and they shall serve him: and I have given him the beasts of the field also.

[TPTB_need_war]

I believe God gave me the abilities I have for a reason. If that reason is to serve a Babylon that could be eliminated if would ascribe to an Eden where I forsaked the abilities God gave me and live in a utopia where there is no challenge, then I'd be bored out of my fucking mind.

So thus I conclude I am destined to my destiny. You somehow think we can just skip some steps and arrive at the end game of infinite entropy = 0 entropy, i.e. where we are all back as one with God and can't be distinguished any more.

I rather think God fancies a toy simulation he can watch, sort of like when I was playing with trains and erector sets in my youth.

[username18333]

I believe God gave me the abilities I have for a reason. If that reason is to serve a Babylon that could be eliminated if would ascribe to an Eden where I forsaked the abilities God gave me and live in a utopia where there is no challenge, then I'd be bored out of my fucking mind.

So thus I conclude I am destined to my destiny. You somehow think we can just skip some steps and arrive at the end game of infinite entropy = 0 entropy, i.e. where we are all back as one with God and can't be distinguished any more.

I rather think God fancies a toy simulation he can watch, sort of like when I was playing with trains and erector sets in my youth.

Those "abilities" (TPTB_need_war) exist only in the phenomenology of consciousness. Conscious experience does not physically exist (A physical system which facilitates it physically exists; however, the phenomenology of that consciousness does not.), so the second law of thermodynamics is inapplicable to it.

[TPTB_need_war]

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/35707

French Elite Say Either Germany Leaves the Euro or Economic Chaos is their Fate

Reading the linked article translated in Google Chromium (Chrome on Linux) or just use translate.google.com, it is clear to me how the end game in EU will proceed.

The only solution will ultimately be a monetary reset with a debt for equity swap. The EU nations will become states of the EU, with their fiscal deficits reset to tolerable levels after this reset and giving up both equity and sovereignty to their EU masters. So that the process of debt accumulation by the states can begin anew to work towards complete and total enslavement over the decades forward.

The EU and Asia are extremely well positioned to fall into a Technocracy of control by the banksters and the new world order.

The wildcards remain rural America, specifically some states of the USA, some states of Canada, and perhaps some pockets of South and Central America.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1049048.msg12068521#msg12068521

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1049048.msg11815282#msg11815282

I can't see Greece or any other EU nation putting up any significant defense. The Europeans lost their testicles. It IS cultural, sorry to say. Please correct me if I am wrong  

The Greeks and Italians will simply continue to cheat on the European taxes as much as they can. Their way of dealing with the problem is to ignore the government. Whereas, the Americans are more likely to defy their government openly and with heavily armed resistance.

Australia is apparently too close to European (and Asian) in culture. That is why it is falling faster than the Americas to totalitarianism. The "Outback" Australians are a dying (outnumbered) culture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Australia

After the second war, 6.5 million migrants from 200 nations brought immense new diversity, and Australians grew increasingly aware of their proximity to Asia. Over time, the diverse food, lifestyle and cultural practices of immigrants have been absorbed into mainstream Australian culture. The Australian colonies had a period of extensive multi-ethnic immigration during the Australian gold rushes of the latter half of the 19th century, but following Federation in 1901, the Parliament instigated the White Australia Policy that gave preference to British migrants and ensured that Australia remained a predominantly Anglo-Celtic society until well into the 20th Century. The post-World War II immigration program saw the policy dismantled by successive governments, permitting large numbers of Southern European, and later Asian and Middle Eastern migrants to arrive. The Menzies Government (1949-1966) and Holt Government dismantled the legal barriers to multi-ethnic immigration and by the 1970s, the Whitlam and Fraser Governments were promoting multiculturalism.

https://www.griffith.edu.au/international/life-in-australia/australian-culture-and-customs

Australians are generally laid-back, open and direct. They say what they mean and are generally more individual and outgoing than many other cultures.

You may think that most Australians live in the 'outback' out in the country. In fact, more than three quarters of Australians live in cities and in urban centres, mainly along the coast.

* Some key values that reflect the Australian way of life include:
* Freedom of speech
* Freedom of religion
* Democracy
* Equality regardless of sex, marital status, religion, nationality, disability or sexual preference
* Peacefulness

A 'fair go' (equal opportunity) for all and support for the underdog.

In most practical ways, Australia is an egalitarian society in that there are no formal class distinctions. There is no segregation between people of different incomes or backgrounds and everyone is free to live where they like, attend university and follow whichever religion and occupation they choose.

What are Australians like?

In the workplace and among friends, Australians generally call each other by their first names. When meeting someone for the first time, it is usual to shake the person's right hand with your right hand. People who do not know each other generally do not kiss or hug when meeting. Australians show respect by looking people in the eye, however they don’t stand as close or have as much physical contact (such as hugs and kisses) as other cultures.
You may find that your Australian friends have difficulty pronouncing your name, at first. Be patient and prepared that you may need to repeat your name or say it slowly at the beginning. As friendships develop, you may find that your friends give you a nickname, which is very common in Australia and is a form of endearment.

http://www.kwintessential.co.uk/resources/global-etiquette/australia.html

Aussie Modesty

Australians are very down to earth and always mindful of not giving the impression that they think they are better than anyone else.
They value authenticity, sincerity, and loathe pretentiousness.
Australians prefer people who are modest, humble, self- deprecating and with a sense of humour.
They do not draw attention to their academic or other achievements and tend to distrust people who do.
They often downplay their own success, which may make them appear not to be achievement-oriented.

Mates

Australians place a high value on relationships.
With a relatively small population, it is important to get along with everyone, since you never know when your paths may cross again.
This leads to a win-win negotiating style, since having everyone come away with positive feelings helps facilitate future business dealings.

A Multi-Cultural Society

The initial population of Australia was made up of Aborigines and people of British and Irish descent.
After World War II there was heavy migration from Europe, especially from Greece, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, Yugoslavia, Lebanon, and Turkey.
This was in response to the Australian policy of proactively trying to attract immigrants to boost the population and work force.
In the last thirty years, Australia has liberalised its immigration policy and opened its borders to South East Asia.
This has caused a real shift in self-perception as Aussies begin to re-define themselves as a multi-cultural and multi-faith society rather then the old homogenous, white, Anglo- Saxon, Protestant nation.

Australian Etiquette & Customs

Meeting Etiquette

Australians are not very formal so greetings are casual and relaxed.

 
A handshake and smile suffices.
While an Australian may say, 'G'day' or 'G'day, mate', this may sound patronizing from a foreigner.
Visitors should simply say, 'Hello' or 'Hello, how are you?'
Aussies prefer to use first names, even at the initial meeting

Negotiating and Decision Making

Australians get down to business quickly with a minimum amount of small talk.
They are quite direct and expect the same in return. They appreciate brevity and are not impressed by too much detail.
Negotiations proceed quickly. Bargaining is not customary. They will expect your initial proposal to have only a small margin for negotiation.
They do not like high-pressure techniques.
Decision-making is concentrated at the top of the company, although decisions are made after consultation with subordinates, which can make decision making slow and protracted.

In the European's mind, America is a violent place. It is a melting pot including some predominance of cultures that have historically fought back and fiercely independent and isolationist, e.g. Pilgrims, African slaves, North American tribes, Central American tribes, South American tribes.

So it seems to me the Americas will be more independent and isolationist. Not necessarily "safer", depending on what it means to you to be "safe".

Perhaps one reason I am more compatible with filipinos is their historically fierce tribes and thus their independence and desire to do what they damn well please. They also have a trait of being informal, friendly, and happy go lucky, which is something both Americans and Australians appreciate about each other. I am drawn to Argentina because you can do what you damn well please to a large extent (with some problematic exceptions such as no carry of firearms and difficulty importing goods). Argentina is a mix of Italian (ignore the government, make the government corrupt) and American culture (fiercely independent). Then you have this large land area and relatively small population concentrated in the cities.

Australians, Asians, and Europeans will prefer a "peaceful" resolution that respects multiculturalism (and subjugation of the individual for the group). Whereas, the Americans will prefer strife and holding their ground on their right to their individuality. You can clearly see that distinction in my combative, noisy, attitude right?       You can see it in OROBTC's determination to keep his guns.

I am not saying one strategy is better than the other. I have not yet been able to formulate a coherent analysis of how these differences will play out in terms of on-the-ground effects for residents.

[TPTB_need_war]

As it says in the Bible, eventually society will chip us. There is no escape. We are talking about where to live for the next couple of decades until this shit becomes a reality. Then I'll hopefully be dead.

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/35714

Brain Chip Implants

[TPTB_need_war]

MA thinks Trump has a lock and Hellary Slimeton is out:

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/35702

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/35741

Let's remember that Trump is beholden to debt.

But damn, Trump is correct on nearly every point!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-trump-platform-because-i-said-so/2015/08/01/4684802c-36f7-11e5-9739-170df8af8eb9_story.html

Yes he can easily collect that money from Mexico by expropriating from funds remittances to the Mexico.

Yes he can play hardball with China and China would have no choice but to capitulate, especially with his other ideas which would make the USA a growing, huge economy.

Yes indeed by eliminating the corporate tax the USA would see such an influx of investment and capital that it would dwarf the 9% loss of revenue for the government.

This is getting somewhat interesting. I will be paying attention while still holding on to my USA citizenship.

I don't believe the USA can heal itself. But if OROBTC and someone like Trump can prove me wrong, that would be the best for the world. I just remember how Perot let me down when I worked so hard for his campaign in 1992. Ever since, I've hated politics and view it as a waste of effort.

I doubt my experience will be any different this time.

So why would I go for S.A. over USA? Because I am fiercely independent. I have more confidence in myself than any group.

But if the USA reverted to the land of the free and the home of the brave (instead of the land of lard ass BigMac Go Big and the home of the dumber than "oh my god" Strip Mall), I would reconsider my position.

Yet it seems Trump would be making it very very difficult to get a visa for a migrant to the USA? Or perhaps he will make it more meritocratic where any one can visit if they put up a bond.

[macsga]

Fairly interesting read in the previous page. I do agree with both of you; my opinion is that you both agree in the same chapters but you're using different terms to describe them. On your last couple of comments:

1. ANY electronic device can be intercepted and/or hacked/disabled.
2. We're already "chipped" if you want my opinion, and we happily agree to. You know about basic networking and how the internet functions. Enough said.
3. America will have to change A LOT more than its politics in order to be on the right track again. Basically, I can't believe a man like Donald will be able to fulfill even the 1/10 of what he's claiming right now. TPTB won't let him. They don't want a bold country (no matter if it's the USA) that can stand on its feet. They need an indebted world which will they can easily control.

I've mailed Armstrong cnp what you wrote. Never got a reply.