Martin Armstrong Discussion

[macsga]

Regarding the Trump discussion (and resurgence in Republicans in general), I have concluded the winner will be...

...the military-industrial complex.

Right on time with MA's War Cycle, which expects war and pandemic to start going hot in 2017 and really accelerating into 2018.

We'll get the increased military spending. The reduced taxes won't matter because the world is going to be so fucked by the rising interest rates and War Cycle, that no one will be able to avail of the opportunities to start businesses in the tangible industrial age economy.

The Knowledge Age doesn't give a shit about the taxes any way, since they will be 0 for the anonymous internet coming.

A global smashup ahead. Trump card doesn't change anything and if anything this lurch back to the hard right politics accelerates it.

Now we see why the USA must break apart into regions as MA predicts. It is because the morass can not be changed from WA D.C. After 2017, the Americans will start to realize they have to take matters into their own hands.

The Feds will fight the militias. The country will break into parts. The world will be a much different place.

Crazy world we are heading into. Be prepared accordingly.

This sir, is a very possible scenario. Yesterday's debate seems to unravel a glimpse of the things to come. A furiously delirious D. Trump that presented both the best and the worst of himself, outbursting the hoorays of TPTB Mass Media who are definitely willing to follow his agenda (because he's one of their own).

On your previous post(s) about women, I'd say that there's a common attitude that deliberately omits the basic role of (mainly) women in this world. This attitude is derived by their educational depth. The more someone (...and to generalize, no matter the gender) knows about science (and how the world functions), the less they want to raise a newborn child. Another factor to look forward to, is -of course- their wealth, religion and social conditions.

Within a fast indebting world, the next decades we're heading for a fast deterioration of the population of children that the most prominent couples would give birth to, and a fast rise of the children of the 'low-education' families who "they don't think". Essentially, this is a plan to expand the 80-20 rule towards a far less number for the 20%, practically eliminating the middle class population without war.

[bigtimespaghetti]

bigtimespaghetti,

I added to my post after you quoted it.

The boomerang reaction to repression by religion is a supporting argument to the generative essence I stated, which is the people are reverting from fear of nature to boastful overconfidence disrespect for nature and the confidence that man can have everything he wants.

After the collapse, man moves too far to the other direction, and the new addiction will be the old one of religion again. Then man again disrespects nature (in a form of fear) and has the confidence that man can control everything other men want.

It is two extremes and both are founded in addiction and denial of reality. And both are founded in disrespect of the decentralized quality of free markets and nature, i.e. yes both extremes require collectivism.

The Republicans are trying to move back towards the old addiction. The Democrats want to move forward into the new addition. Conversativism vs. progressivism. Both are evil.

We need to put an end to this hamster merry-go-round using anonymity technology so the free market can be superior to collective power. Nature is a decentralized meritocracy.

I will quote this over in the Dark Enlightenment thread also.

Yes the glorification of the 'freedom' of gender and type of family (single moms) is something which I believe is a symptom of sickness in society while not being completely destructive in and of itself (I was raised in a broken family)- the raising upon a pedestal such preference and individuality which should be a private choice (not enforced upon us all via redistribution).

People should be free to raise children and start a family as they choose but don't bullshit me that a child raised without a father will not suffer from that male absence in his/her formative years. This is fairy tale thinking. The destruction of the family is some of the most malicious unintended consequence (intention?) of the left.

A relation has recently chose to have a child via a sperm donor rather than find a mate. I have to ask is there something wrong with her that she cannot attract a male or partner to start a family? I find it is incredibly selfish and short sighted to bring a child into this world without a functioning family. She works for government though- so go figure.

[bigtimespaghetti]

Within a fast indebting world, the next decades we're heading for a fast deterioration of the population of children that the most prominent couples would give birth to, and a fast rise of the children of the 'low-education' families who "they don't think". Essentially, this is a plan to expand the 80-20 rule towards a far less number for the 20%, practically eliminating the middle class population without war.

This seems to be the subconscious end game of leftists. It is frustrating to watch happen!

[TPTB_need_war]

Bottom line is the USA is too big.

The only real change would be the candidate that said he was going to downsize the Federal government and return more power to the States.

Rather I hear all these candidates talking about moar Big Gov solutions. As if the free market can be top-down fixed.

Trump thinks he can top-down engineer the Middle East, trade, etc.. Sounds great, until you think about it. I don't expect Americans to think.

Edit: Rand Paul might be the exception, and Trump said, "I like him, but he can't win" (may have been referring to Ron Paul not Rand). You can see Trump wince when Rand Paul speaks, because Trump believes in "get 'er done" top-down organization. Rand Paul follows more in the line of anarchist thinking of Ron Paul and Libertarians. Trump is correct. There is no way to elect a President who would downsize the DEEP STATE. What I heard from Cruz was somewhat reasonable but appears to me to be not a powerful enough personality to be electable.

MA is misreading the implications. Yes Americans are rising up to support a candidate that appears to be anti-establishment, but again they will be fooled by their desire to have change originate from the Federal government. The only real change can come from grass roots actions.

And so I think I better go back to programming, don't you.


The surgeon candidate Carlson is humorous. But so naive. You can find an example of this phenomenon over in Cypherdoc's thread.


Edit#2: Drudge poll says Cruz came in second in the debate to Trump:

http://www.drudgereport.com/now.htm


Edit#3: the protectionism that leads to war has begun:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/629e0260-3c3d-11e5-8613-07d16aad2152.html


Drudge report inciting Americans to lose their non-involvement in external conflicts culture:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3186229/ISIS-executes-19-girls-refusing-sex-fighters-envoy-reveals-sex-slaves-peddled-like-barrels-petrol.html

TPTB are playing the Americans like fools (which they are!).


Edit#4: put me on the podium with those candidates and I'd be executed the next day, because I would tell the people the truth which they don't want to hear.

[MF Doom]

Question for TPTB:

In the event of a "collapse" what should citizens do in terms of their debt (say credit card debt/student loans, etc)  Will that be a big deal, or will the creditors get the short end of the stick?

Looking at Greece, the creditors seemingly got their demands (and then some) while acquiring hard assets from greece.  Will citizens holding debt be in trouble (or risk being sent to these fema camps?)

[TPTB_need_war]

I negotiated cash 33 - 50% settlements for my credit card debts in 2014 which depleted about $10,000 of my remaining precarious level of "savings" (cash). That should indicate the priority I perceive the threat of being in debt going into bankster premeditated deflationary collapse. My options were to default and have them pile on fees and interest, or settle and deplete my savings.

During deflation with interest rates rising, your debt burden can only increase. You'll get trapped and you can't get up. If you are going to declare bankruptcy then get it done before the court systems enter gridlock or totalitarianism.

No I don't think the common man will win by delaying and being saddled with debt. What will happen to you is anyone's guess, but none of my guesses are nice to contemplate.

I know some Americans were able to default on their mortgages and continue to live in their house due to technicalities and other issues during the subprime collapse after 2008. But we were in early innings. Now we are moving towards the hardcore end games. People shouldn't get lulled to sleep by past performance. According to MA we are heading into a confluence of cycles that only comes around every 309 or 618 years. Not good.

Edit: on the way up the debt mountain, everyone goes out of their way to relieve hardship and the brutal realities of nature. On the way down the debt cliff, it is a free fall into the brutality of nature. Communities which didn't eat the poison and remained self-reliant pull together. Communities that ate the poison spin apart into brutal chaos. Communities of tough love remain functional and compassionate. Communities of free love diverge into dysfunction and brutality.

[tabnloz]

This is a fairly romantic view of the Australian character. True regarding modesty. And hile accurate in a general sense, it fails to mention the undercurrent of racism that has always been prevalent. At the moment you'll get a fair go (unless you're Muslim or Chinese).

White Australia has continuously treated the Aboriginal population disgracefully, from outright murder and enslavement, to not giving them the right to vote (or be classified as human), to continually underfunding development. Aboriginals has poorer access to health, education, employment etc and even now, funding has been cut to remote communities. One of the biggest controversies of the last month has been the racist booing (called an ape, told to go back to the zoo) of an Aboriginal football player who has a) mentioned the way Aboriginals see Australia and his hopes to unite all and b) performed an Aboriginal dance on the field.

With immigration post ww2 (outside of the horrendous White Australia Policy), each ethnic group that arrived was ridiculed and disliked until the next wave came; Greeks / Italians in the 60's, Vietnamese in the 70's, Lebanese in the 80's, Asians in the 90's, Muslims now.

At the moment the Australians have a far right government that continues this racism for political gain by attacking Muslims and those seeking legal asylum (those fleeing the very wars Western nations have instigated). It is the main issue (along with anti climate policy) that led to their election. And as the government continues its disastrous decline in the polls after severe mismanagement and endemic rorting and lying, they are playing the terrorism card to its fullest (cancelling of passports for suspicious activities, decided by the Minister and not due process). They further aim to tax lowest wage earners and avoid acting on the billions of dollars lost by not taxing big multinationals.

This idea you have of Aussies is completely false, and has been gradually fed to you by the cultural marxists and not cultivated by your own experience.

 You might even be an Aussie (I don't know) but this exact opinion of us has been gradually fed to you via mainstream conditioning, you probably have a popular opinion of what an American, Frenchman or a Jew is.

Aborigines recieve benefits far surpassing anyone else on the continent, and for the most part they have resisted the temptation to become lazy, entitled children.

They voluntarily choose to maintain their primitive culture, and I admire them for that.

Adam Goodes is one who has taken the marxist bait, and plays the race card at every opportunity despite him being a dirty player (grabbing other men by the testicles)

The other 70 or so aborigine players have resisted the bait and they have no problems, why no mention of them?

It's laughable you are trying to tell me how my experiences have cultivated my viewpoints.

I don't, and certainly don't claim to, generalise how a person or people are, be they American, Australian or French.

And which kind of mainstream conditioning airs an opinion on racism in Australia? This is the kind of vague assertion that people come up with when they just dislike what the other has said. I'm not a socialist, nor a right winger, nor a Greenie. I have a mixed pot of contradicting values, but one constant is an analytic eye for bullshit.

eg, I can see value in small government and less welfare, the mantra of the conservatives, but I believe some people need welfare and a helping hand. So do it without the political bullshit; crack down on tax cheats and welfare cheats, call others bludgers etc, but make sure your own house is in order and do it across the board, including Google, Apple, News Ltd and every other corporation in the equation regardless of how much they donate to your political party.

If you want, you're welcome to refute any of the assertions I made about treatment of Aboriginal populations. I can certainly produce a list ranging from being blanket classified as wards of the state in the 50's or I could say that polite racism is part of our culture, be that through jokes, stereotypes or unspoken assumptions. I've lived and worked all around Australia and there is a hell of a lot I love about the place. I'm also old enough to have seen the stigma move from group to group in our society.

The reason the Aboriginal population receives a multitude of benefits is because in the 100m race of life, they are starting 50m (or a few generations) behind everyone else. To not acknowledge this reveals a lack of understanding and knowledge; your comment on Adam Goodes playing the race card shows that.

They voluntarily choose to maintain their primitive culture, and I admire them for that. - I hope you can see how horribly this sentence reads.

[TPTB_need_war]

It's laughable you are trying to tell me how my experiences have cultivated my viewpoints.

I don't, and certainly don't claim to, generalise how a person or people are, be they American, Australian or French.

And which kind of mainstream conditioning airs an opinion on racism in Australia? This is the kind of vague assertion that people come up with when they just dislike what the other has said. I'm not a socialist, nor a right winger, nor a Greenie. I have a mixed pot of contradicting values, but one constant is an analytic eye for bullshit.

eg, I can see value in small government and less welfare, the mantra of the conservatives, but I believe some people need welfare and a helping hand. So do it without the political bullshit; crack down on tax cheats and welfare cheats, call others bludgers etc, but make sure your own house is in order and do it across the board, including Google, Apple, News Ltd and every other corporation in the equation regardless of how much they donate to your political party.

If you want, you're welcome to refute any of the assertions I made about treatment of Aboriginal populations. I can certainly produce a list ranging from being blanket classified as wards of the state in the 50's or I could say that polite racism is part of our culture, be that through jokes, stereotypes or unspoken assumptions. I've lived and worked all around Australia and there is a hell of a lot I love about the place. I'm also old enough to have seen the stigma move from group to group in our society.

The reason the Aboriginal population receives a multitude of benefits is because in the 100m race of life, they are starting 50m (or a few generations) behind everyone else. To not acknowledge this reveals a lack of understanding and knowledge; your comment on Adam Goodes playing the race card shows that.

They voluntarily choose to maintain their primitive culture, and I admire them for that. - I hope you can see how horribly this sentence reads.

Why can't you guys figure out how to quote properly. The last posts from both of you are a mess. Can't you understand that {quote}{/quote} tags are matched pairs   If you can't figure that out, I am wondering if either of you can figure out what you are talking about, much less mechanical repair.  

What is wrong with trollercoaster's sentence which you have bolded? You are displaying your bias. You think primitive is a negative attribute. Thus you think they start at a disadvantage. This is the entire generative essence of feminism, multiculturalism, etc I am writing about upthread where man thinks he is superior to nature.

And you think you are not in the grip of this madness but you are.

Objectivity would be to see that everyone is diverse and diversity is not a number line. Try reading this blog essay of mine for some insight:

http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html#Algorithm_!=_Entropy

We don't need you to try to figure who needs help. Let nature handle it. It does it quite well with competition, free markets, serendipity, accretive knowledge formation, etc.. Again I cover all the reasons in that essay including Taleb's Anti-fragility.

As for the jokes about Aborginals, Ozzies joke about everything. Don't take it too seriously mate. I have an Ozzie friend who at age 60 is still referring to the filipinas as "birds". He doesn't actually mean they are really birds.

Don't we have more important things to accomplish than worry about the odd personalities and cultures?

But it is interesting how some Europeans often are deeply offended by any affront to multiculturalism even if just a butt of humor. They have been deeply indoctrinated into that madness. They believe it is objective to have someone else decide what is fair and egalitarian for someone else.

One poignant example of the hypocrisy of it all is this 70 year old chain smoker+drinker from Netherlands who can tell me with a straight face that everything about socialism is ethically upstanding, and yet there he is spending all of his days watching porn and he got his wife from a bar and she fucks her cousin when he is abroad and they have a son that is 100% filipino.

I never really judge him for that. I shrugged my shoulders and thought, "more power to him, to each his own". Then I hear from my Belgium friend that the Dane criticizes me behind my back for my anarchistic lifestyle.

So much for knowing what is best for others or any other objective metric of standing. Let the free market decide where everyone ends up.

Maybe the Aborginals will be only ones to survive the global smashup coming. That would be ironic. Well I know how to eat camote. I am making headway.

[tabnloz]

Aussie Modesty

...

Mates

...

A Multi-Cultural Society

...

Australian Etiquette & Customs

Meeting Etiquette

...

Negotiating and Decision Making

...

.

You must be European? Because your support for multi-culturalism is very apparent. (And that is why I would not even consider to migrate to an EU country)

I am vehemently against multi-culturalism because it is just another way for TPTB to weaken the individual sovereignty of the men who are already present in an area.

If we had a world with no government social welfare, then I would support a world with no borders. Who ever can pay their own way, can go where they like. But if you have the immigrants coming to alter the politics and voting for more and more expropriation from the wealthier citizens who were already present in the area, that is just another theft paradigm.

I am against theft. Europeans for some reason wish to steal from themselves. And they are going to pay the price for it again, just as they did with Hilter 79 years ago (right on time with MA's 79.6 year cycle).

Sorry I have always liked your astute comments up until now. And I am not trying to pick a fight with you, hopefully you can explain to me your position and we can agree to disagree. This is a reason I have a fundamental difficulty becoming politically symbiotic with most Europeans. They love socialism philosophically for some reason. Can any of you Europeans explain to me why       It makes absolutely no sense to me.

Don't Australians have an empathy for the underdog because they were always the underdog w.r.t. to the British who banished them?

Yet it is natural that they see themselves as superior to the Aboriginals because they were the colonizers of Australia. It was necessary for them to adopt that belief system in order to steal the land of the Aboriginals. So they have wanted to be open to others who are underdogs yet they maintain the distinction of those who they think are more of the level of an Ape, such as crazy Muslims who behead people and Aboriginals who eat barbecued rats.

I don't agree with stealing sovereignty from the Aboriginals, but I also don't agree with awarding them funding from the government. Let them have sovereignty over themselves and give them the same rights as citizens do. They were the original inhabitants. But don't give them (or anyone else!) social welfare!

I can empathize with discrimination against Muslim (even though I know most are not fundamentalist nutcases) because look what they have done to Europe and they can't seem to get control of their nutcases (ISIS etc). So I say let them figure it out in their own lands.

I also thought I heard that long ago Australians were a very male ego society and woman were second class, but lately I've come to believe they are more woman's lib? It is strange because when I first heard that during my travails to the Philippines in the early 1990s, I was more a women's lib guy and thought they were extreme and now later in life I have become against women's lib and now wondering why the Aussies have lost their masculinity?

Let me explain this clearly so there is no misunderstanding. I am all for women achieving everything they can achieve. I would not discriminate if some female can do the work as well as a man. In fact, recently I recruited a PhD in math and a Masters in Math that were both female. And neither of them could handle the computer security requests and they couldn't handle the concepts of a society going F.U.B.A.R..

I have come to realize that there are innate differences between woman and men, and woman on average just aren't equipped with the same analytical interests nor the same priorities when it comes to building things and planning for the future. Females are more concerned about their kids and immediate family than anything else.

Here follows some astute blogs from a guy you might think is a misogynist bigot rascist, but in reality his facts are correct.

http://blog.jim.com/economics/the-future-belongs-to-those-that-show-up/



http://blog.jim.com/culture/the-false-life-plan/

Men and women are happiest if successfully performing their traditional roles. This is to be expected, since whites and east asians, the descendents of civilizations, are descended from those that did perform their traditional roles.

The Cathedral, however, presents girls, in school and on television, with a false life plan: That they will follow the same path as males, and marriage and family will just spontaneously happen while they are fucking Jeremy Meeks...

...

Include also Eric Raymond's blogs on feminism and here is a guy who is for empowered women who can shoot guns:

https://www.google.com.ph/search?q=site%3Aesr.ibiblio.org+feminism

Even MA has supported the position that traditionally females have a different role than males:

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/12411

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/14810

I love to see females happy. What appears to make them happy is a big and happy family and social network. And a daily involvement in caring for that.

Yet in the West it appears we've been indoctrinating our women to tell them to be powerful and wear the pants. This has made them confused and unhappy, and it causes them to become Frankenstein addicts to their natural hypergamy instincts (being played by the lowest life playboys):

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=3000

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6627

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4934

If they do have any abilities in the STEM fields, then they want to do that work as an adjunct to their core social network. Whereas a male such as myself can lock himself in a programming cave and not see civilization for months while determined to reach a goal.

Males were designed to tolerate pain and to prioritize hunting and strategic endeavors. Women not. They were design to rear children and manage the affairs of the local community.

Those are damned facts.

I wish someone could explain for me the European perspective?

I'm dinki-di (meaning Aussie) but I travel around quite a bit. I always enjoy your informative posts, they very much help in broadening my understanding. I don't always agree, but I can always see merit in your opinion or presentation.

My views are always evolving, a hodge podge of ideals that I analyse as rather contradictory. I grew up in a multicultural area with a large Aboriginal population and have never seen immigration as a negative (indeed Australia would have become a banana republic, withering and dying on the sheeps back without immigration). And over here there is very little political difference between left and right - they both ignore the bigger issues and focus on the act of pretending to promote change (let's see what our focus groups say....)

I can see your viewpoint on immigration but I think in a world of easily accessible air travel, globalisation and constant war, a constant stream of stateless people or those looking for a better life is unavoidable. For me, this is one of the great ironies of our time; the West instigates wars for geopolitic gain (eg Iraq - not a 'blood for oil' war but a 'blood for NO oil' war) and not only are Western citizens too uninformed to revolt against said invasion, they label Iraqi's fleeing the war as terrorists.

In saying this, the European experience is something different in regards to immigration, especially Muslim. I believe in integration but the political and economic environment in some places doesn't lean towards a harmonious society - its human nature to look for someone to blame and too easy for politicians to incite anger for votes when the real enemies (I believe) operate between the revolving doors of TBTF institutions, government and other large multinationals.

As for nutcases like ISIS, they are expanding. My 2c is that part of their 'appeal' in the Middle East (Iraq/Syria) comes from areas that have faced decade long war, chaos and/or degredation. Cities that have seen ancient tribal tensions flare along with Allied fighting after brutal dictatorships. So when a force comes strolling into town promising to enforce order and rule, some people want it more than what they lose in respect to freedom. My other issue is that people are astounded by their brutality but it is just a continuance of the human tradition. None of us are civilised, we're beasts. Semi civilised beast perhaps (with baseball caps and automatic weapons...im sure you get the reference).

It's an interesting point you make regarding colonizers having to look down upon their subjects in order to justify superiority. Famed historian writer Lawrence Rees referred to this often citing that soldiers, mass murderers, colonizers etc etc all saw their "opponents" as sub human, a coping mechanism that allowed the acts to be committed.

Regarding welfare, I believe that there will always be a part of the population that need it for whatever reason. I believe in offering a helping hand. Of course there will always be people who exploit the system so there is no way to have a completely efficient way to do it, but some of the Aboriginal population are a generation behind (life expectancy, education etc) and so I believe it offers benefit. What I dislike is politicians calling people bludgers, welfare cheats and demonising some demographics when their snouts are also in the trough and they tiptoe around cracking down on the corporations that rort taxation by many more multiples than a penniless bludger.

By the way, I don't know about barbequed rat, but dugong, turtle and crocodile aren't bad eating.

[macsga]

AUG 7 DIGEST: G7 Pledges Support for 'Appropriate' Bitcoin Regulation; Market Research Analyst Qualtrics Adds BTC Rewards

G7 representatives announced support for “appropriate regulation” of virtual currencies; online survey giant Qualtrics added bitcoin as a rewards option for consumers who respond to surveys issued by its enterprise clients, and more top stories for August 7.
The G7 representatives who met in Germany in June of this year announced support for “appropriate regulation” of virtual currencies. As can be read in the group's summit statement, the G7 aims to oversee digital currency activity in order to prevent terrorism financing, which it deems a major priority.

The group stated:
“We will take further actions to ensure greater transparency of all financial flows, including through an appropriate regulation of virtual currencies and other new payment methods.”

http://cointelegraph.com/news/115077/g7-pledges-support-for-appropriate-bitcoin-regulation-market-research-analyst-qualtrics-adds-btc-rewards

I post the above with no further comments. If you have something to add, please do.

[TPTB_need_war]

On G7 cooperation on BTC regulation, I told everyone so 2 years ago and the common retort was the world is a big place and USA can't control every nation. Here is the reality. All the more reason we'd be get our anonymous internet technologies robust and pronto. The more often I am typing here, the less I am programming, so that is not a good sign.

tabnloz, the State is doing the injustice. Leveraging the State to restore justice is an oxymoron.

I still don't agree that lacking a book education and having a shorter lifespan is some position on a greater than and less than number line. Statistics lie (study Taleb's Anti-fragility). These are just different cultures. If the Aboriginals want to join modern society, they can. If not, who I am to judge their choice.

I don't know enough about the history of the Middle East. Clearly the allied powers left a power vacuum over there when they removed Saddam Hussein and again Gaddafi. Also the USA hanging Saddam on CNN news, sent out a message to all Muslims that power is right and heads are not sacred. We are deserving what we are getting for allowing the Bush family to take control as they did when Prescott Bush financed Adolf Hitler. Again we can't make it right by involving the State again in social justice.

I don't agree equating to rednecks armed to the hilt with AR-15s. It is precisely moving back to local community rule and removing the power of the State that can restore sanity to the world. I saw a statistic that gun owners err 0.0018% of the time, and doctors err 17% of the time. What should we ban first gun owners or doctors?

But we can't get there just with physical local call to arms. The only way to disarm this morass now is to bankrupt the State and the Deep State.

And thus I go back to coding to try to make that a reality...

[allthingsluxury]

I've read his writings for years. I really found it interesting how he was writing from his prison cell for so long. He has been correct about many things in the past, although I don't know if he is currently being influenced or not? Many doubt his writing now.

[TPTB_need_war]

I've read his writings for years. I really found it interesting how he was writing from his prison cell for so long. He has been correct about many things in the past, although I don't know if he is currently being influenced or not? Many doubt his writing now.

I think people doubt mostly because they don't want him to be correct about precious metals going down more, $usdollar going higher until 2017, and a horrific global (potentially mad max with war and pandemic) collapse starting to accelerate as of October.

Having studied him closely for 3 years (and having a brain that works somewhat like his and getting inside his thinking to the point where I was writing his blog posts on this forum before he wrote them), I put 80% likelihood the only influence is MA's wish to protect the masses. Thus he favors collectivized "solutions" because that is the only possible way to "protect" the masses.

MA's error is that (as he has admitted about markets) that nature is set up to make the majority fail, because that is the only way we get evolutionary refinement of survival-of-the-fittest. Without such decay, then the universe would trend to 0 increase in entropy and then time would stop and past = present = future and everything would cease to exist. Thus any solutions will come from the minority and be new frontiers.

So I guess in his love for humanity he somehow convinced himself to become irrational.

I wish he would be forced to read this.

I am wondering though. He has slowed down his blog postings. Perhaps he is reading my writing and is contemplating that I am correct. I can dream can't I.

Edit: I believe MA refuses to accept the above rationality, because it would admitting that there must be an elite group and that his life's work would amount to helping the rich get richer without saving the masses. This troubles him deeply. This is why he has decided that the only way to have a better world is for the leaders to be upstanding individuals. But this is irrational because it is a fact of physics that a power vacuum must be filled with power not weakness. And corruption in the Logic of Collective Action is more powerful than non-corruption.

[macsga]

Often implemented as a reverse psychology assessment, one of the "tools" one can use in order to persuade somebody that he's wrongdoing [by NOT doing what he's been told], is to persuade him that "the people say so". Chances are most people do not understand that one of the most noteworthy "digital assets" of a political campaign manager nowadays is, well... Google.

The following article explains how this is possible, in a very clarified manner, by utilizing a contrivance that fully automates the aforementioned "trick" of "the people say so", but on steroids. On the other hand,  you didn't really expect that what you voted for, would've been what you were promised...

Right?

http://news.sciencemag.org/brain-behavior/2015/08/internet-search-engines-may-be-influencing-elections

[TPTB_need_war]

Often implemented as a reverse psychology assessment, one of the "tools" one can use in order to persuade somebody that he's wrongdoing [by NOT doing what he's been told], is to persuade him that "the people say so". Chances are most people do not understand that one of the most noteworthy "digital assets" of a political campaign manager nowadays is, well... Google.

The following article explains how this is possible, in a very clarified manner, by utilizing a contrivance that fully automates the aforementioned "trick" of "the people say so", but on steroids. On the other hand,  you didn't really expect that what you voted for, would've been what you were promised...

Right?

http://news.sciencemag.org/brain-behavior/2015/08/internet-search-engines-may-be-influencing-elections

There is some rationality tied into this. Humans historically have survived by banding together with the tribe. They understand they survive if their tribe does. This is why Trump got booed when he asserted his right to bolt independent if he is denied the Republican nomination.

And this is why politics is entirely dysfunctional once the tribe becomes too large. Thus my retort to tabnloz claims that we can't get justice employing the State that created the injustice in the first place (not without causing some other injustice, because you can't do just one thing). The generative essence is lack of degrees-of-freedom, which ties right back into inviolable Second Law of Thermodynamics and the requirement that entropy is irreversible and trending to maximum. I explain it another way. If time were reversible, past = present = future thus there is no change and thus no life.

Of course life may just be an illusion of some local friction. On the whole, the entropy of the Universe might be constant but we'd have to be outside the Universe (be able to navigate spacetime at a rate greater than the speed-of-light) to falsify it thus the catch-22 (due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle). But for us to have our lives as we perceive them, then we must have relativity (due to friction).

So fight as you want against the free market which marching towards greater entropy, greater maximum division-of-labor, and greater decentralization, but nature always wins on a sufficient spacetime scale. Coasian local orders persist until they don't, e.g. the Google effect you cited.

P.S. I added to my prior post.

Edit: what I am trying to accomplish is that we can get economies-of-scale on fungible money and knowledge internet on the internet (the large community) while adding decentralization (end-to-end principle) and anonymity, so that we have the economies-of-scale of large community while also enabling our local community to resist the subjugation of degrees-of-freedom by the power vacuum of the collective. I believe if we can achieve this, we will have a glorious Knowledge Age. Whether I am correct or not, it is this ideal that is pushing me to work so hard at age 50. Hope some people will join if I can get something tangible completed.

[tabnloz]

tabnloz, the State is doing the injustice. Leveraging the State to restore justice is an oxymoron.

I still don't agree that lacking a book education and having a shorter lifespan is some position on a greater than and less than number line. Statistics lie (study Taleb's Anti-fragility). These are just different cultures. If the Aboriginals want to join modern society, they can. If not, who I am to judge their choice.

Joining modern society means overcoming prejudice and stereotypes which exist without doubt - this was my main point, that racism, rightly or wrongly, exists in modern Australia (as it does in every country, even the most diverse and tolerant like Brazil - where racism has been, at least, diluted by sex). There exists in Australia an obligation to employ Indigenous workers with the aim of helping people get experience & employment in different fields. If it were a level playing field, prejudice of the employer could play a part, but by the same token having a kind of Affirmative Action may mean a more qualified person misses out. No system is perfect and I can understand that some think the state should stay out of it.

My dislike of trollercoasters sentence was that in context I read it as a passive aggressive slight. You're right, primitive doesn't have to be negative, but in this context I believe it was without stating that explicitly. No one says that they find it admirable that white people voluntarily keep their culture alive.

End of the day, I'm happy to agree to disagree on things. You're at a much more advanced level than I am regarding your world view and breadth of intelligence, I'm developing my views as I learn and go. Let's get back to MA discussion 

[TPTB_need_war]

And so you transfer the degrees-of-freedom from the individual to decide his own mind, to a power vacuum you hand to the State which will always be captured by power and remember corruption is more powerful than non-corruption. Thus you've chosen corruption over free will. Congratulations for choosing slavery.

You may not like another person's opinion, but to do something about it, you either need to confront him individually or you must empower the State to enslave everyone. Humans can't stop meddling with others.  

If your goal is perfection, then your goal is non-existance. I could explain that all the way from the fundamental physics but not now. I already hinted at the proof upthread.

You were asking why Europeans support socialism and feminism... It is because they are humanists; feminism can be thought of as the culmination of humanist thought...

Karl Marx's own definition of Humanism reads:
"Humanism is the denial of God, and the total affirmation of man... Humanism is really nothing else but Marxism"
--Karl Marx, ECONOMIC POLITIQUE ET PHILOSOPHIE, VOL. I, PAGES 38-40.

[trollercoaster]

That comment was intended to be bait tabnloz, and your response to it was typical of marxists, no offence was meant, peace  

[tabnloz]

And so you transfer the degrees-of-freedom from the individual to decide his own mind, to a power vacuum you hand to the State which will always be captured by power and remember corruption is more powerful than non-corruption. Thus you've chosen corruption over free will. Congratulations for choosing slavery.

You may not like another person's opinion, but to do something about it, you either need to confront him individually or you must empower the State to enslave everyone. Humans can't stop meddling with others.  

If your goal is perfection, then your goal is non-existance. I could explain that all the way from the fundamental physics but not now. I already hinted at the proof upthread.

You were asking why Europeans support socialism and feminism... It is because they are humanists; feminism can be thought of as the culmination of humanist thought...

Karl Marx's own definition of Humanism reads:
"Humanism is the denial of God, and the total affirmation of man... Humanism is really nothing else but Marxism"
--Karl Marx, ECONOMIC POLITIQUE ET PHILOSOPHIE, VOL. I, PAGES 38-40.

That PM didn't come from me, by the way.

[tabnloz]

That comment was intended to be bait tabnloz, and your response to it was typical of marxists, no offence was meant, peace  

no problem, your username.