Can The Economy Ever Be 'Good' While So Many Don't Have Walls?

[TheNomad]

I guess it is just too damned difficult to address the questions posed and to make up our own and then respond to it as if that's what the thread is about.

Is this filed inside reddit somewhere?

We all use phrases like "The Economy", I guess I am asking every person seeing this to determine for themselves WHAT IS THAT.

Then, when you have made the determination, can that THING you imagined for that word, can you be OK with that thing being called OK when so many human beings In America do not have walls around them at night.............. for warmth, protection, for whatever you - yourself - deem it a good thing to live inside of walls.

can YOU be ok with that

I suppose that answer will be different for everyone who seeks to answer it.  Only, make sure you do ask it.  Then, try to ask others.  It isn't a loaded question.  You will not die from asking it. 

You may perish from your answer tho

[here is the time when i admonish the Powers here, I just now noticed I have zero percent warning.  that should change]

[pbrower2a]

Nebulous words and phrases often create more trouble than they are worth. What is "the economy"? Does it simply mean "How am I doing in my economic circumstances?" Or does it really mean such a measure as the DJIA or an unemployment statistic? Does it means that if one loses one's job that one has another opportunity practically begging for one to fill it?

I try not to use the words "the economy" because of the multiple meanings.

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-08-2020, 11:21 PM)TheNomad Wrote: I guess it is just too damned difficult to address the questions posed and to make up our own and then respond to it as if that's what the thread is about.

Is this filed inside reddit somewhere?

We all use phrases like "The Economy", I guess I am asking every person seeing this to determine for themselves WHAT IS THAT.

Then, when you have made the determination, can that THING you imagined for that word, can you be OK with that thing being called OK when so many human beings In America do not have walls around them at night.............. for warmth, protection, for whatever you - yourself - deem it a good thing to live inside of walls.

can YOU be ok with that

I suppose that answer will be different for everyone who seeks to answer it.  Only, make sure you do ask it.  Then, try to ask others.  It isn't a loaded question.  You will not die from asking it. 

You may perish from your answer tho

[here is the time when i admonish the Powers here, I just now noticed I have zero percent warning.  that should change]

Yah.  If you define a few keywords like that, one is often defining much you do not emphasize with those who have not the basics.  To a great degree, in defining how one must exclude to be a good little conservative, one is defining how hard one's heart is.

Given the current division of wealth, there is no excuse.

[TheNomad]

(03-09-2020, 11:21 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(03-08-2020, 11:21 PM)TheNomad Wrote: I guess it is just too damned difficult to address the questions posed and to make up our own and then respond to it as if that's what the thread is about.

Is this filed inside reddit somewhere?

We all use phrases like "The Economy", I guess I am asking every person seeing this to determine for themselves WHAT IS THAT.

Then, when you have made the determination, can that THING you imagined for that word, can you be OK with that thing being called OK when so many human beings In America do not have walls around them at night.............. for warmth, protection, for whatever you - yourself - deem it a good thing to live inside of walls.

can YOU be ok with that

I suppose that answer will be different for everyone who seeks to answer it.  Only, make sure you do ask it.  Then, try to ask others.  It isn't a loaded question.  You will not die from asking it. 

You may perish from your answer tho

[here is the time when i admonish the Powers here, I just now noticed I have zero percent warning.  that should change]

Yah.  If you define a few keywords like that, one is often defining much you do not emphasize with those who have not the basics.  To a great degree, in defining how one must exclude to be a good little conservative, one is defining how hard one's heart is.

Given the current division of wealth, there is no excuse.

I really don't even understand what you said ^^

I asked YOU to ask YOURSELF a few questions:

What is "The Economy" To YOU.  What does it mean.  To you, specifically.

To some people it means a stock market.  To some people it means a jobs report number.  To some people it means the cost of a cup of coffee.  To some, it means nothing.


Can that ^^ (whatever you defined it to be) be thought of as "OK" while so many are without walls.

Can you answer?  Can anyone here answer?  It's not hard.

[Eric the Green]

(03-08-2020, 11:21 PM)TheNomad Wrote: I guess it is just too damned difficult to address the questions posed and to make up our own and then respond to it as if that's what the thread is about.

Is this filed inside reddit somewhere?

We all use phrases like "The Economy", I guess I am asking every person seeing this to determine for themselves WHAT IS THAT.

Then, when you have made the determination, can that THING you imagined for that word, can you be OK with that thing being called OK when so many human beings In America do not have walls around them at night.............. for warmth, protection, for whatever you - yourself - deem it a good thing to live inside of walls.

can YOU be ok with that

I suppose that answer will be different for everyone who seeks to answer it.  Only, make sure you do ask it.  Then, try to ask others.  It isn't a loaded question.  You will not die from asking it. 

You may perish from your answer tho

[here is the time when i admonish the Powers here, I just now noticed I have zero percent warning.  that should change]

The answer to your question is no.

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-09-2020, 11:42 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-08-2020, 11:21 PM)TheNomad Wrote: I guess it is just too damned difficult to address the questions posed and to make up our own and then respond to it as if that's what the thread is about.

Is this filed inside reddit somewhere?

We all use phrases like "The Economy", I guess I am asking every person seeing this to determine for themselves WHAT IS THAT.

Then, when you have made the determination, can that THING you imagined for that word, can you be OK with that thing being called OK when so many human beings In America do not have walls around them at night.............. for warmth, protection, for whatever you - yourself - deem it a good thing to live inside of walls.

can YOU be ok with that

I suppose that answer will be different for everyone who seeks to answer it.  Only, make sure you do ask it.  Then, try to ask others.  It isn't a loaded question.  You will not die from asking it. 

You may perish from your answer tho

[here is the time when i admonish the Powers here, I just now noticed I have zero percent warning.  that should change]

The answer to your question is no.

Unfortunately, the answer is not the same for all people, and is one of several that separates red and blue. Not all have equally hard hearts. I have called it tribal thinking. The reds will do what is best for people like them, which is usually understood as white, well off, evangelicals. The blues tend to think of all men being created equal politically, and would provide government goods and service equally with all. America has traditionally been tribal, but has always moved in the direction of equality, if in fits and starts. These are broadly the S&H cycles.

[TheNomad]

(03-10-2020, 05:16 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(03-09-2020, 11:42 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-08-2020, 11:21 PM)TheNomad Wrote: I guess it is just too damned difficult to address the questions posed and to make up our own and then respond to it as if that's what the thread is about.

Is this filed inside reddit somewhere?

We all use phrases like "The Economy", I guess I am asking every person seeing this to determine for themselves WHAT IS THAT.

Then, when you have made the determination, can that THING you imagined for that word, can you be OK with that thing being called OK when so many human beings In America do not have walls around them at night.............. for warmth, protection, for whatever you - yourself - deem it a good thing to live inside of walls.

can YOU be ok with that

I suppose that answer will be different for everyone who seeks to answer it.  Only, make sure you do ask it.  Then, try to ask others.  It isn't a loaded question.  You will not die from asking it. 

You may perish from your answer tho

[here is the time when i admonish the Powers here, I just now noticed I have zero percent warning.  that should change]

The answer to your question is no.

Unfortunately, the answer is not the same for all people

I already said that

and is one of several that separates red and blue.

No, it really does not.

Not all have equally hard hearts.

I specifically asked ppl to refrain from a "hearts" narrative because it's not what I am asking.

I have called it tribal thinking.

So, your individual thought is tribal?  Since the very definition of tribalism requires more than one person, are you facing multiple personas internally, and if so, how does this affect their views - individually - on the subject matter, and CAN those ppl within you make individual decisions on their own?  If not, you are still not answering.

which is usually understood as white, well off, evangelicals.  

is that who you are?  If so, what does that person answer?  If that's not who you are, please begin at top of list once more.

The blues tend to think of all men being created equal politically, and would provide government goods and service equally with all. America has traditionally been tribal, but has always moved in the direction of equality, if in fits and starts.  These are broadly the S&H cycles.

All this and no answer.

[TheNomad]

(03-09-2020, 11:42 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-08-2020, 11:21 PM)TheNomad Wrote: I guess it is just too damned difficult to address the questions posed and to make up our own and then respond to it as if that's what the thread is about.

Is this filed inside reddit somewhere?

We all use phrases like "The Economy", I guess I am asking every person seeing this to determine for themselves WHAT IS THAT.

Then, when you have made the determination, can that THING you imagined for that word, can you be OK with that thing being called OK when so many human beings In America do not have walls around them at night.............. for warmth, protection, for whatever you - yourself - deem it a good thing to live inside of walls.

can YOU be ok with that

I suppose that answer will be different for everyone who seeks to answer it.  Only, make sure you do ask it.  Then, try to ask others.  It isn't a loaded question.  You will not die from asking it. 

You may perish from your answer tho

[here is the time when i admonish the Powers here, I just now noticed I have zero percent warning.  that should change]

The answer to your question is no.

That's your opinion.  As soon as we start acknowledging the right of all to bear their individual opinion, the sooner we can move beyond who can call whom a bigger name on twitter and into GOVERNANCE of the problems.

I mean, is it not that simple?  I think it is.  There is no denying these people on the street EXIST.  This sounds inhumane but I would rather a government round them up and toss them into ovens for "choosing to live that life" than to publish a report that says SO MANY PPL ARE WORKING "The Economy" is in Good Shape. 

Contrast the above to now the Virus is here and stocks are low and there is MUM about stock plunges and ppl have stopped traveling..........

THE PALE HORSE OF GOD'S WRATH IS COMING.

Either way, the same number of ppl live in boxes, tents, under bushes, in doorways, under freeways, etc.

Does no one else feel tricked?  Like we have some internally INSTALLED trigger that says "here is how you know The Economy" is good/bad and how to know if The Economy is doing well or not doing well.

Is the phrase The Economy, itself, a misnomer?

All this while I am intelligent enough (understatement) to know the previous Depression only stalled when fear gripped.  And to get out, hope must be projected. 

But HOPE at what cost?  SHOULD WE have such optimism when so many live without walls?  Should that even be optional for those of us proud to be American?  We know (some of us) through ancestors how rough it was before emigrating here......... but there's a level of selfishness when we want to believe it's "alright again" when fellow humans live that way right in front of our faces every day.

Perhaps "selfishness" is just another word for "Communism" or something... I wouldn't doubt it.  When it means "WHY do I have adjust my life or be bothered by someone who chose heroine and the "Free Life" that comes from begging, not bathing and unaddressed health problems.

Some, we are watching them die as we try not to look at the intersection and the underpass.  Swollen, black, uncovered feet that should be being amputated due to Diabetes or health issues we cannot see.  Who are they? 

I accept some ppl want to say they chose all that, I don't happen to agree and that's fine.  I'm only asking about this Economy bullshit and how that false concept keeps us looking away from ppl who need our help even if we refuse to go near them or touch them ourselves.  That we are not less passive about how easy it's become to ignore their sheer numbers.

I can't rationally envision a time LESS pregnant with the idea we could be talked into rationalizing keeping slaves in a kennel in the back yard SO LONG as we feed and house them.  I mean, let's take them from the street and use them to our advantage.  That would be humane and a great solution.  They aren't doing any good out there in the rain and sleet.  Let's each take one and use them for the unsightly chores in our every day lives.  And YES, they would be forced to do it, because admittedly, they WANT to be on the street so there is no incentive for them to do work as a slave even if that means "free" housing and food.  It would have to be a mandatory program.

What does anyone think of that?  If we include health care for them, all the more reason to force them.  I also advocate a woman seeking to kill her unborn should be sequestered and Cesarean performed and she never be able to see the child again, then sent home that very day. We can do this by gagging Planned Parenthood so the women don't know what's happening until they go there and sign a document they sought to kill an Unborn. When they come out of the situation and try to tell others (like the evil media) armies of disinformation are to be dispatched proving her an unfit mother and that she lied (it all never happened) and she never was even pregnant.

[pbrower2a]

(03-10-2020, 05:16 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(03-09-2020, 11:42 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-08-2020, 11:21 PM)TheNomad Wrote: I guess it is just too damned difficult to address the questions posed and to make up our own and then respond to it as if that's what the thread is about.

Is this filed inside reddit somewhere?

We all use phrases like "The Economy", I guess I am asking every person seeing this to determine for themselves WHAT IS THAT.

Then, when you have made the determination, can that THING you imagined for that word, can you be OK with that thing being called OK when so many human beings In America do not have walls around them at night.............. for warmth, protection, for whatever you - yourself - deem it a good thing to live inside of walls.

can YOU be ok with that

I suppose that answer will be different for everyone who seeks to answer it.  Only, make sure you do ask it.  Then, try to ask others.  It isn't a loaded question.  You will not die from asking it. 

You may perish from your answer tho

[here is the time when i admonish the Powers here, I just now noticed I have zero percent warning.  that should change]

The answer to your question is no.

Unfortunately, the answer is not the same for all people, and is one of several that separates red and blue.

Some people want a copious supply of super-cheap labor, and most people would like to escape being underpaid and overworked yet feeling no security in such. Some would be masters, yet few would volunteer to be slaves. 

Economic history shows the instability of extreme inequality which portended the economic meltdowns of 1929-1932 and 2007-2009... It's back. People produce and yet cannot consume anything near their productivity because wages have been kept artificially low.     

Quote:Not all have equally hard hearts.

I have just been reading Man's Search for Meaning (Victor Frankl) on his experiences in the concentration camp. It's the hard-hearted people who do the worst. Kindness remains a virtue; without it, everything is debased. 

Quote:I have called it tribal thinking.

Tribal politics (I do not refer to Indian Reservations) in modern or near-modern societies create messy politics. Under Satan Hussein in Iraq it meant that many were indulged (but knew enough to not criticize the Great and Infallible Leader) and others got the shaft -- hard. In the current mess that is Iraqi politics, the tribal structure of life remains, and political life is even messier.

Donald Trump has attempted to introduce tribalism into American politics -- and at that he has succeeded. Maybe he has yet to establish the terror that Saddam Hussein cultivated,  but that is a certainty if his political legacy should be entrenched. 

Quote:The reds will do what is best for people like them, which is usually understood as white, well off, evangelicals.

It is hard to imagine people who so reject modernity being well off...but one can live well  despite believing in young-earth creationism, that the Founding Fathers were closet Fundamentalists,  and that Donald Trump is wonderful.  The people who have any chance of escaping poverty (except by winning the Super-Duper Megabucks Lotto)  as a rule put a high value on learning and formal education. Oh, what about blue-collar trades? Machinists, as an example, need at least mathematics of the type offered in college preparatory programs in high school.  

Quote:The blues tend to think of all men being created equal politically, and would provide government goods and service equally with all.  America has traditionally been tribal, but has always moved in the direction of equality, if in fits and starts.  These are broadly the S&H cycles.

But it has been less tribal, especially when Americans see a common danger. Does it take a depression and Axis aggression to bring out our best as a nation?

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-10-2020, 11:15 AM)TheNomad Wrote:

(03-10-2020, 05:16 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Unfortunately, the answer is not the same for all people

I already said that

and is one of several that separates red and blue.

No, it really does not.

It does to those who care.

(03-10-2020, 11:15 AM)TheNomad Wrote: Well, some do care and an see the difference.  It matters to those wit.

With wit to care about themselves, or the wit to care about others?

(03-10-2020, 11:15 AM)TheNomad Wrote: Not all have equally hard hearts.

I specifically asked ppl to refrain from a "hearts" narrative because it's not what I am asking.

But it is very relevant to the topic of this thread.  Some have hard hearts.  Some do not care about people not like them, or not of their perceived group, be it family, religion, or race.  Some are conservatives.  You cannot address the question of this thread without addressing tribalism and the division of wealth.  You can only declare yourself a tribal thinker and try to insist that others become tribal thinkers too.

Those with empathy are not likely to agree.

(03-10-2020, 11:15 AM)TheNomad Wrote: I have called it tribal thinking.

So, your individual thought is tribal?  Since the very definition of tribalism requires more than one person, are you facing multiple personas internally, and if so, how does this affect their views - individually - on the subject matter, and CAN those ppl within you make individual decisions on their own?  If not, you are still not answering.

There is no unified answer that all will agree to.  We agree on that much.  My personal answer is with the blue.

Yes, I have shadow personas dwelling in my head.  It is called empathy.  It is hard to explain to someone who does not have it.  Believe me.  I have tried.  The best you can do is make them admit that they are not concerned about others and prefer not talk about that lack.

Again, those who do have empathy are not likely to agree. They are just as dedicated to their beliefs, only backwards.

[TheNomad]

[quote pid='50089' dateline='1583869730']
Those with empathy are not likely to agree.

[/quote]

You are failing to listen.  This is not about empathy.  The non-empathetic are depending on others to invite their empathy, and it's through that same door they escape the issue.  WHY must you be just as dogmatic and preaching as they are?

Prophets are 2 sides of the same coin.  Put down your belief system and approach a problem with pragmatism?

I think anyone can get behind the idea of CONDITIONING.  The idea one side wants to CONDITION the other with their side and their beliefs.  Just a few short months ago, The Economy was considered as doing just fine, thank you, yet the number of homeless people (those without walls) had risen and plateaued from THE LAST economic collapse of barely 10 years ago. 

Up until anyone knew what was Coronavirus, ppl without walls were being overlooked.  YES it's unacceptable.  But not due to empathy.  We are all (every one of us) being CONDITIONED to think there are circumstances where that many people without walls is OK.

I am so gut-punched sick of hearing the phrase "this side" and "that side".  No one CARES what SIDE you are on.  Ppl are still without walls.

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-10-2020, 08:48 PM)TheNomad Wrote: You are failing to listen.  This is not about empathy.  The non-empathetic are depending on others to invite their empathy, and it's through that same door they escape the issue.  WHY must you be just as dogmatic and preaching as they are?

Prophets are 2 sides of the same coin.  Put down your belief system and approach a problem with pragmatism?

I think anyone can get behind the idea of CONDITIONING.  The idea one side wants to CONDITION the other with their side and their beliefs.  Just a few short months ago, The Economy was considered as doing just fine, thank you, yet the number of homeless people (those without walls) had risen and plateaued from THE LAST economic collapse of barely 10 years ago. 

Up until anyone knew what was Coronavirus, ppl without walls were being overlooked.  YES it's unacceptable.  But not due to empathy.  We are all (every one of us) being CONDITIONED to think there are circumstances where that many people without walls is OK.

I am so gut-punched sick of hearing the phrase "this side" and "that side".  No one CARES what SIDE you are on.  Ppl are still without walls.

Somebody is not listening.  That we could agree on.

I see a good number of people identifying with either the red or blue perspective, and caring a lot.

Now it may be you don’t care.  In one way, that is the whole point.  But I am with the red and blue, which is a heck of a lot of people.

I am as dogmatic and preachy as they are because I care.

Now you are projecting that all other people are like you.  They are not.  They have attributes that you lack, and vice versa.  They have been conditioned in one way, and you another.  If you try to continue to make all a copy of you, guess what?  You are not going to get very far.  

In Myers briggs land, I am an INTP.  I am supposed to be the engineer / architect into logic and model building, in coming up with an explanation for what is.  I don’t seem to be on that side of the conversation with you.  That is because I perceive other modes of thinking and have included them in my model.  You don’t seem to have.  That does not speak well as to the completeness of your model.

Now some people may prefer the freedom of life without walls.  An old song comes to mind.  

Quote:It’s knowing that your door is always open
And your path is free to walk
That makes me tend to leave my sleeping bag
Rolled up and stashed behind your couch
And it’s knowing I’m not shackled
By forgotten words and bonds
And the ink stains that are dried upon some line
That keeps you on the back roads
By the rivers of my memory
That keeps you ever gentle on my mind

Such a person would value freedom and independence over commitment to other people.  In some circles, they might be thought of as unable to make a relationship, to make a commitment.  Such people do exist.

But I happen to believe that a lot more people are otherwise, and that they would rather live with walls if they could.  They do make a commitment to a wife, a religion, a political party.  The song describes a pretty rare bird.  

Thus, your argument seems pretty irrelevant to me.

[TheNomad]

(03-10-2020, 10:07 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Thus, your argument seems pretty irrelevant to me.

What, exactly, is my 'argument'?  Can you explain it?

- an oral disagreement; verbal opposition; contention; altercation: a violent argument.
- a discussion involving differing points of view; debate: They were deeply involved in an argument about inflation.
- a process of reasoning; series of reasons: I couldn't follow his argument. [1]
- a statement, reason, or fact for or against a point: This is a strong argument in favor of their theory.
- an address or composition intended to convince or persuade; persuasive discourse.
subject matter; theme:


I was not disagreeing, nor debating, nor was I even attempting to perssuade, I think, however maybe not. 

I could copy and paste previous posts to explain, but is that aureatingly tantamount?

[1] Peradventurous

[beechnut79]

(03-10-2020, 10:07 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(03-10-2020, 08:48 PM)TheNomad Wrote: You are failing to listen.  This is not about empathy.  The non-empathetic are depending on others to invite their empathy, and it's through that same door they escape the issue.  WHY must you be just as dogmatic and preaching as they are?

Prophets are 2 sides of the same coin.  Put down your belief system and approach a problem with pragmatism?

I think anyone can get behind the idea of CONDITIONING.  The idea one side wants to CONDITION the other with their side and their beliefs.  Just a few short months ago, The Economy was considered as doing just fine, thank you, yet the number of homeless people (those without walls) had risen and plateaued from THE LAST economic collapse of barely 10 years ago. 

Up until anyone knew what was Coronavirus, ppl without walls were being overlooked.  YES it's unacceptable.  But not due to empathy.  We are all (every one of us) being CONDITIONED to think there are circumstances where that many people without walls is OK.

I am so gut-punched sick of hearing the phrase "this side" and "that side".  No one CARES what SIDE you are on.  Ppl are still without walls.

Somebody is not listening.  That we could agree on.

I see a good number of people identifying with either the red or blue perspective, and caring a lot.

Now it may be you don’t care.  In one way, that is the whole point.  But I am with the red and blue, which is a heck of a lot of people.

I am as dogmatic and preachy as they are because I care.

Now you are projecting that all other people are like you.  They are not.  They have attributes that you lack, and vice versa.  They have been conditioned in one way, and you another.  If you try to continue to make all a copy of you, guess what?  You are not going to get very far.  

In Myers briggs land, I am an INTP.  I am supposed to be the engineer / architect into logic and model building, in coming up with an explanation for what is.  I don’t seem to be on that side of the conversation with you.  That is because I perceive other modes of thinking and have included them in my model.  You don’t seem to have.  That does not speak well as to the completeness of your model.

Now some people may prefer the freedom of life without walls.  An old song comes to mind.  

Quote:It’s knowing that your door is always open
And your path is free to walk
That makes me tend to leave my sleeping bag
Rolled up and stashed behind your couch
And it’s knowing I’m not shackled
By forgotten words and bonds
And the ink stains that are dried upon some line
That keeps you on the back roads
By the rivers of my memory
That keeps you ever gentle on my mind

Such a person would value freedom and independence over commitment to other people.  In some circles, they might be thought of as unable to make a relationship, to make a commitment.  Such people do exist.

But I happen to believe that a lot more people are otherwise, and that they would rather live with walls if they could.  They do make a commitment to a wife, a religion, a political party.  The song describes a pretty rare bird.  

Thus, your argument seems pretty irrelevant to me.

That song, although not really thought of that way, was popular smack-dab in the middle of the hippie era when free-spiritism was very much in vogue. Sometimes I think we could usu a little more of that today. Am now in my 70s and still would like as little responsibility as possible. Depressed that most of the bills never seem to go away. Probably won’t be able to retire until death, even though I never had substance abuse issues.

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-12-2020, 12:24 AM)TheNomad Wrote:

(03-10-2020, 10:07 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Thus, your argument seems pretty irrelevant to me.

What, exactly, is my 'argument'?  Can you explain it?

- an oral disagreement; verbal opposition; contention; altercation: a violent argument.
- a discussion involving differing points of view; debate: They were deeply involved in an argument about inflation.
- a process of reasoning; series of reasons: I couldn't follow his argument. [1]
- a statement, reason, or fact for or against a point: This is a strong argument in favor of their theory.
- an address or composition intended to convince or persuade; persuasive discourse.
subject matter; theme:


I was not disagreeing, nor debating, nor was I even attempting to perssuade, I think, however maybe not. 

I could copy and paste previous posts to explain, but is that aureatingly tantamount?

[1] Peradventurous

The ‘argument’ might be seen in two parts.  First is general.  Many conservatives seem to be tribal thinkers, caring more about their own groups than people in general.  One stereotypical group is the white, male, evangelical, Republicans, though there are many variations.  The opposite is into all men being created equal, resists government benefits from targeting only specific groups.

I see tribal folks as not wanting to talk about caring about all men equally.  I see it as a basic red blue difference.  I do not think we will bridge the pending crisis until the new values overcome the old, until tribalism is rejected much as kings, slaves and fascism were defeated in prior crises.  As in the prior crisis, the believers in the old values see nothing wrong with them, and want to stick with them.  They do not see how the history books, written under the new values, will portray them as badly mistaken.  

No democracy?  Slaves?  Dictators?  State racism?  War of aggression?  Tribal thinking?  All are comparably wrong.

Second, this thread is dedicated mostly to the homeless.  While the above might apply to several issues, this thread is dedicated to one.  I don’t see it as being solved so long as most people have developed some excuse to not care.  Thus, we must be aware of the elephants in the room.  We can not let them declare they are sick of talking about the new values, and stop speaking of them.

While some of the homeless may be free spirits, as illustrated by the song, may be homeless by choice, the bulk of them are not.  Therefore an argument based on free spirits does not speak to the issue.  It is just an attempt to press the old values, to ignore the people who most need to be addressed.

[pbrower2a]

Homelessness is damaging. The homeless are particularly vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. They are at particular risk from meteorological hazards.

Homeless youth are often dragooned into the sex trade. You do not want to be in that business; it is not good for a happy life. The suicide rate is astronomical in the pornography business, so just think of how tough life could be for a street hooker. Prostitutes are the most common prey for serial killers, and for some it is only a matter of time.

Many of the homeless have troubles far worse than a lack of housing, including mental illness and addiction. Many are violent people. When families get consigned to it, the absence of walls makes raising a child extremely difficult. Privacy works two ways -- in protecting intimacy and protecting children from things inappropriate for them.

We have gone nearly as far as we can with a paradigm that says that economic inequality and brutal management create wealth. Consequences include poverty and economic insecurity. The only way for things to get worse is if we resort to fascist or Stalinist labor camps even more destructive of the human spirit as well as of the precious virtue of liberty. We are in a saecular Crisis, one that requires basic changes in institutions if only to prevent a domestic apocalypse. We have enough wealth and productivity with which to solve all human needs.

We need to revitalize "flyover country" so that people think twice about leaving Cleveland for Los Angeles on the knowledge that Los Angeles at least has milder winters. Maybe if people weren't so broke in "flyover country"...

Life without dignity? That is how we rightly treat criminals as a deterrent to dealing drugs, doing armed robberies, and starting bar brawls. But such can also be a consequence of an economic ideology whose fundamental underpinning is an ethos asserting that no human suffering can ever be in excess so long as it creates, enhances, or enforces class privilege for the elites of ownership and administration.

Should I get the now-unlikely opportunity to see castles and palaces of central Europe, I will remind myself of the Eszterhazy family (Hungarian-Viennese aristocracy) so rich that they could keep the most pivotal composer of Western musical history (Franz Josef Haydn) as a retainer. OK, so we have a great volume excellent music as a legacy... but how was life for the peasants? A feudal lord taking all the surplus above a starvation level could, if he had enough peasants under him, could live in a way that a more modern Rothschild or Rockefeller can. At least Rothschild financing relies upon the principle that the deal must be good for the borrower, and the oil companies that derive from John Davison Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company seem to pay well enough.

Much is wrong in America, and it is going to take solutions not of a political nature to solve some of those. Solid families will themselves solve many problems better than any welfare programs. Changing the tax laws to favor small business instead of vertically-integrated, bureaucratized behemoths will make prosperity more widespread due to the dispersal of economic and administrative power. Small business? What could better suit and reward the current and potential workaholics that we now have?

[beechnut79]

(03-12-2020, 04:14 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Homelessness is damaging. The homeless are particularly vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. They are at particular risk from meteorological hazards.  

Homeless youth are often dragooned into the sex trade. You do not want to be in that business; it is not good for a happy life. The suicide rate is astronomical in the pornography business, so just think of how tough life could be for a street hooker. Prostitutes are the most common prey for serial killers, and for some it is only a matter of time.

Many of the homeless have troubles far worse than a lack of housing, including mental illness and addiction. Many are violent people. When families get consigned to it, the absence of walls makes raising a child extremely difficult. Privacy works two ways -- in protecting intimacy and protecting children from things inappropriate for them.

We have gone nearly as far as we can with a paradigm that says that economic inequality and brutal management create wealth. Consequences include poverty and economic insecurity. The only way for things to get worse is if we resort to fascist or Stalinist labor camps even more destructive of the human spirit as well as of the precious virtue of liberty. We are in a saecular Crisis, one that requires basic changes in institutions if only to prevent a domestic apocalypse. We have enough wealth and productivity with which to solve all human needs.

We need to revitalize "flyover country" so that people think twice about leaving Cleveland for Los Angeles on the knowledge that Los Angeles at least has milder winters. Maybe if people weren't so broke in "flyover country"...  

Life without dignity? That is how we rightly treat criminals as a deterrent to dealing drugs, doing armed robberies, and starting bar brawls. But such can also be a consequence of an economic ideology whose fundamental underpinning is an ethos asserting that no human suffering can ever be in excess so long as it creates, enhances, or enforces class privilege for the elites of ownership and administration.

Should I get the now-unlikely opportunity to see castles and palaces of central Europe, I will remind myself of the Eszterhazy family (Hungarian-Viennese aristocracy)  so rich that they could keep the most pivotal composer of Western musical history (Franz Josef Haydn) as a retainer. OK, so we have a great volume excellent music as a legacy... but how was life for the peasants? A feudal lord taking all the surplus above a starvation level could, if he had enough peasants under him, could live in a way that a more modern Rothschild or Rockefeller can. At least Rothschild financing relies upon the principle that the deal must be good for the borrower, and the oil companies that derive from John Davison Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company seem to pay well enough.

Much is wrong in America, and it is going to take solutions not of a political nature to solve some of those. Solid families will themselves solve many problems better than any welfare programs. Changing the tax laws to favor small business instead of vertically-integrated, bureaucratized behemoths will make prosperity more widespread due to the dispersal of economic and administrative power. Small business? What could better suit and reward the current and potential workaholics that we now have?

Now for my paragraph by paragraph response:

P1: Very self explanatory. No real response needed.

P2:  May really be only a matter of time before the next Jack the Ripper or Gary Ridgway emerges. The latter is the infamous Green River killer for those not familiar with the name. He was responsible for more murders than was the much better known Ted Bundy, the reason probably being that Bundy selected mainstream college girls who are higher up the societal totem pole.

P3:  The fact that families have been sucked into the homeless whirlpool is especially damning. The nature of the modern era’s job and housing markets is also a significant factor as well as the trend toward more isolation among the society at large, ironically brought on in part by what is often referred to as social media.

P4:  Opening sentence: the brainwashing seems to be continue. Another unfortunatel byproduct is the increasing desire along with difficulty in creating some alone time, which I began to touch on in my response to P3. There is and has been for quite some time an increasing need to just get away from it all. The unfortunate byproduct of this is a much worse societal malaise than that which sacked the Carter presidency four decades ago. Not mentioned here buy certainly making the current malaise worse is how much you have to guard against the urge to say something impulsively, which will certainly get you that alone time,  but not in the way you want and will regret it later on.

P5:  Agreed for the most part. A microcosm in one state is Pennsylvania, which has often been described as Philadelphia on the east, Pittsburgh on the west and Alabama in the middle. The national translation is for the most part self-explanatory with the exception of the area around Chicago.

P6:  Proof that we have been in Gilded Age II for the better part of four decades.  Not really sure if increases in crime are co-related.

P7: Illustrates the seedlings of what could erupt into modern day Bastille-like rebellion. But I don’t believe that today’s society would have the collective spirit with which to pull it off. A plot to burn down Wall Street and/or some big corporate behemoth? Might the corona virus accomplish this without any bloodshed? (Do not advocate such actions; just demonstrating that there could be sufficient anger bubbling under the surface).

P8:  No juice here. Right number, wrong alpha character.  Makes a lot of sense. Could it be that we could yet have a breakup of today’s corporate trusts like the one admistered by TR around the turn of the previous century? Could it also be that the reason big business came to dominate pretty much every industry is that they brainwashed the public into believing that they could do it all better?  While it might be nice, I do tend to be doubtful that we could ever return to the days of mom and pop shops on Main Street. Much has been made of the decades long trend toward interests of Main Street being eclipsed by those of Wall Street. The reason a mom and pop revival is unlikely is because they usually  can’t offer the level of convenience that today’s society demands. Haven’t you all noticed that each generation seems to demand more convenience than did the previous owner one—from the advent of 7-11 and similar stores to home delivery of food.

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-12-2020, 07:38 AM)beechnut79 Wrote: That song, (Gentle on my Mind), although not really thought of that way, was popular smack-dab in the middle of the hippie era when free-spiritism was very much in vogue. Sometimes I think we could usu a little more of that today. Am now in my 70s and still would like as little responsibility as possible. Depressed that most of the bills never seem to go away. Probably won’t be able to retire until death, even though I never had substance abuse issues.

Yes, it was more the norm to be a free spirit during the last awakening.  It went with the times.  When you were young, a member of a band (such as those who wrote the song) and had not yet put down roots, it was easier.  Boomers have sunk roots since, generally.  I sympathize with the seeming ugliness of some of those roots.  Persistent buggers, no?

[pbrower2a]

(03-12-2020, 11:52 PM)beechnut79 Wrote:

(03-12-2020, 04:14 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Homelessness is damaging. The homeless are particularly vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. They are at particular risk from meteorological hazards.  

Homeless youth are often dragooned into the sex trade. You do not want to be in that business; it is not good for a happy life. The suicide rate is astronomical in the pornography business, so just think of how tough life could be for a street hooker. Prostitutes are the most common prey for serial killers, and for some it is only a matter of time.

Many of the homeless have troubles far worse than a lack of housing, including mental illness and addiction. Many are violent people. When families get consigned to it, the absence of walls makes raising a child extremely difficult. Privacy works two ways -- in protecting intimacy and protecting children from things inappropriate for them.

We have gone nearly as far as we can with a paradigm that says that economic inequality and brutal management create wealth. Consequences include poverty and economic insecurity. The only way for things to get worse is if we resort to fascist or Stalinist labor camps even more destructive of the human spirit as well as of the precious virtue of liberty. We are in a saecular Crisis, one that requires basic changes in institutions if only to prevent a domestic apocalypse. We have enough wealth and productivity with which to solve all human needs.

We need to revitalize "flyover country" so that people think twice about leaving Cleveland for Los Angeles on the knowledge that Los Angeles at least has milder winters. Maybe if people weren't so broke in "flyover country"...  

Life without dignity? That is how we rightly treat criminals as a deterrent to dealing drugs, doing armed robberies, and starting bar brawls. But such can also be a consequence of an economic ideology whose fundamental underpinning is an ethos asserting that no human suffering can ever be in excess so long as it creates, enhances, or enforces class privilege for the elites of ownership and administration.

Should I get the now-unlikely opportunity to see castles and palaces of central Europe, I will remind myself of the Eszterhazy family (Hungarian-Viennese aristocracy)  so rich that they could keep the most pivotal composer of Western musical history (Franz Josef Haydn) as a retainer. OK, so we have a great volume excellent music as a legacy... but how was life for the peasants? A feudal lord taking all the surplus above a starvation level could, if he had enough peasants under him, could live in a way that a more modern Rothschild or Rockefeller can. At least Rothschild financing relies upon the principle that the deal must be good for the borrower, and the oil companies that derive from John Davison Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company seem to pay well enough.

Much is wrong in America, and it is going to take solutions not of a political nature to solve some of those. Solid families will themselves solve many problems better than any welfare programs. Changing the tax laws to favor small business instead of vertically-integrated, bureaucratized behemoths will make prosperity more widespread due to the dispersal of economic and administrative power. Small business? What could better suit and reward the current and potential workaholics that we now have?

Now for my paragraph by paragraph response:

P1: Very self explanatory. No real response needed.

P2:  May really be only a matter of time before the next Jack the Ripper or Gary Ridgway emerges. The latter is the infamous Green River killer for those not familiar with the name. He was responsible for more murders than was the much better known Ted Bundy, the reason probably being that Bundy selected mainstream college girls who are higher up the societal totem pole.

I am reminded of one serial killer who flippantly said "I always killed prostitutes". Evil people can be as harshly judgmental as the devout. We need to do some soul-searching on what brings out the evil that can determine that some lives are not worthy of life. 

The serial killer has become rarer, most likely because police work is better. Matching evidence of a crime to a unique trait of a person, whether a fingerprint or a DNA sample, makes it far easier to connect a burglar (many burglars are rapists) to rapes. Most serial killers are rapists, so whatever catches rapists might thwart a would-be serial-killer. Offenders are being caught before they qualify as serial killers.  

We are going to need basic reforms of many aspects of society for America to be the best for more than a tiny elite. We need to make much horrible behavior unthinkable again. Our educational system must again inculcate such virtues as caution, empathy, self-restraint, fair play, sobriety, equity, and respect for learning. We do well at enforcing economic subordination just as does a fascistic plutocracy. Such demonstrates who has the power and who does not. Fascist plutocracy promotes recklessness, cruelty, elite indulgence, inequity, and contempt for the intellect. Does this sound familiar?

 

Quote:P3:  The fact that families have been sucked into the homeless whirlpool is especially damning. The nature of the modern era’s job and housing markets is also a significant factor as well as the trend toward more isolation among the society at large, ironically brought on in part by what is often referred to as social media.

When the homeless are people largely beyond help other than institutionalization (such as the mentally-ill) then maybe we need to re-open the mental wards. 

Honest work should be enough to get people a solid living, especially in a country that produces a huge agricultural surplus and in a time in which material abundance is easy to achieve. In effect, capitalism must work for people other than tycoons and executives, or it loses its validity in its current manifestation. We have capitalism without conscience. 

Wise parents know enough to constrain access to electronic entertainments for their kids. Kids need exercise, and "virtual" experiences are not valid substitutes for real ones. OK, such a game as Age of Empires allows one to commit virtual genocide (if one is so disposed) without ending up like this:

  

(Hans Frank, Nazi Governor-General of occupied Poland, after having been hanged)

Reality is that there are consequences in human activities. Virtual reality allows people to achieve psychic rewards without having achieved anything.  To be sure, some people need that -- but it can't be everything. Putting up a tend capable of protecting one from a cold rain while getting to experience nature -- now that is an achievement. 

Homelessness that results from extreme inequality of economic results most likely has its cause in the decisions of people to centralize economic activity to ensure that everyone works for the purpose of enriching, indulging, and empowering the economic elites irrespective of the degradation of the lives of most people. To be sure we have a conflict between decentralized individualism (which few of us can practice anymore) and a socialistic idea that all men are brothers down to economic matters. Ordinarily we have a middle-of-the road synthesis that harmonizing those supposed opposites with workable compromises. In recent years we have ended up with a synthesis that authorizes unbridled indulgence among elites at the cost of poverty and subordination for everyone else. The elites get to live the dictum of the amoral Aleister Crowley (Do what thou wilt) while the rest of us endure great hardship on behalf of the elites.   

It is not possible to maximize economic inequality without creating vast suffering. No technology, no level of economic resources, and no clever organization can redeem an economic order of such nastiness without forcing humane values upon it.       

Quote:P4:  Opening sentence: the brainwashing seems to continue. Another unfortunate byproduct is the increasing desire along with difficulty in creating some alone time, which I began to touch on in my response to P3. There is and has been for quite some time an increasing need to just get away from it all. The unfortunate byproduct of this is a much worse societal malaise than that which sacked the Carter presidency four decades ago. Not mentioned here buy certainly making the current malaise worse is how much you have to guard against the urge to say something impulsively, which will certainly get you that alone time,  but not in the way you want and will regret it later on.

The fault with all totalitarian ideologies is the inevitable neglect of the subtle realities of human nature. Consider well that much of the training of potential elites was to make them aware of the complexity of human nature and the inevitable messiness of human institutions. The liberal arts taught that  as economic analysis and psychoanalytic theory could not. Maybe we need to revert to the liberal arts as a norm in undergraduate education instead of making undergraduate education a watered-down graduate or professional school that the "Multiversity" became. It may be possible for the proles to get away with believing that there is nothing more to life than "sex and drugs and rock-n-roll" (OK, most working people are more complex than that), but people with administrative responsibilities had better believe in something more than primitive desires for economic gain, bureaucratic power, intoxication, mass low culture, sex, and material comfort (often sold with the fraud word "luxury"). So the elite Pilsner Urquell replaces the prole mass-market beer  -- so what? 

People in the position to do insider trading, accounting fraud, bribery, and sexual harassment because they seem exempt from judgment due to their position must have cause to not do such things. With privilege must come responsibility, and such requires a moral compass. Integrity must be worth the inconvenience; custody of assets must imply a duty to protect them from one's worst inclinations; one must assume that the cute secretary who looks like the Playmate of the Month ™ has no desire for a quick fling that reasserts one's 'manliness'. I have said enough times that our bureaucratic elites are becoming similar to the oppressive, exploitative, exclusive nomenklatura of the alleged 'classless societies'; power, and not ownership, is the means through which exploitation with human degradation is inevitable.

Real democracy disperses power, but homogenization of results (socialism) equalizes the economy. With some recent trends we are on the path to the infamous Third Way of irresponsibility for the elites and deprivation for the masses. Our elites have somehow melded the worst  indulgence possible in libertarian ideology and the extreme centralization of late-Soviet socialism. Libertarianism and socialism look incompatible, and no synthesis between them is possible. We still must make the effort, for what we now have is abominable.       

Quote:P5:  Agreed for the most part. A microcosm in one state is Pennsylvania, which has often been described as Philadelphia on the east, Pittsburgh on the west and Alabama in the middle. The national translation is for the most part self-explanatory with the exception of the area around Chicago.

Well -- there is Texas, or at least the triangle with the Dallas-Fort Worth "Metroplex" in the north, either Austin or San Antonio (depending on taste) in the southwest, and Houston in the Southeast.  Reputedly, Denver, Omaha, and the Twin Cities are livable. Atlanta would be OK if it weren't surrounded by Georgia... Salt Lake City seems good enough. College towns other than New Haven and South Bend are generally good. For example, Ann Arbor is about as good as Detroit is awful. 

Quote:P6:  Proof that we have been in Gilded Age II for the better part of four decades.  Not really sure if increases in crime are co-related.

Crime really is down from the 1970's -- way down. Police work is better, but perhaps more importantly, we no longer use leaded gasoline. Lead as dusts and in fumes cause both learning disabilities and poor impulse control, both contributing strongly to crime. It was easy to link environmental lead (increasingly heavy as one got closer to the core cities, worsening as traffic leading into the core cities got heavier and slower, exposing children in "tenderloin" districts to the most lead and stunting their minds) to urban crime rates. 

I lived in the San Francisco Bay Area in the 1970's, and I well knew certain rules: one was that going north on BART except to head for Berkeley or San Francisco was a mistake if one was concerned about safety of person or property. BART wasn't the problem; the nearby Nimitz Freeway (then California 17, now I-880) was. Fremont was relatively safe except for people originally from Oakland who had been exposed to much lead in childhood. Traffic along the "Nemesis Freeway" got heavier and more congested, and as one went through Union City, Hayward, San Lorenzo, San Leandro, and from southern to downtown Oakland, the vehicle exhausts became more dense, belching out lead  that blew into surrounding communities. Poverty intensified the farther north one got, so -- Oakland was a place to avoid.  

    
(the map is to illustrate the geography). 

People have grown up for about forty years since leaded gas vanished from the marketplace, and crime rates are now much lower. 

Quote:P7: Illustrates the seedlings of what could erupt into modern day Bastille-like rebellion. But I don’t believe that today’s society would have the collective spirit with which to pull it off. A plot to burn down Wall Street and/or some big corporate behemoth? Might the corona virus accomplish this without any bloodshed? (Do not advocate such actions; just demonstrating that there could be sufficient anger bubbling under the surface).

Know well that economic elites have turned to fascism to destroy the liberalism that they see as the source of radical leftist ideas. Nazi Germany was a paradise for industrialists, financiers, executives, and big landowners
To be sure, industrial labor was cheaper in Germany than in any other European country except perhaps Russia before 1933 -- but after 1933 labor got really cheap as working conditions deteriorated to peonage. People could not strike for wages or conditions, nobody could change employers without the consent of the employer, and if one slacked off one would exchange the dehumanizing conditions of the usual prison of a German factory with labor in a concentration camp where one toiled to exhaustion on near-starvation rations that would kill one if one did not get out by establishing that one believed that working to exhaustion for what an employer determined was right (just enough for bare survival) was fully adequate. 

All that prevents such in America is democracy. Our economic elites are no more moral than those who backed Hitler in Germany because he promised them "labor peace" and the destruction of the Left. The concentration camps of Nazi Germany were highly profitable to the tycoons who exploited the workers so severely there. That we are a "Christian country"? Anyone familiar with the Sermon on the Mount recognizes that what our economic elites do is anything but Christian. If one wants to talk about Germany -- there was nothing wrong with the German people between 1933 and 1945 that Judaism would not have solved. 

Fascism, whether the nearly-pure-capitalist type in Chile under Pinochet or the militaristic madhouse that was Nazi Germany, compels people to accept the awful as a defense against the horrors that the rulers can inflict. 

Quote:P8:  No juice here. Right number, wrong alpha character.  Makes a lot of sense. Could it be that we could yet have a breakup of today’s corporate trusts like the one administered by TR around the turn of the previous century? Could it also be that the reason big business came to dominate pretty much every industry is that they brainwashed the public into believing that they could do it all better?  While it might be nice, I do tend to be doubtful that we could ever return to the days of mom and pop shops on Main Street. Much has been made of the decades long trend toward interests of Main Street being eclipsed by those of Wall Street. The reason a mom and pop revival is unlikely is because they usually  can’t offer the level of convenience that today’s society demands. Haven’t you all noticed that each generation seems to demand more convenience than did the previous owner one—from the advent of 7-11 and similar stores to home delivery of food.

Maybe this time the events will give us the scenario of "too big to save" instead of "too big to fail".  If the 1929-1932 meltdown was a tiger, the 2007-2009 meltdown that lasted half as long was a bad dog. When the behemoths are no longer around to flood the airwaves with advertising, and -- worse -- buy politicians and fund right-wing front groups, then the brainwashing will come to an end. I do not say that we are on the brink of a meltdown as severe as the one that started the Great Depression, but all in all we Americans got out of it better than we were going into it. The 1930's were a great time for starting a small business, mostly because many found that such was all that they could do when what passed as the gravy trains as there were in the 1920's derailed -- and burned. 

Much of what we think when it comes to economic choices is the result of advertising. Just ask yourself when you last thought of going to Montgomery-Ward to kill a little time and maybe pick up something; going to Blockbuster for a video; having a steak dinner at Steak and Ale; or buying a record (and at one point I started calling compact discs "records") at Tower Records. Those entities are all gone, and few people seem to care now. When was the last time you thought of looking at the new line of Oldsmobile cars? General Motors no longer cares what you think about the marque. 

Mom and Pop will reappear on Main Street (or perhaps at the re-purposed "dead mall") when the behemoths with bloated bureaucracies and with workers concerned solely with keeping their jobs are no more. The gravy trains of well-paid white-collar work with steady income will be gone. Small business at the outset is hard work with low returns on investment and potentially a good payback some time in the distant future if at all. But -- rents will be low as landlords will beg for occupants. Inventories will be available at fire-sale prices without the smell of smoke. Good help will be available cheaply. The work is sunup-to-sundown every day... but in a depression, work of any kind is a privilege. Besides, what else can many people do?  

Convenience is a myth when it comes to retail behemoths. It is self-service: the retailer (which has been so since the grocery store became the supermarket) stocks what he thinks customers will buy, stand back, and let the merchandise sell itself. This is the same whether the merchant is John Wanamaker, James Cash Penney, Martin Barton Skaggs, Frederick Meijer, Ray Kroc, or Sam Walton.  The merchant uses advertising  (which may be as simple as showing a commodity and a price -- "Hamburgers 15¢") to draw people in, and people find plenty of wares to buy. The merchant is there to collect the cash, keep the store stocked, and deter shoplifters. The merchant buys stuff in quantity and people buy on impulse with the understanding that they get their money's worth for something that they need. Or they buy on impulse. Or the customer gets a catalog from the "World's Largest Store" (the call letters of the WLS Radio in Chicago stood for "World's Largest Store" -- then Sears -- oh, how time has changed) and people can easily buy what is sold by mail.

The real convenience comes from buying a very specific item that stores might not stock. This is not something someone reads for pleasure, so it is never going to be an impulse purchase:

     

but it started selling at a faster rate once Donald Trump became President. I would suspect that a Portuguese-language translation is doing fairly well in Brazil if it isn't banned yet. (See my tagline!)

But this is not an impulse purchase:



Knowing that this is worth the time and cost requires some intellectual sophistication. The titles are mostly generic, so the only indication of interest is "string quartet" and "Franz Josef Haydn". Would I give this to someone? Of course! Talk about "golden oldies" -- the composer was born the same year as George Washington. That George Washington.-   

It is safe to assume that Jeff Bezos knows what he is doing, and he isn't selling books and music (among other things) quite the same way as Ray Kroc sold hamburgers. But one could never put these items on a stand and make people want them.  

We are in an economic crisis in part because the reality in most American lives has gone from shortage (which makes marketing easy) to surfeit. Many people are downsizing, and tiny apartments are incompatible with large collections of anything.

[TheNomad]

(03-13-2020, 05:02 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(03-12-2020, 07:38 AM)beechnut79 Wrote: That song, (Gentle on my Mind), although not really thought of that way, was popular smack-dab in the middle of the hippie era when free-spiritism was very much in vogue. Sometimes I think we could usu a little more of that today. Am now in my 70s and still would like as little responsibility as possible. Depressed that most of the bills never seem to go away. Probably won’t be able to retire until death, even though I never had substance abuse issues.

Yes, it was more the norm to be a free spirit during the last awakening.  It went with the times.  When you were young, a member of a band (such as those who wrote the song) and had not yet put down roots, it was easier.  Boomers have sunk roots since, generally.  I sympathize with the seeming ugliness of some of those roots.  Persistent buggers, no?

Should I chime in here, "free spirit" means to a child "unknown chaos / danger".  I am so glad and thankful to the gods for Strauss and Howe's concepts, it helped me understand WHY I felt so alienated and under-protected as a child.

It's also enlightening how Prophets had the world to claim for themselves.  A healthy infrastructure, parents who adored them, every material thing they could want (NEED was a given, WANT is the operative word).

^^ this is a generality.  But it works.

Then, when they were finished shitting on everything I just mentioned, decided to "put down roots" as you say, and then here we are in 2020 - living in essentially their world - and things have been falling down through my entire adult life, no one can agree on how to move forward on anything, and America wonders if we can even survive until Summer.

It was all about them.  Their visions.  Their ideology.  It still is.  I recognize America needed them to overthrow a stale culture.  I can't say The Doors shouldn't exist.  But their use is over.  Please just die already.  Self-impose that you will no longer vote or involve in politics if you can't do the latter.  Admit and recognize YOU are the problem right now.  Whether you call yourself a color or a side or a movement.

You are not here to change culture.  Your time for that is over.  Now, we need inner change you cannot provide.

please opt out