Jim Naseum
-
Posts
2026 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Jim Naseum
-
-
Predicting LE for health professionals is like predicting the weather 6 months out. They have way too many variables to juggle and all those variables can move a lot.
My pessimism is just the "bet" I would make on all those variables. And it is based on the premise that all controls in society are still shifting from government to private influence - for the simple reason of "follow the money." Where the money goes, so goes the influence." Here's one example: Private prisons. Since government increasingly can't afford to operate prisons, the shift is toward privitization. That drastically changes the incentives involved in recidivism. Where once the object was to lower it, the profit motive now wants to RAISE it, and raise it as fast as possible. The obvious and inescapable result of privitizing prison is that only increases in prisoners will satisfy Wall Street.
And so it goes with food. Every dollar increase in Kraft's yearly dividends will be represented by another inch on the waistline of consumers. That's simply the undeniable logic of a system where all the influence is privatized. Harking back to my previous post, "Governments are now charged with helping private capital run the economy." So, you look at that and can see why the people can't possibly get GMO labeling requirements from their government! An unbelievable condition of events! (Notwithstanding any argument about the health value of GMO, just simply based on people's "right to know.")
So, "the American human body" will continue to provide a massive profit incentive to the food industry. It's "the new frontier" everyone is always looking for. "Ok boys, we have raped all the forests, dug out all the coal, fished out all the fish, now let's dredge the good health out of 310 million human bodies." It's not one bit different than the prison incentives.
What can anyone possibly imagine will reverse the current trend in obesity? I see nothing whatsoever on the horizon. As we see, the younger generations are getting obese at an ever earlier age. Disaster looms.
Incentives are determined by the nature of the contract. In healthcare positive outcomes now gauge reimbursement so providers are incentivized to provide better health care. If privatized prisons are structured to punish recidivism then they too will become more rehabilitative. As you say, they will follow the $$$ and if the $$$ punishes negative consequences then better outcomes should result.
And if industry rapes the forests understand that forests are inanimate, nonthinking, nonreactive entities, - as are coal mines - and to a lesser degree fish. People on the other hand actually do think, do react and should be held responsible for their own conduct. They are not at all equal when it comes to being a commodity.
Yes. Incentives could be used positively. I see no sign of it yet.
From my limited view, prisoners are simply another resource to farm for profits. In the four counties around me, they contracted out all the phones in the jails to a outfit that uses it as a means of bilking the families of prisoners. In addition to the very high per-minute fees, there are connect fees, account fees, and $8 fees to add money to the account. Families of prisoners end up paying out hundreds of dollars a year trying to stay in touch with their family member. It's raw. It's crass. The county receives a $2.5M kickback from this robbery phone company. Story here: http://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2016/01/28/county-sued-over-jail-calls-accused-taking-kickbacks/79085210/
THAT's the kind of "resource" that private capital sees everywhere they look in this new world.
-
Predicting LE for health professionals is like predicting the weather 6 months out. They have way too many variables to juggle and all those variables can move a lot.
My pessimism is just the "bet" I would make on all those variables. And it is based on the premise that all controls in society are still shifting from government to private influence - for the simple reason of "follow the money." Where the money goes, so goes the influence." Here's one example: Private prisons. Since government increasingly can't afford to operate prisons, the shift is toward privitization. That drastically changes the incentives involved in recidivism. Where once the object was to lower it, the profit motive now wants to RAISE it, and raise it as fast as possible. The obvious and inescapable result of privitizing prison is that only increases in prisoners will satisfy Wall Street.
And so it goes with food. Every dollar increase in Kraft's yearly dividends will be represented by another inch on the waistline of consumers. That's simply the undeniable logic of a system where all the influence is privatized. Harking back to my previous post, "Governments are now charged with helping private capital run the economy." So, you look at that and can see why the people can't possibly get GMO labeling requirements from their government! An unbelievable condition of events! (Notwithstanding any argument about the health value of GMO, just simply based on people's "right to know.")
So, "the American human body" will continue to provide a massive profit incentive to the food industry. It's "the new frontier" everyone is always looking for. "Ok boys, we have raped all the forests, dug out all the coal, fished out all the fish, now let's dredge the good health out of 310 million human bodies." It's not one bit different than the prison incentives.
What can anyone possibly imagine will reverse the current trend in obesity? I see nothing whatsoever on the horizon. As we see, the younger generations are getting obese at an ever earlier age. Disaster looms.
-
Highly recommended:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Brothers-Karamazov-Fyodor-Dostoevsky/dp/0374528373
Thanks, I am going to pick it up this afternoon.
Here is an article you reminded me of re: the translation of the Russians, including Garnett and your reccomendation. Back when I read it I suspected that I had missed out on a lot of what both Tolstoy and Karamazov were trying to say. I think you will enjoy it.
Now I will find out.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/11/07/the-translation-wars
A very interesting piece for sure. And certainly paints a good picture of the difficulty of translation. When I picked up the Pevear W&P I browsed several reading forums and was surprised to find out how very many people have read all the translations. And then of course, there are those who said they learned Russian just to read Tolstoy and Dostoevsky in the native. That's real commitment.
I hope you all will report back on how you like the Pevear W&P. I gave it to my sister who is not wont to read the Russians, and she is loving it so far. I have now stacked the Pevear A.K. I finished not too long ago right behind it, so she will be reading Tolstoy for a long time! Life could be worse.
Tolstoy knows his farming like Melville knows his whaling, and it is one of my favorite reasons for enjoying both.
-
Highly recommended:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Brothers-Karamazov-Fyodor-Dostoevsky/dp/0374528373
-
Barclays settles dark pool suit.
I just want to clarify that my assertions about "dark wealth" has nothing to do with these "dark pools" which are very common. In other words, my "$33T/$35T" is not related to "dark pools" a common investment source.
Carry on. I just didn't want to see any confusion pop up.
-
Life Expectancy
Is complicated! First of all, the number stated is a reference to a new borne at the time the computation is made. So, if the LE today is 80, it means someone born today can expect to live to be 80.
The number is a computation based on current death rates for each age. What's important to know is that the computed figure is widely different by gender, race, education, geography, and health status. For example, a white male, non smoker, with college degree and low BMI, will have a higher LE, than a female, non white, high school grad, who smokes, and has a high BMI.
What is not figured into the number is the current health of living people. So, if you look around and see that the current health of a big segment of the population is very bad and getting worse, you can see that the death rate for that group will rise, eventually skewing the LE downward. That's the condition we see today.
The NIH is seeing a very large jump in obesity in millennials- a very large change. They are issuing warnings saying in short, of you don't make some serious changes, you will have a shorter life than your parents -- which has never happened in our history!
So, actual LE can only reflect current death rates. If 20M people right now had a fatal disease, that wouldn't move the LE at all. But, after they all die, it would be reflected in the lowering of the LE. So, LE is a rearview mirror only. That's not very intuitive.
Hypothesis: The current bad health of millennials due to obesity will eventually lead to a generation living shorter lives than their parents. A historical first in the USA. And, it will cause the LE to point downward.
The obesity trend is not yet reversing, and the food industry continues on its path of producing unhealthy food.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
Of course the answer is demand. The economic meaning of demand.
Just look at the process of how new food items are introduced. They arise from the marketing department. "Gee, if people like our Ritz crackers so much, and we know they buy a lot of cheddar cheese too, how about we try putting the cheese right into the cracker?"
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
Not to get picky but you can't conspire with your self.
I get the inkling you're trying to paint me into a corner.
Which meaning were you using when you used the word? That's what I am trying to get at.
A conspiracy doesn't "have" to be an unlawful act, but rather one that is harmful.
Which people and which systems??Maybe this whole discussion can be boiled down to HOW individuals, or even groups, work within or even manipulate these established systems to their financial benefit. Then, the unforeseen results due to these actions, and the conspiracies behind their implementation are really the result of good old-fashioned human greed - .
And again, when you say conspiracy above here, do you mean the act of planning an unlawful act?
I'm just trying to understand your comments. Good to see them!
Acts can be harmful, yet lawful.
Acts can also be unknowingly harmful at the time they are committed as the results of all acts cannot be entirely known in advance.
I prefer the synonyms "ploy, scheme, plan, & ploy" as to show the intent at the time the act is committed.
con·spir·a·cy
[kənˈspirəsē]
NOUN
-
a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful: "a conspiracy to destroy the government"
synonyms: plot · scheme · plan · machination · ploy · trick · ruse ·
[more]
-
the action of plotting or conspiring:
"they were cleared of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice"synonyms: plotting · collusion · intrigue · connivance ·
[more]
Powered by Oxford Dictionaries · © Oxford University Press · Translation by Bing Translator
To answer your question, I was using "conspiracy" as in its synonym "plan".
In simple terms, ANY act to advance ones financial position (or preserve a position in declining conditions) will most likely have an adverse result on someone else, or another group, or some entity. Hypothetically, if I use my intellect to analyze such a condition, calculate a net result that would benefit me, formulate a PLAN, act upon it, and either knowingly or even unknowingly cause harm no matter how minuscule, a conspiracy - by definition - has occurred.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
-
I honestly think Tolstoy needs deep patience. You have to slowly savor much of the thought bubble talk and really ponder it rather than keep marching along. Sometimes is ponder one of those thoughts for half an hour! Well OK, part of that was actually a nap, but you get the idea.Yet Dostoevsky doesn't seem so sensitive to translation. Fascinating. Tolstoy just needs the right interpreter.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
Catch 22 doesn't feel as richly passionate and spiritual as WPs anti war sentiment.Catch 22?
Trinity?
Trinity I don't know, so no comment.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
Restated - I believe that it is likely that this is just business as usual because a conspiracy theory seems quite unlikely - to ever be proven or reprimanded.
Well, there's also that angle - the fact that actual conspiracies DO occur quite frequently. And, it's hard to get them investigated until after all the evidence has been destroyed, lost or buried.
Just in the past 5 years, I would say there have been several coups, several assassinations of state leaders, and all of those are surely conspiracies. DUH. Of course when US leaders are assassinated it's never a conspiracy! Only when it is a foreign leader!
-
Besides the incessant social claptrap reminiscent of English soap operas, there is also a writing style which seems designed to incite a desire to inflict a Stephen King misery effect. Other than that, no problem.
Yes, the setting is the aristocracy. But that is simply a context for the characters to play out the enormous range and subtlety of human emotion and behavior. What greater anti-war sentiment do you find in literature? What greater love story do you know of that surpasses "Anna Karenina?"
As to linguistic style, there is of course always the problem of translating Russian. Some are much better than others. I recently read the Pevear translation and it is far better than what I read 20 years back. You almost forget that the native language is not English.
-
Questions Why would anyone doubt that the world's largest bankers act to drive the world's economies? Do you know what the FED does? The CBs in Europe? Do you know about bailouts of governments? Companies? What do you think happens to you when they raise and lower interest rates? (Do you even have a portfolio?)
Good question. These bankers loan money and earn interest. Their plan is to continue loaning money and earning more interest. Surely, you can see that this is what they plan to do. Without banking, they are done and out.
Their plan is to engineer a system which maximizes their interest income. That means, ipso facto, the borrowers have to have the ability to repay. The lender does not want to see debtors fail and default.
That's not my question. Yes, the loan money. But they do SO MUCH MORE than that in the global economy.
Let me try again with a more specific question:
hypothesis: Bankers are the parties most responsible for the overall economy in the USA. That means, the unemployment rate, the cost of living, the wages people earn, the interest they pay, the ability to get credit and so on. Short hand: Bankers drive the US economy.
Q: do you believe that is likely, unlikely, absurd, a conspiracy theory, or just business as usual?
I believe that it is likely that this is just business as usual because a conspiracy theory seems quite unlikely.
To which I would just add, "...and also unnecessary."
-
Maybe this whole discussion can be boiled down to HOW individuals, or even groups, work within or even manipulate these established systems to their financial benefit. Then, the unforeseen results due to these actions, and the conspiracies behind their implementation are really the result of good old-fashioned human greed - .
Which people and which systems??
And again, when you say conspiracy above here, do you mean the act of planning an unlawful act?
I'm just trying to understand your comments. Good to see them!
A conspiracy doesn't "have" to be an unlawful act, but rather one that is harmful.
Acts can be harmful, yet lawful.
Acts can also be unknowingly harmful at the time they are committed as the results of all acts cannot be entirely known in advance.
I prefer the synonyms "ploy, scheme, plan, & ploy" as to show the intent at the time the act is committed.
con·spir·a·cy
[kənˈspirəsē]NOUN- a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful:"a conspiracy to destroy the government"
- the action of plotting or conspiring:"they were cleared of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice"
-
Powered by Oxford Dictionaries · © Oxford University Press · Translation by Bing TranslatorWhich meaning were you using when you used the word? That's what I am trying to get at.
I get the inkling you're trying to paint me into a corner.
To answer your question, I was using "conspiracy" as in its synonym "plan".
In simple terms, ANY act to advance ones financial position (or preserve a position in declining conditions) will most likely have an adverse result on someone else, or another group, or some entity. Hypothetically, if I use my intellect to analyze such a condition, calculate a net result that would benefit me, formulate a PLAN, act upon it, and either knowingly or even unknowingly cause harm no matter how minuscule, a conspiracy - by definition - has occurred.
First of all, getting clarity is not painting one in the corner!
Ok, so you meant "plan" with no criminal intent. I can just restate it then like this:
"Maybe this whole discussion can be boiled down to HOW individuals, or even groups, work within or even manipulate these established systems to their financial benefit. Then, the unforeseen results due to these actions, and the PLANS behind their implementation are really the result of good old-fashioned human greed - "
Well, yes, everyone works for their own benefit, and greed is behind most financial activities and plans. I have no argument against that.
So, when I say to you: "The Food industry intentionally engineers food that is one of the causes of obesity and disease and early death," do you agree or disagree?
-
-
Dear Frito-Lay,
My friends and I would so much love to eat heavily greased and salted eggplant slices. We'd like them in many flavors, like HoneySuckle, Dill Pickle, Fish, and Creamy Cucumber. Add as many wild artificial colors as you can! And we want them to last 6 months after the bag is opened. Please call them EggieBoobles! We will buy them all, we promise!
Your Truly
Connie Sumer
-
Everyone knows that Stew. The real point is that I am right and 5674 is wrong. Tolstoy is the most over-rated author of all time.
Ha ha
What's the critique? What is his fault?
-
Questions Why would anyone doubt that the world's largest bankers act to drive the world's economies? Do you know what the FED does? The CBs in Europe? Do you know about bailouts of governments? Companies? What do you think happens to you when they raise and lower interest rates? (Do you even have a portfolio?)
Good question. These bankers loan money and earn interest. Their plan is to continue loaning money and earning more interest. Surely, you can see that this is what they plan to do. Without banking, they are done and out.
Their plan is to engineer a system which maximizes their interest income. That means, ipso facto, the borrowers have to have the ability to repay. The lender does not want to see debtors fail and default.
That's not my question. Yes, the loan money. But they do SO MUCH MORE than that in the global economy.
Let me try again with a more specific question:
hypothesis: Bankers are the parties most responsible for the overall economy in the USA. That means, the unemployment rate, the cost of living, the wages people earn, the interest they pay, the ability to get credit and so on. Short hand: Bankers drive the US economy.
Q: do you believe that is likely, unlikely, absurd, a conspiracy theory, or just business as usual?
-
Maybe this whole discussion can be boiled down to HOW individuals, or even groups, work within or even manipulate these established systems to their financial benefit. Then, the unforeseen results due to these actions, and the conspiracies behind their implementation are really the result of good old-fashioned human greed - .
Which people and which systems??
And again, when you say conspiracy above here, do you mean the act of planning an unlawful act?
I'm just trying to understand your comments. Good to see them!
A conspiracy doesn't "have" to be an unlawful act, but rather one that is harmful.
Acts can be harmful, yet lawful.
Acts can also be unknowingly harmful at the time they are committed as the results of all acts cannot be entirely known in advance.
I prefer the synonyms "ploy, scheme, plan, & ploy" as to show the intent at the time the act is committed.
con·spir·a·cy
[kənˈspirəsē]NOUN- a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful:"a conspiracy to destroy the government"
- the action of plotting or conspiring:"they were cleared of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice"
-
Powered by Oxford Dictionaries · © Oxford University Press · Translation by Bing TranslatorWhich meaning were you using when you used the word? That's what I am trying to get at.
-
-
Crumbs is one word, I would venture a guess more arengoing to see turds.
I think they will see how far you have retreated and find you have list credibility. As Jeff said, you tend to color things and way overstate them.
They will see you cant even establish that the LE is declining, much less what the cause is.
I think the will see you make a lot of unsubstantiated claims, and they are unwilling to take a blind leap onto whatever magic carpet ride you are in.
Which is a darned shame, because buried in that rambling firehose approach you have are some real intriguing ideas that deserve being fleshed out.
But have no fear, I will be here to fact check you on everything. Hopefully it wont require you to backtrack to the point that the number of bankers doesn't matter, and whether the Dark Bankers control 33 or 35T.
Precision
Courage
Well, I absolutely won't do your homework for you. And this is an important point. You like to sit back and say, "show me X" and then, once shown, you will discount it as insufficient. This is because there is no STANDARD for what constitutes acceptable evidence. And no one knows this game better than lawyers. You are asking me to accept YOU as a judge of the quality of my position. That isn't going to happen. When I put out a position, I judge the response I get, and I can tell very easily what the responder may know about the position. Your initial responses told me you have no working knowledge of international finance, or even banking in general. Hence, your "alien" BS, and quotes from polemicists and the like. You had no clue what I was even talking about.
My role is not to educate you on the sources and details. That job would be endless, frustrating, and lead to nothing. I could give you a dozen references to something, and each time you would simply deny its credibility. Old game. My purpose is to make some assertions that cause others to have enough interest to do their own homework. You surely have no interest in that. I gave you an cogent, short reference, from the IMF as to why infrastructure relies on private capital. You poo-pooed that, as though laughably YOU have more knowledge of the subject than the IMF!
I have many years and a very, very long reading list relative to the subjects I speak on. This is not a court of law, and I am not making a case for the evaluation of a jury. I am trying to stimulate new ways for people to look at problems and try to understand what's going on. If anyone is expecting me to provide all the details, they better not hold their breath.
If you have any interest, you will do your own homework. If you don't you wont. I have no interest in either path you take. My interest is far more general. It is to present the view of the anti-establismentarian, who isn't following the US Government script for interpreting history,or explaining current events. Hopefully to get other people interested enough that they would do their own independent research to whatever level interests them.
As to the $33T/$35T let me say this. It's roughly a five minute job for anyone that knows how to use a search engine, to find a VERY credible report describing this hidden money, and the amounts and all the rest. I have purposely NOT provided the link to see how interested you were. When I see something interesting, I go find it. I figure you can too. And if haven't got that much interest, then you are simply trying to exercise me, and I don't do exercise for people.
So, there it is!
-
Maybe this whole discussion can be boiled down to HOW individuals, or even groups, work within or even manipulate these established systems to their financial benefit. Then, the unforeseen results due to these actions, and the conspiracies behind their implementation are really the result of good old-fashioned human greed - .
Which people and which systems??
And again, when you say conspiracy above here, do you mean the act of planning an unlawful act?
I'm just trying to understand your comments. Good to see them!
-
Is this a result of a 12 banker coup conspiracy? NO.
Do you mean "conspiracy to violate some law"?
Or, do you mean, "the actions of 12 bankers."?
I said early on that "conspiracy" was a loaded word. You never know what people mean by it. Strictly speaking, a conspiracy is a plan by a group to do something unlawful. It is a crime.
12 bankers can plan something without it being a conspiracy. And this is the particular kind of action that interests me. When bankers meet in say, Davos, and create strategies for say, improving the global economy, this is NOT a conspiracy, and yet it IS an action of a group of bankers that will affect your life.
Questions
Why would anyone doubt that the world's largest bankers act to drive the world's economies? Do you know what the FED does? The CBs in Europe? Do you know about bailouts of governments? Companies? What do you think happens to you when they raise and lower interest rates? (Do you even have a portfolio?)
Do people imagine that bankers operate in a vacuum?
I'm mystified why so many people reject the operation of bankers as some kind of absurdity that is just impossible? What's going on here?
-
I started reading it. I have to say Tolstoy sucks compared to Dostoevsky. Newsflash. Moby Dick is better.
What? Heresy!
There is no one who has ever equaled Tolstoy for the depth of his human understanding. Because, not only is there W&P on his resume, but there is also, "Anna Karenina", which I thought was actually better, deeper if not wider, than W&P, although most reverse that order. Either way, no one has ever written two masterpieces of that scale. And, I am a huge fan of Dostoevsky. I have also raved for ever about, "Moby Dick," and have insisted my friends read it forever now.
Anyone I know who has questions about life, I always tell them to read, "Brothers Karamazov."
-
The six part mini series is running on a couple tv networks currently. It's really very good. Although much of the interior passion and mental life of the book is necessarily impossible to put in a short series, it still manages to hew very close to the storyline of the "greatest novel ever written."
I can't say the acting is up to say, "Downtown Abbey," but it's not too far behind.
Check it out.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
No. Because no credit is available to replace it, or fix it.
Good lord, let me guess, because we haven't maintained it?
Benevolent? No. I'd, say they are misanthropic forces important to understand, and not trustworthy.
Essentially, it sounds like you believe these conspirators are benevolent dictators. That's not all so bad. From most religious doctrine, I would gather God is essentially seen as a benevolent dictator as well. But this isn't about a comparison of religions or a debate about any particular religious tenets. It's just an observation that life isn't bad just because somebody controls you or limits you in some ways. There are degrees of the control vs. freedom paradigm applicable to everyone... including the bankers.
Putting aside your wild restatement of the premise. But I get the humor.
A bit of hyperbole, but the question is, "If bankers rule the world and want to kill everyone they can for a profit, how did we wind up with the FDA, the Consumer Safety Dept., etc.?
WTF?
So, why did Clarence put together an FDA and a Dept. of Consumer Product Safety? Aren't GM, RJ Reynolds and Kellogg's closer to Clarence than you and me?I want to show that all large man-made phenomena arise from intention, not accident(1). GM didn't accidentally make defective key locks that killed people, they did that with intention. Yes, even after knowing the defect was deadly they refused to spend a few dollars to fix it. This works against all arguments that bad consequence are important to business. The only bad consequence that is important to business is if people don't buy the product. Be sure that the shareholders and executives of RJ Reynolds tobacco company enjoyed all those dividends just fine well after it was understood that smoking causes cancer. The makers of SugarSmacks are having no trouble enjoying their profits. So, it's fair to eliminate "negative consequences" as a serious operator in how things work.
Those agencies arise from legitimate public politics. And to some extent, industry and bankers want these "basic institutions" to prevent the country from becoming Somalia.
But in all cases, "industry" captures these regulators with their own personnel, and steer them in ways that won't harm the industry being regulated. This capture is commonly called "the revolving door" of Washington.
These basic institutions do not stop industry, they more or less give an imprimatur of approval. "What could go wrong....we have the FDA watching!"
The two pieces I cited extensively explain exactly how private capital is expected to run the economies of all developed countries and the government's job is to SUPPORT THEM in that goal.
I know it's not your thing to dig into history, to pursue that kind of knowledge, but it is mine. I am fascinated by history, and history can not be understood when you don't know how these forces work.
For example, many people will wonder about why our infrastructure is failing...I don't wonder, I know why.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
Look, you operate on a purely establishment framework and world view. You accept the superficial phenomena you can see, and that other establishment figures you trust will endorse. You just have never dug deep enough to get to what's behind the curtain to where the real levers are. It's obvious by the lines of questioning you take, and the ludicrous conspiracy claims you make about common phenomena.
What you think is far fetched, is just common knowledge to those like myself who have dug below the superficial pablum for keeping the population pacified and satiated, and not curious.
You find it incomprehensible that there even exists a "dark banking" world, let alone that it has trillions of dollars flowing in it. You think causes end with the FDA, CDC, etc, congress, and politics. From your comments, it appears history is not a passion of yours.
I get it. You're an establishment lawyer and involved in law enforcement and all the trappings thereof. I have no such loyalty to the establishment, and prefer to let the reality of history inform my beliefs, not crap coming from the mouths of government officials.
That makes it tedious to communicate. Rather than some substantial disagreement about neoliberal economics, or unrestricted capital flows, you fixate on the meaningless difference between 33T and 35T.
We don't occupy the same plane of understanding about history and current phenomena of globalism, making any discussion doomed to superficial niggling over nothing that is important. 33 or 35? Who cares? 10 bankers or 12? Misses the point.
But, I did leave all the right cookie crumbs in the thread so that anyone can verify that my assertions are logical and well accepted by economists and historians that go deeper than establishment mythology.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
Infrastructure in Your Area?
in Lounge
Posted
How funny is the timing of your post! I was in the kitchen fixing my lunch (bag of peas), and tossing ideas about how how exactly the trend could be reversed, as the trend was reversed with tobacco. I was writing a post in my head to launch that discussion. I sat down with my peas, and there it is on the screen!
First thing I thought of was that this is a much different era than 1970. We have an extremely vocal libertarian streak in the various legislatures that didn't exist 40 years ago. I think that greatly burdens actions like taxes. Did the sugary drink tax pass in NYC? There might be one in Berkeley, but that's not very typical of any place else in America, and frankly, there was not much obesity in Berkeley anyway (by my last account people were pencil thin).
So rather than looking for the AGAINST proposition, maybe try a FOR proposition. Like getting a 50% discount on your health insurance for a normal BMI.
Pay for college for any kid entering college with a normal BMI? HA HA - - man, the courts would destroy any kind of discriminatory rewards like those!
You can't move FoodCo, they simply are not going to volunteer an inch of ground. Even the Nutritional Pyramid is loaded with false bias created by the agra business. It's hard to make progress by simple advice when facing a delicious bowl of ice cream.
Which means, it has to become a cultural taboo, and that will take many generations. And actually, it might backfire where the taboo becomes against thin people!
I can predict the JEFFMATTHEWSBAND answer: Leave them alone. Who cares? They will figure it out! Which, sorta, kinda, maybe makes some sense too, if it weren't for the social cost of treating diabetes and the whole lot of conditions contained within the obesity problem. It's a tough one.