Quote:

---

6IXSTRINGJACK:
The problem is all the earmarks and pork they pass.
Here's one I know I mentioned before, but forgot to put it on my list above...
Termination of bundling shit together. Every single thing that ever gets passed is voted on individually and on its own merit.
All they do now is barter for shit they want with OUR money. That's why nobody is happy with how the money is spent and why Congress always has approval ratings in the low double digits no matter who's in control.

SECOND: Write 50 bills, each bill very simple because the bill is targeting one state. Those 50 bills will get votes mainly from Congressmen of 1 state and the 50 bills will not pass. Write 1 bill, targeting 50 states, which will be a very long and complicated bill to write. That bill will get votes from Congressmen in many states, which might be enough to pass.

Your choice is to make bills short, simple, easy to understand, and unlikely to pass because the other 49 states' Congressmen aren't interested in your dull problems or paying for your stupid solutions. Or write long and complicated bills that might have something another state's Congressmen want enough to give you what you want for your state.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

6IXSTRINGJACK:
The problem is all the earmarks and pork they pass.
Here's one I know I mentioned before, but forgot to put it on my list above...
Termination of bundling shit together. Every single thing that ever gets passed is voted on individually and on its own merit.
All they do now is barter for shit they want with OUR money. That's why nobody is happy with how the money is spent and why Congress always has approval ratings in the low double digits no matter who's in control.

SECOND: Write 50 bills, each bill very simple because the bill is targeting one state. Those 50 bills will get votes mainly from Congressmen of 1 state and the 50 bills will not pass. Write 1 bill, targeting 50 states, which will be a very long and complicated bill to write. That bill will get votes from Congressmen in many states, which might be enough to pass.

Your choice is to make bills short, simple, easy to understand, and unlikely to pass because the other 49 states' Congressmen aren't interested in your dull problems or paying for your stupid solutions. Or write long and complicated bills that might have something another state's Congressmen want enough to give you what you want for your state.

---

SECOND. unfortunately your argument and SIX's "fix" to the budget process are easily gotten around, and it's called "logrolling", where individual Congresspeople simply trade votes: "You vote for my pork and Ill vote for yours".

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So while in general I think government should run a balanced budget, I think there should be exceptions.

And, no, not to protect the banks from their excesses and to make the rich richer.

So OOC when -if ever- should a government spend in deficit, and why? (If ever)

If not, why not?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

6IX4. If you're not a pedophile, rapist, murderer or dealer of hard core drugs that are still illegal, you get discharged from prison immediately. If you spent time for dealing weed, you get back pay for all the years you lost paid for with tax dollars that hypocrites are raking in now with weed sales.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I guess "drug crimes" is where you and JSF agree.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
What kind of drugs are you high on?
I fairly clearly stated to leave all of the drug criminals incarcerated - they belong there, whereas innocent people do not belong there.
6ix wants not only all drug criminals to walk free, but also for the government to encourage them to commit mor4 crimes, and also for the government to pay for them to commit more crimes, because of all of the criminal activity they have been missing out on.
Those are pretty much polar opposites on the subject.

---

Lie.

I want ONLY drug "criminals" to walk and be made whole for for either dealing or possession

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

6IX4. If you're not a pedophile, rapist, murderer or dealer of hard core drugs that are still illegal, you get discharged from prison immediately. If you spent time for dealing weed, you get back pay for all the years you lost paid for with tax dollars that hypocrites are raking in now with weed sales.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I guess "drug crimes" is where you and JSF agree.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
What kind of drugs are you high on?
I fairly clearly stated to leave all of the drug criminals incarcerated - they belong there, whereas innocent people do not belong there.
6ix wants not only all drug criminals to walk free, but also for the government to encourage them to commit mor4 crimes, and also for the government to pay for them to commit more crimes, because of all of the criminal activity they have been missing out on.
Those are pretty much polar opposites on the subject.

---

Lie.

I want ONLY drug "criminals" to walk and be made whole for for either dealing or possession that the state they live in has now made legal, and for which they are making INSANE amounts of tax dollars on a product they wrongfully criminalized until they figured out they could stuff their pockets with cash by selling it themselves.

As far as I know, that's only weed. Has California legalized Meth yet?

---

You claim lie, and then you repeat what I just posted.


Criminals saw a crime to commit. Criminals perpetrated those crimes. Criminals were convicted.
You stated that you want the criminals to roam free. And also, to be paid, by the state, for all of the lost time that they could have been committing more crimes. And also to now go forth and commit more crimes.

I don't agree with that.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I think the issue is that we recognize that so much harm has been done with (stated) "good intentions". R2P. Human rights. BLM. Public good.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I think the issue is that we recognize that so much harm has been done with (stated) "good intentions". R2P. Human rights. BLM. Public good.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNYM:
I think the issue is that we recognize that so much harm has been done with (stated) "good intentions". R2P. Human rights. BLM. Public good.

SIX: She gets it.

KIKI: I think the equation needs to be broken 'corporate good = public good'.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

SIGNYM:
I think the issue is that we recognize that so much harm has been done with (stated) "good intentions". R2P. Human rights. BLM. Public good.

SIX: She gets it.

KIKI: I think the equation needs to be broken 'corporate good = public good'.

---

So does she.

Altho there is another dimension besides profit, and that is power. As business craves profit (and mind-fucking people) government craves authoritarianism (oh, and also mind-fucking people).

We may be a little fuzzy around the edges, but I think we're in substantial agreement here.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
So "R2P. Human rights. BLM. Public good." Pfffft! They're not as claimed.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Calling it "Public Good" is an intentional misnomer with incorrect connotations attached to it.

It makes stupid people believe that the Federal Government's role is beyond the scope of what it really is.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
JSF, I misunderstood your post. what threw me off was this ...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN
Leave the guilty drug dealers in.

---

Since both dealing AND possession are a crime, I thought you were making that distinction and treating them separately. My bad.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Build the wall to end Illegal Alien Invasion, child, drug, and sex trafficking.

---

Maybe we don't need a wall everywhere, but we should definitley control our border.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Altho there is another dimension besides profit, and that is power. As business craves profit (and mind-fucking people) government craves authoritarianism (oh, and also mind-fucking people).

---

Quote:

---

This happens every time.

Every single time.



You will not, in the history of mankind, find an example that successfully argues against this truth.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
lol

Your 1930's cartoonish view of weed smokers is hilarious.

You're the dick at the family parties that everybody else hides the weed from.

My god, you'd end up having to cut off more than half your family if you ever knew the truth.

---

Quote:

---

6IXSTRINGJACK:
lol
Your 1930's cartoonish view of weed smokers is hilarious.
You're the dick at the family parties that everybody else hides the weed from.
My god, you'd end up having to cut off more than half your family if you ever knew the truth.

JSF: The really cartoonish view of potheads is recognizing that they all get really, really defensive and offended in their denial, whenever reasonable folk point out any facts regarding their abused substance of choice.
Oh, wait......

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
lol

Your 1930's cartoonish view of weed smokers is hilarious.

You're the dick at the family parties that everybody else hides the weed from.

My god, you'd end up having to cut off more than half your family if you ever knew the truth.

---

The really cartoonish view of potheads is recognizing that they all get really, really defensive and offended in their denial, whenever reasonable folk point out any facts regarding their abused substance of choice.
Oh, wait......

---

Quote:

---

KIKI: I believe there's a legitimate role written into the Constitution for a legitimate government.
But what's advertised as legitimate "good intentions" by the government - and many administrations both D and R along the way - aren't.
Some of them fail at first blush - R2P for example. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the US is responsible for the well being of people in any other country but this one. In fact the founders envisioned an isolationist country, uninvolved in international pacts that could lead to endless wars. They'd seen hundreds of years of Europe having been there, and done that (Hundred Years War, anyone?). R2P is an unConstitutional fantasy.
Another that fails right off the bat is 'Human Rights'. It's a feel-good sound-bite fantasy, an amorphous blob of camouflage the government and the Deep State hide behind. Our rights are spelled out in the Constitution, and the US government is enshrined with protecting them. 'Human Rights' has no meaning in Constitutional America, let alone around the globe. But we make war all everywhere foreign in the name of 'Human Rights', while gutting our Constitutional Rights at home with the Surveillance State.
BLM is a front for - in the very kindest interpretation - a poorly thought out response to over-policing. But its mayhem and destruction betray the real motivation behind it. As I've mentioned, I do believe one can judge intentions by results.
Public good - there really is such a thing as the public good, found in other countries, where governments really do govern at times with the overall, long term benefit of their people in mind. In the US, though - and judging intentions by results - we see 80 years of not enough good-paying, productive jobs; the decline of vital, national-interest productive capacity; the marginalization of self-organization (unions and farm cooperatives are a form of self-organization), the common grounds of the environment being despoiled, and so on. Basically, we see a country being imploded to benefit corporations.

Anyway, while I don't see the government performing its legitimate functions, I do think they exist, as stated in the Constitution.

---

Quote:

---

6IXSTRINGJACK
Bottom line is that, specifically in a society where it is necessary to flourish, Individuals themselves are generally, more often than not, "good", and even have the capacity to rise above and be great.
It's groups, movements and governments that are terrible, no matter how good the intentions behind them were when they originated. They are far too easily co-opted and ultimately controlled by the worst individuals among us. The power hungry. The greedy. The sociopaths.
This happens every time.
Every single time.You will not, in the history of mankind, find an example that successfully argues against this truth.
If it hasn't happened yet, you only haven't noticed it because it's somehow benefiting you enough to not notice it. That, or the eventuality of this truth still has yet to play out.

---

Quote:

---

KIKI: For sure there are no perfect societies. There are also no completely negative ones either for the simple reason that everyone would have perished.
I'm sure you can think of at least one society around the globe that you find worse than the US. So there's no 100% perfect society, and no 100% irredeemable society, either. But there's better and worse.

---

Quote:

---

6IXSTRINGJACK :When talking about America now, we just haven't seen the eventuality play out yet.
We're living on borrowed time at 245 years, and there are many signs that it's starting to crumble around us.
And after we're gone, nearly every other developed nation is going to fall like dominoes. Certainly all of the "free" ones.
That tree of liberty hasn't been watered in a very long time, and I doubt very much that any of us are going to see it happen in our lifetimes.
But just as everything is eventual, everything is cyclical as well. After our fall, and the fall of Democracy worldwide, there will be another very dark period in human history. But from the ashes of Democracy freedom eventually will rise once again.

---

Quote:

---

6IXSTRINGJACK:
I haven't smoked weed in 7 years.
Of the vices I'd indulged in, nothing was easier than giving up weed.
Coffee is harder to stop than weed is.
You have a serious misconception of the plant.

And I'm not joking about the family thing either. They laugh at your attitude toward it behind your back while they're outside lighting up at the Christmas party.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

6IXSTRINGJACK:
I haven't smoked weed in 7 years.
Of the vices I'd indulged in, nothing was easier than giving up weed.
Coffee is harder to stop than weed is.
You have a serious misconception of the plant.

And I'm not joking about the family thing either. They laugh at your attitude toward it behind your back while they're outside lighting up at the Christmas party.

---

Not against pot per se, but from experience I gotta say, it was not for me.

---

Nothing wrong with knowing what you like and don't like. I love coffee, but I hate tea.

I love weed. I plan on smoking it again one day. But the effects from person to person can be quite different. I happen to be among those that become quite lazy when I indulge. I made up my mind that I don't have time for that right now. I'm around people that smoke it all the time, and it's no harder for me to not partake than it is when I'm around people who drink. Any one of those people would gladly get me high. Hell... my sales-man buddy has made it a personal mission of his to try to get me to try the new store-bought stuff and feels that I'm one of the most challenging marks he's ever had at this point. He's not used to taking no for an answer.

Quote:

---

Also, the strains now are so strong, they really pack a wallop. It's like coca- chew some leaves and you get a bit of a buzz, like a couple cups of espresso. Concentrate it, add base (to make it volatile) and inhale it, and it takes some people to such a high they spend the rest of their lifetime trying to get back to that place.

---

Yeah... I think I'd probably just be using the black market weaker stuff. That's still everywhere, despite the legality of it now. The taxes are far too high to ever eliminate the black market.

The last 10 or so years I smoked, I only used a hitter bat, which is a very small amount. And I'd only do it after I got home from work or on weekends.

My days of ripping 6 foot glass bongs are very, very far behind me.



--------------------------------------------------

Vaccinated People: "You need to get muh vaccination shots that don't work because I got muh vaccination shots that don't work and I'm afraid of people that didn't get muh vaccination shots that don't work because muh vaccination shots that don't work don't work."

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Can you name some examples of what governments do, with long-term societal benefit ...

---

Quote:

---

Also, there were some governments that actually relinquished power peacefully. The Soviet Union, for example. Britain also gave up parts of its empire without revolution. So I wouldn't say that power "always" becomes so entrenched that it doesn't dissolve itself. Historically, societies and movements have.

---

Quote:

---

How do you define "better"?

---

Quote:

---

KIKI: Your mileage may vary

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So, I guess this would be the time to discuss WHAT we expect of government ... and society!

What about you, SIX? I left a couple of questions for you bc I didn't understand your post, and would really like to know what you think.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

SECOND? You have a lot of criticisms which [might] mean that you also have a picture of your ideal government policies (or, at least, your "better" government policies).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
Signym, you might have noticed that I don't think in generalizations and abstractions.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND:
Signym, you might have noticed that I don't think in generalizations and abstractions.

---

It says while cheer leading a spending bill in which it could not actually tell you more than 2% of what is in said spending bill.


The problem with Democracy is that two idiots can out vote a genius.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNYM:

SECOND? You have a lot of criticisms which [might] mean that you also have a picture of your ideal government policies (or, at least, your "better" government policies).

SECOND: Signym, you might have noticed that I don't think in generalizations and abstractions. Here is a very specific example, but there are a million things only the Federal government can do, but does not because too many Americans and Congressmen think in abstractions blinding themselves to the million things an engineer sees:

Ike Dike. It would protect property around Galveston Bay. It is an enlargement of the Galveston Seawall, which could only been built with Federal money, BUT CONGRESS WAITED UNTIL AFTER 7.000 DROWNED IN THE 1900 HURRICANE. America tends to wait too long to react to all problems, large or small or specific to one area. But if it doesn't react immediately, America forgets until a new disaster reminds Congress/America for a week or two what it had forgotten.
https://www.google.com/search?q=ike+dike+congress

---

Quote:

---

SIGNYM:
So, I guess this would be the time to discuss WHAT we expect of government ... and society!
What about you, SIX? I left a couple of questions for you bc I didn't understand your post, and would really like to know what you think.

SIX: Oh honey... I'm blackedpilled at this point. There are too many holes in this sinking ship to ever fix it now.

---

Quote:

---

SIX: But sure... I'll answer your questions.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: Can you explain "in a society where it is necessary to flourish"? There are a LOT of societies where it's necessary to work like a dog to stay alive, but these societies are usually the product of greed, corruption, and extreme division of wealth and power. I'm pretty sure that's not what you mean.
Can you give me some examples of societies where it is "necessary" to flourish?

SIX: I didn't mean in one PARTICULAR society where being more or less good is necessary to flourish. I meant in ANY society, unless of course you are successfully part of the greed, corruption and on the right side of the extreme division of wealth and power, it benefits you to be more or less "good" if you have any desire to flourish. Being good doesn't mean that you will flourish in a society, but unless you're very good at being bad, it's basically a prerequisite and it behooves you to have friendlies about.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: Also, there were some governments that actually relinquished power peacefully. The Soviet Union, for example. Britain also gave up parts of its empire without revolution. So I wouldn't say that power "always" becomes so entrenched that it doesn't dissolve itself. Historically, societies and movements have.

SIX: I doubt very much that any of that was relinquished freely and of their own will. That only happens under duress. Let's just say that if America wasn't around at the time, neither of those examples would have happened.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: But I agree with you that power generally behaves "gravitationally": the more you have, the more you can get.

SIX: Don't forget the gravitational pull of this power over the worst individuals of a society. The greedy. The ambitious. The sociopaths.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: When we say "Make America Great Again" I suppose we should probably figure out what it is that we mean by "great".

SIX: At this point, I'd settle for "Not Terrible and No Longer On A Downward Trajectory", but we can't even do that.

---

Quote:

---

SIX: There is no hope for this version of America. And after we fall, the rest of the "free" world falls with us.
Maybe we get it right next time. History would predict otherwise.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

SIGNYM:
So, I guess this would be the time to discuss WHAT we expect of government ... and society!
What about you, SIX? I left a couple of questions for you bc I didn't understand your post, and would really like to know what you think.

SIX: Oh honey... I'm blackedpilled at this point. There are too many holes in this sinking ship to ever fix it now.

---

Well, this is just for discussion. We are, at best, ants in the steerage compartment of the Titanic.

---

Yup. The best thing about nobody giving a shit about your opinion is that nobody gives a shit about your opinion.

Quote:

---

SIX: But sure... I'll answer your questions.

---

THANKS!

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: Can you explain "in a society where it is necessary to flourish"? There are a LOT of societies where it's necessary to work like a dog to stay alive, but these societies are usually the product of greed, corruption, and extreme division of wealth and power. I'm pretty sure that's not what you mean.
Can you give me some examples of societies where it is "necessary" to flourish?

SIX: I didn't mean in one PARTICULAR society where being more or less good is necessary to flourish. I meant in ANY society, unless of course you are successfully part of the greed, corruption and on the right side of the extreme division of wealth and power, it benefits you to be more or less "good" if you have any desire to flourish. Being good doesn't mean that you will flourish in a society, but unless you're very good at being bad, it's basically a prerequisite and it behooves you to have friendlies about.

---

So, if I were to restate this as: setting up an environment [society, ethics] where you must be good to flourish... is that about right?

---

That's probably too far simplified.

I mean, sure... Great. Let's reward people who work for it and make it a meritocracy... But you know that's never going to happen.

I think one of the biggest problems we have is that our "societies" have become too large. With smaller, more intimate "societies", there aren't any need for hard-coded rules and alphabet agencies enforcing them. If you're a piece of shit to everyone and you haven't already consolidated a huge chunk of power, you're outcast from the society and the problem takes care of itself.

Things are really just too big now.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: Also, there were some governments that actually relinquished power peacefully. The Soviet Union, for example. Britain also gave up parts of its empire without revolution. So I wouldn't say that power "always" becomes so entrenched that it doesn't dissolve itself. Historically, societies and movements have.

SIX: I doubt very much that any of that was relinquished freely and of their own will. That only happens under duress. Let's just say that if America wasn't around at the time, neither of those examples would have happened.

---

Well, Britain gave up Canada and Australia without a fight, USA not involved. But I understand about the USSR.

---

I think you're severely discounting the mere existence and power of America at the time those things happened. If there weren't larger powers around that would frown upon those decisions by fellow "free" countries AND they felt that they really needed those empires, the only way that they would have ever become free is with a fight.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: But I agree with you that power generally behaves "gravitationally": the more you have, the more you can get.

SIX: Don't forget the gravitational pull of this power over the worst individuals of a society. The greedy. The ambitious. The sociopaths.

---

I think we're saying the same thing, but I see it more mechanistically: Power doesn't automatically concentrate, like matter accumulates automatically thnaks to gravity. It is purposefully concentrated by the greedy, ambitious, and sociopathic. But once they HAVE some power in their hands, they use that power to gather more power. Exponential growth is possible.

Altho at some point it becomes self-feeding, because once the greedy, ambitious, and sociopathic start warping the rules that govern society, it just gets bigger and bigger as more people are swept up into it and depend on it.

---

I think a lot of happy accidents occur along the way. With humans being humans, nobody ever created this grand plan that brought us to where we are today. It only works because it's NOT rigid, and because the people on the tippy top making the decisions are versatile and quickly adaptable to new and unexpected situations that pop up every day.

It sounds pretty mind-boggling to consider that in a game of chess after both players have made 4 moves there are already 288 Billion + possible positions, but that's not really true since a great deal of those moves would never be made by somebody who knows how to play the game.

But now take a world where you've got 7.5 Billion pawns instead of only 16 pawns and 32 total pieces. Designing a great plan that was absolutely rigid would fail before it even began.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: When we say "Make America Great Again" I suppose we should probably figure out what it is that we mean by "great".

SIX: At this point, I'd settle for "Not Terrible and No Longer On A Downward Trajectory", but we can't even do that.

---

HA! TOO TRUE!

Quote:

---

SIX: There is no hope for this version of America. And after we fall, the rest of the "free" world falls with us.
Maybe we get it right next time. History would predict otherwise.

---

"Free" as in western civilization?

Just curious.

---

---

Yes. As in any truly free place today, and those who like to pretend that their people are free.

China, Russia, the Middle East, etc...

The only reason that they even behave as well as they do right now (which leaves a lot to be desired already) is because of nukes and because of the size and might of the American army.

If America were to crumble it would be what happened to Afghanistan EVERYWHERE overnight.

Even worse... If America were to throw out the Constitution and become the enemy of freedom itself, it would have the most powerful war machine mankind has ever made at it's disposal to eliminate freedom.

And let's face it... that has arguably already happened and we're just pretending like it hasn't because most of us have it just good enough where the cake and circus surrounding us is welcome distractions we all consume because even thinking about doing the alternative is not pleasant.

--------------------------------------------------

Vaccinated People: "You need to get muh vaccination shots that don't work because I got muh vaccination shots that don't work and I'm afraid of people that didn't get muh vaccination shots that don't work because muh vaccination shots that don't work don't work."

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So let ME start out by saying, when I say "Make America Great Again" I'm not really aspiring to greatness. What I really mean to say is

Make America Sovereign and Resilient Again.

Put the American nation on the path to survival, not self destruction.

Make America economically independent again: Able to survive mostly on its own production, and to trade fairly for things that it can't produce, instead of depending on debt and the reserve currency status.

Make America able to survive in the long run (for the next 200 years at least)

Make America independent of foreign entanglements, again.

Make America less corrupt, again.

******

What this boils down to, mostly, is about our individual physical and long-term social welfare. I could say "the greatest good for the greatest number, including those living in the future", but - what do I mean by "good"? If I were religious, it might mean "make people worthy of heaven" or "make us worthy of being reincarnated into the whole" or "make us the ideal socialist beings", but my ideas of "good" are more earthbound.

For me, that means fulfilling what humans have sought since humans started evolving:
Food and water, safety, good health, acceptance, agency, purpose, long-term predictability.

So my goals don't revolve around "freedom" altho freedom (individual agency) is part of the equation.

Any of this ringing any bells with anyone, or is it all gobbledygook?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SIX: To be perfectly cynical ... IF we toss out the Constitution?

I think we've tossed out more than half already.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So let ME start out by saying, when I say "Make America Great Again" I'm not really aspiring to greatness. What I really mean to say is

Make America Sovereign and Resilient Again.

Put the American nation on the path to survival, not self destruction.

Make America economically independent again: Able to survive mostly on its own production, and to trade fairly for things that it can't produce, instead of depending on debt and the reserve currency status.

Make America able to survive in the long run (for the next 200 years at least)

Make America independent of foreign entanglements, again.

Make America less corrupt, again.

******

What this boils down to, mostly, is about our individual physical and long-term social welfare. I could say "the greatest good for the greatest number, including those living in the future", but - what do I mean by "good"? If I were religious, it might mean "make people worthy of heaven" or "make us worthy of being reincarnated into the whole" or "make us the ideal socialist beings", but my ideas of "good" are more earthbound.

For me, that means fulfilling what humans have sought since humans started evolving:
Food and water, safety, good health, acceptance, agency, purpose, long-term predictability.

So my goals don't revolve around "freedom" altho freedom (individual agency) is part of the equation.

Any of this ringing any bells with anyone, or is it all gobbledygook?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

---

Just to specifically address 'agency' and 'purpose' for the moment (and btw this is a synthesis of the ideas and observations others). As animals, we'd love to lie around all day being fed high-reward foods and indulging in endless sex (for those with a high sex-drive), and perversions (for those who find them rewarding) and drugs - think of a non-stop Roman orgy. In other words, we'd like 100% reward for 0% effort.

But when we treat animals that way in a zoo - protect them from danger, and feed them with no effort required - they become for want of a better word neurotic. They groom to the point of taking their skin off, or masturbate ceaselessly, or eat or throw poop or both, or act inordinately dominantly and aggressively, or lie around listlessly ... and so on.

When animals are allowed to roam to graze, or their food is challenging to find (partly hidden), or they're given opportunities to play, neurotic behaviors go away.

So reward with lack of challenge, while desired, isn't healthy for animals. As animals, we need challenges in our lives to exercise our minds, sharpen our motivations, and give us a sense or reward. And if depression is a sense of helplessness, one way to be depressed is endless struggle with no end in sight. Another way to be depressed is to be in a state of enforced helplessness with nothing to do.

As for 'purpose', if you talk with 'primitive' (non-monetary) peoples, their sense of reward is their children. Once you get past a certain age, you know that you'll die. So getting up and doing the same things over and over again till you die becomes unrewarding. People want to survive, but it's not a source of consistent reward. When they look for reward, they look to a purpose of healthy children and grandchildren.


So agency and purpose - both of which are tied to challenges, effort, success, and the future - are important to people for their mental well-being.

---

Quote:

---

And if depression is a sense of helplessness, one way to be depressed is endless struggle with no end in sight. Another way to be depressed is to be in a state of enforced helplessness with nothing to do.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

To address human needs again (and again, this is a compilation of many ideas and observations of others) - as adults people don't forward species survival as isolated creatures, like tigers or bears. And the reason is this: To get rid of a misunderstanding that it's all about how males must be the 'fittest' - as the saying goes, sterility beats virility. And to get rid of a misunderstanding that it's all about how many children a male can breed - if those children don't survive to adulthood, there goes all his genetics. To survive as a species, enough children have to survive to be old enough to have their own children, and for those children to have children, and so on.

And females burdened with children are likely not going to survive on their own and neither will their children, especially if they're in competition with males for resources. Human survival is structured in such a way that male and female adults and children need to live together in groups at least somewhat cooperatively.

And when they do that, there needs to be standards of behavior in place that will routinely lead to enough children surviving over the indefinite future to carry the species forward.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So let ME start out by saying, when I say "Make America Great Again" I'm not really aspiring to greatness. What I really mean to say is

Make America Sovereign and Resilient Again.

Put the American nation on the path to survival, not self destruction.

Make America economically independent again: Able to survive mostly on its own production, and to trade fairly for things that it can't produce, instead of depending on debt and the reserve currency status.

Make America able to survive in the long run (for the next 200 years at least)

Make America independent of foreign entanglements, again.

Make America less corrupt, again.

******

What this boils down to, mostly, is about our individual physical and long-term social welfare. I could say "the greatest good for the greatest number, including those living in the future", but - what do I mean by "good"? If I were religious, it might mean "make people worthy of heaven" or "make us worthy of being reincarnated into the whole" or "make us the ideal socialist beings", but my ideas of "good" are more earthbound.

For me, that means fulfilling what humans have sought since humans started evolving:
Food and water, safety, good health, acceptance, agency, purpose, long-term predictability.

So my goals don't revolve around "freedom" altho freedom (individual agency) is part of the equation.

Any of this ringing any bells with anyone, or is it all gobbledygook

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So let ME start out by saying, when I say "Make America Great Again" I'm not really aspiring to greatness. What I really mean to say is

Make America Sovereign and Resilient Again.

Put the American nation on the path to survival, not self destruction.

Make America economically independent again: Able to survive mostly on its own production, and to trade fairly for things that it can't produce, instead of depending on debt and the reserve currency status.

Make America able to survive in the long run (for the next 200 years at least)

Make America independent of foreign entanglements, again.

Make America less corrupt, again.

******

What this boils down to, mostly, is about our individual physical and long-term social welfare. I could say "the greatest good for the greatest number, including those living in the future", but - what do I mean by "good"? If I were religious, it might mean "make people worthy of heaven" or "make us worthy of being reincarnated into the whole" or "make us the ideal socialist beings", but my ideas of "good" are more earthbound.

For me, that means fulfilling what humans have sought since humans started evolving:
Food and water, safety, good health, acceptance, agency, purpose, long-term predictability.

So my goals don't revolve around "freedom" altho freedom (individual agency) is part of the equation.

Any of this ringing any bells with anyone, or is it all gobbledygook?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

---

Just to specifically address 'agency' and 'purpose' for the moment (and btw this is a synthesis of the ideas and observations others). As animals, we'd love to lie around all day being fed high-reward foods and indulging in endless sex (for those with a high sex-drive), and perversions (for those who find them rewarding) and drugs - think of a non-stop Roman orgy. In other words, we'd like 100% reward for 0% effort.

But when we treat animals that way in a zoo - protect them from danger, and feed them with no effort required - they become for want of a better word neurotic. They groom to the point of taking their skin off, or masturbate ceaselessly, or eat or throw poop or both, or act inordinately dominantly and aggressively, or lie around listlessly ... and so on.

When animals are allowed to roam to graze, or their food is challenging to find (partly hidden), or they're given opportunities to play, neurotic behaviors go away.

So reward with lack of challenge, while desired, isn't healthy for animals. As animals, we need challenges in our lives to exercise our minds, sharpen our motivations, and give us a sense or reward. And if depression is a sense of helplessness, one way to be depressed is endless struggle with no end in sight. Another way to be depressed is to be in a state of enforced helplessness with nothing to do.

As for 'purpose', if you talk with 'primitive' (non-monetary) peoples, their sense of reward is their children. Once you get past a certain age, you know that you'll die. So getting up and doing the same things over and over again till you die becomes unrewarding. People want to survive, but it's not a source of consistent reward. When they look for reward, they look to a purpose of healthy children and grandchildren.


So agency and purpose - both of which are tied to challenges, effort, success, and the future - are important to people for their mental well-being.

---

Quote:

---

And if depression is a sense of helplessness, one way to be depressed is endless struggle with no end in sight. Another way to be depressed is to be in a state of enforced helplessness with nothing to do.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

6IXSTRINGJACK:
lol
Your 1930's cartoonish view of weed smokers is hilarious.
You're the dick at the family parties that everybody else hides the weed from.
My god, you'd end up having to cut off more than half your family if you ever knew the truth.

JSF: The really cartoonish view of potheads is recognizing that they all get really, really defensive and offended in their denial, whenever reasonable folk point out any facts regarding their abused substance of choice.
Oh, wait......

---

JSF, how do you feel about coffee-drinkers getting defensive about their coffee habits? Or tobacco smokers getting defensive about smoking? Or soda-guzzlers getting defensive about sugar? Same category as pot smokers, or different?

Yanno, people have been drinking coffee and tea, smoking tobacco, drinking alcohol, chewing coca leaves, eating magic mushrooms, chewing betel, smoking hash and opium, starving or steaming themselves into hallucinations, drinking yohimbe, ingesting mescaline, chewing salvia divinorum, and in general messing with their brain chemistry for.... millenia.

Where do you draw the line between the commonplace (such as coffee) and the problematic (such as oxycodone), and why?

---