Goldbug thoughts going more main stream? http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/blogs...-with-the-next-depression-20120521-1z19q.html
Nit to mention that kids now live protected lives in their enclosed back yards and are ferried back and forth to their security guarded schools in mum's SUV. We are indeed heading into some kind of evolutionary dead-end with so many people not even able to change a light globe themselves, let alone a tyre.
How will we cope? Why didn't anyone warn us this would happen? How could we be lead to such a horrible end? WHO IS JOHN GALT? At some point, some 'revolutionary' will lead the way and the masses will flock to it... like it's a new paradigm? Around and around we go...
That's a great picture! I was just reading this article in the age and was scanning the comments. There were some interesting ones, but I think this one is my favourite of the ones I saw.
"Idle schemes and speculations yield poverty and ruin" Very nice. Shame that picture didn't elaborate on the fact that it is the honest and moral that are the ones brought to ruin. The problem is this...we all know that there is a problem, a great problem. But when I hear about possible solutions, they are quite frankly lacking in imagination and courage. "Reduce debt" or "bring competitiveness back to the market" or "punish the bankers". What a joke. The fact is that everybody is too scared to face the real truth. They continue to skirt around the edges and deny the magnitude of the problem and the drastic measures required to fix it. And that drastic measure is this - we need to take the capitalists out of capitalism and replace them with entrepreneurs that have a wider criteria for success than profit.
I agree 100% jonesy . A lot talk the talk but fall over when they try to walk the walk . Ive watched it for years slowly getting worse to a point where most dont want to get dirty or use their body only wanting to exercise their brain . Good for them if they can make it doing that but the sad fact is most wont.
I bet you and I were building billy carts at the same time. We used to think that kids that were brought to school by their parents were weird, normal kids jumped on the 388 bus from Bondi to get to school.
Get boys into boxing and contact or motor sports and they will get some real education on winning and loosing. Keep them away from Westfield Shopping Centres and hairdressers.....I truely believe that parents who don't send their boy to a barber only are indulging in child abuse. Not sure about the girls as we were never blessed with a daughter.
Bus ? that would have been luxury !!! i had to walk . @ 46 i cant remember ever getting a lift to or from school i walked both ways every day of my school life & only remember a couple of times getting a lift to footy training i used to jog there & jog home . The only jogging most people do these days is their memory. Im starting to sound old ....really old
lol i know what you mean . I remember saying to one randy young punk that i would do to him whatever he done to my girl ... :lol: Well i didnt see him sniffing around again
Dude..the first time I watched our son shave was awesome. It was one of those small though important events. It was up there with the first time I had to give him money for condoms and the first time I had to tell him it was not cool to steal Vodka from your parents for a party.
I feel sorry for the kids, all they've known is a false reality of bullsh!t. Video games, damaging cartoons and sugar. They'll be to pudgy, sick, brainwashed and poisend too fight tyranny I fear.
I note this image was drawn before the creation of the Federal reserve bank. Nowdays you pretty much have to speculate (whether on PMs or on the stock market) to get ahead due to the 10% a year inflation tax.
I'm 9999 sure you are right. I have have seen auspm refer to Atlas shrugged in several posts, his avatar is from the book's cover. Hope this helps.
Okay, bear with me here. This will be a fairly long explanation (even by my standards!) Currier and Ives have nothing to do with Ayn Rand. Two different eras. Ayn's philosophy came years later, based (loosely) on the ideology of Aristotle. Currier and Ives were famous in their day for portraying imagery related to the ills of the age, which are ironically the same as today (barring the specific technological advances) Essentially they were making political and social statements through art, which often occurs during these times in the cycle. ie This is probably one of their best known works and again, we can see how it relates to the world around us today. If we wanted to parallel the imagery and idealism in today's environment, you'd probably look at works like this : The (in)famous 'Burning CHASE' building by Alex Schaefer who was recently interviewed by Max Keiser : [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2havcDPMbA[/youtube] The point I'm trying to make is that the nature of all things concerning human interaction are cyclic in nature. As stackers, we understand the concept perfectly, logically and rationally in wealth cycles. The charts and historic data provide proof that's easy to follow and making the connection to a cycle seems really obvious. We lament regularly how blind the MSM and collective are in not recognising these cycles, but I stand on the principle that this extends beyond the simple economic and wealth related activities in society, but the social, ideological and political as well. The nature of human interaction is tied together and much of the same suffering we see today has been repeated over and over again through history, with the same devastating and painful results. We like to assume that 'it's different this time' but only see the technology of the age as the defining factor. That is, we think because we've 'advanced' technologically, this also redefines everything else that goes with it so it becomes something we've never seen before. I say that's rubbish and diversionary. The exact same ideology that exists in the world today - destroying it - is the exact same ideology that has come up again and again and again through history. It's just that because human society only has a collective memory of a couple generations at best, we lose that which we have learned as 'invaluable' lessons of the past either through arrogance or ignorance. I mock the ideal not only because it's wrong, but because it's completely unnecessary and causes so much suffering in the world where we can put efforts to better use. In other words, it's a waste and I positively hate to see paradise lost, paved over for the sake of a parking lot (to pinch a well coined phrase). Now this is where there's a diversion of sorts between what we assume as the ideal in a society that also encompasses religion and socialism. Whilst I can quite effectively debate logically and rationally the fallacy and misdirection of the modern times, my mindset deviates from what the mainstream ethics and values are more in line with the alternative idealism under Aristotle. So much of what I lament today can be reconsidered perfectly fine in the 'modern' ideals with religion and socialism at the core - but I personally don't think it goes far enough to really make a change to the system. Reason for that is because even when we go through these cycles and reach the stage of 'enlightenment', we STILL inevitably go back to repeating the same mistakes all over again because whilst the ideological core of our foundation is based on sound ideals, there always remains the 'malignant growth' on that core which will undoubtedly raise it's ugly head again. What I speak of is the ideals of control with religion and collectivism. As an Objectivist, I not only object to the moral standing of the current age in terms of how far it's removed from the core/fundamental ideology that it always said was the 'best' way - but I also object to some of the components on that fundamental level that I believe also undermine the basic framework for a standard of living that's SUSTAINABLE. I'm rambling a bit, but I need to make this point clear so we understand it. Even IF we have a sudden 'awakening' in society today and we make that massive paradigm shift back to that fundamental standard in the Currier and Ives 'idealistic' ladder above, there STILL will be a few root causes for the same problems to develop (as they did today) to repeat this process all over again. So I am throwing down this ideal from those thinkers of old as the most likely retrace our society will head back to post collapse, but also that like a healthy person who's had a bunch of tumors removed and is now in remission, the same problems will reoccur over the long term UNLESS you attack those niggling ailments which seem to be trivial at the start, but eventually grow to create the same problems once more. Without getting TOO much further into it, let's just say that Objectivism goes RIGHT back to the core of idealism (even beyond the ladder of fortune above) and cuts away ALL of those tumors to create a fundamental ideology that (IMHO) trumps even that. Now, as a post script comment to the above, the phrase 'who is John Galt' is used in the Book 'Atlas Shrugged' as a phrase by the many to surmise a situation for which there is no logical answer. How high is the sky? How deep is the ocean? WHO IS JOHN GALT? You get the idea. So when I mock the baseline ideology of today where the system IS falling apart and people are looking for answers, I'm caustic in my response because the 'answers' were there all along - but were always mocked and even outright denounced. So in my view, they're asking what I deem rather stupid questions about the situation where they don't even WANT to know the answers is laughably ironic... hence, Who is John Galt? Make more sense now? Now people (even around here) like to piss on Ayn anytime I mention or relate to her work. I make no apology for the fact I love the woman for her ideology and the impact it's had on my life in as much as the earlier works by Aristotle did so as well. Before I touched their works, I couldn't make the cognitive connection between what was wrong with the world today and the reasons why it was so, but after being involved with Ayn & Aristotle's work, it crystalised so perfectly it was like being given the red pill in 'waking up'. I'm not joking. Once I absorbed it and really understood it, the rest of the world was like a light switch. It just made complete *sense* after I looked at it from that paradigm and what's more, it made me angry the world is what it is - for the reasons that it is. Ironically, the collective can look at a speech by Robert Welch like this one : [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZU0c8DAIU4[/youtube] And clearly see how he was very 'smart' in seeing future events. He really was bang on with this speech as well, but as usual, it was lost in the white noise of the modern times. But when Ayn did a very similar thing herself : [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeJuySjCL5g[/youtube] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIIrVBCWYX0[/youtube] She is lambasted in as much as anyone who supports the same thinking. There's a stigma associated with Objectivism because of one simple, defining difference - Objectivism didn't try and 'fit in' with what the establishment was comfortable with (especially concerning the collective and religion). It outright denounced it and pointed to it as part of the problem and oh boy, don't we all know how well the collective responds when someone says your religious beliefs are a problem! WARS start over crap like that, even today! Apart from the general hypocracy on what our society deems 'moral' on the back of a socialist driven bandwagon, it's ironic (again) that the same people who want to cry out what's WRONG with the world are the same people who aggressively lambast anyone who wants to tell them the truth. And hence... we get to the CORE of our problem... The collective doesn't WANT to know the truth. Because with truth comes responsibility for yourself. Responsibility for your mind, responsibility for your actions and in almost every facet of this sick, dying world we live in - the opposite is the prevailing paradigm of the day. And so, those philosophers and 'truth tellers' who have literally shrugged off the burden of learned doctrine and instilled dogma continue to be not the beacons of logic and rationale to wade these murky waters of the modern age, but are continually cast out and ostracized as 'evil' I don't believe this will change 'just because' - it will change when the collective is FORCED to question their foundations, usually after the fact. That's the 'enlightenment' stage of the cycle and we are still a long ways off that part today, especially concerning the collective and hence, why I have such a mocking and caustic sarcasm to those who demand the truth, but spit in your face when you offer it. Hence, when people ask those questions I can either be honest and be lambasted for it, or I can just smile and say 'who's John Galt?' I choose the latter. Who is John Galt?
