Tuesday, March 20, 2018
Friday, March 16, 2018
It is a symptom of the collective schizophrenia in the world today that marijuana is perceived as a crime that must be answered with deadly force. China, Singapore and Malaysia, among other barbaric outposts, are known to execute those that traffic in large quantities of marijuana. For this reason, among others, an alien intelligence evaluating H. Sapiens would be wise to conclude that our species is not worthy of rescue, of enlightenment and education; that we should be left to our own devices, which means, to self-destruct in our own toxins and nuclear weapons. Rather than continue to contact us, they withdraw, leaving no trace.
Friday, February 16, 2018
If there are some who want to pay to keep a murderer alive, then they should donate the cash, after compensating the victims' families a million dollars per life, and compensating the state for all legal costs, police overtime, etc. Perhaps some of these people that want to keep the insane murderers alive can sell their homes, cars, clothes, kidneys, fingers, eye-balls etc. to raise money. It is not the responsibility of the taxpayer to keep an insane murderer alive for the next hundred years. It is a violation of my rights as a human being to compel me to finance a murderer's food, shelter, and so on. The amount I am willing to pay for that sort of thing is zero.
Sunday, December 24, 2017
Guns are about as good as we've got at this stage, but they are brutal, klunky weapons, and we have to be willing to accept that accidents will happen--often. Police require the ability to exercise deadly force simply because deadly force is widely distributed amongst our criminal class. If our criminals were not armed with deadly weapons, then yes, the police could be kinder, gentler, and have fewer accidents. But that's not the case. We have to get used to reality. The reality is that yes, the police will off innocent folk by mistake from time to time, because it comes with the job, and there is always going to be a certain percentage of accidents and misjudgements, both due to the human factor and due to the fog of war. People casting blame blindly upon police do not grasp the challenges that the police are up against in today's heavily armed society.
Friday, December 22, 2017
Thursday, November 16, 2017
Wednesday, October 4, 2017
Tuesday, September 26, 2017
I don't recall consenting to give Equifax all my information. They invaded my privacy and then gave my information away to criminals.
Personally, if I have to go through identity theft hell at some point down the line, then it seems only right that Equifax people have to suffer, too, because that's not my cross, it's theirs. The amount of time I am willing to spend cleaning up Equifax's mess is zero. I will not lift a finger to resolve any kind of identity theft problem. Equifax makes me whole. There is no other way. If my dinner gets taken away by identity theft, then they feed me. My life is not about cleaning up after Equifax; otherwise it is no life. But if millions of people suffer identity theft, then our entire financial system is called into question.
The proper response, which would have already been taken by a benevolent dictator, is to make credit card applications much, much more difficult. Credit card, loan, or any kind of financial account application must be done in person and require a DNA sample, retina scan, or something else that is very individualized and extremely difficult to fake. That is the simple, elegant, permanent solution, not just to Equifax, but to all the other scandals that have hit our sorry, stupid, negligent and corrupt business community, driven by greed and completely unconcerned about the country.
However, none of the above is going to happen, because the Republican Congress is just as stupid as the business community. Maybe more so.
Congress has proven again and again it is incapable of acting, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that action is justified. Marijuana was proven non-toxic and harmless way back in the early 1970s, during the Nixon administration, and due to stupidity, Congress never did anything about the laws that equate pot with heroin.
So, is social collapse on the horizon? No, because the American people have a high tolerance for pain and suffering, a limited memory, and are easily distracted by social issues like bathrooms, prayer and abortion. What will happen is that millions of "nobodies" like myself will go through identity theft hell, and nothing will be done, and there will be a lot of hand-wringing but ultimately no changes, and the cycle will continue with more scandals, more data-leaks in the future, and future generations will deal with the problem as well. Because stupid rules the land.
In the end, the only hope for H. Sapiens is that genetic engineering creates a smarter species, capable of seeing through obvious lies and falsehoods. Then the electorate might become capable of electing good people into public office. Such a species might demand more accountability from the corporations that control so much of our lives. But today's people? They just roll over and take it, again and again. They focus on what's important, like Hillary Clinton's email server, or Anthony Weiner's weiner.
Saturday, September 23, 2017
I don't think the Brits know what time of day it is, if they are letting in asylum seekers from barbarian territories that follow the cult of death. Anyway, why do asylum seekers need to come to the developed, rich West? Britain is a crowded island as it is. Is Africa so bad? Send them over to the Sudan, Kenya, or Zimbabwe, and let the folks over there deal with 'em. Definitely I would vote Conservative in every British election if the Conservatives are the only ones that have common sense on this particular issue. The Labour Party needs to sit down with the bombs and think about those nails, knives and screwdrivers penetrating their eyeballs. I think then they could "see" the simple truth, that granting asylum to every Tom, Dick, and Harry is stupid and wrong, and a poor use of taxpayer money. Those people can go over to Africa and live there. There is surely some African nation that will take them, or they can just slip off into the jungle and live off the land. Beggars can't be choosers. I can't even immigrate to England, so why should some 18 year-old Iraqi who doesn't know anything except how to kneel before the demon-pig?
Hopefully, the educational system over in England will improve to the point where politicians can trace the obvious line between letting terrorists into the country, and people getting blown up in bombs. Hopefully, they will learn that letting in terrorists in not such a great idea, and that includes all the Muslims, who are always going to feel alienated from Western culture and will always hate the West and are really just ticking time-bombs, destined to kill Westerners at some point in time now or later. To accelerate the learning process, politicians that don't get it should be voted out of office.
Wednesday, September 20, 2017
I think applying for credit cards should be far more difficult and involve DNA matching, in-person. Only one credit card per person is really needed. Anymore is nonsense. The more complicated finances are, the more opportunity for abuse, fraud and negligence. A lot of credit card companies and banks are worthless, including Equifax. I think Equifax betrayed the country. Is the Equifax betrayal worse than what Chelsea Manning did? Apples to oranges, but I think so. The executives at Equifax basically said, who cares about the American consumer. We can save a little bit of cash by skimping on security, so let's do it. Meanwhile, they played golf. They should have treated the confidentiality of our personal information like they were transporting gold bricks, but they acted like it was used rubber tires.
But I am a voice in the wilderness. Apparently, tons of people apply for credit cards online daily, and many people have multiple credit cards. No one will listen to me, and every day, the list of identity theft victims grows. But I bet you one thing. I bet you the identity theft victims agree with me.
Monday, September 18, 2017
The only thing an executive knows how to do is fire Americans and send the jobs over China for less pay. Steve Jobs, often held up as a shining example of a corporate executive, hated America with every fiber of his being, and that is why he told Obama "Hell, no!" when the President asked him to think about his country for one moment, think about American workers. Steve Jobs had the most ironic name in history, although Steve Traitor would have been more accurate. When I look at an Iphone and see "Made in China," I think of him, and think what a traitor he was. He sent all those factories to China, those factories that can be easily converted to produce military hardware.
My opinion is, we need fire executives like that and put people at the top that are actually capable of leading companies, instead of spending all day playing golf. Looks like Equifax did indeed fire their security officer and chief technology officer, although they sure did take their time coming to a rather obvious conclusion. Equifax owes the U.S. taxpayer a couple trillion dollars for negligence. Really, there is no need for a company like that, if it is going to give all our data to criminals. Equifax should be investigated for criminal negligence, let alone the civil lawsuits.
Saturday, September 16, 2017
In the U.S., there is a certain element of blacks that make a living out of racism complaints. They feel like any sin can be excused based on the color of their skin. They are not without sin themselves. In reality, they are the racists. Every white person they see, they call racist. I have seen more black racists in my day than white racists, and I have encountered racism from blacks more often than I've seen black people on the receiving end. The only time I see blacks on the receiving end is in Hollywood movies.
The way to end racism is simple. Act decent, obey the law, work for a living. Any other proposal just smacks of reverse racism. There are plenty of black police, and local departments are eager to hire. Want to improve the police? Join them! They are looking for a few good men and women. Color of skin, unimportant.
One of the biggest problems of law enforcement today is that people take drugs or drink and then get behind the wheel of a large automobile. Where politics has failed, technology will succeed, and self-driving cars are the ultimate answer to the problems besetting law enforcement. If there are no drivers, then there is no need for quite so many police, and no need for chases. Every vehicle can have a "kill switch" installed if the vehicle ever becomes a problem. Whether stupid people drink or not, their cars can get them to where they are going. The police will then be confined to foot patrol, investigators and S.W.A.T. teams, resulting in a reduction of their manpower and significant savings to the taxpayer.
At any rate, there will be no jobs in the future, because robots are going to do just about everything, including driving. In a low-employment future, where so many of our current professions have become fully automated by robots, people will be willing to die for a job, and only the best of the best will be selected for a nice salaried job with benefits, such as a police officer. The top 1% will become police officers, while the vast majority will be unemployed, selling their organs or bodies in order to make a living.
My guess is that the vast hordes of the unemployed will become bandits, stealing and pillaging to make a living, and law enforcement will then need to be robotized. Vast armies of machines will fly about killing bandits and composting their bodies for agriculture. Mass-production of the flying killers will be necessary in order to reduce the human population by 99.99%. For the super-rich, this is all about forging a wonderful paradise for themselves and their future genetically-enhanced generations of godlike beings. After all, our ancestors did give Neanderthals short shrift. We cannot expect easier treatment, now, can we?
Friday, September 15, 2017
Thursday, September 14, 2017
Now, it's not rocket science. The other rich folk know that he makes their whole class look bad.
Just goes to show, a rich man has to act abominably, and make the other rich folk nervous, before the law comes after him. If Shkreli acted nice, played silent and listened to his lawyers--that is, if he had a lick of sense--then he'd get off, despite his alleged crimes, because money buys the law, in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred. Money buys the law, except in the case of a fool.
Friday, August 25, 2017
A poor man may steal something, or deal drugs, or both, and get twenty years, sent to a hard prison, where who knows what will happen to him, and who cares? A rich man may steal millions, and get no jail time at all, or if he does get some, it's going to be a light sentence at one of the easier jails, where at any rate he will get preferential treatment.
That's the main problem with justice in our world. It's not new. Always has been, and still is. It's the left-wingers that want to change this scenario and make justice truly blind. In other matters, such as love, ordinary life, and medicine, the rich may have all the advantages, but in matters of justice, to which human beings attach a spiritual significance, they should be equal to the poorest of the poor. Now, the right-wingers would not agree with that. They would say, to be rich is to be handed a blank check. Until the bank account is empty, the check can cover anything, including any sin. Money is equated with piety. To me, that is blasphemy. But there are even "Prosperity Gospel" Christians who believe money means Grace.
At any rate, I can't imagine such a sentence being handed down in an American courtroom. The rich here get off. No matter what the crime is, they get off, except if the crime is against other rich people. If there are rich victims, you know, rich people matter, so an exception is made, as in the case of Maddoff, who sinned against his own kind.
Even O.J. Simpson got off a murder charge, because he was rich. Color of skin did not matter one iota. I don't think black Americans understood that race was not a factor in that case. They rooted for O.J. and seemed elated when he got off. I recall black coworkers cheering as if they had won something. For my part, I was not surprised. He was rich, he would get off. A poor black man would be on death row right now. Not everything is about race. Money is far more important.
Now, if most blacks were rich, then the shoe would be on the other foot. There are plenty of poor whites, and ironically, they seem to be the ones marching in these white nationalist protests. They lack all class consciousness. They fail to understand, they are viewed under the same lens as the poor blacks. All are dispensable. Racism is opposed because it disrupts productivity and profits. Most barriers in society are generated not by race, but by class. It is not the blacks that are out to get whites. That has always seemed a ludicrous proposition to me. Why some whites want to single out a minority race as a scapegoat for all their problems just seems like blind animal stupidity, like a dog biting its tail because a flea bit its behind.
Thursday, July 6, 2017
If a man kills another person, it is a bit rich that he objects to society exacting justice. Scared of death? Grow a pair, I'd say. Easy to pull that trigger--not so easy to be on the other side, eh?
If people object so much to the death penalty, one option I would support is that these folks personally pay 100% of the cost of incarcerating the killer for life, as well as the cost of reparations to all victims' families, the exact amount to be determined by the victims at their own discretion. If the victims want millions, then that's what the death penalty opponent should pay. Billions or trillions would most likely exclude any possibility for parole, although perhaps collections could be taken among all the death penalty opponents in the world. I'd like to see the first victim-trillionaire.
I also believe those opposed to abortion should pay 100% of the cost of raising those fetuses that would otherwise be aborted. They can pay for college, as well, at a four-year institution of the parents' choice. That would probably run to about a million dollars. I say cough up the money, if abortion is so bad. Get a second job moonlighting at McDonald's.
What we don't have in the world at this time is any shortage of human beings. The number being generated far outnumbers the number lost through the death penalty or through abortion, and it could be argued, the quality gained is better than that lost. If a mother seriously wants to off her offspring, if that is her final choice, then she probably was not about to give birth to a rocket scientist, a saint or a great leader. Daddy must not have been all that great, is the most likely conclusion. Never a good scenario for a kid to grow up unwanted. And there are killers a-plenty in the world, and offing a few here and there through the death penalty is not going to keep this world from turning. If a killer's death brings a small measure of solace to the victims, or relief that they won't have to attend any parole hearings, so much the better.
Thursday, December 8, 2016
Perhaps there are Angels, potent and furious, presiding over the situation now, for this crime does melt the heart of any with a heart. Such a crime as his is Satanic in every aspect. It will work, not toward racial animosity, as the depraved and doomed insect supposed, in his fevered brooding, but toward racial harmony; for no one with even an ounce of goodness would excuse such a grave and heinous crime. The Ways of the Lord are mysterious, and some do His Will by leaving this life. So will the murderer. He, too, must lay down his life for racial harmony. He must be sacrificed. That is the way to make amends and to assist in the healing of the survivors. He must not continue to new days. He must rejoin the earth.
Thursday, December 1, 2016
The one argument I could make against the death penalty is utilitarian. A murderer does possess something of value--a human body. It is not worthless. Yet the death penalty wastes it. There are organs that could be harvested, blood that could be donated, medical experimentation that could be performed. Clinical drugs could be tested. If a murderer consented to these things, then perhaps there might be value in granting temporary clemency of one or two months. However, even a murderer has absolute domain over their own body. I do not condone forced donation of organs or blood. Donations must be on a voluntary basis, or else humankind is reduced to cattle.
Wednesday, September 14, 2016
On the one hand, I feel the transgender issue in her case is exploitative, riding upon the backs of the gay political movement. Perhaps many people follow her solely because she is transgender and happens to make the headlines. She is asking a lot in terms of medical care from the institution that she betrayed. However, in the end, it makes the military look good that they are providing her with recommended medical care.
On the other hand, perhaps her 35-year sentence does seem rather excessive. However, punishment in criminal cases is mainly for deterrent value. It is not Manning that society fears, but others that might do as she did in the future. That is the real explanation for a 35-year sentence. It is not that Manning poses a huge danger to society or that people want revenge against her (although some probably do, namely her superiors who were embarrassed by the leaks). It is not Manning, but the specter of future Mannings that the powers-that-be fear. Military justice is always about setting examples. Thus, a murderer may actually get a lighter sentence than Manning. It does not seem fair, but fairness ain't in it. Combat-readiness is the priority, not fairness.
In truth, jail sentences are a blunt instrument aimed at prevention of future crimes, both from the perpetrator and future perpetrators. Human justice often seems cruel and arbitrary. It is fear that keeps many people from doing things, and draconian sentences are intended to inspire that fear. I am sure that if Manning were released, society would not be in danger, but perhaps others would be tempted to do as she did, and in that scenario, how could the military keep any secrets? A larger question is, should the military keep quite so many secrets? Secrets sometimes exist for good reasons, but they also exist to cover up evil, corruption, negligence, and incompetence. What if the military had fewer secrets? Perhaps we could rid our military of evil, corruption, negligence, and incompetence. There are many advantages to openness.
I'd be in favor of reducing Manning's sentence, to make it comparable with similar crimes, if it can be demonstrated that the leaks resulting from her actions did not result in physical injury to others. That may be a rather high bar to reach. Perhaps the absence of evidence of harm would be sufficient.