September 13, 2012




about words


Welcome to the About Words website. Below is a brief audio introduction to this site.

Did you know that one of the most popular words on the internet is God?

My Google Profile

unleashing motivation: repulsion propels attraction

August 27, 2015

eager child

Have you noticed that motivations can change over time? For instance, for a child, there may be an attraction to something familiar, like a favorite character from TV. However, the same child will inevitably switch which character is their favorite. The toddler who is excited about Barney or Blues Clues or another cartoon character will eventually prefer something more mature, like Harry Potter or Hannah Montana or even James Bond.

There are two basic forms of motivation: attraction and repulsion. The most powerful motivations will combine an attraction toward a specific outcome as well as repulsion from a specific existing condition. In other words, instead of just an interest (attraction) toward something or just an annoyance (repulsion), there will be propulsion. There will be motion, action, change, experimentation, learning, and achievement.
For the young child, they have not yet developed a capacity to independently create alliances. There is no reason for some stranger to simply make thousands of T-shirts with a popular TV character and then give the shirts away to kids. So, for the young child to get those shirts, they typically would need someone else to buy it for them.

Maybe the child receives a shirt as an uninvited gift. However, anyone who has walked through a store with a child (or as a child) may recall the tendency of children to make repeated requests for someone to get them what they want.

Did you forget which TV character is their favorite? They did not. They will remind you.

Did you notice when they no longer are interested in “baby stuff” and now they only want things for “big kids?” Again, if you forget, they will remind you, right?
Social validation can be important. When a bunch of children are crammed together in a tight area, that can be stressful for them. How do they cluster in to pairs and small groups to adapt to all the distractions?

Children of the same size tend to cluster together. However, what if they are all about the same size? Then what will they use to clump in to smaller groups that are less stressful?

Kids glance around at the other kids and see obvious things like how different people are dressed. If one child has a shirt with a popular TV character, then some other kids will recognize that and approach that child who is “obviously like them” (because they like the same thing- that TV character).
Earlier, the issue of propulsion was mentioned. How does the above example relate to propulsion? Let’s review.

If one child has a colorful shirt featuring a popular TV character and another child recognizes that character as one that they also like, when will that produce an “approach?” Notice that in some cases, the observing child will simply go right over to the other child who is wearing the shirt. In other cases, the observing child will ask the familiar adult “can I go talk to them?” Further, the observing child may simply point to the shirt (ignoring the child wearing it) and then say to an adult “I like that shirt.” Or, maybe one child will say to the other “I like your shirt,” but without physically approaching the other child to start a conversation or play.
The element of attraction is easy to consider. Obviously, the child is attracted to some shirts and ignores many other shirts. Also, if the child is on the way to do something very attractive to them, then seeing a shirt that they like will barely be noticed.

What about the element of repulsion? We have not really discussed this issue yet, but anyone who is experienced with children may recognize the following.

What happens when the child knows that they are on the way to do something that frightens them? What if “it is almost time to go” and then the child suddenly experiences “intense interest” in “just saying hello” to that one child with that one T-shirt who has been on the same playground for the last 10 minutes but now all of a sudden the child “simply must go say hello quickly?”

Have you noticed what happens after they are quick to say hello? Yes, they do say hello very quickly. However, after they say hello quickly, what about playing one “very short” game of tag “real quick?”

The more that the child dreads “the next destination” (whether that is the shoe store or Gramma’s house or the church youth group), the more important it may be for them to “just say hello real quick.” How long does it take for the child’s favorite TV character to change? They child asks you what is happening after you leave the park, then you tell them “we are going to the doctor’s office real quick for you to get some shots.” Suddenly, amazingly, at the speed of light, the child’s favorite TV character changes to what? The child looks around the park and sees someone wearing a “Dora the Explorer” t-shirt just like the one they had just a few years ago! How cute! How interesting! How exciting!
In my exploration of social psychology, I do not recall ever learning about the importance of combining repulsion and attraction to create surges of power. I heard that “some people are dominated by risk avoidance and others are dominated by pursuit of pleasure.” I get that, at times, people avoid risk or pursue pleasure, but how accurate is it that “they are exactly two isolated types of people: risk-avoiders and pleasure-seekers?” Is an individual’s tendency toward one form of motivation aboslutely eternal as in “genetic?”

In the “positive thinking” subculture, it may not be popular to say this, but repulsion can be far more powerful than attraction. What do I mean?

Imagine that you are inside a building and then suddenly you hear some loud crackling sounds and smell smoke then see flashes of orange like a fire? You instantly would stop whatever “very attractive” thing you were doing and look to see if there is a fire, right? If there is a fire, you will EITHER take immediate action to extinguish that fire or take immediate action to get away from the fire (perhaps making a point to grab a few items or wake a few people first).

The threat of getting burned or dying from smoke inhalation is far more powerful than the typical attractions that people experience. Intense repulsion vetoes familiar attractions, at least temporarily. You exit the building promptly.
One challenge with exploring the issue of repulsion is that the subject is… repulsive. We may tend to habitually avoid things that we find disgusting or shameful or infuriating.

However, exploring the various triggers of repulsion is not essential in this presentation. The point here is to recognize the importance of repulsion within the study of motivation.

The strongest attraction that we experience generally will be whatever we focus on most often. In fact, if we love to talk about how a particular thing is not how it should be, that is not something that powerfully repulses us. That is an issue that attracts our attention. We would not intentionally bring up issues that powerfully repulse us (or not in an organized commentary). Things that trigger shame or panic or denial will only be addressed when there is no other alternative. Oo- that reminds me: did I mention that I saw someone at the park today who was wearing a Dora t-shirt?

We totally avoid things that intensely repulse us. If other people bring them up, then we either ignore the subject, or quickly change the focus of the interaction, or justify an immediate withdrawal from the interaction. We do NOT talk for hours about how that thing should not be how it is (and should be some other way… so how can we reofrm it to conform to our ideals about how it should have already been). If we do that, then the subject of that conversation is not a subject that triggers intense repulsion in us. It is possible for us to be hysterical about an issue (like to argue furiously for months about some political proposal), but the issue in which we display the hysteria might not be the actual root of the hysteria, right?
Still, repulsion can be very important. Attraction is what sets our destination. A stronger attraction will produce a change of destination.

However, that is usually a relatively easy issue. Except in cases in which people have suppressed their natural envies and desires, they will know what they are attracted to. If they are repulsed by the idea of admitting what attracts them, that is not uncommon, but the strongest attraction will still attract whether they admit it or not.

How do you tell what attracts someone? Just notice their patterns of behavior. What outcomes do their actions repeatedly produce? They may attempt to distract others with their words and “acting out a role.” However, everyone experiences attraction, including attraction for the familiar, attraction to familiar slogans about “nothing attracts me,” and so on.

Instead, notice what they habitually condemn. Why so much attention on that subject? Why initiate a focus on it?

They may be attracted to it, but ashamed of the attraction, so they display verbal repulsion while demonstrating a foundation of strong attraction. If they complain about a government being too powerful, then they are interested in power, but they are not acting on that interest. They are slowly cultivating the interest and studying it. They may say it disgusts them. Does it?

Imagine someone who say that they hate the heat of eating cayenne pepper, but keep tasting a little bit of it and say “see, it is still way too hot for me!” If they do that twenty times in one hour, then maybe they are secretly attracted to the heat.

We do not repeatedly initiate conversations about things that disgust us. What we might do though is say that something disgusts us when in fact it infuriates us. Fury and disgust are quite distinct. Fury includes demonstrations of assertiveness. Disgust does not.
I have repeated a few times that attraction sets our destination (our focus). However, what motivates change most powerfully is often not just attraction.

Imagine a sleeping dog. If you put a bone in the dog’s mouth, the dog may start chewing on it, but continue to sleep. But what happens if the smoke alarm goes off?

Repulsion wakes us up. Repulsion motivates action. Repulsion even motivates attraction.

“Next, after we leave the park, we are going to the doctor’s office for you to get a few shots real quick.” Suddenly, you are told that every child on the playground has a fascinating t-shirt, right?
Repulsion is key to motion. Attraction MIGHT produce motion.

Here are some variations: Strong repulsion without attraction will not produce well-organized planning. Very strong repulsion with mild attraction will produce poorly-organized planning (with lots of anxiety and irritability in the background). Strong repulsion with strong attraction will produce thorough planning and discplined implementation.

What is the key to highly-effective planning? Motivation will produce effectiveness. When there is motivation, but no effectiveness, then motivation will consistently pursue effectiveness until effectiveness begins to develop.

To plan well, there must be some attraction (to bring the target in to focus), plus strong repulsion (to motivate a careful investment of time in to planning, gathering any relevant resources, and implementing the plan). If people say “but I do not have enough resources to do that yet,” that may not be a lack of attraction to the outcome. They may be truly frustrated. In that case, what they lack is clarity about repulsion. If they experienced powerful repulsion (without habitual coping mechanisms to dampen out the repulsion), then that woul dmotivate innovation.
So, the key to coaching is an ability to assist someone in regard to two related issues: first, identifying what attracts them (without condeming their attraction based on socially-programmed ideals) and, second, properly accessing the power of what repulses them. Too much repulsion will typically lead to disorder. Too little experience of what repulses them will not produce consistent investment. They will no release prior habits.

What if you suddenly noticed that your house is one fire? Repulsion will motivate change. To motivating lasting change, there must be an access to lasting repulsions (which includes experiencing a fire in such a traumatizing way that a person creates a new habit, like always identifying the location of fire extinguishers and carefully checking them). In fact, creating repulsion toward old habits CAN be very effective for motivating new habits.


Harry and JR complain about people who lack our intellectual superiority

August 27, 2015

As for you twitter addicted ”that is too long for me to read” people. kindly know that the lack of empathy and appreciation is entirely mutual. If something stops being interesting just because it takes more than 140 characters to explain, go ahead and do us both a favour; delete your simple ass from my friends list. No, I’m not better as a person. It isn’t about being better or worse. It’s that you simple twats.. you annoy me.. with your stupid rants about things that I don’t care for.. just like how they in turn find my words are stupid and do not care for them. [Facebook ended the original “preview” about here…]

I just don’t like stupidity that is not humble, and it mostly is far from it. I do not mind if a smart person is not humble. Since their thoughts lead to actual results and someone that can provide for others doesn’t need to be modest about the reality of things. Someone that is stupid and selfdefeating and incapable of being useful to anyone, even themselves, well, they have no claim to anything else than the humility a realistic person would feel at being that stupid.. but they don’t even notice their own lack of functional knowledge. They deny the usefulness of knowledge and intellect. Thought-deniers, selfishness deniers, why don’t ya skip ahead to the part where ya wanna hang yourselves and go speak with a professional. I mean I might be of actual help to someone that wants to learn how to be relaxed and not uptight all the time. They will pretend it is their choice to be worked up about something that has nothing to do with them personally. Sure it is a choice.. like it is the heroin junkie’s choice to stick in just 1 more needle. I’m done thinking that I am supposed to be nonjudgmental. Fuck thou shalt not judge. Thou shalt try not to and fail like a paper plane fails to even come close to the sun. But either it is out of yer own spontaneous nature that you’re nonjudgmental or you’re a tryhard wannabe moralising idiot like oh so many, and you can go get lost as far as I am concerned.

  • You like this.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I did not read it all yet, but I liked the part up to “you twats” that showed up before “click here to read further.”
    Like · Reply · 1 · 4 hrs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Ok read the whole opening. The actual scriptures that I Like are “condemn not” and “by the same standards that you openly champion to be used for evaluating others (judging them), so shall ye also be judged.”
    Like · Reply · 1 · 4 hrs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The scripture is a warning about contempt as distinct from discernment and repulsion. Some things may be repulsive, but personal contempt is often quite hysterical (especially contempt for vague groups of that we can vaguely presume to “all be however we say they are”).

    common people of course are filled with contempt and shame. Those scriptures may not be for the common people, but only for the elite/ select.

    Like · Reply · 1 · 4 hrs
    • Hide 106 Replies
    • Harry Lieberwirth Yes J R but this exactly what I mean. They cannot read scripture to an effective extent. What happens when their brain reads that from which you manage to extract fine and functional insights, is that it gets overwhelmed by speculation on meaning and most are terrified to interpret for themselves. The christianity that you teach and that they teach is not the same Christianity.

      ”I never hated a one true God, but the god of the people I hated”
      – Marilyn.


    • Harry Lieberwirth God to me is what Einstein called the Energy that is beyond destruction. Eternal fucking life. Really simple when you take the word eternal life and look around for anything that fits those words. What is due that label? the stuff all matter is made from. Space as well.
      Unlike · 1 · 4 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth J R – So in a mainstream Christian’s view I am saying the creation and creator are one and the same entity or event. I prefer event. It is not a person, so why does it have a name like a person? Oh right because their god is not Jesus ”father” in which he dwells while we dwell in him (duh, since it is space/time/matter, we all dwell in space time and matter.. so yeah, don’t you know that I am in the father?). Jesus tried to undermine and usurp judaism. He failed. Although I can only imagine how much bigger it would be without him. In the end the ones that call themselves his followers seem to be like the ones he opposed in his life. They pray publically. Many self proclaimed christians are pharisees who worship some depraved ancient alien that thinks humans make good peons. Anyway that Yahweh is not the God I insist is worthy of the capital G. Yahweh is a small god like Odin or Thor. All that makes them gods is their imagination. Fucking aliens I swear tongue emoticon
    • Harry Lieberwirth Either ancient aliens, or people’s imaginary friends. My imaginary friend will punish you! is all I’m hearing on account of a God that is judge. God as energy is all things so also all forms of judgment, so yes, god will judge.. really though, may as well say this reality or the mode of it sure likes playing headgames with itself.. once it has fashioned some heads out of itself.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Oddly enough, my orientation is that these are simple matters of being clear about words. There is “The Almighty” which is the creator and the creation (and all that can be perceived is simply a branch of that inclusiveness).

      Then, there are the various ancient aliens (and current aliens), such as the one that led the Hopi to locate their villages in the configuration of the constellation Orion:



    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Is that “celestial being” the exact same one that led Moses and the Israelites? That is not important to me.

      What is clear is that the records (in the Old Testament of the Bible… like the most popular book in the world) indicate that the celestial being that led Moses hovered ahead of them to lead them, then the bright craft came down to the surface level occasionally, plus it hovered directly over the tabernacle, which the humans moved with them as they traveled.



    • Harry Lieberwirth I will gladly die for my insolence if they happen to be real. Fuck all gods but the one that substitutes any and all things including so called gods. This God of mine is no person. It is inexhaustible energy, unending space, time and phenomena, all inSee More
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn (That last image is a modern depiction, but the oral history and writtenhistory is very clear. Most common people do not know about it, even though it is clearly stated in the Old Testament, but who actually reads the Old Testament?)
      Like · 1 · 3 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth To call a person, an organism, and individual, a god, is calling everyone else unholy or not god. If not and we are all gods, the word is as worthless as gold would be if all dirt changed into gold.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn You can throw around words like “unholy.” That one does not interest me much. tongue emoticon
    • Harry Lieberwirth So I’m a god.. so is everyone else.. big fucking whoop. They want exclusiveness as being a god, according to their manuals. Fuck them smile emoticon
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Why are we talking about “those other dumb people” still? (Not that I ever was….)
    • Harry Lieberwirth As it does not exist under your definition of reality being what is called god. If God is holy and god is reality then all reality is holy.
      Unlike · 1 · 3 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Of course “exclusiveness” exists.
    • Harry Lieberwirth Meaning we are all aspects of the one god that IS life.. yeah.. however, it stops being something to jerk off on. Stops being an ego boost because it doesnt mean anything if everyone else is also god.
      Unlike · 1 · 3 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Humans may have varying capacities for sentience (consciousness). Whatever capacity is present can be exercised as well as nourished (I mean like with the right diet).
      Like · 1 · 3 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth And that Jewish Yahweh wants to be the one and only as an individual. Maybe a giant alien. Still, how do giant aliens react to being shot by people that aren’t going to go ass down face up because oh this must be the god we are worshipping? like this iSee More
      Like · 1 · 3 hrs · Edited
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn The Queen of England is alleged to be a descendant of Wodin. The “pure bloodlines” have dominated the global monarchies for millenia.
      Like · 1 · 3 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth I would gladly welcome many visitors but someone that seeks to rule humanity through words is not a welcome visitor. We have plenty of that from our own already.
    • Harry Lieberwirth yes, like the queen of england. Or the ancient pharaos demanding they be worshipped as equals to their head gods.. or as aspects, incarnations, of them. These practices can’t result from healthy psyches.. not human ones anyway.. any being that has a craving for being worshipped has some mommy or daddy issues.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Why not welcome a “visitor” who dominates humanity with weapons, words, and various other methods? What choice would you have?

      When the Israelites were “disobedient,” then Yahweh sent chemical warfare to create a plague that killed 24,000 of them. Then, the survivors were much more obedient.

      Like · 1 · 3 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth Anyway they come off like slave driving old boys, those aliens or imaginary gods.
    • Harry Lieberwirth Once more, I’d be like ”You want servants, you’re about 300 years late motherfuckers.”
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn That was in the time of Moses. After that, when Moses said “Yahweh commands that we form an army and invade the Midianites and slaughter them,” suddenly the Israelites were much more receptive to sending off their young men to be exposed to harm.
      Like · 1 · 3 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth The choice to not welcome them and die with my spit on their boots.
    • Harry Lieberwirth That is the choice I have. What choice do I have he asks. lol.
    • Harry Lieberwirth lemme just sum it all up ”Your one true god strangely and conveniently wants what I want, how convenient for me that I am the only authorized person to claim knowledge of His Divine will.”
    • Harry Lieberwirth What, you don’t find my choice to be realistic or in line with your values? Well let’s just say I have this value where I would rather die on the spot than be forced to be subservient to anyone else’s will. Gladly.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Ancient sculptures of the Pharaohs show some unusual physical features:
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Those who allege that those individuals were “normal humans like you or me” may be slightly imprecise.
    • Harry Lieberwirth I am quite familiar with the myths and ”conspiracy theories”. I know about the sumerians and how even their myths were only echoes of the same myth again and again. That does not mean I think it is more than the collective human psyche trying to growSee More
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Yes, the ancient scriptures clearly state that humanity was a slave race created as hybrids. The Sumerian texts are more clear than the Bible, but the oral tradition that is transcribed in the Old Testament is from those same parts of the world.

      Basically, the reason that the library of Alexandria and similar reservoirs of knowledge were censored or destroyed or ruled as heresy was to “better maintain order.” The masses do not respond well to being fully-informed about the simple realities of things.

      Like · 1 · 3 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth We do respond so well to threats. No, really though.. I would rather die than knowingly submit to years of what we may call slavery or indentured service.
    • Harry Lieberwirth 12 years a not happening because I spat massah in the face and got my head blown clean off. What an idiot, now I don’t have to suffer ever again as me.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn You speak of “welcoming them” like they are not already here and ruling over human affairs. That is not what the Roman Catholic Pope stated in the 15th century in his published writings.

      Basically “our spiritual powers rule over secular governments.” It is the basic idea of a “holy empire” or “global empire” or “inclusive empire.”

    • Harry Lieberwirth I do not care. We evolve too. Whether we are actually genetic engineering pet projects or not. We can take our place as any natural born species could. Fuck the you have a destiny and implied knowing of our place that these chosen people and their either imaginary or alien overlord called YHW say they posess. They lie. I don’t care what the initial plans were.. you better not think we will submit to something so clearly alike to our form of slavery, after we just got past that as a race, almost entirely.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn If you were faced with overwhelming physical force, you might decline. If you were threatened with torture and so on, you might resist. However, imagine that I was once abducted and taken to a celestial craft. Is it possible that resistance might be coSee More
    • Harry Lieberwirth Unless you got more than me to threaten, I will keep spitting in the face of the meanest looking asshole among them. Wanna bet I can troll them into killing me? Wanna bet I am not stupid enough to want to survive the trauma of slavery? nah I just got done with my hangups, not gonna let them fuck me over again and make for another 20 years of releasing pent up pain and anger.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Perhaps you are not ready. I will say that there is extensive physical evidence of advanced civilizations on this planet in ANCIENT times. There is also extensive evidence of CURRENT advanced technology, which might be from an exclusive group of humans, but if they are human, then they are so distinct from the common folks we know that a dedicated verbal category might be useful.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn If there is destiny, saying “fuck destiny” will not change it. If there are cycles of day and night, saying “fuck cycles of day and night” will not change those either.
    • Harry Lieberwirth Maybe some people can shake it off but I am not bending that far without being broken. I am not ready to be a mindless servant to an agenda not even from this planet. I am not willing to degrade myself and just plain go against my nature. I get diagnosed with depression/burn outs from working on someone else’s schedule alone.. the government thinks it means I cannot work, so they pay me to stay home. If that little pressure drives me crazy imagine how I would just not last anyway as a slave. I wouldn’t make 12 years. More like ”Kill me now please”. Want me to damage your other slaves? No? Then kill me before I become a bigger loss than win.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn What do you mean by go against your nature? The social programming of the global empire (delivered through schooling rituals and so on) is not innate.
    • Harry Lieberwirth I do not despise destiny because it includes me having a choice. I am sure I can influence them to kill me instead of submit me to the worst form of human abuse we have managed to come up with. I guess it is easy to disregard the trauma and time it takes to get past it when you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about from a golden cage where slavery has not been directly perceived because it has been banned. I am sure there is mental ”slavery” going on.. but this way people have a choice. No one is making them repress their emotions.. its all words.. which makes it their own responsibility to not submit. It is not actually slavery like hey here’s a cattle prod to your ass get to work you dirty inferior goyim.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Maybe you are talking about whether or not you get a job. I did not know that was part of the conversation.

      We as humans are enslaved (in one sense of the word) to things like the cycle of day and night as well as the existing social order. We also can be enemies or allies of that order… with a multitude of variations.

      We have discretion up to a point and beyond that we have no choice. So what?

    • Harry Lieberwirth I would despise destiny if I did not have that little influence. If I had no choice but slavery. Nah, somewhere ,some time, one of those space heads would lose it and I would get my wish. Its kind of easy to find out what it takes to get deleted. Just do what the guy that got shot did.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Forget about other people. I was trained (traumatized?) in to repressing certain emotions. Now, I develop awareness of that history and the current implications.

      To me, this brings us to a fascinating subject, not something to rant about or argue about. If you or anyone else find it disturbing or disgusting or boring, so be it.

      Like · 1 · 3 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth No I am talking about being physically harmed as intimidation and being physically harmed whenever I do not comply. I do not serve those that consistently show they mean to harm me. As in: You ain’t my friends and I find life less valuable than not existing if the choice is death or slavery how I describe it.
    • Harry Lieberwirth I am not principly speaking out against slavery. I am saying without overstating myself that I would sincerely rather be undone as organism and individual, be killed, than be beaten every day for not being fast enough, being beaten for good measure.. rather be dead than a slave, give me death or liberty.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Ok. Consider that you claim that “life AS YOU KNOW IT” is less valuable then _____ [insert preconceived notion here]. What a fascinating claim!
    • Harry Lieberwirth No, not life. just the state of my body being active as an organism. I value disintegration over slavery. That simple.
    • Harry Lieberwirth I mean actual down in the dirt slavery like we used to use to build railroads across a nation while we’re killing the natives who are like me and literally did prefer death over slavery, and got it.
      Unlike · 1 · 3 hrs · Edited
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn I agree that there are many outcomes that could be less appealing than simply being executed. Torture is generally ineffective if lethal… at least in regard to that organism. What if the goal is to intimidate others though?

      Even with killing one “deviant,” again that is just a normal ritual of human sacrifice by any government court in the global empire. The individual organism being executed is not being ritually killed to “get rid of it.” It is being killed in order to create publicity about the authority of the ruling system.

      “Firing squads” (like are more common in civil war) are used to execute groups of people. Those are often much less well publicized. Some methods are for efficiently disposing of “livestock.” Other methods are about what the rest of the herd will do in the future.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn So are you ashamed of the status of a slave? If so, then it might be rather challenging for you to assess whether or not you or anyone else is a slave and in what ways. If the whole subject is repulsive and sickening and “I would rather die,” then perhaps we should stop on that note…. wink emoticon
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn “It is awful that people were treated poorly in the past during the building of this railroad. It is shameful and disgusting. Anyway, small talk aside, how much will it cost to buy the train ticket to ride from Amsterdam to Berlin?”
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn No one really cares about the dead slaves (or not as a group). Some people display shame and outrage over the dead slaves. They are displacing their actual distress and coping with their internal distress by projecting it on to some distant past episode.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn If someone says “my very own grandfather perished while working on the construction of this railroad,” that is a distinct grief. Even so, “personal grief” is often yet again a coping mechanism to displace some more immediate grief / grievance.
    • Harry Lieberwirth What if they mean to intimidate me into loyalty rather than slavery? I will not comply. I am not that kind of mediochre person that is easily forced away from their frivolous sense of free will. No, I will not comply.. I will not dance the dance they want me to dance. I don’t care if aliens land and people declare them overlords. I will simply say I do not recognize their authority and that the logical consequence will be that they will have to disable me because I would be part of the resistance. The more they push the harder I say nuh uh. I don’t feel too crazy about life, only about having certain things in it. But in that situation those things would be disallowed so my reason for finding life worth the ride would be gone. I have managed to think of reasons, like I really want to cuddle and sleep with a person.. and be with them often as much as possible.. makes my life worth it.. take that away, take the chance of that away, I will not have a reason to maintain a ”civil” behavioural mode.
    • Harry Lieberwirth I feel like being very immature and childish with any would be non-terrestrial influences of forceful kinds.
    • Harry Lieberwirth Or with anyone that thinks the offer they make me is going to be taken. Complying means not being able to have what I want. if I cannot have what I want I will whine and kick and toss. Ultimately if the prospect only gets darker and it seems like I amdisabled from being free to travel and meet those I want to be with, well, fuck being alive. The point where death is the preferable option tends to be not far off. As long as I have somewhat or a fair chance of getting what I want, I am ok with being alive long as it lasts. I am lucky to not want something that I can never have. Since romantic love is not so hard to find if you’re honest to the point where it will scare anyone off that I wouldn’t find attractive anyway. If radical honesty is shocking to someone I probably can’t trust them anyway. I just mean I just want romantic love, like you have with your wife I guess
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Consider that you are already quite compliant (to “the system” and to the interest of those who designed it). In fact, you may have extreme loyalty toward it (as an economic dependent of it).

      You could ally with the system and thus be less dependent. You could also develop more practical freedom (including in the form of wealth).

      Or perhaps you are “staying poor” because the social programming says “that is a very spiritual thing to do.” After we all die, poor people get in to heaven and avoid hell right?

      “I am not influenced by words because that would be shameful and disgusting and disturbing.” – Santa Claus

    • Harry Lieberwirth It is the most meaningful and enjoyable experience I have had so that is what I have looked for.. and found, I think. I will say more when I know more. It truly makes me enjoy life so much more when I have someone I am romantically in love with and canshare any thought with without fear of being judged as a person. Something may repulse me or the other but repulsion isn’t personal and I do not take it as such. Radically honest people tend to have an easy time finding someone they like because they like honesty.. and other radically honest people. Note that I am not for radical honesty, I am for a creature living as it naturally is inclined to. I would not want to impose the need to be honest on others. It is not a need for me, just a rather intense preference.
    • Harry Lieberwirth I am very conservative. I am loyal to the system in place. or rather I am just beyond thinking it is going to change. I gave up resisting it. However that system does not require non earth overlords. Its my racist/speciest side. I’ll bow down to you slitnosed uglies when they show me how they manage to be sociopathic enforcers. Which they won’t because it is in a sociopathic asshole’s nature to be a sociopathic asshole as much as it is in mine to be honest. It just works better for me. Trusting your allies makes them like me more. Allies that like me are more steadfast and worthy.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn What about romantic love is so relevant? Do you mean that you respect the intensity of the vitality that it stirs?
    • Harry Lieberwirth As for some cultures it might be functional to be slavedriving overlord kind of sociopathic assholes. War economy all the way. I am not saying that as an opinion just as an observation of how we got where we are today. Not by being moral and peaceful.
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn It is okay to be concerned that others might judge you. If you want radical honesty, you might be better practicing that with me than with someone you are dating.

      It may be best to handle your “social needs” outside of the couple. Being in a couple is a great way to notice how loyalty works.

      To “demand honesty” of someone in a romantic relationship may be counter-productive. Invite it. Offer it. To push it on others may not work.

      Also, feel free to ignore anything here and “learn the hard way.” I might even be wrong about approximately 18% of what I claim.

      Like · 1 · 2 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth Whatever works for everyone. One Happy Cow article I liked.. no need for the tiger to try and be like the elephant.. no need to let others live by standards or values that they do not feel naturally of their own. I want people to be free to be what they are.. even the ”assholes”. I’m not afraid of them.. they are fools that will just play the game my way if I want them to. A forceful regime might think it will manipulate me into doing what they want but what if me being dead is what I wanted and they are the ones that in the end are the ones doing as I wanted. If they put me in a bind of not being able to get what I want, which is a free life with my lover.. then I will make them kill me. Societies like that will run into trouble sooner or later because it tends to take thick headed fools for their leaders. Might work as long as it does.. untill it just doesn’t. See european society as an example.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Whether current political systems “require” over-lords is of no great interest to me.
      Like · 1 · 2 hrs · Edited
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Again: in intimate relationships, loyalty is central. In more casual (or less procreative) interactions, like ours, then honesty may be more important than loyalty.
      Like · 1 · 2 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth There is no demand for honesty and I will not condemn my lover if she is dishonest. Or anyone else. But I do find a awkwardly honest communication between two people that prefer having hurt feelings over being given an image of reality that is not trueto be useful and functional. I just want things to work. Being dishonest is not going to do that. Because they will still only love the image of me that I manage to so artistically sketch in my own favour. I don’t want someone to love the image of me, their imagination of me, while I hide the qualities that they might find repulsive. Either they can take that honesty, or they are not what I am looking for.
    • Harry Lieberwirth Maybe, I think it is the case, that our ideas of what romantic or married life amounts to, differ greatly. That is ok, whatever works for you and yours. I have found someone that feels like I do about the honesty though. You know her.. if more happens I will be a little more open about it, nothing to put a label on for now.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Political celebrity “figureheads” may or may not LEAD (exercise actual power). For figureheads, their main job may be to manage public opinion.

      Imagine that millions of people work for the US government. Together, they create momentum. That momentum is far greater than one person’s. To claim that one individual really leads that entire system is a rather extreme speculation.

      Even in monarchies, in which that may be officially true, that may not be entirely true.

      Like · 1 · 2 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth I am loyal to myself first. I do not feel comfortable omiting something I know is meaningful to the other or flat out lying. It makes me feel uncomfortable. This is where you imply all shame is taught, therefore to be dismissed (for what reason?)?
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs · Edited
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn What works in a relationship? Be cautious about dishonesty (in yourself or others). Avoid obsession with honesty (by you or by others).
    • Harry Lieberwirth Yes but we maintain either an illusion or sense of collectively owning that ”greatness”, whereas the actually powerful, I think, are more interested in just owning it and saying ”I did that”. And having the resources involved, or a large slice. Like Kings or Oligarchs.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Be careful of seeking social validation or (being accepted) in an intimate partnership. The male may offer that to the female, but for the male to seek it in the intimate partnership may be a source of disappointment and frustration.
      Like · 1 · 2 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth Maybe it is a comfortable lie we tell ourselves, that we are collectively out of our own free will being the economic power we are. Oh really, just forget about the marketing all their lives that told them what to want. Nothing they want is even what they really want.. they have forgotten what they really wanted. Or have been convinced they are to be ashamed of it. I am not really ashamed of lying though. Just emotionally distressed. Unfomfy as shit.
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Maybe you are not really looking for an intimate partnership at this point. After all, you are corresponding with me, and last I checked I was “one of the dicks.” (male)
      Like · 1 · 2 hrs · Edited
    • Harry Lieberwirth No, not the approval that is craved.. it is nice, I like it, and I give it gladly, but not seeing it as a need. Honesty is my jam because it tends to not result in disappointment. If I am going to feed someone a dishonest image of who I am they will simply be disappointed when they find out through my behaviour that I was lying.
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth Lying is stupid when it is with someone as intelligent as I am interested in. She’s way to clever to lie to. But even so it just feels.. awkward.. like pissing one’s pants. Is pissing pants wrong? Maybe not absolutely but does it feel comfortable? Not for most, even if it isn’t seen as an evil.
    • Harry Lieberwirth She is not available at the moment. It is her birthday today, she is probably celebrating.
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth trust me I would be talking to her otherwise.. lol.
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth Oh yeah how is that for honesty.. you’re only my second choice… and only after I chatted with Dan wink emoticon
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn I am aware that you and “AA” are “corresponding favorably.” I do not mind whatever amount of privacy / secrecy / discretion you favor.

      Words and communication are important. If you say “I require honesty in a relationship,” then I think that you want to be relaxed. You do not want to be constantly obsessing over fitting someone’s preferences.

      Want to know a secret about that? Create a stable cash flow and have an extra 10 or 20 thousand Euro stashed away. There is nothing quite as relaxing as not needing the relationship to work on any particular timeframe or in any particular way.

      Like · 1 · 2 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth I just don’t see the point of lying when people find out what the truth is anyway. Ask Hayley. I wasn’t the angel she insisted I was and it hurt her that I gave her the image that I was or meant to be. I think she was hurt anyway.. people don’t tend to say ”you’re the one to blame” when they don’t mind what happened.
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn If you experience stress in regard to omitting something in an exchange with someone, then you can call that shame and you can EITHER “dump the info” on them, talk to someone else first about it, gently acknowldge that you have more to tell them and you would like to continue soon, etc etc etc….. (or all of the above)
    • Harry Lieberwirth I am far from obsessed with complying to her preferences. I rather do enjoy it when it comes to pleasing her on her preferences like not calling her by shortening her name. I will gladly use the full name. I will gladly adjust because I get off on pleaSee More
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs · Edited
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn I’ve been thinking lately of the importance of envy (including jealousy). A major target of shaming is the displaying of envy.

      So, children learn to suppress envy and be dishonest about it. Their innate motivations are, in some case, completely suppressed.

      They turn to “spirituality,” which they encounter with an extreme competitiveness. This is what I did at least.

      I am “more spiritual” than those commoners. I am more spiritual than those stupid Christians. bla bla bla

      Like · 1 · 2 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth I really am sincere when I say I like to cater to my lover’s preferences because I like pleasing them.. their pleasure pleases me greatly.
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth But I am not feeling like I must do so on every count.
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn In reality, I have experienced lots of discontent and envy and boredom. I have been frustrated about not even saying what I value. I have been annoyed by my own habits and momentums.

      Humility arises. Shame arises.

      “The one who fears shame, shun. The one who welcomes shame and yet is cautious about it, welcome them.” – JR

    • Harry Lieberwirth ”So, children learn to suppress envy and be dishonest about it. Their innate motivations are, in some case, completely suppressed.” they learn to be dishonest with themselves and end up believing the usurpers’ motivations are their innate ones. I’veSee More
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs · Edited
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn I do not mind being third choice to those two. After all, I am much more scary than Dan, right? I talk about ETs and plagues and torture. huh huh
      Like · 1 · 2 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth Good point dude. Yes, you sometimes.. scare me off for lack of a better word although I mostly just lack interest in those subjects because I find them to lack satisfaction. I like to do things that I find satisfying. That is anything from reading a book to playing roleplaying fantasy games on the pc, to listening to music.. to making love with someone that I feel deeply for and that feels deeply for me. I guess a lot of people do not know it exists because they never happen to have that kind of sexual intercourse.. but it’s beyond what I would call sex.. anyone can have sex.. to melt together with someone untill there is only her and oneself is the most satisfying thing on so many levels. Emotionally and physically. It isn’t filthy or dirty and I am not ashamed of something so gorgeous.. or ashamed of talking about it in general terms.
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Back to “loyalty in an intimate partnership,” I have noticed that when my partner “is experiencing so much pleasure that the neighbors are annoyed,” I like that. Maybe it is the implicit loyalty that is being built.

      Power: “I can do that to you and you know it and I know that you know it.” FYI, I was “slightly” sexually inhibited in prior decades….

      Like · 1 · 2 hrs
    • Harry Lieberwirth So yeah I tend to have a.. store, of those things, like a queue of things I know will satisfy me. Thinking may be on the list but not so much about ancient aliens or politics or global illuminati take overs. Not like I can stop them. Not sure I think I should. That is if I am sure they even really exist at all. Anyway, oh yeah sure you can rule yourself, humanity.. not like it’s been proven by now ya just don’t have what it takes. The majority of brains is too stupid to know what is good for them (and effectively favours their preferences).. and they seem to get to pick the leaders.. if democracy is not actually a farce and the votes are simply not counted at all but fabricated. I am sensitive to conspiracy theory but also agnostic as in I cannot know. If I was able to know about them, then I would have some power over them. However, what people say they ”know” is not going to stand in any court of law in the world.. because it is just a bunch of claims they read and felt like believing without actually being able to predict certain things based on that knowledge. Real knowledge makes it so you can predict outcomes. You have some real knowledge of economics for example. If I knew of a plot on an international level I am pretty sure I would not manage to survive. Because if that were to be real and the goal is economic monopoly or all-power.. well then I don’t suppose it would escape their notice that they have been spied and I don’t suppose if the goal is so serious that I would manage to survive that knowledge. Anyone that is loud and being heard by thousands of people at the same time does not know anything. If they did they would be dead for ratting. The alternative is they are gullible and wrong about the facts.. but they cannot be sharing something that amounts to knowledge of a real conspiracy that goes that far because I don’t buy the conspirators would let live anyone that makes waves based on knowing something factual about them.
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs · Edited
    • Harry Lieberwirth Please hit refresh if you are here now, I edited my second to last message somehwat extensively. AA is back.. gonna chat with her.
      Unlike · 1 · 2 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn It is very interesting that there is so much logic and intelligence being presented on a mainstream network (“the history channel”) in the Ancient Aliens TV show. However, is it just more “scandal-pumping?” I do not know.

      I do find it interesting that some of the major claims of mainstream “academia” are so easily revealed as weak and “ritual slogans of blindness.” Is it important that humans were hybrids made by ETs? Perhaps not. However, as someone who likes to exercise the faculty of critical thinking, I appreciate the reasonably well-organized presentations of information that been censored for a long, long time— including as I mentioned before with the burning of library at Alexandria so long ago.

      A new group of “illuminati” are being cultivated. Most of those who dabble in “conspiracy theories” may be emotionally destabilized for their exploration.

      However, when breeding horses for racing, all that matters is that a few good ones are identified. All of the ones that are “almost good enough” are ultimately just as irrelevant as those that were never anywhere near “good enough.”

      Like · 1 · 1 hr
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn I had already watched on youtube much of the source material used in the Ancient Aliens show. The research of Lloyd Pye on “the starchild skull” was fascinating to me and he explained the recent DNA evidence about how homo sapiens were genetically engineered.

      He explains why we have a different number of chromosomes than “native earthlings.” The facts are not in controversy and “mainstream science” simply ignores the elegant and simple explanations provided by people like Lloyd Pye, who often are simply repeating what has been stated in the old Hindu scriptures or Sumerian scriptures.

      The twist is that with the huge advance of technology in the last several decades, the DNA evidence that humans were created (not evolved) is massive. Some say that the rapid advance of human technology was “seeded” by ETs. That is a mildly intriguing idea, but not very important practically to me now.

      Like · 1 · 1 hr
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Anyway, I see how the TV show selects info to present and leaves out other info. I have no issue with that. The same thing happens in every book etc
      Like · 1 · 1 hr
    • Harry Lieberwirth The trouble begins when the fact is that like with the concept of racial purity, you actually get crazy, stupid, malformed human beings when those that are very alike continue to breed. Marry your sister and put a madman on the throne why don’t ya. Like the royals pre-1800. Like the nazis also though, the reality is that the idea of what makes for the ”uber mensch”, is flawed, and the reality is that having only blonde men with blue eyes of approx 6 ft mate with women of the same specifications, doesn’t actually make for a human being that is above average. It might, but that chance is always there. Just not more so than usual. I am thinking diverse genetic parents produce what is in animals called hybrid vigor. Because between the two there is less ”double info” or traits that both parents have.. the variety and diversity of dna is greater, and therefore more apt at warding off illness or being mentally destabilized.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn I have not studied human genetics extensively (or not in regard to “breeding excellent specimens”). I do understand that there is (or may be) a genetic resistance to malaria (?) among those of African descent which is eventually lost with enough inter-breeding with those who do not have that same genetic resistance.
    • Harry Lieberwirth The movie Trading Places with Eddie Murphy is symbolic of this. They take a supposedly ”superior stock” human being and trade his place with a homeless beggar on a bet that this superior stock will be fine in the beggar’s shoes and the beggar will not be able to fill his shoes. But the superior stock resorts to being emotionally charged and filled with tension which only makes things worse on himself, not better. The fact is – I think – that there is no such thing as superior stock for more than a select few tasks. Yes, one lineage of horses may be better at racing alone, but all other aspects of horse training? Maybe not so much. And similarly I do not believe in altogether ”superior” peopl Maybe a person is better at a few things, but at everything in general? yeah su8re..Maybe highly intelligent people are an exception but I haven’t seen anyone breed those… and typically its sports or brains so even intelligent folks arent good at everything in general.
      Unlike · 1 · 1 hr · Edited
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn My focus is more on epi-genetics, which is how to control which genetic programs are implemented. For example, an organism is genetically identical as a butterfly and a caterpillar. It is the same organism in different physical compositions.

      Epi-genetics is the study of what factors trigger different genetic codes to turn on or turn off (especially “external factors” like temperature and dietary intake and light cycles). Specifically, I am interested in the hibernation hormones and how those produce massive increases in neurological efficiency (heightened learning states).

      The same hibernation hormones also control quality of sleep, metabolism of fat, physical exhaustion / depression, etc…..

      Like · 1 · 1 hr
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn An obsession with “athletic excellence” is highly promoted in certain cultures. Perhaps all that exercise helps to keep the blood away from the brain. However, there are many cases of people who are quite bright and quite fit.

      156 seconds long:


    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      Write a reply…
  • Harry Lieberwirth Yes J R but this exactly what I mean. They cannot read scripture to an effective extent. They are too stupid to get it without someone like you to make the literalist bs go away and having the words make for something useful. What happens when their brain reads that from which you manage to extract fine and functional insights, is that it gets overwhelmed by speculation on meaning and most are terrified to interpret for themselves. The christianity that you teach and that they teach is not the same Christianity. –
    ”I never hated a one true God, but the god of the people I hated!”
    – Marilyn.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn It is a rather rare thing to be able to distinguish between what is relevant in a literal sense, what is relevant in a figurative sense, and what is not so relevant at all.
    Like · Reply · 1 · 3 hrs · Edited
  • Harry Lieberwirth JR J R if you want to save this conversation please save it to somewhere else, I wish to delete this post.. pretty much saying it all in the other posts too. They get it Harry, ya don’t like stupid.
    Unlike · Reply · 1 ·

One-day gains of over 50% on yesterday’s stock market action

August 25, 2015

The set of 12 trades below is from 8/24. These were all profitable trades with profits totaling $2,027 (which, after commissions, would actually be closer to $1900). The largest amount of investment at any one time was just under $3,450 (which is highlighted in brown below).

Combined, that is a gain of well over 50% relative to the maximum capital invested at once that day (which was a relatively small portion of the total capital available in that brokerage account). In other words, I made that $3,450 in to almost $5,500 in a few hours.

The market that I traded most was QQQ (The Nasdaq 100 stock index), although the first two trades below were XLF (an index of financial stocks in the US). As for the timing of those trades, these were all trades designed to profit from declines in the overall value of the US stock market. I placed this series of trades after the morning rebound in the US stock market. Specifically, I was “scalping profits” off of the series of declines in the pink trendchannel shown below (including in anticipation of that channel prior to it forming).

Inline image 1

In the table below, I added italics to some lines to make it clear when I had more than one position open at once. Again, the brown highlighting shows when I had the largest amount of money invested at once (just under $3,450).

up arrowDate Activity Quantity Description Price Amount Type
08/24/2015 Bought 24 PUT SECTOR SPDR TRUST
$23 EXP 09/18/15
$0.60 -$1,447.62 Margin
08/24/2015 Sold -24 PUT SECTOR SPDR TRUST
$23 EXP 09/18/15
$0.65   profit of $5 x 24 = 120  [120] $1,552.35 Margin
08/24/2015 Bought 30 PUT SECTOR SPDR TRUST
$23.50 EXP 09/18/15
$0.78 -$2,348.78 Margin
08/24/2015 Sold -30 PUT SECTOR SPDR TRUST
$23.50 EXP 09/18/15
$0.83 profit of $5 x 30 = 150  [270] $2,481.17 Margin
08/24/2015 Bought 5 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$92 EXP 09/18/15
$2.38 -$1,193.96 Margin
08/24/2015 Bought 7 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$92 EXP 09/18/15
$2.64 -$1,852.35 Margin
08/24/2015 Sold -7 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$92 EXP 09/18/15
$2.72   profit of $8 x 7 = 56 [326] $1,899.61 Margin
08/24/2015 Sold -5 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$92 EXP 09/18/15
$2.68 profit of $30 x 5 = 150 [476] $1,336.01 Margin
08/24/2015 Bought 5 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$97 EXP 09/18/15
$2.79 -$1,398.96 Margin
08/24/2015 Bought 6 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$97 EXP 09/18/15
$3.41 -$2,050.16 Margin
08/24/2015 Sold -6 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$97 EXP 09/18/15
$3.82  profit of $41 x 6 = 246 [722] $2,287.79 Margin
08/24/2015 Sold -5 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$97 EXP 09/18/15
$3.96 profit of $117 x 5 = 585 [1307] $1,976.00 Margin
08/24/2015 Bought 2 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$95 EXP 08/28/15
$1.25 -$253.39 Margin
08/24/2015 Bought 16 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$95 EXP 08/28/15
$0.76 -$1,222.08 Margin
08/24/2015 Bought 20 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$95 EXP 08/28/15
$0.48 -$966.85 Margin
08/24/2015 Sold -20 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$95 EXP 08/28/15
$0.58 profit of $10 x 20 = 200 [1507] $1,153.12 Margin
08/24/2015 Sold 16 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$95 EXP 08/28/15
$0.82 profit of $6 x 16 = 96 [1603] $1,305.89 Margin
08/24/2015 Sold -2 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$95 EXP 08/28/15
$1.37  profit of $12 x 2 = 24 [1627] $270.60 Margin
08/24/2015 Bought 9 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$97 EXP 08/28/15
$1.50 -$1,354.73 Margin
08/24/2015 Bought 11 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$97 EXP 08/28/15
$1.17 -$1,292.12 Margin
08/24/2015 Sold -11 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$97 EXP 08/28/15
$1.37 profit of $20 x 11=220 [1847] $1,501.85 Margin
08/24/2015 Sold -9 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$97 EXP 08/28/15
$1.54 profit of $4 x 9 = 36 [1883] $1,381.24 Margin
08/24/2015 Bought 9 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$99 EXP 08/28/15
$1.84 -$1,660.73 Margin
08/24/2015 Sold -9 PUT POWERSHARES QQQ TR
$99 EXP 08/28/15
$2.00 profit of $16 x 9 = 144 [2027] $1,795.23 Margin

On Donald Trump and prejudice as an after-the-fact rationalization for economic imperialism

August 23, 2015

Todd shared this article from Rolling Stone magazine about Donald Trump:


A.R. wrote:  He’s a businessman. He’s paid dearly to distract. It’s all a stupid game…rigged.

JR wrote: While I agree with A.R., I think of much of politics as “bait” to draw the common people in to some variation of national socialism. Those variations tend to be some version of this idea: “We need the nation to rescue us from… the global economy, poverty, stupidity, etc….”

If you argue about politics, that is what I call hysteria. If you ridicule any politician of any party, that is also hysteria. If you *harshly* ridicule any political idea (in contrast to discarding it or making a casual joke… Like Jon Stewart sometimes does), that is still hysterical.

Stirring Hysteria is the media’s job. I skimmed the actual rolling stone article and I found it “distasteful” (which is even less attractive than “tasteless”). The media (in this case, some author for rolling stone magazine) is basically attacking a politician for not bowing to the media “how he should” (in relation to a particular moderator In a recent debate). Also, he did not show that he is intimidated and their framing of him as more or less “inciting” a recent attack is just more guilt-tripping.

“He should apologize THE RIGHT WAY for what other people did!” And what if he doesn’t?

Then the conversation “started….”

  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar J R … They aren’t saying he should apologize the right way for what other people did, they are saying he should be reflective about comments he made that were racist- and thoughtless, during his interviews. No one thinks the crime was done in his honor, but you can see that he believed that these men were “passionate” about America. Passionate for your country often does entail commuting a crime [Nicky later corrected this to be “committing a crime”], but that crime is seldom peeing on someone [which is a reference to the Rolling Stone article and the incident reported in it]. I have no idea what you are talking about when you say we shouldn’t criticize politics or our politicians or we run the risk of being “hysterical”.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Hi Nicky. You might proof-read your above comment for auto-correct errors and then like this comment of mine to let me know you have. Further, you might read my comment below first.
      Like · 1 · 14 hrs · Edited

(still JR writing:)

Nicky, I do not know which comments you are calling racist. I also do not know how you made what I wrote in to a statement that “we shouldn’t criticize politics.” I will assume that you mean that you think that I said “we shouldn’t criticize politics” and that the statement that you say I made was also the one that you are labeling racist. (I am teasing with the second reference.)

Let the contributors to Rolling Stone be reflective about their own comments. You be reflective about yours. If you are interested in an interaction with me, I expect you to first establish relevance (in a way that I agree with) and also to raise your precision (in regard to any quotations that you attempt to make… of me or anyone else).

In conclusion, it is disgusting to me that Rolling Stone magazine supports racist attacks on hysterical people.

  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar Ok. Spelling error corrected. Thank you for pointing that out to me.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Ah, I was wondering if there was more than just the one mistake of “commuting”…. Anyway, on the subject of commuting sentences for crimes, Todd probably recalls that I frequently make reference to the pardoning of convictions and indictments, like Clinton pardoning the biggest tax evasion criminal of the 20th century, Marc Rich, or Carter pardoning folk singer Pete Yarrow for pedophilia, or the pardoning of North and Weinberger by Bush Sr.

    Or… President Johnson (who was Lincoln’s VP until the assassination) even pardoned several of the people convicted of participating in the assassination. Since the assassination is what made Johnson the President, I think of that one as one of the most suspicious….

    Like · 1 · 14 hrs · Edited
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Was Johnson in on it from the beginning… or was he just blackmailed and intimidated by the assassins who were backed by the British Monarchy?
  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar Interesting topics, indeed! I think maybe I’m sleepy and not making sense. I meant the interview he gave with Megan Kelly where he degraded women and acted nonchalant about having in the past said racist/sexist comments. I’ll check back tomorrow when my mind is sharper and see again what you wrote and so that I too can be more reflective about my own comments and this article. Thank you for making such clever jokes. I especially enjoyed your joke at the end of that other post about the magazine. It’s a pleasure to communicate with you.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I am confident that some comments I made in the last few decades were interpreted as sexist or racist. The reality is that racism was the foundation of the USA… And I do not mean the treatment of African and Irish slaves. I mean the indigenous populations, as well as the treatment of the Chinese in the 19th century (especially in California) and the Japanese during world war 2 (all over the US).

    Some would say that anti-Arab “racism” is a core part of the politics of the allies of Israel, such as Hillary or Bernie etc etc etc…. Not sure about trump’s stated position on Israel, but I do not expect any politician to actually take actions that significantly reduce the cash flow of massive foreign aid to Israel (no matter what they say on campaign).

    Like · 1 · 13 hrs · Edited
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn If someone thinks of a political candidate as racist (in a way that you do not like), then you can vote against them. What is new about that? Again, even president Lincoln, whom African Americans may celebrate, made very explicit racist comments (about “niggers”).
    Like · 1 · 13 hrs · Edited
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn To be clear, I think that most people in the US are often hysterical and I further think that the school system and mass media are specifically designed to promote “unexamined” hysterias and paranoias, like about illegal drugs or guns or cholesterol or global warming. They do their job well.
    Like · 1 · 13 hrs · Edited
  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar Scintillating comments–all very true. But I think the articles point wasn’t that he was a racist or sexist but that he was an unapologetic racist/sexist. That his un-political correctness was the appeal to some people who are nowadays too lazy to even try to keep up appearances as being against things collectively frowned upon. The more I think of your original comments from a Buddhist perspective, however, the more I agree that Rolling Stones is just doing what they do, stirring up gossip and making character attacks without any real substance paid to what’s really happening, so it’s more of a distraction from politics. Very insightful.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Why should I care what is “collectively frowned upon?”
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn If trump is unapologetic, so be it. Should he be apologetic? Should all politicians apologize for their opinions?
    Like · 1 · 13 hrs
  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar We tend to collectively value virtues and collectively frown upon vices.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn People who are operating in a hysteria of social anxiety may think that “racial equality” is a “better concept” than “racism.” Since you referenced Buddhism, I will note that all concepts are equally conceptual. Prejudice against “racists” is still prejudice.

    prejudice against various kinds of sexism (militant feminism or militant misogyny) is also more bias based on the worship of one concept as better than other concepts.

    Like · 1 · 13 hrs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Now do not say that I am criticizing prejudice. Prejudice is a very important coping mechanism. wink emoticon
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Well… Maybe I was criticizing in the sense of analyzing it, but I was not ridiculing it, right?
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn As for virtues and vices, I think of “being apologetic” (as in reactively apologetic) as a vice. There are times to apologize and times to respectfully withdraw (with no apologies), as well as times to be aggressive.

    “for every pattern under heaven, there is a time. A time for peace and for war… For love and for hate.”

    – king Solomon

    (The book of Ecclesiastes)

    Like · 1 · 13 hrs · Edited
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Those ideas of that ancient king of Israel are similar to the basics of Taoism.

    “Hysterical liberals” may have a prejudice against war or hatred. I certainly did when I was “under the influence” of trying to conform to “what society values” (according to the programming of schools and media). It was the extreme of arrogance in my life.

    Like · 1 · 13 hrs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn But a hysterical shame about hatred tends to correspond to SELF-hatred. “I need to know what society values and then conform to that.”

    Is that a great virtue or a great vice? It is useful to respect the various value systems within a culture and subcultures. To strive for perfection according to some inherited set of social values is the ultimate social anxiety / paranoia.

    Like · 1 · 13 hrs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Do I hate asparagus? If so, then it is good for me to know so I can generally avoid it, right? wink emoticon
    Like · 1 · 13 hrs
  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar J R Fibonacci Hunn You said, “There are times to apologize and times to withdraw,” …that’s true if one still has a choice in their response. But elected officials think and act for all constituents, as well as the country. So it is only natural we do not want corrupted leader, because we are no longer able to participate in the choice. So looking for evidence of corruption is part of the process of selection. It is true that certain prejudices are helpful defense mechanisms, like you said, but it is also true that we can train ourselves to not engage in- or perpetuate- socially inculcated prejudices, such as racism/classism/sexism or other forms of elitism, knowing that these are not helpful (you do agree these are unhelpful attitudes, right?) to work toward peace. Perhaps I am misperceiving your message? I am interested in hearing about what you describe as the “extreme arrogance” of your life, being indoctrinated by schools and society. Do you think that these are liberals’ messages? How has your life changed today and what changed your way of thinking?
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Disastrous results motivated a relaxing of perfectionism and arrogance.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I lost the ability to walk (which I recovered). I experienced a series of financials setbacks. I also experienced collapses in certain personal relationships.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Those were all in the last 15 years. Also, in the 1990s I reported a violation of policy by a co-worker to the department of justice, expecting an investigation and disciplining of that co-worker as well as a possible reversal of “unauthorized” penalties against an inmate.

    that was actually a pretty big transition as well. I witnessed that “whistle-blowers” are not always greeted with parades.

    I was fired. Lots of other people who knew first-hand about the situation which I reported were also fired. The actual misconduct, to the very best of my knowledge, was completely ignored.

    Like · 1 · 1 hr
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Over time, I came to the conclusion that special interest groups may regulate human behavior, such as defining certain behaviors as crimes UNLESS AUTHORIZED by that special interest group. When a group regulates extortion, that means they punish unauthorized extortion. Their own rituals of extortion (such as taxation) are protected.
    Like · 1 · 1 hr
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Another “dent in the programmed delusions of mainstream schooling” actually happened to me as a student at a public university. I learned about events in WW2 that the soviets (who were then the allies of the U.S.) had blamed on the Nazis. Eventually, the Soviet Union publicly admitted the deception (in the early 1990s). Their soldiers committed the Katyn Forest massacre and then they had blamed the Nazis for political reasons.

    The Media in the UK and the U.S. Had simply repeated the soviet propaganda. As time went on, I realized that this was not very exceptional, but quite normal. I read the short 1929 book “propaganda” by Edward Bernays in which he detailed how he was hired by the U.S. Government to promote public receptivity to an invasion of Europe. He explained how he invented stories to outrage and shame the U.S. public in to supporting that invasion of Europe (which we now call world war 1). Bernays also detailed the methods used to publicize those invented stories and why it was so easy to get so many media outlets to print his fictional press releases.

    Like · 1 · 1 hr
  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar Ahhh… congratulations on your awakening.Do you think your suffering has improved your life?
  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar I will have to check out that book Propoganda that you are talking about.
    Unlike · 1 · 1 hr
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Nicky, you referenced prejudices as defense mechanisms. Here is my take.

    A very common sequence of how prejudice and conceptual bias arises is that there is first an act of aggression and then the formation of a justification for the aggression. In cases like world war one, the aggression was so complex that the justification was conceived prior to the deployment of soldiers.

    in the case of the invasion of Vietnam by the US, we may notice that the use of a slur such as the word “gook” by US soldiers was a consequence of their aggression. Notice that 10 or 20 years prior to the deployment of troops, the troops probably did not know the word Gook. After involvement in the slaughter of civilians, that is when the psychological attraction to forming racist concepts developed.

    Like · 1 · 1 hr
  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar Ha! That book is $695 on Amazon.http://smile.amazon.com/Propa…/dp/0970312598/ref=sr_1_1…

    “Bernays’ honest and practical manual provides much insight into some of the most powerful…
    Unlike · 1 · 1 hr
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn As for the European tendency to Display prejudice against Africans, is it fair to consider the long history of military conquest of the moors in to what is now Spain and France and so on? When we consider cases of colonization or out right massacre, we can notice a correlation to an increase in prejudice by the invaders against the colonized population as well as a counter prejudice of the colonized population against the new oppressors.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn So, the idea that racism is a form of hysteria may be quite astute. However, the idea that hysteria should not exist is also very notable. It is arrogant. It is preposterous. It is contrary to observation. In short, it is hysterical as in hysteria.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Plus, it is ironic as in hypocritical. Because of the hypocrisy, the psychological maturity required to perceive the simplicity of The irony may be quite rare.
    Like · 1 · 1 hr
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn There is a time for psychological maturity and a time for hysterical presumptiveness. The challenge with hysterical presumptiveness is that there can be so much resistance to relaxing that habitual coping mechanism.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn You can download the book for free as a PDF.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The reason that sellers list high prices on Amazon may be that they are selling one of the first editions (a collectors item).
    Like · 1 · 1 hr
  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar I can’t help but read your words in harmony with the music of “turn, turn”—There is a time for psychological maturity and a time for hysterical presumptiveness… a time to reap a time to sow…
    Unlike · 1 · 1 hr
  • Todd Daniels get the kindle one
    Unlike · 2 · 1 hr
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I am certain that suffering and distress and disappointment have motivated new sequences of learning. The ideas that I was programmed to worship in public school rituals included conceptual illusions that eventually dissolved because of lasting contrasSee More
    Like · 1 · 1 hr
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I did not mention yet that I lived in a Buddhist monastery briefly. I was disappointed. The simple reality of the ending of illusions is that when the programmed illusions dissolve, then there can be a period of disorientation. The ending of illusions can be called disillusionment or enlightenment.

    There can be a burst of delirious joy initially. Chronic physical tensions that were developed as coping mechanisms for the social pressures of public school rituals may relax. It can be like releasing a parking brake on a car.

    However, those early releases of latent joy and delight are not the last notable experience in the sequence of awakening. There may still be many layers of drama and chronic physical tension related to suppressing certain emotions as shameful such as fear or anger or grief.

    Like · 1 · 1 hr
  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar So you left the monastery?
  • Nicky Curran-Farahvarhttp://blogs.scientificamerican.com/…/decoding-trump…/

    Fans of Donald Trump praise his dedication to…
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Note that I mention public school rituals in particular. While those rituals set up a very severe social anxiety and obsession about social validation and what society values, those rituals are of course based on other rituals of earlier imperial institutions, such as the Roman Catholic Church’s Office of the Inquisition to regulate the propagation of certain public perceptions.
    Like · 1 · 57 mins
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Nicky, the song you referenced (by The Byrds) is lyrically a paraphrasing of the third chapter of Ecclesiastes, which is credited to King Solomon.
    Like · 1 · 54 mins
  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar Wow. You read the bible too? I say that without a trace of sarcasm. I never read the bible. My dad forbade it.
  • Nicky Curran-Farahvar But I assume you are no longer Christian, so it impresses me when even non-christians know more about Christianity than Christians do.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I left a Zen monastery populated almost entirely by white folks and then visited a monastery with only a handful of monks from Thailand. There were no females in residence. My visit there lasted under two weeks. I had a better sense by that time of what would be attractive to me so it did not take a long time to conclude that living in that monastery might be an impediment to my spiritual development.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I see the link about hating political correctness. I do not expect to click it.

    I do not hate The existence of hysteria. I hate being around hysteria.See More

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Todd may recall that I occasionally quote the Old Testament book of numbers. I do not own a physical Bible but I use the Internet. I have read Far more Buddhist scriptures in the last 20 years then Bible passages.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I have found it interesting that the references in the Old Testament are so clear as to the nature of the celestial beings. I believe that it was Elijah Who was taken up into heaven in a shining metallic craft.

    We also can review the record of how the God of Israel physically led Moses through the desert. The references to an army of angels residing at Mount Hermon and visiting Mount Sinai are very explicit.

    It is also very obvious to anyone who reviews the stories of various cultures that we see the same pattern over and over. The celestial being that led the Hopi tribe to start three villages in northern Arizona is described with the exact same references to the craft coming to the ground, then rising up, then leading the tribe to the specific locations. When viewed from above, those three villages have the same arrangement as the three Pyramids in Egypt or in Mesoamerica. The oral traditions of all of these populations indicate that the people were instructed by the celestial visitor as to the location of the buildings or the villages. Did the architects even know that they were duplicating the three stars in the constellation Orion, The three across the belt of Orion? I am almost certain that these primitive humans did not know what the three villages would look like from above in a satellite image. They did not know that they were being instructed to duplicate The geometry of the three stars in the belt of Orion.

How does everything fit? Perfectly!

August 21, 2015

Everything fits. All effects are a perfect match for the conditions that created them.

What about so-called “mysteries?” Does everyone have equal perceptiveness? No, there are clearly many mysteries that most people do not currently understand.

Before we review a few specific examples of contrasting levels of perceptiveness, note that some interpretations are more precise than others. Plus, when a particular interpretation has a lot of social validation, then skepticism and caution may be rare (and even intimidating to some people). If people presume that they comprehend something, then they may lack curiosity or even resist unfamiliar ideas. The more embarrassed that they are about their lack of competence in a subject, they more intensely they may attempt to distract from their lack of competence, such as by ridiculing unfamiliar ideas. They may even panic hysterically and explode in a jealous rage.

What triggers their jealousy? They may perceive that someone else may have superior competence in a subject of interest to them.

Next, let’s review a few quick examples of how everything fits. We can consider examples in the realms of health, wealth, and self-development.


First, in the field of health, some specialists may lack understanding of the mechanisms that produce a particular result. Everything fits, but not everyone knows how certain things fit together!

As a simple example, imagine that there is a glass jar that contains no Vitamin C in it. We can attach a label to the jar that has the words “incurable scurvy.” However, the label has no effect on the contents of the jar, right? Adding the label has no effect. Removing the label also has no effect. Altering the label or putting another label over it has no effect.
However, labeling can be very important to some people. Some specialists may label a particular set of symptoms as “incurable,” which simply means that they lack a comprehension of how to discontinue certain results. However, no matter how many specialists refer to a particular diagnostic label as “incurable,” their labeling still has no effect on the competence of other researchers and the effectiveness of other methods.

Next, in regard to wealth and financial trends, some analysts may lack understanding of the mechanisms that produce a particular result. They may label a particular development “surprising” or “unexpected” or even “unexplainable.” What would that labeling indicate about them? They probably did not have to skill to predict that outcome (possibly predicting some other outcome that did not develop).

However, no matter how many investment analysts refer to a particular development as “impossible” (or “inevitable”), their labeling has no effect on the competence of other analysts. More competent analysts may use other methods to take different measurements (or the same measure in more precise ways), then offer logical interpretations, and issue relevant forecasts.

In fact, when there is an extreme consensus among certain groups of investment analysts, there is a long history of a strong correlation to inaccuracy. When there is extreme discounting of an investment market, that means that most people are willing to sell that investment for a lower price than usual. That discounting can be measured. When discounting is most extreme, that consistently corresponds to unusually high long-term profitability and unusually low long-term risk (of continuing declines in market price).
When forecasting investment markets, measures of consensus (AKA “sentiment”) help to indicate whether a particular price trend is mature (ripe to reverse). When buyers are nearly unanimously enthusiastic, that means that they are exhausting their ability to continue buying, which is what has been driving prices up. When sellers have been pessimistically discounting a market (reducing the price for which they are willing to sell that investment), then that corresponds to a lot of unused buying power still available to sharply drive prices up.

When most investors are interested in social validation for their investment choices, then they wrongly associate extremes of optimism with safety and opportunity. The reverse is true. Extremes of hysterical optimism (optimism based on perceived social validation) have the least safety and least opportunity. Likewise, extremes of hysterical pessimism offer the safest and most lucrative buying opportunities.

So there are contrasting levels of perceptiveness in health, in wealth, and in everything else. What other benefits are there for recognizing the reality of contrasting levels of perceptiveness?

In interacting with other people, different levels of hysteria and anxiety can be observed. The more perceptive that someone is to other people, the more quickly that various kinds of distress or comfort can be identified (“diagnosed”).


For instance, a very common indicator of anxiety is to make a distressed statement like this: “stop analyzing me! You always analyze everything too much. Analyzing is bad and negative and wrong. My analysis of you is that you analyze other people which you should not do because that is just wrong because obviously people should not analyze other people.”

Unless they are joking, they are clearly demonstrating distress (anxiety). They may be ashamed, plus embarrassed that they are ashamed, and likely to harass others who do not respect their “boundary traps.” In other words, they bait others in indirectly, then claim a “boundary violation,” then justify their harassment of others with their claim of a boundary violation.


Noticing their suppressed distress can avoid “unexpected drama.” Withdrawing and/or setting clear healthy boundaries can allow for moderate amounts of focused interaction without triggering them. Or, humor can be used to delicately “trigger” them (and if this process is being done attentively, then to can be refined or discarded as relevant).

What about assessing one’s own levels of stress (distress) and then responding to that stress? The methods available range from suppressing the display of stress (“burying it”) to altering stressful circumstances in one’s life (like improving wealth). We can also relieve some of the symptoms of stress, such as chronic physical tension in the muscles of the neck or back.


Further, removing the causes of stress may not automatically reverse habitual coping mechanisms. When there is no further underlying demand for a coping mechanism, then they may dissolve by themselves or may easily be interrupted once and then never resume. However, when we address symptoms without addressing the causes, then the symptoms predictably return eventually.

Why do people form habits as a way to cope with stress and the unfamiliar? People form habits because habits may provide an element of stability in the midst of instability. Habits are just “personal rituals.” So, if the underlying motivations remain (to cope with “real” stresses or with embarrassment regarding social validation) and then a particular habit is interrupted, what is predictable? A more extreme habit may form.


Get superior results from superior methods

August 16, 2015

Get superior results from superior methods        
Are you skeptical ​about many popular practices?
​Are you willing to admit it when average results disappoint you?
Are you open to getting above average results (even if it requires using above average methods)?

If you answered yes to at least 2 of the above questions, then you might be a snob​. (If you refused to answer the questions just because you can, then you are definitely a snob!)

Realistically, this website is probably not for you (unless you are above average). The average person probably lacks the discernment and discipline to benefit from this website. Why would the average person decline to receive attractive benefits that are easy to obtain?

Because this website features results that are only available through exclusive methods, most people will not get those results (even if those results are very appealing to them). For some people, their familiar methods are coping mechanisms to attempt to stay within a familiar range of experience and emotions (to stay “muted”). They value the familiar over the attractive. In fact, attraction may be an experience that they habitually minimize or avoid.

So, exactly how common is it for people to have the courage to explore unfamiliar methods? That courage (also called curiosity) is universal in small children. However, because children lack social discernment, they are easily deceived. So, when the children eventually realize that they have been tricked, they naturally learn shame (shyness, social caution).

Before we explore some of the results available through this site, let’s briefly review the example of Santa Claus. If there is a consistent  message presented to children, will they be skeptical or naively receptive? What if each message triggers powerful emotions in them, like excitement about the gifts that they hope to receive if they are obedient to their parent’s preferences? Will those strong emotions about getting a particular Christmas present distract them from carefully assessing the logic of the stories of Santa Claus that they are being told?

Which gets more attention from those children? Do they independently assess the logical plausibility of the Santa Claus story or do they get interested in observing what behaviors their parents encourage or discourage? Don’t most children focus primarily on identifying what behaviors they think will attract their favorite toys, then present the “good” behaviors that their parents encourage and avoid or at least hide the “bad” behaviors that their parent’s discourage?

Which is more relevant (for producing results): taking the appropriate actions or comprehending the “big picture?” To get their desired present (as a reward)​, kids are smart to focus on how to modify their behavior to get what they desire. They do not really need to know the specific details of the actual identity of Santa Claus, right? They just learn to conform to the behaviors that the powerful reward, then they earn their reward.
In this website, you can review several results that may be attractive to you. Those results are only available to you through certain actions (actions which you would have to either perform yourself or hire someone else to take for you).
You could take the time to learn how the methods work. However, that is optional.

You do not need to understand how a computer works to use one. You do not even need to know how light bulbs create light to benefit from them. You just learn to flip the light switch and that is usually enough.

How many electricians does it take to change a light bulb? Zero… because you can do that yourself, right?

Again, understanding the methods is optional. However, to get superior results, you are required to use the superior methods.


​Average people may want to support a politician who will tell them that is okay to keep their familiar methods forever… because, if elected, the politician can just change some law and doing that will make an average method magically produce above average results.​ Many people hope that political reforms can reduce risk. However, many laws do nothing to reduce risk and instead simply transfer risk.


Where do the laws transfer the risk? Governments frequently transfer risk from certain corporations to the public.

To briefly review some examples of that, click HERE. { LINK NOT ACTIVE } To browse through the superior results available through this site, click HERE. { SCROLL DOWN }

A well-known example in the US is the FDIC. The FDIC is an insurance program that is designed to be paid for by taxpayers. Rather than banks being held solely responsible (by courts) for the financial obligations of the banks, the FDIC transfers some of that risk from banks to taxpayers.

A less-know example is the VICP. That US government program was started in the 1980s. The general public is the source of over $3 billion of awards that have been paid to over 4,000 people as compensation for injuries (including deaths) that the US government determined to have been caused by vaccines. That is an average of about $750,000 per approved claim.

Who lobbied most enthusiastically for the VICP program? Would you be surprised to find that pharmaceutical companies poured millions of dollars in to promoting the creation of that program (which has relieved them of immense financial risks)?

​If you were a shareholder of a pharmaceutical company, wouldn’t you prefer that the government transfer financial risk ​from your company to the public? Or, if you ran a bakery, wouldn’t you prefer that the government transferred risk from your company to the public? Or, if your company built furniture, how would you feel about a massive transfer of liability from your company to the government?

The point is that some industries receive special favoritism from the government. In fact, governments are in the business of special favoritism. That is what they do.

In some cases, the special favoritism is completely unearned, such as in the case of the winner of a state lottery. They bought a lottery ticket just like thousands of other people, but they happened to get a wining ticket.

In other cases, the special favoritism is conditional on certain qualifications. Some governments offer special health care benefits to elected officials, military veterans, and public school teachers. However, while all of those health care benefits may be paid for by the public, they might not all be the same health care benefits. Which group is most likely to vote to give themselves a more lavish health care package: elected officials, military veterans, or teachers?

Elected officials tend to be more openly elitist than other groups. Other groups tend to be more concerned with public perceptions about them as a group.

Politicians tend not to care much about how people perceive them as a group. Most people have so much emotional arousal that they do not consider the politicians as a single group. Instead, the average person love their favorite political heroes and condemn whoever they perceive to be a threat to their favorite outcomes.

So, if an individual politician can polarize the masses, that creates two different forms of intense emotional arousal. Controversy is what attracts attention, with one group excited about the individual politician and another group also increasing the publicity of that politician by viciously condemning them. As long as the public is talking about the controversies and scandals programmed by the mass media, the individual politicians focus on polarizing public opinion about them as an individual.

The polarizing of public opinion is the key. The masses argue over individuals instead of recognizing the simplicity of the larger pattern.

So, politicians tend not to be idealistic perfectionists. They are just practical. They care about public opinion about them personally because they are public opinion specialists. They learn what behaviors to present to the public to attract certain rewards (to polarize public opinion), then they carefully conform to displaying only those behaviors that trigger the desired emotions in the public.

Why is it that governments run gambling operations like state lotteries? Is it because the government workers care so much about the financial results of all of the participants in the state lottery? Or, do governments run state lotteries because elected officials realize that publicizing huge jackpots creates a massive positive emotional association for the people who read those billboards and see those advertisements?

Obviously, most people do not win $10 million or $100 million from their lottery ticket, but many people LOVE the IDEA of winning the lottery jackpot. That IDEA creates massive attraction to lotteries. Public opinion about lotteries can be overwhelmingly favorable.

Imagine that casinos in a certain area earn $10 billion per year, resulting in tax income to various governments of several billion dollars (for use in various programs like education, health care benefits for politicians and so on). Then, imagine that government-operated lotteries earn about the same amount of profit and provide about the same portion of their earnings to the exact same government programs. Which of those two flows of money will help create positive emotions that improve public opinion about governments?

Politicians like programs that the public likes. In fact, politicians like to present programs to the public in ways that result in the public liking those programs. In other words, politicians are interested in creating positive public sentiment.

Imagine that some political parties form in order to appeal to “populism.” That is, they just want to create a set of programs that the public likes. Then, while the public focuses on the numbers that will win the state lottery (and perhaps a few current scandals), the primary business of politics goes on in the background. Huge amounts of money are involuntary redistributed from the public to select groups. Maybe a government pays a few billion dollars to a drug company (or creates a law that requires the public to directly pay that company), but if the government can get the public to experience hysterical support for that program, then the basic fact of the involuntary redistribution of wealth is not in question. Instead of the public questioning the basic program of involuntary redistribution, two opposing parties form and then argue hysterically over exactly which forms of involuntary redistribution are most justified (or least justified).

“National Socialists” of all political parties cooperate to give the public a sense that there is meaningful conflict between the opposing parties. What if the foundation of government is “corporate welfare” (special favoritism of specific industries that form governments and then lobby those governments for favors)? What if the “icing on the cake” is the bait of social welfare programs that attract the masses to vote in elections to “heroically” redistribute wealth to “the most deserving recipients?”

Again, individual politicians do not need to understand what results the system produces or how it does so. They may be sincere idealists (“useful idiots”).

One group of national socialists specialize in fanatical nationalism and “tolerate” moderate amounts of socialism (perhaps with a few theatrical protests for the mass media). The other group of national socialists specialize in fanatical socialism and “tolerate” moderate amounts of nationalism (probably with a few theatrical protests for the mass media).

The two groups of elected officials present to the public that the groups oppose each other in some meaningful way. However, those may be just a few hundred elected officials. Far away from the theatrics of opposition and controversy and emotion, the vast majority of government workers continue to perform their rituals of coercive redistribution and special favoritism. As time passes, different beneficiaries receive different special favors.

The public habitually celebrate the various political programs that they FEEL good about and complain about others as “unfortunate injustices.” Modeling their commentaries after the “babyface” politicians and the “heel” politicians, different groups in the public copy the different commentaries of their political heroes from their favorite political party.

What is the ultimate effect of such a “democratic debate?” Does it help to maintain high rates of compliance with programs involuntary taxation and involuntary confiscation (like seizing automobiles from people who are accused of carrying certain amounts of marijuana in their car)?

Can you recall the first question on this website? “Are you skeptical ​about many popular practices?”

If you have been a fanatical supporter of political reforms and activism, then you have probably been influenced by the programming of public schooling and mainstream media. How skeptical are you about the general quality of content in the mainstream media? Have you noticed that coverage of particular stories may be excessive in your opinion, while other stories either get ignored or reported in misleading ways?

How about public education? How skeptical are you about the general quality of those programming operations? Have you noticed that coverage of particular topics may be excessive in your opinion, while other topics either get ignored or presented in misleading ways?

In schools, children are trained to identify what the authorities will reward in tests, then memorize and repeat that content. That is basically the opposite of critical thinking and the scientific method. Children are programmed about science. They are not simply encouraged to actually invent their own hypotheses and then construct methods to attempt to invalidate their premise.

They are presented with a specific series of claims of scientific consensus. In fact, the idea of directly participating in scientific inquiry and debate is directly contrary to most programs of public schooling. Technicians (such as pharmacists and physicians) are trained to conduct pre-existing rituals. They are not encouraged to innovate or challenge consensus. They are spoon-fed rituals and then tested on the precision of their conformity. They are regimented and regulated for standardization.

So, standards of practice are created by bureaucrats (or the lobbyists who actually author the legislation), then technicians are trained in those practices, and then the practices are popularized by the mass media (so that there is favorable public opinion about the rituals that the technicians have been trained to blindly perform). How does the media program the public to relate to the trained technicians? The technicians are presented as having scientific credibility because they conform to standards of practices created by bureaucrats (or actually lobbyists).

The technicians are presented as the high priests of an infallible religion called “popular science.” Ironically, the bureaucracy that regulates the technicians has a long record of opposing science (and ridiculing those who promote critical thinking, skepticism, and scientific methods). The “crowning irony” may be that websites claiming to be “skeptics” may simply repeat popular indoctrination and then ridicule those who dare to question the “infallible authority” of government-approved “science.”

In schools and the media, how are students trained to relate to the practice of debating politics? Debating politics is not only presented as important and even heroic, but as “essential for good citizenship.” If you want to get special favors from Santa Claus, then you pay attention to what behaviors Santa encourages, right? Santa does NOT reward questioning “scientific” consensus, right? Santa does reward the idea of “expressing your political will by voting.”

But why does Santa encourage the behaviors that Santa encourages? For instance, if you want to transfer risk from your company to the public, which is the best way to invest your time and money: activism with the general public or lobbying the elected officials?

What if Santa encourages behavior in the general public that promote obedience and compliance with the interests of Santa? What if Santa wants a stable cash flow? Would Santa resort to running gambling operations? Would Santa justify the gambling operations with emotionally-loaded publicity about “what is good for children?” If Santa can get the public to associate “doing what is right for the children ” with “running a gambling operation,” then why not continue business as usual and add a new layer of icing on the cake: a state lottery to fund a further concentrating of government influence over children?

What if instead of worshiping whatever Santa Claus rewards us for worshiping, we respect the manipulations of Santa and either play along or not? Santa might encourage us to “get politically active to let Santa know which forms of involuntary redistribution you support the most.” Maybe we participate in voting rituals. Maybe we spend a few million dollars to lobby for the government to transfer risk from our company (or our industry) to the public. Maybe we do both. Maybe we do neither.

Eventually, we may reduce our interest in what behaviors Santa Claus is publicizing, rewarding, or punishing. We may be interested in obtaining certain results and avoiding others, but we may completely lose interest in “voting to express our political will about the best way to reform the local systems of involuntary redistribution.”

To briefly review some examples of the superior results produced by superior methods, click HERE. { LINK NOT ACTIVE }

Shaming people for being “ungrateful”

August 13, 2015



Sarah brought up the subject of happiness and gratitude (and maturity). Here is what I wrote to her:

You my have noticed that I am very attentive to words. Where does silence come from? Where does unrage come from? Where does stillness come from?

These terms refer to the absence of something: no sound, no rage, and no movement. How about “ungrateful?” Gratitude is a pattern and it is an experience that “comes from” certain processes or practices.

In my life, I have been targeted for emotional harassment and abuse by people who said to me (and to others) “you should be more grateful.” They were shaming me. They were in a type of distress called anger (specifically, resentment).

They were not being grateful or respectful. I am not saying that they should have been more grateful or more respectful or less abusive or less resentful.

They were just practicing emotions and behaviors that had been repressed in their life. When there has been social pressure to be a certain way and not be other ways, then that pressure will tend to eventually release in the absence of ongoing intimidation and bullying.

In my own adult life, have I ever “guilt-tripped” someone and targeted them for resentment, saying “you should be more grateful!?!?” Yes, and it is the same hysteria when I did it or when someone else does it.

What leads to resentment? It is easy to see in a 2 year old. They have a preference, then they relate to it as an expectation (or something that “they deserve” / “other people owe to them”). Eventually, someone somewhere (or even their dog) will not do whatever they expect. People may even do other things INSTEAD of what was expected.

The natural thing for a child who is TIRED is to “throw a tantrum.” That can take the form of “people should be more grateful, RIGHT?!?!”

When the expectation does not fit with observed reality, a tired child may get so confused and frustrated that they send a distress signal. They will call for help and attention by attacking others (often just verbally). That may work to get someone to help them settle in for a much-needed nap. (For adults, they may attract some much-needed attention from some cops and be rewarded with a bit of jail-time to “cool down.”)

What about a child who is well-rested? What do they do when their observations do not match their expectations? They simply revise their expectations. If they still want to pursue a particular goal, then they alter their approach and keep experimenting.

“I wish people would be more attentive to me” is a direct expression of disappointment. Guilt-tripping others is a more complex (indirect) expression of disappointment. “Those people should be more grateful, RIGHT!?!?”

It is an invitation for social interaction. It is a harsh and tense invitation, but still an initiative to reach out.

To throw a tantrum or guilt-trip someone is a social manipulation. We can attempt to manipulate other people by threatening (or displaying) social rejection of them.

One approach is “if you give me a cookie, I will be your best friend.” The contrasting approach is “I deserve a cookie. Why doesn’t anyone around here appreciate the obvious fact that I deserve a cookie? I do not know how I put up with these greedy punks who do not offer me a cookie every time that I come in to the room. I am such a GENEROUS person. I forgive them for their offensive crimes of not giving me a cookie. They should be more generous like me and give me a cookie. Aren’t they GRATEFUL for the fact that I am here? Don’t they LOVE me? They should, RIGHT?!?! “

Resolving a persistent “time crunch”

August 5, 2015

There are 3 main limitations that people experience:

time crunch
cash crunch
health challenges

crushing a clock

Sometimes, the easiest issue to remedy is a time crunch. Here’s a story to clarify that.

Imagine a single parent who lives in the remote wilderness in the 18th century. Even with lots of money, there are no stores around for buying food. In fact, there are no people around except for that one parent and the offspring.

If that person experiences stress related to raising the children, there are literally no adults around to assist. The single parent could be a bear or a human. Either way, they need basic things like food and safety, right?

If the parent cannot buy food, then they would have to find it or grow it. Even with lots of time to grow food, growing food takes more than just time. It takes water, healthy soil, sunlight, and so on. Plus, one cold wave could freeze to death an entire harvest.

So, that person could face a real time crunch in relation to something like the end of daylight or the approach of winter. Maybe they have only a certain amount of food or fuel, and a scarcity of crucial resources creates a time crunch for them.

Their health is at risk. For them, time is a factor in promoting their health. They could already have a health crisis and time could be a factor in it. Or, they could anticipate a possible health crisis in the near future and again time could be an important factor in preventing an anticipated crisis.

That situation might not be easy to remedy. Some time crunches are easier to remedy than others. The single parent in the wilderness in the 18th century may not have someone from the government coming to their door every week and offering to donate food and fuel or medical services.

So now let’s jump ahead to the 21st century. For most people in the world, they are within a day’s journey of an enormous amount of food and other wealth. Near them, there are an abundance of resources that are easy to find (just look for any grocery store).

However, modern people have so much wealth in their midst that they may not have developed their social skills much. They have not needed to.

They may have had plenty of money to buy food most of their lives. If they have a sudden cash crunch, they may be terrified and ashamed of their terror (rather than humble and openly desperate).

They may even know that there is government assistance available for someone with a low amount of earned income (note that “earned” income may exclude things like alimony or child support payments). However, they may be too ashamed to apply for assistance (and very ironically they may refer to their shame as “pride”). Do they refuse to ask for help because of too much pride, or from not enough self-respect (or we could say not enough commitment)?

By the way, I was raised in a middle class household (financially stable) and then later in life I obtained something that is generally called “food stamps.” (Actually, I did not receive any actual stamps, but just a plastic card that was charged with some credit for buying food.)

Of various experiences that I personally have found to be embarrassing, obtaining assistance was quite unremarkable. I was grateful to receive the assistance although impatient about how long it took (which, as I recall, was less than a week). I was not embarrassed about receiving the assistance. I may have been embarrassed about my financial situation at the time, but whether or not I got assistance for buying food, that issue was totally independent of any embarrassment about my overall financial situation.

Getting assistance helped my situation. So, how would getting assistance itself be embarrassing?

I learned a fantastic “cure” for the embarrassment about my overall financial situation. I call that cure “humiliation” and it results in something I call “humility.”

Much more stressful for me (than getting credits for buying food) was a moderate health crisis. I say moderate because there was no immediate risk of death.

Briefly, I lost the ability to walk in early 2007. That motivated me to ask for help from friends and strangers. Some strangers helped and some did not. Naturally, some friends helped more than others.

I did recover physically and in the process I developed self-respect that was not present before. In other words, there was shame and grief that I had suppressed prior to that which I released. I will come back to the issue of repressed emotion soon.

First, recall that we were imagining a single parent in the 21st century (and not in the wilderness). Imagine that there is plenty of food around them.

However, to access the food, people use money (including credits issued by a government). So, if someone gets a monthly credit for buying food, but uses most of that credit in the first week, I do not call that a time crunch. That is just a money crunch.

If they are hungry or even starving, again that is not a time crunch. That is a health challenge.
What is a time crunch? That is a great question.

When there is a background of health challenges and economic scarcity, then we can have a time crunch. For instance, earlier, I mentioned the time crunch of an approaching winter.

Generally, a time crunch is a label for having a limited amount of time to handle a cash crunch or a health challenge. However, that is not always the case.

A time crunch is about perception and time management. For many modern people, what they call a time crunch is actually stress about a lack of social competence.

This may be a startling idea, so let’s explore it. If someone desires to have more food for winter and there is plenty of food around plus a variety of ways for them to get it (from government charity or private charity), then there is an obvious solution. However, many people do not use the obvious solution (or only after a period of resisting it). Why?

People resist a particular method in order to create a perception of a time crunch. They create an outlet for grieving.

With grieving, they may withdraw from familiar social contacts. By withdrawing, they can observe who (if anyone) reaches out to them. If anyone shames or ridicules them, they can observe that, too.

Why would someone create a breakdown like that? Why would they sabotage their situation? I have done it myself and witnessed it many times in others.

My answer is simple. By creating a cause for withdrawal, they can reduce their social interaction dramatically. Why would that be so valuable?

Imagine that someone is in a room full of radios and all of the radios are turned up very loud but playing different stations. There is too much going on to actually enjoy any of the stations. The conflicting sounds could be very disorienting and even stressful.

So, creating a cause for withdrawal is a response to social stress. Instead of being disoriented and irritable, someone who withdraws can then occasionally give attention to individual interactions and really notice their own experience. Which subjects are stressful and which are relaxing? Who consistently offers goodwill and useful insight? Who consistently offers ridicule and harassment?

If there is plenty of money and plenty of health, then creating a time crunch can justify withdrawal. If someone is used to emotional harassment, then by withdrawing they can notice if they are pursued or allowed to withdraw without harassment.

Further, out of a lack of social skills (such as the ability to quickly distinguish between social threats and social allies), people may even create other challenges. The challenge simplifies their social context. It creates an interruption to prior momentums.

Sometimes, a time crunch can be resolved because it is really a cash crunch or a health challenge. Or, it may be even easier to resolve… really just a call for focused, supportive attention. After attracting supportive attention, the reality of finances and health can be calmly assessed and maybe there is no crisis. But if someone is terrified because of limited social skills by the possibility of a crisis, then they may need a supportive ally just to face the simple facts.

In other cases, there can be a lasting value to developing time management skills and practices. In that case, people may have sufficient health and wealth, but simply wish to casually explore different ways of prioritizing time and organizing their schedule.

Which would you prefer to explore next:

improving wealth
improving health
improving time management

Attraction x Repulsion = Propulsion

August 2, 2015

determined lady 2

Attraction x Repulsion = Propulsion

Multiply Motivation!

If you have been studying the subject of motivation for a while, have you noticed yet how rare it is that people mention how to combine attraction and repulsion? Many authors focus exclusively on attraction, while others present the idea of two exclusive categories of people, such as “opportunity chasers” and “risk avoiders.”

Those ideas are incomplete. In fact, they are so incomplete that many people influenced by those ideas will find themselves confused by the huge contrast between what they observe and what they have been programmed to expect. The confusion can lead to ongoing disappointment and then eventually frustration.

Imagine that someone gets frustrated after having been programmed with the idea that, if someone is sincere enough, then they should be able to produce ANY result. In that case, what would they interpret as the source of their frustration? Instead of simply identifying their method as ineffective, they might label themselves as “lacking faith” (or something like that). If they presume that “positive thinking” is always sufficient to produce any result, then any experience of frustration can trigger shame. Eventually, they may attempt to suppress the social display of frustration or even numb themselves to their own experience.

In particular, when “the law of attraction” got popular several years ago through new age churches and promoters like Oprah Winfrey, many people were initially excited but eventually disappointed. A notable case is that of James Ray, who was one of the featured experts in “The Secret.” A few years after his rise to fame, he was charged in relation to the death of a participant in a “positive-thinking” retreat, and then convicted and imprisoned.

+& -     6

So, the reality is that everyone sometimes experiences both attraction and repulsion (even at the same time). Sometimes we will experience a direct conflict between attraction to and repulsion from the same thing (such as in the case of shame or agonizing). Or, we can experience an alignment such that the attraction and repulsion create motion in the same direction (as pictured above).

To learn more about the basic principles of how to combine attraction and repulsion to create propulsion, click here. To skip ahead to browse some of the specific results available through our programs, click one of the links below:

Getting motivated & Motivating others

Getting motivated:

health, wealth, & emotional alignment

Motivating others:

marketing, communication, & management

Quick menu:


Contact us.

Browse index.

images: guidance system on magnetic trains? rocket ship? boat with two sails

Count Dracula speaks out on cruelty

July 30, 2015

“People should not be cruel, which is a lack of concern for the suffering of others. Instead, people should be emotionally disturbed by any suffering that they witness. In fact, they should go out of their way to find new instances of suffering for them to condemn in hysterical outrage. For instance, if an elephant steps on an ant pile and crushes hundreds of insects, then every lion who knows about the crushed insects should grieve in shame and beg for forgiveness, right?

So, that is why we are slowly killing the criminal that you see before you today. This criminal was convicted of cruelty and the shameless disregard for the suffering of others, plus committing a public ritual of human sacrifice without first completing the proper paperwork. Let the slow and painful death of this criminal be a sobering reminder that I have spoken out against cruelty and made it illegal, which means that it does not exist in our system. Therefore, anyone who witnesses a possible instance of cruelty must immediately report it to an officer of the law so that we can either keep cruel people from corrupting our holy empire or, if the accusation is unfounded, so we can punish those who falsely accuse others of cruelty.”

– Count Dracula
(a.k.a. Vlad “the Impaler” Tepes, the Proconsul of the Holy Roman Empire in Transylvania)



“It is really a tragedy that there are so many poor people in the British Empire, isn’t it? Those people need to learn to read, then read my King James Bible to understand what it says about God helping those who help themselves, and then finally stop bringing shame to our empire by their lack of wealth. Also, remember that you need to pay your annual taxes to the Inner Temple in London by the sacred day or else the high priest of the court will issue an order to the court soldiers to put you and your family in prison. Thank you for your loyal support!”

– King James of England


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 298 other followers

%d bloggers like this: