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

Respecting emotion (delight, shame, rage, etc)

July 5, 2015

Are emotions something you are open to experiencing? Exactly how open are you? However open you might think that you already are to emotions, you might experience further opening in a moment.

Remember that whatever emotions develop, you can relax by breathing calmly for a few moments. You might pause briefly now to calmly breath, then continue.

Did you pause yet? Is there anything that you could easily change (like in the room where you are right now) to improve your receptivity to any powerful emotions that may arise? If so, go ahead and change in before you keep reading.
“Suddenly a chariot of fire appeared… and [the Prophet] Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind.”

2 Kings 2:11

The original text in Hebrew:

יא ויהי המה הלכים הלוך ודבר והנה רכב אש וסוסי אש ויפרדו בין שניהם ויעל אליהו בסערה השמים

“… Behold, a whirlwind was coming from the north, a great cloud with fire flashing forth continually and a bright light around it, and, in the midst of the fire, something like glowing metal.”

Ezekiel 1:4
Those are two quotations from “the Old Testament,” which is an ancient oral tradition of the Israelites. The spoken words were later transcribed in to Hebrew writing, then translated, then published in the Christian Bible.

So, when you see certain shapes, can the perception of those shapes trigger powerful emotional responses for you? Right now, you are reading words that are composed of sequences of shapes (mostly letters plus a few “punctuation marks”). Perhaps you recognize a particular sequence of shapes and then you recognize each word and finally the meaning of the words together, right?

Once upon a time, there was a clear sequence of words that delivered a message that was very unfamiliar to many people. Imagine that some people were so frightened by the message that they obsessed over a particular word or a particular chapter. Sound familiar?

If disturbed enough, then they might even begin to argue over a few details (rather than calmly discuss the larger whole). They might even panic, dismissing the story as absurd or impossible or simply irrelevant. Then, they would focus on anything else that could distract them from their anxiety about the unfamiliar idea.

But why do some unfamiliar ideas produce curiosity while others produce panic? Why do different people have different reactions to the same ideas (or the same paintings or the same passages of scripture)?

What if someone is paranoid about anyone seeing them display fear? What if certain ideas were perceived as major threats because those ideas triggered fear and terror?

What if a person pretends to be calm and intelligent, but was actually constantly terrified about the possibility of a greater intelligence than their own? What if certain ideas were threatening to their pretense of calm intelligence? What if certain ideas exposed their constant paranoia and anxiety?

Next, imagine a Dutch painter in the year 1710 AD who saw something so fascinating that he included it in his painting. Maybe it was a round object that hovered over a gathering of people as it beamed down 4 shining “pillars.” Maybe the painter even labeled the 4 things “cherubim.”

baptism of christ

The painting above is titled “The Baptism of Christ” (“De Doop van Christus”). It was painted by De Gelder (1645 – 1727), a famous student of Rembrandt.

Next is an even older painting from about 1430 AD called “The Miracle of the Snow,” which features Jesus and Mary as well as some very unusual cloud formations. It was painted by Masolino Da Panicale (1383-1440).


Of course, it is not impossible that the artist actually saw those straight lines of naturally-occurring regular clouds and then simply copied something he saw, right? However, the event depicted is called a miracle not because it is normal, but because it was very surprising.

The “miracle” involved some snow falling in Rome, Italy on August 5th, 352 AD. Snow rarely falls in Rome at all. Snow in August (in the hot summer) would be even more surprising, right?

Now, back to the contents of the Bible, I have found it notable how little reference is made by most Christians to the contents of the Old Testament in particular. In fact, most Christians that I have met seem generally unfamiliar with almost all of the Bible.

Consider that they generally do not know what it says. They certainly do not learn Hebrew and study the original (untranslated) scriptures. They might not read many of the commentaries written in the last few thousand years. They might not be very interested in the Bible and comprehending it. In fact, they might be completely terrified of it. Maybe terror is the perfect result when people of their maturity and intelligence explore the contents of the Bible.

Back to the topic of emotions, how open are you to understanding the response called shame? Shame is a type of fear, right? How open are you to all different types of fear?

Many people value soothing diversions. They can escape for a while from a background experience of anxiety. They can distract themselves with popular trivia, such as the latest political controversy. They may have no actual personal interest in the topic, but they can converse about it for hours. When some new popular scandal is publicized to them (or discovered by them), they will ignore the older, familiar one and focus on the latest issue.

Some may be eager to argue over political reforms that are being negotiated thousands of miles away. Some may focus more on matters within their personal discretion (their direct influence or capacity).

The masses are programmed to focus on subjects that they cannot directly control. They are programmed to be excited, anxious, and even hysterical. The behaviors modeled for them in mainstream media includes a lot of complaining and arguing. They live in context of divisiveness (toward various other people) and condemnation toward perceived threats.

What other ways can someone relate to a perceived threat? First, someone could withdraw for safety. Second, someone could attempt to assess the specific risk and dangers. Third, someone could attempt to neutralize or reduce the dangers, such as by forming an alliance with the threat (or scaring the threat away).

In other words, people could respect a possible threat. They could be cautious about it. They could even pause occasionally to keep relaxed and to breath calmly.

Condemning a possible threat is an attempt to push away or repulse the possible threat. However, when Christians read the Old Testament, will they be terrified and ashamed of what is reported there as the recurring behavioral patterns of Moses or Phinehas or Hashem? What if they get no value through condemning those individuals and those stories?

Then they simply must find other things to condemn. Perhaps they will condemn the very same behaviors in others that are attributed to their own heroes in The Old Testament. However, as long as they do not read the Old Testament, they can just obsess over condemning anything that does not fit the preferences and presumptions that they have been programmed to keep and to protect.

I respect hysteria. I respect panics of condemnation. I respect that people seek to escape from shame through their panics of hysterical condemnation.

Shaming someone directly can result in them withdrawing or fleeing. Repeatedly insulting another person or criticizing them hysterically can drive them away.

However, condemning others will not relieve shame. Condemnation, at least how it is commonly practiced (as in vilification of a few distant targets), may be merely a diversion and thus must be constantly practiced or else the underlying experience of latent shame can suddenly be apparent and that can be quite intense.

So, shaming others hysterically does not end hysteria. You may have even read that somewhere before, right?

This has been a warning and an invitation. The warning is that anyone who is not ready to respect emotion should withdraw and forget this content (at least for a while). The invitation is that if you are ready to respect all emotions while calmly and intelligently studying them, then you can notify me by sending me a comment.

My genius story

July 2, 2015

Yes, I was recognized as a genius at an early age. Yes, I competed against other kids
(who were my age or older) and I performed far above average. Yes, I was lavished with attention for my
superior academic performance.

What about inner discipline? I found so many things to be easy that when
I did encounter something that did challenge me, I got frustrated easily. I would just quit
(maybe after inventing an excuse). If someone questioned my stated rationalization for quitting, I might
insist furiously that I did not care. But why so furious?

Also, what about communication and social skills? I was used to figuring things out on my own.
Most other people slowed me down. To do well in school, I certainly did not need to collaborate.
However, outside of school, I did not have much experience with other people. I was a classic nerd.
The more someone suggested I get assistance, the more I might insist on doing it myself.

What about when I got smarter than most adults and they did not understand my ideas (or did not find them
interesting)? Again, I lacked discipline and communication skills. Spoiled by the attention I got in schools,
I resented other people in my personal life for not being more admiring, more flattering, and more grateful.
Why weren’t they more like the recruiters who competed for my attention?

I was not just a classic nerd. I was also an under-appreciated, frustrated genius.
In other words, I was an arrogant brat.

Eventually, after years of boredom and frustration in graduate school, I was motivated to try something new.
The good news is that I learned a lot. The bad news is that being a genius was often irrelevant or even
counter-productive. I was simply not interested in many popular subjects and conversation topics.
I would rather read an entertaining book.

Also, I did not really want to find other geniuses. I wanted to find people that gave me social validation.
I wanted everything to be easy.

I wanted life to be more like school. In school, the teacher gives us the answers, which we memorize and repeat back.
Then, we get rewarded. We do not need to understand most of the material. Neither does the teacher.

Even if some idea taught in science class was disproven decades prior, I just wanted to know how to get a good grade.
Maybe other people valued comprehension and intelligence, but I just wanted someone to assign me
a curriculum and then be interested in me conforming to their rituals.

Over the years, I encountered interpersonal challenges, financial challenges, and then serious health challenges.
All of those challenges focused my motivation. Eventually, I realized that
if I networked with other people who were unusually perceptive at least in one area of expertise, that
could be very good for me.

I could develop new skills, especially by modeling successful people or even getting trained by them.
I could get better at communication (as long as I recognized a potential benefit to me
through the communication). I could get better at self-discipline in general (again, as long as I recognized a potential reward).

Eventually, some of those folks might also be perceptive enough (and desperate enough) to recognize my strengths. I could form mutually-attractive partnerships (the kind that everyone involved would value nurturing). Instead of just being an isolated genius, I could be part of a network of people getting breakthrough results from insightful, elegant innovations. That seemed like such an attractive outcome that it would even be worth some experiments and learning from “trial and error.” After all, that is the kind of thing that geniuses love, right?

benefit from the unique insights of a genius

July 2, 2015

(I’m thinking of going with this much simpler intro.)


Can you benefit from the unique insights of a genius (even if you are not a genius)? Sure you can!

In a medical emergency, how much does someone need to know about surgery to benefit from surgery?
To use a computer, how much do you need to know about electronics and circuit boards?
To fly on a plane, how much do you need to know about designing planes or how to pilot them?

You do not need to understand anything to benefit from a genius (except to know exactly what to do to get the results you value). Knowing why something works so well is totally optional. So, why is it so much easier to get results when using the methods of a genius? You simply do not need to know!

So, anyone can benefit from the insights of a genius. In fact, you already benefit from lots of insights developed by geniuses!

Now, what if you could develop your own genius plus benefit from the latest insights of not just one genius, but a whole network of them? What if you could get easy access to the latest genius methods (breakthrough methods that produce surprisingly beneficial results)?

Or, maybe you are just focused on one specific priority (like your business, your finances, or your health). In that case, just select the first option below.
> Browse actual results & benefits

> Unleash your inner genius

> Benefit by joining our network

Respecting the protection rackets of governments (and the importance of language)

July 2, 2015

Interesting viewpoint. But I see the reason that government puts its fingers into licensing marriages is so the product of marriage (children ) could be theirs.

I want nothing in this world more than to be a father. Yet I can’t bring myself to celebrate same-sex marriage.
  • 3 people like this.


  • Carl Freestone

    One point he did make that I found intriguing was the concept of government licensing love (which marriage between two people of the same sex is) What business does government have to meddle in that arena? Why shouldn’t I have access to all the benefits you listed outside of marriage. If there are benefits there must also be restrictions, just like in marriage. Several years ago it hit me strangely my getting a marriage license. I felt i had invited a third party into bed with me. I felt akin, but worse than the Scots having to give the first night to the baron who reigned over the wedded couple (See Braveheart). Correct me if I’m wrong, but submitting to a license puts me under new rules and regulations that are outside the arena of common law. It also makes what is produced under that license (children) subject to regulation by the government. Pretty soon government will be licensing breathing or licensing masturbation, which is being married to yourself. They already have licensed Marijuana. Taking psychedelics is illegal. WHY? Why is drinking alcohol legal? It is far worse for you. The whole concept of government licensing is more to give the government more control than.to protect the public.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The business of governments is to use force (or threats of force) to promote certain outcomes that benefit those who form governments and operate them. When the lord of the armies of Israel directed Noah to impose regulatory systems on all of humanity, that was to govern the masses, not to “protect” them. Later, when Moses was commanded to gather an army and slaughter the midianites, that was not to protect the midianites, was it?

    All the sheep, donkeys, goats, cattle, and 32,000 Virgin girls were taken. All the male midianites of any age were massacred (by the lord’s command) and all females except those 32,000 were also massacred.

    Now, if you have been trained to be ashamed of those simple realities, that is a different issue. If you have been programmed to be confused, so be it. But the reality is simple enough.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn When communists took over Cambodia, did shapes of ink on “holy” paper protect the middle class from the bullets and bombs? Not at all.

    Common law does not “protect” anyone either. If you are able to assert your interests according to the principles of common law, that is you protecting yourself by one of several possible methods.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Generally speaking, socialist systems take a chunk of the economic productivity of the labor force (which used to be Almost exclusively male back in the 1930s when social security started in the US). Then, those benefits were also extended to the wives of those men as a way of increasing public compliance with that program.

    in other words, governments bully and extort whoever they target, then they say “hey, but now we will do you a huge favor by extending your benefits to your wife (as long as you marry her in conformity to our rules). You should thank us!”

    To then extend the social security benefits to same-sex couples may be bizarre. I consider it distracting trivia.

    However, The bottom line is that governments are in charge due to their superior military capacity. They take what they can and then make the rules for how to apply to get a better chunk of the wealth that they redistribute.

    A few billion dollars in social security benefits by new definitions of marriage is trivia. The basics of the system remain.

  • Carl Freestone I’m not really interested in being controlled. I would rather control myself than have another control me. As far as the Midianites, if that happens to our society I will deal with it or be killed. If my daughters are taken as sex slaves by a force bigger than me I will be angry and sad but I’ll get over it.
  • Carl Freestone You said it better than i could.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Lol. Yeah well if all of us males were massacred, we would not be around.

    imperialism is the system that Noah developed and that is continued in our midst. If you have a mobile phone service, you are participating in the system. Shame is optional.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn All of our commercial activity using a government currency is “a benefit.” Be grateful. Many have it much worse than you or I. Be angry too if you like, but be grateful as well.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn It would not be ridiculous to say that the USA is the most successful empire in human history. We are beneficiaries in that system.

    We may condemn the benefits in shame. We may reject them and say “I do not deserve it.” Or, we may be grateful for the benefits we have received, are receiving, and will receive.

  • Carl Freestone I get about the phone. Also bank accounts are agreements to pay taxes. Woman when confronted with the choice of a weak man or a government that gives out benefits with hidden regulations attached will probably marry government and ditch her weak husband (in comparison). It feels like the marriage licence turns both parties into kids to be watched and rewarded. It really destroys masculinity.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Any exchange involving the private central bank’s currency is involving them in the contract between buyer and seller.
  • Carl Freestone I am grateful for a system that works so well. But I want as little of it as possible.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Marriage laws may favor the wife over the husband. We could say that the court system challenges the men- rewarding certain kinds of masculinity and punishing it’s absence.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn What about protection of exclusive rights to occupy property (real estate)? Wanting as little of it as possible is not about the system. That is about who you are for yourself. (How you relate to yourself in language)
  • Carl Freestone You could say that. But in my mind it’s time for me to grow up and live beyond being rewarded by Big Daddy whose only objective is to control.
  • Carl Freestone True. And who I am is not big enough to fight big daddy who really loves my wife more than me.
  • Carl Freestone Or has bigger benefits to hand out.
    Unlike · Reply · 1 · 15 hrs
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn An old conversation: there is a check for $150 in the drawer. There is some gasoline and food available in exchange for $$$. Will you cash the check or what?
    • Carl Freestone There is a scripture in the Book of Mormon which says “Touch not the evil gift”. I feel that is very sound advice. Now what there is to do is define what an evil gift is. An evil gift is any gift given with a grudge or as a reaction to a complaint or or in landmark terminology is racket based. I also would say that an evil gift is any gift given with the motive to domesticate me. I won’t take the gift. I prefer to be a wild man. The movie dead poet society comes to my mind. Those boys refused the education they were offered and some of them chose to be real men and undomesticated and untamed and they were powerful. And they were inspiring
    • Carl Freestone Behind every racket is an ideal. A neat little package that you wish others would conform to. The opposite of a racket is Anarchy. It is being ruled by my heart. There, there is freedom, passion, unruliness, wildness.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      Write a reply…
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn You are grown up. However, you could stop practicing the verbal programs of figuring out what is wrong, who is wrong, and so on.
    Like · Reply · 1 · 15 hrs
    • Carl Freestone I have a grown up body but I am not equipped to raise a family or be a proper husband. That is a self judgement and is open to debate. I may be being too hard on myself. I did not receive adequate training in how to be a father or a lover or a husband. Or maybe I did and I’m just living in this story. Maybe I’m gay and was never meant to be a woman. Maybe maybe maybe. I could live out of the context yes I am grown up. And be grown up in the areas that I feel reliable in. as far as the figuring out what and who is wrong I don’t feel like I’m doing that. Enlighten me and show me what you are talking about
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Cloudy thinking about “which gifts are evil” is the same as “which gifts are wrong.” You operate around shame- you did things, some of which you relate to as wrong. You have a past, some of which you relate to as wrong. In addition to “making yourself wrong,” you make the vast majority of the billions of humans on the planet wrong.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn If We invent that maybe certain other people “should have trained you better,” we can make them wrong too.
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn I will add that maybe you cannot stop figuring out what is wrong. Maybe you instead take it to the extreme. Maybe you list every single thing and then go around telling everyone that everything is wrong. They are wrong. You were wrong but now you are rSee More
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      Write a reply…
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn You could accumulate benefits to hand out. However, if you did, you would be giving up this excuse: “I am not giving you benefits because I have none to give.” You might encounter “I do have benefits to give, but here are the conditions that it will take for you to receive them….”
    • Carl Freestone I do have conditioned benefits to give. I also have benefits that my family doesn’t want. Like living on the land in sub-optimal and primitive and archaic conditions. I hope that my boys would choose wildness over domestication with all of its dis comforts and inconvenience
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Did you notice that you totally avoided the issue I pointed to of you asserting control? Your whole narrative is to me about victimhood. I say of course governments victimized you. That is their job.

      they also benefited you. For you to organize your life around being a better perfectionist than those evil ones (who live in cities or whatever), that is a full time job.

      you are either complete with your past or you are an idolater worshiping your past with condemnation. You vilify a villain. You lose. Game over.

      if you are scared, great. There are dangers.

      Most Paranoia is about being terrified but pretending not to be- it is a form of ashamed hysteria. However, to be cautious means to allow fear to move your attention to possible risks and then measure them (get powerfully related to them).

      instead of fearing God, you fear shame. You do not relate to shame as a great blessing. You justify paralysis as a method for avoiding shame. What if you stopped avoiding it?

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      Write a reply…
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn You could fight or condemn “big daddy.” You could be big daddy. You could relate to “big daddyness” in a variety of ways or not at all.
  • Carl Freestone I’m not fighting or condemning Big Daddy. & I don’t want to be big Daddy
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Imagine that an institution forms that says “hey parents, we will take care of your children for you. You can even abandon them to us (whether you want to or not) and maybe we will let someone else adopt them. We will train the children and program them and vaccinate them and make sure that they are confused and hysterical about worshiping the demons of cholesterol and cancer and injustice.”

    imagine that all of that stirred up some emotion in you, but you worshiped the idea that several emotions are shameful and must be avoided.

    Imagine that eventually you isolated yourself so you could privately allow emotion to stir vitality in you and cause you to refocus and learn.

    imagine that you have been fighting you.

    Like · Reply ·

Simple insights regarding investment markets, IRAs, and more

July 1, 2015
Below is a long sequence of comments regarding investments. I do not enter the conversation until this symbol below (if you scroll down).

relevant logo circle



Interesting article, that talks about how complex systems fail, from the perspective of global economies. Read the article, and stop and think about how your complex system Thrives, limps along, or fails. Jack NeilAlert

Greece’s banks will be closed indefinitely, starting on Monday, after the European Central Bank (ECB) announced that it will end liquidity funding that was being…



relevant logo circle




Gretchen Bronson I’d love to hear J R Fibonacci Hunn take on this. his economics blogs are very insightful…..



  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I can comment on many details. First, I began to publish reports and forecasts in 2003 pertaining to an emerging “wealth transfer” of historic proportions. I detailed the set-up for the coming decline in “global” real estate and financial stocks (which is far from over). In 2004, I used the term “the dominOil effect” to describe why fuel prices globally had been rising since 1999 and what it would do to Europe and the US as those prices continued to spike, which they did until 2008 (when a gallon of diesel was up to $11 in the UK and Germany).

    screenshot from the original location of the 2004 article:


  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Second, as of last week, I was already in position for the flood in to the US bond market that happened starting 18 hours ago or so in Asia. 30-year yields dropped over 5% overnight (and 2-year yields dropped over 12%). I do not recall ever seeing such a huge change so quickly.

    I have “very moderately leveraged positions” that benefited quite a bit from that sudden swing. The pace of redistribution from the naive to the astute is speeding up, as expected.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn As for currency and Austrian Economics, I love Von Mises and all of his analysis. It is the modern “reactionary libertarians” (such as I used to be) that seem absurd.

    The demand for currency comes from the military power of the state. When a mafia forms an army and says “we are the state and you all owe us protection money in the form of taxes and fines and fees,” then what happens? If the coercion and violence of the mafia’s soldiers is sufficient to terrorize the masses, then they perceive that their best alternative is to avoid getting arrested by paying the invented tax liabilities.

    What form of payment is accepted by the high priests of the mafia who collect tax payments down at the courthouse temple? If they say casino tokens from Harrah’s, then public demand for those casino tokens rockets. When the US invaded Texas (which was part of French Mexico at the time, right?), then Texans no longer wanted Pesos but wanted US Dollars suddenly. Same for the Louisiana Purchase (demand for one currency collapsed in that region and everyone wanted to exchange the old currency for the US Dollar).

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Where did the first big wave of demand for gold and silver come from? When the high priests of the first “mafia armies” were trying to figure out a very rare substance that would be very easy to monopolize and then sell to the public, rare minerals were a great match for their plans. The armies surrounded all the mines and other locations of the rare deposits, then gathered the material and minted coins.

    This was more costly to them then making wooden nickels, but much more reliable, since the masses could rather easily access wood and “counterfeit” wooden nickels. So, the man-hour cost to produce a wooden nickel might be a tiny fraction of what the “rightful government of the Levites and Israelites” could intimidate the masses in to paying to buy that nickel. For instance, the masses might pay one sheep or a dozen oysters (which was worth however many man-hours of labor) in exchange for a wooden nickel that cost a tiny fraction of a man-hour to produce.

    Replace “wooden nickel” with “precious metal coin of gold or silver.” It is that simple. Now you know now why the prophets said “the gold bull is just a symbol of the power of the state. Do not worship the bull statue. Do not worship the gold. Respect the government’s soldier’s and respect the Lord of the heavenly armies of flying fallen angels who resides in Mount Hermon, who has threatened us with plagues and then made good on his threats (killing 24,000 Israelites) and who sent a flood to devastate so many species on this planet, and who will come again in the early 20th century to spread Spanish flu to depopulate us.”


  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Of course, commercial interests can gather together and invent curriculums for the programming of the minds of the youth. Contempt for money and for the methods of government would be widely publicized. Reactionary libertarians can be cultivated who can say ridiculous things like “let’s go back to the good old days when the pretty shapes on ink on the paper of the constitution protected everyone and a tiny percentage of the white males were allowed to vote for who would rule them and everyone had the right to bear arms except of course for the President’s slaves, who would be punished for crimes like trying to learn to read.”
  • Anthony G. Beck I’m giving a virtual smootch and hug to Gretchen for Iceland comment smile emoticon I personally can’t wait for the reset button that we have coming to the USA and a return to our precious Republic.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The masses can be rewarded for memorizing the slogans that the teachers instruct them to memorize. They can be rewarded for answering the test questions by parroting slogans like “cholesterol is a dangerous poison” and “a gold-backed currency is the best” and “the federal reserve is a private bank that is either our holy savior or a terrible villain.”
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Should I go on? Do you need to do a little CT before I start getting in to “the heavy stuff?” wink emoticon
  • Gretchen Bronson Interesting that you brought up the Bond mkt J R J R Fibonacci. On our drive back from NOLA we listed to a money podcast that was taking a about dumping bonds & moving things to a MM or long term.
  • Ben Belty What do you make of this J R Fibonacci Hunn?http://news.yahoo.com/texas-wants-gold-back-promises…

    Texas has a new law to set up a depository for gold…
  • Gretchen Bronson Please don’t stop. This is important in the larger context most don’t see or understand
  • David Limacher When I read this, I realized how flawed the system is and how it’s been used as a tool for human engineering.http://www.goodreads.com/…/2714607-the-ascent-of-money

    Niall Ferguson follows the money to tell the human…
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn As for those “good old Republics,” I agree that the People’s Republic of China is a great model for enslaving billions of human resources. Iceland will either get invaded or left alone or something else. As for it being the “reactionary libertarian’s wet dream,” anyone is welcome to try to relocate there. Take some nukes with you to keep away the other nations though.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn What else to say? I offer professional account management services (including shelters that are tax-exempt for US citizens). Apparently, just last night I “closed” my first international investing client ever.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Gretchen, if you meant by MM “money market funds or a cash equivalent,” that can certainly be better in the long-run than speculative bubbles collapsing… like stocks, gold, or real estate.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn While “low-grade” government bonds in Puerto Rico or Greece may be owned by lots of pensions funds in Detroit, that is part of why Asians just flooded in to high-grade US treasury bonds. The US military has military capacity that Detroit and Greece do not.

    If they have to invade Iran and confiscate “our American oil” to sell to cover US treasury debt, so be it. Detroit can’t bring that kind of “political will” to the bond market.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I’m not saying that Swiss government bonds or New Zealand’s bonds are always going to be stable and safe. They are subject to speculative bubbles too, but the Swiss are the center of the global banking “scam.” If you asserted that the EU is basically a siphon constructed by the Vatican and the Swiss to transfer the wealth of Europe through the Swiss to the Vatican, I would not argue with that. I value my life too much to attract bullets by making statements like that anyway. wink emoticon

    Switzerland is in the center of this “donut.” The EU is a funnel or siphon to enrich the Swiss bankers.


    i used that pic in this article called “living in a military empire”:https://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com/…/living-in-a…/

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn An Austrian Economics kind of intro piece:https://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com/…/benefiting-from…/

    Sometimes, a quick demonstration of a very obvious…
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Simple criticism of Austrian Economists: they act like forming coercive mafias and then monopolizing the coercion to form governments is not a predictable and economically reliable approach. What libtards!
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Here is a simple presentation for folks who do not know me and want to understand how investment markets are basically like sponges that slowly get saturated and then quickly squeezed out. That is how they transfer wealth so efficiently:https://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com/…/measuring-market…/

    Measuring market risk and opportunity Through this presentation, you will understand a key factor in…
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Ben, you asked about a particular political intervention. Pension funds have a history of performing far below average. The complacency of those who run them is huge. There is almost no profit incentive for the fund managers. Astute investors, in contrast, have a history of performing above average.

    When someone is looking for an isolated long-term solution to the
    “problem” of market fluctuations, the big issue is that THEY ARE RELATING TO MARKET FLUCTUATIONS AS A ****PROBLEM.**** Pension fund managers, no offense intended, are pension fund managers because of their relatively low level of competence. They are attracted to social validation and groupthink to compensate for lack of comprehension of markets.

    There are NO highly competent fund managers working for pension funds to my knowledge. Why would a competent fund manager ever settle for working there?

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Anyway, I started to make a point a while back and got distracted. It is possible that schools and the media program the masses to be hysterical about “what should not be” in order to distract the masses from the fact that “what should not be” has been “business as usual” for thousands of years?

    Train the masses to be ashamed of perceiving the simplicity of how governments work and what governments are. One by one, as the masses recognize different aspects of the current political corruption, they will reactively think “it was NEVER like this before. That ONE dude or group has BETRAYED us!!!!”

    Schools program blind conformity (and repression of emotions that are disruptive to the classroom and thus are labeled as shameful or negative). That produces widespread social anxiety and chronic physical tension to suppress the display of the “shameful” emotions (thus lots of PC libtards). Then, the leaders direct everyone’s attention to “important paranoias” like how cholesterol causes autism and how everyone should drop everything to promote equal rights for bisexual libertarian vegan pot smokers who insist that “they were just were born that way.”


    The image is from my 2013 article titled “homosexuality: a behavioral-choice-or-a-genetic-condition?”


  • J R Fibonacci Hunn If you feel left out because I have not said anything yet in this thread that insulted or upset you, I apologize. Please be patient. wink emoticon

    Also, you have to PM me. I want to meet you!

  • Gretchen Bronson J R Fibonacci yes with regards to MM I was referring to Money markets or other “Cash equivalents”. Now as part of a detour related to the Bond Market – Annuities. thoughts on those? I’ve got one through work and I’m considering rolling it into my 403b. I don’t have much of my 403b in MM, as a long term investor I’ve focused on 2050 time frame but wonder if there might be some validity given the current environment (geopolitical affairs) to rolling a portion into a MM/cash equivalent within my 403b structure….or take the tax hit, and clear all debt. DH and I have been discussing this for a while now… wondering when our money won’t be our money any longer……
  • Gretchen Bronson One thing that fascinates me about markets is how guys like Buffett pick something, and as the masses start buying, he sells. He’s been buying infrastructure for a while now, but not a lot of people have caught on to that…. which I find interesting.…. yet when he buys something like Apple, or MSFT, or Amazon… the masses flock… I need to go back and look at what his recent tech buys have been…. I want to say he hasn’t been buying a lot of tech…..
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I consider most annuities contracts to be guarantees that the issuing insurance company will go bankrupt soon. The US financial sector was hit VERY hard a few years back for their hilarious risk-taking. Insurance companies are massive concentrations of risk.

    They are government-approved ponzi schemes that have no military to back them. They bring in premiums each month in the hope of covering their massive stack of unfunded liabilities. When they “bet wrong” with all of their gambling, they go down.

    FDIC is similar. The government insurance program for the Savings & Loans institutions collapsed in the 1980s. Insurance without a court system and military to enforce the guarantees is about as powerful as the ink on the paper of a condeferate dollar.

  • Gretchen Bronson hahaha…. which is why I’m looking to roll it into something…… I have a good chuck of change in there that I don’t want sitting around with TIACREFF goes belly up…
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Regarding Buffett, I just republished this old article of mine (just for you Gretchen) and the links may not work but you can let me know of any interests and then I can give you access.


    BEST VALUE INVESTMENT: History?s most…
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn also, GB, see my latest edits & additions 2 comments above
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn People with tax-deferred accounts like IRAs, 401Ks, and 403Bs can plan to ALWAYS take the maximum annual disbursement that does not incur a penalty. If you want to protect your account from something like what happened in Cyprus (when the government there froze the retirement accounts of the public and dipped in and then said “we will give you access again to your reduced account balance soon”), then get out.

    I recommend tax EXEMPT shelters. (Disbursements may be taxable as income, but any profits in the sheltered brokerage account are exempt from taxes).

  • Gretchen Bronson J R can’t access the results… link…. Economics isn’t my strong suit. but it pays to pay attention to what’s going on there with regards to larger geo-political issues… China’s instability is concerning, in that they might just be willing to step out of line… But the Economy I’m really interested in besides our own is India….
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I can manage IRAs etc (even at your existing brokerage). Accounts with very few alternatives (only 5 funds or 12 funds) are not as attractive to me, but I will consider anything. My understanding is that usually the existing balance in a retirement account can be converted in to an IRA with no tax penalty.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn If you do not know how to time markets (and are not partnering with someone like me), then cash is great during a deflation. Bond markets in the US eventually will panic, too.

    Yields on short-term US treasury notes just “improved” 12% overnight. That is “great” for existing bond-holders. However, that kind of volatility is “not good for amateurs,” like as far as wanting to sleep well.

  • Gretchen Bronson Then the question comes down to when you move annuities to a IRA do you continue with the Traditional IRA or move to a ROTH, and pay the tax now? I think it would depend upon the balance of the account, and if you’d prefer follow the traditional IRA’s tax and disbursement process….. As for Bonds, I’m currently not in them, though my parents are as they’re in their 70’s, though they’ve been converting more to cash as they get older…. that and they’ve got their “Automatic” withdrawals from their Traditional and Roth IRAs and pensions….
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn If someone (who is considering moving funds in to an IRA) is open to “paying the taxes now,” then why not convert to a tax-exempt shelter like a CRUT or CRAT? There is nothing wrong with “annuity contracts” in general. It is just the ones that most insurance companies sell that are “too good to be true.”
  • Gretchen Bronson Good point…. I’ll have to look into those… wasn’t thinking about that… I think my challege is that the vehicle I choose, my company must be able to pay in the 3% they match me on the annuity…. which is why I’m trying to figure out the best vehicle to move the annuity too…
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn You could just let the employer keep paying in to the account that is there, but move the old funds to the kind of shelter(s) that you like best. What I tell folks is that “if you are not using a tax exempt shelter soon, then after a few big gains, you might be motivated to get one before long.” Also, with CRUTs, it is so simple to pay the account manager (me), so generally that is what I recommend as my default and then there are the actual complicating realities of people’s lives, like divorces in progress etc…..
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I “might” not be able to legally charge someone to write a CRUT for them, but it is totally legal for them to pay me an initial one-time fee to be their account manager. So, technically, I write the CRUT for free. wink emoticon
  • John Scott Major in additon to the above, some do not qualify for a Roth IRA, which really pisses me off.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn To John, I give a nice framework in this article for why governments benefit from IRAs (and everything else that they give people incentives to use). I do not get in to any details (like that IRAs and 401Ks may legally give governments back-door access like in the case of Cyprus- which I referenced a few comments above), but the presentation linked below was intended to be pretty concise, so once the framework is clear, you can see how all the details that you already know “suddenly fall right in to place.”


    Sometimes, a quick demonstration of a very obvious…
  • John Scott Major I understand why they have downsides, I just cannot understand why the government would restrict people from having a Roth? It hurts no one? In addition, I moved all my IRA money into cash last week because I predict the market is about to crash, and I am feeling pretty smart right now. (I am trying to not hurt my shoulder while patting myself on the back).

How to insult JR the elitist (by Harry Lieberwirth)

June 29, 2015

It was never -me- that made my intellect out as though it makes me better than anyone.. the only one that cares whether another is smarter than them, and judges themselves or the other based on that, is the one that is insecure about their intellect. They dont like having their self-estimated lack of intellect confirmed. Suck it.

  • You like this.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn People are afraid of being tricked or betrayed etc. so they use “social validation” instead of rational logic. In other words, if something is familiar or popular, that can be preferable over something that one has observed to be valid or accurate.sotheir intellect is not even at issue usually. It is just the emotional reptilian part of the brain that is activated and the rational part of the brain can be involved to rationaliZe the emotional domination. But the emotional domination is not the result of intellectual discernment. It is like criticiZing someone that their dream is stupid. Dreams can be stupid. It is stupid to use the framework of the awake state to criticize the logical continuity of dreams.it is like criticizing someone who is drunk for showing signs of intoxication.

    I have made a few things lately about the cultivation of social anxiety through schools and media. The effectiveness of the common programming is quite extensive.

    5 hrs · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth I believe that at least at this point, they dont need any help at all being always occupied with social appearance and not, ya know, using reason, which is what makes this day different from the dark ages. They are sufficiently gullible and stupid to keep this going without help from some spooky shadow government or school. Its what these people do naturally, at this point, they would still be doing it even if it wasn’t encouraged. I suspect that the majority of people simply lack the mental faculties to engage in logic and reason..even if freed from that social bind – born to be a box lifter -and that is fine, but then they get it in their head that they can be more and they start making assertions of how reality works.Sorry, I’aint saying they cannot, just that I only listen to those that use logic, reason, and rationalism, scientific method, when it comes to claims to the nature of anything, because they can actually show, share their findings, and the rest just has anecdotal words, which evidence nothing but a single instance of whatever. Antibiotics, at least, do what they are claimed to do, they kill certain microorganisms including beneficial ones – they work the same, in 99% of all instances, whereas anecdotes are usually just speaking about one single instance where a certain effect was perceived to be had.. science among other things entails testing something on a dozen to a thousand people at the same place and timeframe to see if the effect is always the same.. so if someone is so sure that ”marijuana cures skincancer”, and they want to show that to be true, the way to do it is getting hundred people together and applying the same oil to their cancers. If true, a significant amount of people will be cured, and it will all be neatly documented. But apparently if someone’s cancer happens to recede, and that person had applied the oil, it must for sure mean it was that oil and not just coincidental. 10 times over or I’m not listening, mr cow cream wink emoticon
    5 hrs · Edited · Unlike · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn People are capable of reason. Shame and resignation and divisiveness are programmed very deliberately… and effectively.When reading the writings of Edward Bernays, who wroteabut how he deceived the US in to entering World War 1, he is very clear.He deliberately created a hysteria about patriotism and “our obligation to the victims of the Germans.” Whether his accusations about the Germans were actually accurate was apparently not something that mattered much to people once their initial emotional triggers were activated.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn Did Iraq have weapons of mass destruction or any involvement in 9/11? It does not matter now.70+ years after the US occupied Germany and Japan to end World War 2, we still have military bases there. Was there any intentional deception ever used in any war? I certainly hope not because deception is a very bad thing. In fact, Santa Claus was very clear to me that if I told lies that he would not give me that Hot Wheels toy car that I said I really wanted.

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Your dismissal of the cow cream thing does not interest me. If you are skeptical, I don’t mind. If you dismiss it, I still don’t mind. If you say you are interested but then do not gather your own 10+ subjects to conduct the test yourself, then well I may have already stopped listening by then… too busy chuckling.
  • Harry Lieberwirth I am skeptical. I would be very willing to see tests of raw vs processed food sources, absorption rates, etc, but I leave providing the evidence to a claim, with the claimant. I have no interest in actually sciencing, because I dont make a lot of claims that I feel invested in showing are true. And like I said, the one that makes the claim can go and get the evidence, if there is any. Which is one part of the scientific method and the secular practice called rationalism. The reasoning is that if I claim there is a tea pot floating between mars and earth somewhere, I could not reasonably expect anyone to take me very seriously, let alone leave it up to them to disprove -my- claim, when I can just change my story saying they must have missed it when they find none.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn A quick thought experiment: among mammals, what percentage of mothers produce cooked breast milk to provide through their nipples to the infants? What percentage of mothers produce raw breast milk?
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth 100%. But natural does not imply healthier. I would have to actually look into this but I think the research I would refer to would claim that cooking any organic makes the cell-walls weaken which like marrow from a bone makes it easier to absorb the nutrients. I don’t know which is healthier for sure though. As for natural = better – Arsenic is 100% all natural too, wanna try? wink emoticon
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn As for floating teapots, a fundamental issue is relevance. To me, I favor “extra” skepticism toward any content that some group of people intentionally gathered and formulated to publicize to me and millions or billions of others. I understand that I have been programmed to presume as relevant whatever they programmed me to value. I have been programmed to devalue and deem irrelevant things by them as well.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I understand that networks of coercive wealth redistribution promote compliance through words like “patriotism.” I respect that. I may not comply, but I respect their methods and their results.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Arsenic is an element that is in every molecule of Vitamin B-17. Just because a human can drown in water does not mean water is fundamentally dangerous.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth True, basic chemistry, dosage creates toxicity, the idea of toxic substances is a misunderstanding.Here I found the tea pot examplehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

    Russell’s teapot, sometimes called the celestial teapot…
    1 hr · Edited · Unlike · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Another thought experiment: take a chunk of raw meat, a chunk of well-done cooked meat, an ear of raw corn, and an ear of cooked corn. Then, set them all outdoors and wait for insects to gather. Would you be surprised if 3 of the items received no flies (and no maggots), while one got all the flies (and all of the maggots)? Eventually, there would also be mold on one ear of corn (and the cooked meat).
    1 hr · Edited · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth Funny how micro and macro disagree, because animals go crazy for cooked over raw, a lot of the time, meat in particular. ( would have to look that up I may be wrong) Anyway I’m abstaining from drawing the conclusion that you are right, or wrong, for now, but I will be looking at what you’re implying.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The smell of cooked meat is stronger, but once the sharks gather, they go for bloody carcasses, not steaming meatloaf fresh out of the oven.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Bones are a bit different. Snakes do just fine with digesting bones, but bone gelatin is easy for me to swallow personally than a cow’s skull.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Ok, I just skimmed the teapot link. Yes, rationality has it’s advantages, eh?
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth Its easy to show eachother nothing but words, but I will try that expirement a couple of times perhaps. I know ants dont touch margerine, but even then, I have no reason to trust an insect or microbial lifeform’s instinct as proof of anything. Humans are stupid as shit, and they’re huge, what makes you think them tinies have to necessarily pick the one that is actually healthy? It isnt healthiness that makes most animals pick foods, and if offered raw vs fried stake, it is the smell of the cooked one that will attract them more. Maybe cooked foods just smell like shit to moulds and microbes
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Apricot kernels are a seed that has a lot of B-17 (& arsenic). However, those are known for reversing and preventing cancer, not poisoning anyone.
  • Harry Lieberwirth This is why I prefer to not be on the side to prove anything. I can always think of reasons why it doesnt necessarily prove anything tongue emoticon
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Although many people may hysterically FEAR eating apricot kernels and their CAUTION is quite rational, though perhaps erroneous.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Mold is not an animal with a nose or olfactory sensitivity.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Again, cooked food will be easier to smell, but you can test for attracting creatures with cooked food and then having a few cooked and raw options. I would be surprised if you cared enough to do an experiment, but when I have left out raw meat, I then ate the flies and the maggots along with the meat. wink emoticon I am very serious.
    1 hr · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth I have eaten them, my father is into stuff like that, and he fed them to his dog, whom had cancer. I find it hard to claim it cured him, I would want to see the same thing with 12 other dogs or more.. and a lot of that stuff is ”evidenced” by anecdotal attempts to prove something but not taking care to read up on what the steps of the scientific method are, since it is that method that defines something as being scientific, and if it doesnt follow those steps, however much it seems to evidence something, I can’t really say its scientific – and most anecdotal articles skip huge swaths of the method, not just one or two steps. Make claim, provide no source, claim it is reader’s responsibility to disprove claims that only the writer cares much for. I dont honestly care in most cases whether I am arguing right or wrong because in actual science, the facts reveal themselves at the end of the process and are usually beyond doubt. There are a couple specific scientific ways to create technologies, and many, many more ways to not succeed, and facts always have an application that can be exploited, tech is what I take to be proof of scientific method’s efficacy. When did permaculturalists, naturalists, and health fad people last come up with a result to their anecdotal testing that resulted in the creation of anything that didnt already exist 500 years ago? Waving around the old and familiar as valid just because its old and familiar, that must make it time tested? Well, popular abrahamic religion stood that test, no results beyond second rate taoist interpretation possibly. Just cuz its old doesnt mean it isnt useless for anything but a reason to repress having certain thoughts or feelings. Asbestos was timetested aswell, used that shit for decades if not more, because, we always had, so why not right. I am not very serious but I enjoy poking holes in other’s reasoning almost as much as I enjoy being scientifically proved wrong.. in the end we all win if we get to the kind of facts that have applications. Other facts may be totally uninteresting to me. One proves its power, takes a whole race of hominids out of the dark ages, the other, well, even if a fact, is literally useless. And if it turns out it isnt then cool. The pragmatism of science attracts me, not the opportunities to show how right I am or how wrong others are – I just save the spiteful U R WRONG for the morally dogmatic. Pisses them off, which makes me laugh a little.
  • Harry Lieberwirth You comprehend me well. Indeed, probably dont care enough to do so. xD I would if someone I knew would be in need of an alternative to say chemo therapy. But I dont really have a lot of reasons to do more than just speak of it and read about it, as a form of entertainment equal to say watching a tv show. Discussions for the sake of the discussion. The real facts always show themselves eventually, so I’m not too worried with invalidating unscientific anecdotal approaches.. they usually dont result in useful data so they do that all on their own tongue emoticon And just because I do not trust an industry, doesnt mean I think they are all out to get me. It sounds paranoid, even if I always used to see conspiracies everywhere. I saw a scientific article on the psychology of conspiricy thinking, it looked right through me. I’ve been changing my tune every time I found myself being wrong, and in the end, its the best move I ever made. I have a distrust of any large industry or group, and I realize they will likely use their influence to serve themselves more than me – knowing that, I dont see them as a problem. They sell drugs, most of which functions as described, some of which I use, but none of which I pay for. 100 euros a month out of my welfare cheque for insurance and all the pills I could take are free of charge aside a 250 a year extra since 2013. So I have no stake in any of it, I just thought I did at some point. Why should I care, they take good care of me, I dont feel like biting the hand that feeds.Yay welfare nation.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Yes there is a primary issue of what pragmatic results are interesting (and when, in what order, etc).
    58 mins · Like · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Yes, I advocate paranoia (or caution that others might call paranoia) in regard to mainstream quack medicine, especially in regard to certain treatment methods that I know to be detrimental and/or when I know a much more favorable method.
    55 mins · Edited · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth I appreciate your honesty and openness but I cannot count personal experience as a sound way to verify anything for anyone else but that one subject’s instance. It evidences to an extent, that it is far more favorable, for you, but I am aware of how different ”types”, whether that is down to blood type or something else, lets say different constitutions, respond differently to the same thing. My ex used to almost die when eating red meat, does that also prove it is favorable to never eat red met for anyone but her and those like her?
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn For instance, the US government has had a program to compensate
    people injured by vaccines since the 1980s. The data to support the theory behind vaccinations is also “extremely weak.”
    However, when a treatment method is extremely profitable, that allows for a lot of budget for lobbying and advertising. Which treatments get publicized most: the most profitable ones or the most effective ones? Effectiveness is simply not relevant in regard to many promotions.http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html

    National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, VICP
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I won’t argue generally speaking with anyone who says “the government is taking good care of me (in regard to education or health or personal safety / gun control).” If you are satisfied with that, then there may be something else of more interest to you currently.
  • Harry Lieberwirth True, but every dealer knows selling crappy dope is bad for business. It might have averse effects on a minority, quite possible and common even with paracetamol, but if everyone ever vaccinated got autism or anxiety issues, there would be a lot of autistic and anxious people, more than there are. Its easy to not notice all the relaxed nice people that dont have something to defend when I want to see proof of what I believe is true.. but for me it is evidence first, belief second. I abstain from comitting to believing for or against untill someone using the scientific method confirms it. I just feel like it is a great way to save myself the time of being recruited to someone else’s cause, because the anecdotal naturalist more often than not is more concerned rallying people to the cause of morally disapproving and verbally and socially ”going to war” against a certain institute. But I do not see any institute as my enemy. I see people that prefer moral value judgments as a focal point that would have me rebel against an industry I would be a hypocrite for attacking. Wrong guy, they own me xD
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Some treatment methods are so favorable to a government that a government will make those treatments mandatory (conditional for things like working in the medical field, going to a public school, receiving public welfare, etc). Vaccinations (in much of the world) have recently been made mandatory. Someone really wanted that policy implemented in many countries.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I am aware of ample evidence of the dangers of vaccinations and rather little evidence of benefit. Same thing for statin medications (which effectively impair the function of the liver). I have seen the research showing the consistent decrease in health for those taking statin medications (relative to a control group). However, the profits from statin usage continues to pile up. Scientific accuracy was never a primary issue.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Again, aspartame (“nutrasweet”) is a very clear case. The substance was rejected as clearly harmful, then a new wave of lobbying began and eventually it was approved anyway. There was no controversy about the science showing that it was harmful. They simply approved it when enough political will (bribes, assassinations, etc) was exerted.
  • Harry Lieberwirth So no offense, but do you enjoy not being listened to to the extent of the other saying I get you and agree? Does that ever happen at all? tongue emoticon – I’m slightly poking fun at you here, but again, no offense, I get that you might find this important, and I respect that, but I also respect my own lack of interest in showing those dirty corrupt industrialists and oligarch madmen that we will not submit. I just sort of lost wanting to wage war on corrupt elitists. We the people pay them to lie to us, maybe so, but if so, I find we the people guilty of being deserving of being deceived and abused – we pay them to do so after all right? So nvm raising awareness against possibly corrupt intent, and nvm bothering with these fools.. they all have it coming. At least I know who I am in bed with, quite possibly.
    Anyway Maybe you’re like me, talk for entertainment purposes and dont at all mind me poking fun at ya.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The anti-fat hysteria led to the obesity epidemic. When Sweden’s government reversed their anti-fat hysteria and allowed the teaching of why bodies (like cows) manufacture fat and how most types of fat are beneficial and/or essential for health, then what happened to Sweden’s obesity rate? It plunged.The idea that all fat is “poisonous” is absurd. Again, much of the mainstream medical religion is totally absurd.
    38 mins · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth Yes, mainstream science actually agrees there since a year or something. Now they say its carbs that pose most danger.
  • Harry Lieberwirth The idea that any substance is poisonous by default is absurd. Basic chemistry shows even arsenic in minute doses is harmless.. cyanide in kernels is harmless, all about dosage. I think you are combatting an aged version of mainstream science, I am not familiar with some of those claims but they sound like something the 80’s may have taken as fact when it was lacking. Science last I read agrees on the harmless nature of fats, though there is still a media frenzy saying saturated fats are bad. They arent scientists and do not speak for them however. Maybe the model you criticize is the one you grew up under. They definitely change stuff around, but thats the point of being willing to admit being wrong to get to the useful facts.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn It is a bit absurd to say that “carbs” are dangerous. Carbs are less metabolically efficient than fat as fuel. Fat is essential for reasons other than fuel. Generally speaking, carbs are not essential and are only useful as fuel. That is my understanding at least.Lactose is a sugar that mammals create for breast milk. It is for fuel. As for other fibers like plant fiber, they are like the bones that give a plant stability.The idea that humans NEED to eat plant fibers is very strange. Why would carb be so high in a classroom’s dietary recommendations? There is no scientific basis, but a commercial basis.

    32 mins · Like · 1
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn To clarify, I am an elitist, not an anti-elitist.
    31 mins · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth Nah I mean they found that the amount of carbs modern people eat is dangerous, not carbs in and of themselves. But bottles of coke every day, donuts, high sugar food, they say it would be healthier to eat fatties.
  • Harry Lieberwirth I edited my previous post please refresh btw.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The fact that the tax extortion system is supported by the masses does not have any connection to me to guilt or “deserving it.” It is like deserving a hurricane or earthquake in one city but not the next one over.
    30 mins · Edited · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth So maybe you are actually opposed to the media-driven image of scientific concensus, but it is very easy to pretend in a commercial that ”we are being scientific” when they are not. Maybe the marketing teams pretending to be representative of any actual scientist is the issue.
  • Harry Lieberwirth No, being stupid enough to pay one’s abuser for the abuse, makes them deserve it. Paying for a hurricane to come my way if that were possible makes me someone I wouldnt feel a need to help.
  • Harry Lieberwirth You may be an elite-ist, but you ain’t rich enough to be elite! Ok I’m gonna go do something else besides poking fun at you while you try to make a point tongue emoticon
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn oops- yeah that might have been cyanide not arsenic. eh, close enough for jazz…..
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The consumption of processed vegetable oils by humans is quite new (except for olive oil, coconut oil, and a few others). It is the cooked seed oils (corn oil, canola oil, etc) that are new.When saturated fats were demonized, that was by the marketers who were trying to figure out “how can we get schools and fast food restaurants and everyone else to use our products, such as margarine? how can we get them to be terrified of butter etc?”The anti-fat hysteria campaigns were then designed and implemented in schools. Soon, government outlawed the use of saturated fats in certain fast food applications. That paved the way for huge profits for the new seed oils, which are universally recognized as harmful for humans (among competent biochemists… to the very best of my knowledge).

  • J R Fibonacci Hunn As noted many months ago, sodas are harmful mostly for the acidity, not just the sugar. Diet sodas also typically are sweetened with the popular neurotoxin aspartame (“nutrasweet”).
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Media is secondary. You have to turn that on. Schools are primary. Attendance is mandatory, with limited exceptions.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn The teacher says “cholesterol is a substance that every liver on the planet makes to poison you.” The students generally say “I want to know what claim to repeat on the test (without regard for the absurdity of the claim).”Schools are the primary programming rituals for groupthink and social anxiety. They are where intelligence is shut down and chronic physical tensions to repress shamed emotions are deepened. Rationality is generally unwelcome, but there are exceptions that the school system encourages and rewards socially.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Students are encouraged to focus their rationality on the science fair project (perhaps as long as they do not directly challenge the central slogans of mainstream medical quackery).
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn I am not opposed to how the media programs. I respect how the media programs.
  • Harry Lieberwirth Just know that I am not invested in you being wrong or anything. I am a skeptic and suspicious of any groups whatsoever including pharma industry. They arent selling cures, they are selling repression, but without the effects manually repressing emotions (through morality and verbal imposition). Risperidone makes me think less, makes my own thought process more enjoyable, more orderly and overseeable. I know who I’m paying and what for.. so maybe they are the enemy of those that believe their pills are cures, but I am well aware there is a reason to not support that approach since symptom repressers are good for return business. School taught me that, first I feared groups of people, they always get this attitude like the fucking dogs they are, always so ballsy when in a pack. Now I play Bear Mauls the Wolves and actually enjoy fucking with social groups. But the dynamic of people groups and industrial businesses are very different. The former tend to demand compliance when all they are is a weaker version of the guys in blue and green with no way to back up and enforce their imposed opinions, unless they are so called white or black trash, always ready to compensate violence for their lack of capacity for words. All off topic here, but being the focus of an entire group that is angry is less fun than many things, but given they arent a physical threat, I quite enjoy riling them up by saying the opposite of what they claim is true and moral. But thats just social groups, cliques, classes, clubs. I dont pick fights I can’t win, like rallying my friends into realizing someone is taking them for a ride… let em find out in their own time or not.. I want pharma in business, I am a loyal customer, and actually, being against them would just make me a huge pill chugging hypocrite. Actually anyone that claims to oppose symptom repressing medicine industries but takes painkillers sometimes or often, would be a hypocrite in my eyes. I know you arent against them, like you said you are an elitist, but you must realize that when someone you know realized for the first time that they have been taken advantage of or just misinformed as to how the medicine works, they will get angry. Spare them, I will.. not care the slightest for them unless they come to me and ask me for my views, I do. I have nothng to lose or gain in their typical, or stereo typical rage against the machine. So original, sticking it to the man. That is so common now that it is no longer edgy, its way more edgy to be like ‘fuck yeah elitist moneymakers!’ and supporting the man since everyone nowadays is a fricking punkrock hippie. Funny, I dont wanna be common, so I refuse to remain anti esteablishment if that is more common than pro. I just wanna take the piss and enjoy my time and exorbitant wealth while it lasts.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn Imagine that the USA’s diplomat goes to Iraq and says “we have a plan for the future of Iraq. Our plan is that the Iraqi public including you will buy a lot of stuff from us that you do not really need. You will pay a very FAIR PRICE for it, which we will dictate to you. You will say you like the price because it is so fair. We will punish you severely for ineffectiveness in regard to public support for the program. We will also train you to effectively obtain the compliance of your constituents.”What is weird about that? Diplomacy is not that explicit. The threats are usually much less direct. The blackmail and bribery can be very complex and subtle.
    6 mins · Edited · Like · 1
  • Harry Lieberwirth Nothing at all, its how probably many people do their business deals. But groups of peasants with some top 10 list of do’s and don’ts do not have the actual force that makes the government and business elite capable of backing up their impositions. Little social groups aside gang rape and beating me up can do shit all in their PC all words no balls approach.


  • Harry Lieberwirth Groups of commoners, of civilians, put 10 humans in a room and they will soon have a pecking order and group morality norm that if not obeyed is ”enforced” with stares, verbal aggression, forced isolation. Like any of those are actually coercive. I just dont play along with that bullshit, in person, people are way different, one on one, those same people, apart, arent the same, but when people group up they always seem to think their flaky alliance amounts to being able to impose their brand of morality on anyone within the group. No way no game! Not that I could bring myself to play anything but a joker in a group even if I wanted to.
  • J R Fibonacci Hunn My basic point is that diversity is wrong. Nature should not have so much diversity. Nature should have consulted with me first before producing all this diversity.Diversity is variety, and variety is inequality, and inequality is wrong. That is what I have been trying to tell you all along, dude.

The key to profit (promo)

June 27, 2015

Get the most that the market can bear.


Who will profit from this site?
How could you profit most?
What can you do to profit?

Who will profit from this site?

> most investors

If you are open to taking the specific actions that the marketplace rewards most, then you will profit from this site. The only thing you will need to understand is what results are available to you. To see samples of actual results first, click here. Or, to learn how it will work for you, click here now.

> social networkers (Facebook users, etc)

You can earn profits simply by sharing this information with people who need it and are able to recognize that they need it. To learn how it will work for you, click here now.

> select business owners

If you already have what the market wants most, you just need to make it easy for them to find you. If you do not know know exactly what the market wants, we can show you how the market is changing.

There are two essential steps for a profitable business, though we usually only help with one of them. First is cornering at least one part of the available market (which you may have already done, like through distinctive products, specialized expertise, or the perfect location). Second is either capitalizing on existing demand or driving up demand even further (and both of those require effective marketing). If you need help marketing your business better, then you will profit from this site. To see samples of actual results first, click here. Or, to learn how it will work for you, click here now.

How could you profit most?

> For profit-motivated investors

The easiest and fastest way to profit is through hiring us to provide services for you. In that case, all there is for you to understand is that we provide the kind of results that motivate you to change.

Next, you might also choose to learn some of the simplest principles about “what markets reward most” and then capitalize on whatever opportunities you can identify and seize. Finally, you can share this content with other profit-motivated investors and then earn incentive rewards when, through these methods, they access profits that are safe, consistent, and, occasionally, huge. To see samples of actual results next, click here.

> For social networkers

We have lots of great promotional content for you to broadcast. However, what can be even more effective is to identify specific people that need a certain thing that we offer, and then share a targeted promotion directly with them in particular. You will use our simple system to automatically track your leads and then you will earn commissions on the profits from those leads. Next, to find out which promotions fit your current network the best, click here now.

> For profit-motivated business owners

Marketing is the key that makes the most profitable businesses so profitable. For instance, the most successful fast food businesses of course do not offer the best-tasting food or the most nutritious food (and some coffee retailers will even charge $4 for one drink).

So, what do those profit-motivated business owners do to drive demand? They market to the emotions of the masses.

If you are committed to producing steady profits through your business, then you will respect the power of marketing (and the power of emotions). It is clear that in some market conditions, many people can be quite successful without much attention to marketing (or even without much skill). However, in certain market conditions, effective marketing is essential to making a business consistently profitable. If you have ever complained that your competitors are charging too much for low-quality work, then that may be a sign that they have capitalized on the value that effective marketing can give them over their competition.

If that sounds familiar, then respect their wisdom. Be as jealous as it takes to motivate you. Then, whenever you are ready, contact us to help you create and implement a marketing plan that targets steady profits and then meets or exceeds those targets. To see samples of actual results next, click here.

What can you do to profit?

For earning incentive rewards by sharing our services, click here.
For investment profits that are safe, steady, and large, click here.
For better marketing of your business, click here.
If you 2 or 3 of those choices fit you, click here.

cute pics: http://thebullsandbears.com/

Balloon demand through perceived scarcity.

on the value of discipline, insights, and small changes that bring big rewards

June 26, 2015

I like to emphasize concepts through interesting visuals. With that in mind, below is a homepage draft, then the text from the right (so you can read it more easily), then an background image for the next page.

cockpit facing storm4



For example, insights allow for easily recognizing risks that most people may neglect to notice. Once recognized, most risks can easily be avoided. Instead of constantly worrying about unknown risks, many risks can be measured and then avoided. Precise clarity about any relevant risks can save an enormous amount of time, resources, and sanity. What a relief!

Producing familiar results with much less effort is great, but what about unexpected rewards? Some insights can result in small but very precise actions that bring massive rewards (even using only very modest resources). The perfect adjustment at the perfect time can bring unexpected rewards.

For instance, what is the best way to fly past a dangerous storm? Sometimes, you can just fly over it!


Background image for 2nd page (Showing view from above the clouds):  (from this animation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAcZh6DvTDU )


over clouds

How much larger are the gains produced by the most successful investors?

June 26, 2015

What do the most successful investors do differently from the masses? Oddly enough, most people simply do not ask. (They also probably do not ask “exactly how much more successful are those investors?”)

By most successful, I mean the largest long-term profits. We can measure that as a multiple of typical gains. Let’s look at typical gains compared to a simple alternative.

sample results

Above is an actual example of 33 years of trading results for two methods. On the left is the final balance that would result from a starting balance of $10,000 placed in to a mutual fund modeled on stock prices of the top 500 companies in the US (which would include different companies over a period of several decades, but a mutual fund investor or 401k investor would not need to pay attention to that detail).

The nominal gains are almost $212,000 (beyond the initial $10,000 invested). That is a very common method.  The percentage gained is 2,120%. Sounds pretty good, right? How open are you to even better results than that?

On the right above are the results of a method that is only slightly less simple. The same $10,000 managed with just a bit more care (only a few transactions per decade) produced actual gains of over $427,000, a gain of 4,270%. In other words, the gains on the right ($427k) are over twice as large as the gains on the left ($212k). Now, are you interested yet in learning exactly how easy it has been to produce results that are at least twice as good as average?

Click one of these two options:   >>>THESE LINKS ARE NOT ACTIVE YET<<<

> How easy is it to produce results that are far above average?

> Why are the 2,120% gains not as good as you might presume?

Of course, you might think that the “typical” results are pretty good. In 33 years, the value of the balance multiplied by over 20 times. Pretty successful, right?

spx 2
One problem with that presumption is that the gains were not constant across the 33 years. The charts above and below show that almost all of the gains were in the first half of the 33 years. Compare those two time periods and then we will review how inflation and taxes have further reduced the success of that method.

spx 3

For comparison, note that the method that gained 4,270% did so well largely by exiting the stock market prior to ALL of the biggest declines of the last 33 years. By occasionally using select mutual funds and the safest bonds, that strategy even produced gains while most stock market investors were losing money year after year. The total number of transactions were just a few per decade. Sounds pretty easy, right? It has been.

(Further, the investment advisor whose results are shown above actually had much better results than what are shown above. I am showing those results here because that is the simplest and safest strategy of that advisor. It is very easy to do AT LEAST that well.)

How about taxes? While there could also be significant taxes on the amount of dollar increase, there are ways to avoid capital gains taxes and income taxes. Though most investors only delay taxes (like through IRAs and 401Ks), it is a simple thing to use tax-exempt investment shelters. However, most people do not know much about tax-exempt shelters (but do know about inflation). So, let’s ignore the tax issue for now and just focus on the unavoidable issue of inflation.

sample results 5
The black areas above show the actual purchasing power of the original investment (adjusted for inflation). In terms of purchasing power, the method on the left produced more than a 500% increase (but almost all in the first half of the 33 years). The method on the right produced over a 1000% increase, plus it was much more consistent (far safer) than the much more common method.

Again, the results on the left are for a method which would be recommended by most any mainstream financial advisors. Those people are usually just commission-earning salespeople who have a large financial incentive to give advice that is good for the companies that hire them, (but may be not all that great for naive consumers, especially in the last 15 years).

One issue ignored by many advisors (salespeople) is tax-exempt gains. In the chart below, we see that, after taxes (in red below), many investors would only make about a 400% increase in purchasing power from the common method.

That 400% increase is a long way from the gains of 2,120% that many investors might think they have gotten. Inflation results in “false profits” that produce tax liability but no increase in purchasing power. Even with interest income on some bonds, there can be income tax liability. When thinking about multiple decades, we see that inflation can create inflated investment gains that, through taxes, will create a massive transfer of wealth from investors to governments. (The same thing applies to real estate, etc…)

sample results 4
If not using tax-exempt sheltering, the method on the right would produce an after-tax increase in purchasing power of about 800%. By using tax-exempt sheltering, the gain in purchasing power would be over 1000%.

> To let us know that you want to know more about investment shelters that are tax-exempt in the US, click here.
One simple point is that most “average” investors are unaware of what results are realistic to expect from using the most common long-term investment strategies. They may be totally unaware of the many cases of long-term negative results, like the last 26 years of decline in the entire stock market of Japan:


The most popular strategies are not the most successful strategies. In fact, they are often not successful at all (at least not unless you are the salesperson piling up commissions from selling those methods to some naive mainstream investors).

Using the most common investing methods during periods of weak markets will consistently produce huge losses that can take several decades to recover. In contrast, the most successful investment methods are either designed to work in absolutely all market conditions or adjust along with changes in market conditions.


In the next presentation, one issue that we will explore is the fact that investment markets serve to transfer wealth. Who receives the bulk of the wealth being transferred (and how do they do it)?

Of course, governments benefit enormously from the fees on every trade and the taxes on taxable gains. But that is probably not as relevant to you as making sure that you are one of the “smart money” investors who are receiving the bulk of the wealth that most investors are complacently pouring in to investment markets. All you have to do is let us better position you to receive much more of that flow of wealth.

To hear that presentation now, click here: https://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com/2015/06/25/benefiting-from-the-constant-transfer-of-wealth/


To receive an email with a link to that presentation, click here.

Benefiting from the constant transfer of wealth

June 25, 2015

Sometimes, a quick demonstration of a very obvious point could be very important to you. Even if the point is quite obvious, it may be very rare for someone to directly explain it. The reality could be very simple and yet very startling (even shocking). However, clearly perceiving the reality could quickly give you access to huge benefits, reduce risk, and eliminate the old familiar anxiety that results from a lack of clarity.

What in particular could become clear? You may be stunned to recognize the simplicity of what is going on with the global transfer of wealth right now. Massive amounts of wealth are being redistributed through two general types of activity: free markets and government programs. We will briefly review both so that you will learn what to do to better position yourself, your household, and your business.

First, why should you be interested? (How will you benefit?)

Most people do not realize that they are the sources of the huge profits of a small number of recipients of a massive transfer of wealth. It is common knowledge that governments create tax systems that collect wealth from the masses. Perhaps it is less obvious where that money goes, but it is probably no surprise that large amounts of tax revenues go to groups like government employees and the manufacturers of the expensive military equipment purchased by governments.

But what about something like investment markets? One thing that is clear is that every single transaction in investment markets will create a cash flow for brokerages. The biggest brokerages and their employees can make a lot of profit just from the commissions for all of those transactions.

But who else benefits? And who is the source of all of those profits? Again, most people do not realize that they are the source of the huge profits collected by a small number of recipients.

How you will benefit is simple. We will benefit you by positioning you to increase the amount of wealth that you receive, as well as reducing or eliminating your current exposure as a source of profit for the select few.

Next, you will watch a slideshow that will demonstrate simply and quickly how massive amounts of wealth are being transferred right now. You can pick from two versions (one with audio and one without audio). There are two basic sections:

Who benefits from investment markets?

Who benefits from the programs of governments?

Before proceeding, note that wealth is not just exclusive ownership of valued resources. Wealth is exclusive access to resources PLUS the intelligent use of those resources.

Now, select a choice below: (links are not active)

> See slideshow with audio

> See slideshow without audio

> Contact us

> Skip to main menu



SLIDES: (To see all the writing, you may need to increase your screen magnification or click some of the images.)

Keep in mind that investment markets do not create any wealth. They ONLY transfer ownership of existing wealth. Over a lifetime, we can chart different amounts of total gains or losses.



Gains will be shown in black and losses in red.



Here is an idea of the long-term results that most people think is going on with investment markets.


Let’s visually isolate those who profit (in black) from those with a net loss (in red).


net5c net5b

Let’s quickly review the investment returns last decade for the Dow Jones Industrial Average of 30 popular US stocks.

djia 10 yrs

At the end of the entire decade, the result would be a small decline in liquidation value. Also, the vast majority of the time, there was a significant standing loss (often greater than 10%). One reason why many people tend not to notice the negative long-term returns is that they are frequently adding money to make up for their occasional investment losses (like adding funds with every paycheck).

However, stock markets can go down quickly and can take years or decades to recover (if they ever do). Plus, all of that is before we adjust for inflation. There are a few ways to calculate inflation, but all of them would produce double digit losses for that stock market index for last decade, like this:

djia 10 yrs2

Also, many investors in the US are subject to taxes for any year in which they have an annual gain. Last decade, there were profits 5 of the 10 years.

djia 10 yrs7

Depending on the exact losses on taxes, the final results could be a significant loss of purchasing power, like over 30%. Investors would have done better by just investing in the safest government bonds (to at least balance the loss of purchasing power from inflation).

djia 10 yrs5



So, again, here is what most people think is happening:




But here is what is really happening (after considering inflation and taxes):




Again, keep in mind that investment markets do not create any wealth. They ONLY transfer ownership of existing wealth.

Here are some ideas of the different groups that typically benefit from investment markets (as well as those who are the source of those benefits).

As investment markets transfer wealth year after year, huge numbers of typical middle class investors are the source of massive gains for small numbers of recipients.



Also, note that I left out one group who benefits from that transfer of wealth. They benefit even more than the brokerages and the stock exchanges. They collect fees on every transaction and also collect taxes on all the profits. Who do I mean? Governments!




We can pause here. What you have learned so far may be enough to interest you in considering the potential value of investing using the strategies of “smart money” investors who consistently make the highest profits. For many of you, that may begin with accurately re-assessing your current risk levels (not just what your broker wants you to believe).

We can help with all of that. First, I’d like you to also review a much shorter presentation on wealth transfers  performed by governments.

> Go to that slideshow about governments
> Skip to learning about the best investment methods (and the results you can get through them).
> Skip to learning how the most popular investment methods are so risky.






We will create a chart similar to the one you saw about investment markets.



On the left, we will show different levels of contribution (in red) or benefits (in black).




Note that we are considering the total net transfer of wealth over an entire lifetime.







With governments, how would you imagine that the chart would look? Is it more common to pay more in taxes than is received in benefits?



Considering all the businesses and households in a single country (such as the US), here is a possible range of how many people are net donors or net receivers from government transfers of wealth:




Next, consider some examples of who receives the benefits of government programs to transfer wealth.

Consider also some examples of who provides those benefits.


Through taxes and other revenues sources (fees, fines, etc), governments consistently transfer wealth from the masses to those who have the lobbying power to form governments and direct their policies.


Before considering what actions to take, it may be useful to first be very clear on the interests of governments (as in the actual results that they consistently produce). They generally transfer wealth to a select few recipients from large numbers of human resources (contributing donors, such as the taxpayers that are the involuntary “underwriters” of government debt). Even with governments that claim to promote equality, what often happens is that the masses own little or nothing and are assigned their work (with severe punishments for non-compliance), which is also known as slavery.

So, be cautious about the interests of government-regulated specialists. They tell you what they have been programmed to tell you (and they are subject to penalties for presenting truths that are contrary to the interests of a particular government).

Further, do not expect government-regulated specialists to empathize with you or validate your observations. Do not expect the masses to be interested either. They have been programmed by schools and mass media to focus elsewhere. They may have even been programmed by religious indoctrination to be ashamed of accepting their own self-interests and acting on them.

Instead, expect some people to be repulsed by small pieces of this information. This presentation was created to be a gentle but provocative “demonstration of the obvious.” You can share the presentation from the beginning. To share individual points “out of context” can repulse people (as in frighten them without first establishing hope in favorable alternatives).

So, because of years of government-regulated programming to promote the idea of governments as the champion (or even the savior) of the masses, many people will be upset emotionally by simple and obvious truths. In that case, it is important to relax, slow down, and remain calm.

While reviewing the prior content, it is not unusual to get light-headed or experience nausea. In extreme cases, just drink some cool, clean water, take a break and then return to this content as soon as you are able to be attentive.

When it works for you, we can explore some objective measures of what works best and why, plus review why the methods promoted most by governments and financial institutions tend to be so good for them (and so bad for everyone else). You can proceed immediately or get a link emailed to you for you to continue at a later time.

By the way, the massive transfer of wealth is not going to stop. It will still be here whenever you are willing to position yourself wisely to benefit from it more than you ever have before. It will go faster or slower at certain times, but there is no stopping the fact that different people have access to different resources (as well as different levels of expertise in knowing how to use the various resources).

Nature contains diversity (variety), which means inequality. Rats are not as smart as cats, and neither of them are as smart as humans. Just like kids may eventually tame a stray dog, government leaders may eventually tame new human resources to provide wealth to the few (like through invasion and then ongoing colonization with occupation soldiers).

If you have a reaction of contempt (envy) for certain nations, political groups, or politicians, that is common enough, but will be of no practical benefit. Here is what will actually make a real difference in terms of long-term results.

You may be motivated to stop doing any unwise (detrimental, risky) practices that you may have been programmed to do. You may even choose to start doing some things that have been working very well for a select few people for a very long time.

> Learn about the best investment methods (and the results you can get through them).
> Learn how the most popular investment methods are so risky.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 298 other followers

%d bloggers like this: