Posts Tagged ‘value’

What is unusually valuable about me?

November 5, 2013

What is unusually valuable about me?


English: Comparing precision and accuracy. (a)...

English: Comparing precision and accuracy. (a) is neither precise nor accurate. (b) is precise and accurate. (c) is precise but inaccurate. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)


Seek first to understand. This is far more valuable than to be understood.”



After decades of sincere naivete, I am now unusually perceptive. As for my capacity to produce either clarity or confusion in others, I can do either one quite well.


I expect there to be some clarity already as to the immense value of having highly accurate perceptions. When driving a car, it is better to have a clean windshield than a windshield covered with raindrops or fog or dust or mud. You already know that, right?


However, what about the value of influencing other people’s perceptiveness? If I can assess how perceptive someone is, then I may be interested in altering their perceptions. I could contribute to the accuracy of certain perceptions or reduce the accuracy of certain perceptions. I could also notice their presumptions (including false presumptions or misperceptions) and then either ignore, extend or reduce certain presumptions.


Accuracy and precision example

Accuracy and precision example (Photo credit: Wikipedia)



Someone might think: “but all people SHOULD contribute to everyone else’s clarity!” I was programmed to share that presumption. How realistic is it?


In contributing to “everyone else’s” clarity, when would I stop? How would I select which people and which issues to focus on first?


What if I am not totally clear about something? What if I question my own perceptions and presumptions? Exactly how much time should I devote to researching and mastering a subject before I pause my research in order to contribute to someone else’s clarity?



The reality is that sometimes I may value contributing to a particular person’s clarity in a particular way (or otherwise influencing their perception about some issue that I consider to be a priority). An entire group of people might even be my exclusive priority for influencing their perceptiveness.


Also, some people are going to be more interested in interacting with me (relative to them interacting with other people). Further, everyone who is open to interacting with me is going to have their own priorities of specific issues that are of interest and value to them.




I am an avid researcher. I love to understand things- and certain things in particular.


The things that I have studied have included three broad categories. First is things that other people told me to be interested in (like in school or in a job). Second is things that I was not personally very interested in, but that I predicted would be interesting to other people (like in order to attract the interest and approval of others socially). Last would be things that no one told me to be interested in, but I just naturally found fascinating (even if some other people had actively discouraged me from exploring those topics).


I Like 'Smooth' Men (1946) ... 4 Steps to Grea...

I Like ‘Smooth’ Men (1946) … 4 Steps to Great Listening – Jumping to conclusions. (January 9, 2013 / 27 Tevet 5773) … (Photo credit: marsmet546)


Among the jobs that I have done, I have been an instructor preparing students to do well on college entrance exams. I did that for most of the 1990s (most of that time working for a nationwide leader in the industry).


For just a few months in the year 2000, I also was a math teacher at a public high school that was basically a “second chance” school for students that had not been thriving in a regular public school setting. So, I got a lot of exposure to different levels of motivation among the various people I was instructing.



The most committed people were typically people who were entering graduate school (such a law school or an MBA program). They had personally paid around a thousand dollars to be part of my class.


Less committed in general were the “high school kids” who were entering college. Their parents were paying a thousand dollars for them to be in that class, not them directly. Some of them clearly considered the class to be an infringement on their teenage social life.


Even less committed were the “second chance” students. They might not simply be unmotivated, but even directly resistant. They might be terrified of getting frustrated with math because of past experience, so they may actively rebel, avoid, distract, withdraw, and so on.


'Helplessness' from 'The Expression of Emotion...

‘Helplessness’ from ‘The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals’ London 1872. Charles Darwin (1809-1882) (Photo credit: National Media Museum)


Representation of high precision and low accuracy.

Representation of high precision and low accuracy. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I am quite a good math instructor (and private tutor). One reason is that I understand math better than most people. Students who learn from instructors who do not know math very well are more likely to get frustrated.


Mathematics is about analyzing some information to compute one or more solutions. One unusual thing about math is the idea of multiple solutions (especially in a school setting in which students have been programmed to expect to be confronted with multiple choice or true/false responses).


Math problems not only can be solved in a variety of ways, but multiple solutions may be equally valid. For instance, a simple algebra problem might be “find the square root of 9: x^2 = 9.” Most people will immediately say 3.


3 is correct, but it is an incomplete answer. The precise answer is that both 3 and -3 are the square rootS of 9.



Is this example important? Not in particular. However, it is an example of something that mathematicians tend to know better than most people: there can be more than one valid solution to a particular computation or issue.


Some people might find that confusing. Mathematicians probably would not.


For instance, there is only one way to make a square that is 9 square feet in area. However, how many ways are there to make a rectangle with an area of 9 square feet? The answer is infinite. Not only could a rectangle be 2 feet by 4.5 feet or 9 feet by 1 foot, but many other dimensions.


To say “a square with an area of 9 square feet” is very precise because a square is a very specific kind of thing. However, to say “a rectangle with an area of 9 square feet” is not as specific.


Representation of high accuracy and low precision.

Representation of high accuracy and low precision. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)


Why do I mention this? Because, oddly enough, some mathematicians often understand language better than almost all other people.


A “shape” with an area of 9 square feet is even less specific than a “rectangle” that is 9 square feet in area. The shape could be a circle or a rectangle or an oval or a hexagon. “Shape” is an extremely broad linguistic category (while square and circle are very specific).



So, different people will have different understandings of how language works. Those who are confused about the nature of language will be much less able to experience accelerated learning than those who are clear that language involves sets of categories of varying precision.


But what is the function of language itself? It is simply for directing behavior (as in governing or mind control).


How is behavior directed? Through influencing not only perception itself, but also the interpretative models for relating to whatever is perceived. In other words, behavior is directed by influencing people’s values as well as their perceptions.

Not only can their perceptions be programmed, but their values. By programming both perceptions and values (priorities), it is possible to influence masses of people in regard to how to be patriotic consumers and loyal taxpayers: what to eat, what to wear, what music to buy, when to borrow money, how to invest your time wisely, who to vote for, and so on.


C23742-34, President Reagan having a photo tak...

C23742-34, President Reagan having a photo taken with Arnold Schwarzenegger at the Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Public values are systematically influenced by PR firms (the public relations industry), mainstream media, public schools and of course religious institutions. The public’s values are conceptual presumptions). In order to direct these conceptual presumptions, perception itself can be influenced through distraction, diversion, deception, and emotionally-charged drama.


Theatre can be used to influence values and perceptions. The theatrics can be a totally fictional drama, like in a movie or at a live performance by professional wrestlers. Or, the theatrics can be presented as sincere, like a political controversy in which actors like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jesse Ventura present the public with scandalous topics which the mainstream media sensationalizes.


In addition to presenting a confusing array of contradictory perspectives, the mainstream media also selects particular topics to value as a priority. Then, there is the “alternative” media which is of course still regulated by governments and funded by biased sponsors.



President George W. Bush meets with California...

President George W. Bush meets with California Governor-Elect Arnold Schwarzenegger in Riverside, Calif., Thursday, Oct. 16, 2003. White House photo by Eric Draper. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Is there such a thing as an unbiased sponsor? No. By sponsoring any particular something, they are demonstrating their bias.


So, is there such a thing as an unbiased media? No.


The ideal of an unbiased media is a fantasy promoted in certain cultures/religions. The idea of an unbiased media is like the idea of a video camera that is not pointing in a certain direction or angle.



Every camera angle has an angle. Every media production has specific content presented in a specific way.


You cannot have a math problem without numbers. Likewise, you cannot have a mass media production without an editorial spin or bias.



Vice President Dick Cheney meets with Gov. Arn...

Vice President Dick Cheney meets with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for the first time at the White House. Vice President Dick Cheney meets with California Gov.-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger in the Vice President’s West Wing office Oct. 30, 2003. This is the first meeting between Vice President Cheney and Mr. Schwarzenegger since the state’s historical recall election Oct. 7, 2003. White House photo by David Bohrer (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

You also cannot communicate without directing attention to a particular focus in a particular way (from a certain perspective). All uses of language have the potential to produce an influence.


Communication can support pre-existing perceptions and values or it can question them or even directly challenge them. Further, language can be used in ways that go beyond what someone has previously considered or studied.



Why should any of this be important to you? Maybe it won’t.


I mentioned “sincere naivete” very early in this presentation. Maybe you are interested in identifying topics which you already value, but about which you recognize that you might be sincerely naïve in some way (without even knowing it of course). So, one possible interest for you could be to explore the entire topic of sincere naivete: why could it be important, how can it be recognized, and what can be done about it? (As a quick note, anything that you find frustrating could be a clear sign of sincere naivete, as in a false presumption that you do not even recognize as being presumptive.


Groundbreaking Research (Feb. 1st, 2004)

Groundbreaking Research (Feb. 1st, 2004) …item 1b.. Coburn, Contreras, BSU address racist comment made by FSU student (Sep. 6, 2013 10:33 AM) …item 2.. The Cure – Mixed Up (1990) Full Album — “A Forest (Tree Mix)” … (Photo credit: marsmet53)

Another interest for you now could be the subject of public relations: how to produce certain perceptions, values, and behavior in a targeted audience. You might also be specifically interested in how public relations has been used to promote certain false presumptions and naïve sincerities in your own systems of values and interpretations.


A rather broad focus would be the power of language itself. In contrast, a very specific focus could be something that is inspiring to you, but that you are interested in sharing with me (or a small group of like-minded individuals) so as to invite the contribution to you of clarity and precision and effectiveness in your exploration of your spontaneous interests and inspirations.


Schwarzenegger, Air Wick, poodle in pillows - ...

Schwarzenegger, Air Wick, poodle in pillows – toilet at Hobba (Photo credit: avlxyz)


I welcome your questions, comments, invitations, and requests. Not only can I explain things in new ways that you may greatly value, but I can demonstrate principles to you and show you how they may be valuable in ways that you do not already recognize. I can even guide you in applying those principles yourself.


I recommend that you also briefly specify why I might be interested in investing my time in communicating with you. In case you were wondering, I value cash as well as contractual promises to provide me cash upon your reaching a specific target in increased revenues for you. By the way, if you are not already open to dramatically increasing your financial capacity, are you willing to at least be open to the increased practical freedom that comes with increased access to financial resources?


What gives currency value (purchasing power)?

November 12, 2012

war veterans


You may know the phrase “the full faith and credit of the United States of America.” What exactly does it mean? What really gives the US Dollar market value (purchasing power)?


president obama


Some libertarians assert that gold and silver give value to a currency. That is an understandable presumption, but clearly false.


ron paul and mitt romney


In 1971, the US Dollar went from being redeemable for gold (by non-citizens only) to not being redeemable for any particular substance. You could use that currency to do business with the US, like to pay taxes or pay court fees to file a lawsuit or produce an eviction or foreclosure auction or levy.


If the currency had collapsed by 1972, then clearly gold would have been what gave it value. However, 41 years later, the US Dollar is still the dominant currency in the world.

Are there more US Dollars in circulation today than in 1971? Yes, but so what? Is one US Dollar worth about what two dimes were worth in 1971? Yes, but so what? That does not alter the fact that the US Dollar is the dominant currency in the world, being used in millions of transactions day after day.


veterans day


Therefore, the clear reality behind the purchasing power of the US Dollar is obviously not gold (and thus we can presume that it never was). The purchasing power comes from organized violence (and always has).


us soldiers veterans


1861 Confederate States of American half dolla...

1861 Confederate States of American half dollar coin, front and back (Photo credit: Wikipedia)


That is just the beginning of the issue (as it relates to the bubble or speculative demand for gold). The other issue, which I have often repeated in recent years, is that court systems of organized violence created demand for materials like gold and silver by requiring payment in that substance. Why? Because they could mine it and the common people could not.


Imagine- what if a court system says “every citizen in this country has to pay us 2 ounces of gold per year or we will arrest and execute them?” Then that gives a certain demand for gold- especially if the threat is believable. Or, if the threat hinges on “4 ounces of gold per year,” then that extortion racket or taxation scheme will create even more demand for gold.


The public compete with each other for gold even more when the annual requirement is 4 ounces. Why? Not because they want gold, but because they fear the organized violence of the gangsters making the threat.


What if a government demanded that every citizen provide an 8-carat diamond to the government every year. Would that effect public demand for diamonds? What if they demanded a currency like Euros or Yen or confederate dollars?


8 carat diamond


At some point, the people may rebel against the extortion racket, potentially leading to a civil war or colonial revolution. If the rebels kill enough of the old regime, they may then set up their own court systems of organized coercion. If the rebels get nuked or starved to death, then that eventually leaves less people to compete for the same amount of gold, so the slaves settle down and get back to work on the financial plantation.


rand paul - government bullies


6 Confederate States of America currency notes...

6 Confederate States of America currency notes three $10 notes 3 $20 notes (Photo credit: Wikipedia)


So, even the former value of gold when it has been accepted as a currency is not from the chemical compound itself, but from the organized violence of governments who accept that chemical compound as a “casino token” worth a particular amount of organized violence. $5,000 can buy 100 times as much organized violence from a court system as $50. That is the proper way to think of it.


When court systems collapse, then the prior demand “abruptly declines” for dollars or gold or whatever was accepted by that court system. In the case of fiat currency, the value of the paper as a collector’s item is negligible (like what happened to the Confederate dollar when the court system of organized violence of the confederacy no longer forced people to use that currency to pay them taxes). In the case of a metal coin like a dime or nickel, there is the raw metal itself- also almost worthless- or the wood in the case of an old wooden nickel, which you could use as fuel in a fire, right?


wooden nickel


If Libya or Iraq accept gold, that effects overall demand for gold right- certainly locally at least, right? What gives gold it’s purchasing power? I assert that it is primarily just the organized violence of government court systems which offer their organized violence in exchange for gold (or silver or whatever).


Is there industrial value (practical functionality) to silver and gold? Of course! That is why the bimetallic standard eventually was dropped. The masses had too much access to newly mined or newly imported metal. The fact that local supply of metal was no longer controlled by a court system attempting to monopolize coercion is what led to the dropping of gold and silver, with the rise of fiat currencies.


ron paul - silver and gold


Organized violence has always been the issue. Gold and silver were convenient tokens for the elite when they could tightly control supply of those rare, convenient materials for them to mint “casino tokens.”




memorial day



Campaign poster showing William McKinley holdi...

Campaign poster showing William McKinley holding U.S. flag and standing on gold coin “sound money”, held up by group of men, in front of ships “commerce” and factories “civilization”. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)



Diamond cartels, “bubble values,” & cheating

November 7, 2012

This is a reply to a private correspondence. Let’s review some basics before we get in to the idea of prices, valuation, and legal definitions of cheating/fraud.

A rose-cut synthetic diamond created by Apollo...

A rose-cut synthetic diamond created by Apollo Diamond using a patented chemical vapour deposition process. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

There are many distinct cultures in the world today (& across history). Each of them involve influencing the attention and perception and behavior of individuals. You can call that good or bad, but even any values/evaluations of “good” and “bad” are culturally specific, not universal.

If we broaden our scope to biology & ecology, we see that many species of animal are social, with behavioral norms and also occasional deviance from the norms. Maybe some of the behavioral norms are genetic and maybe some of the deviance is from genetic mutation (as in evolution, but also the “epigenetics” of things like how what we EAT triggers different code within the DNA sequence, so two identical twins with identical DNA can have very different physiology, neurochemistry, and behavior because of different diets and so forth).

English: 2 of diamonds.

English: 2 of diamonds. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

So, now let’s look at “cheating.” In the card game of poker, deceiving the opponents is a common part of the game. In many sports, competing athletes fake one direction & then go another.

Cheating is a broad category that may include lying, stealing, and extortion. I am saying that all currency systems (and all court systems) are based on extortion (AKA taxes). I am not condemning taxation or extortion or “cheating.” In fact, the reality is that because court systems have so much concentration of military power (deputy soldiers), the various courts can define “cheating” in different ways- maybe to drive without a license is cheating in one jurisdiction, but in another jurisdiction, it is simply illegal for women to drive (or perhaps only women between the ages of 20 and 60) – they do not have the right to obtain a license at all.

Jewellery and other luxury goods are used for ...

Jewellery and other luxury goods are used for conspicuous and/or invidious consumption (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

So let’s be clear that not only across human history, but even today, there are vast ranges of social norms. With the diamond industry, there is a tight control of the supply of diamonds to the general public. Why? Because controlling supply allows for the maintenance of artificial scarcity.

Once the diamond cartel had control of supply, then they went on a big campaign to make diamonds popular- to manufacture demand through funding Hollywood movies that were 90 minute advertisements climaxing in the romantic emotional scene in which the handsome leading man offers the diamond ring to the gorgeous model actress. This was not “product placement,” but the writing of movies around the product.

DeBeers set up photo-ops with the Hollywood stars and also with British royalty to wear “free” diamond jewelry supplied by the cartel. The cartel set up the media showcase of diamond jewelry, including at huge media orgies called “award shows.”

So, that marketing campaign was hugely successful, with diamonds becoming associated first with wedding rings, then with anniversary jewelry and engagement rings. The success of their ploy is distinctive.

(When a lot of people started re-selling their diamond jewelry, then the DeBeers slogan changed from “diamonds are a girl’s best friend” to “diamonds are forever.” They wanted to make people feel guilty- like they were hexing their marriage or being somehow unfaithful- if they sold their old anniversary jewelry. The new marketing campaign, like the others before it, worked very well.)

The diamond cartel was behind all of those cultural values- from glamourizing diamond rings to discouraging people from pawning old diamond jewelry. “Pawn other jewelry, but not the diamonds, because those diamonds are forever.”

When synthetic diamond production was invented a few decades back, the cartel swung in to action to make sure that only small “industrial grade” diamond were synthesized. Otherwise, there tight restrictions on supply would collapse and prices would plummet.

I mention all this because the history of the diamond cartel is recent (in the last 150 years) and rather well-documented. They created wars, forcing masses of people in to armies and slavery conditions in work camps, also creating the Apartheid regime to supply compliant workers to their mines. We could call their campaign “evil” or “cheating,” but you probably have some diamond jewelry and as long as you can exchange it for other things of value, that is the real social valuation (price) that you can obtain for that item. If their supply controls ceased, any diamond jewelry you own would plummet in value.

carats (0 mg) round diamond engagement ring.

carats (0 mg) round diamond engagement ring. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

So, it is not cheating to sell a home for $200,000 shortly before it drops in price to $100,000. The same is true for a stock or an ounce of gold or a diamond. Prices fluctuate.

Demand is social. Demand is manufactured by advertising- influenced by marketing and coercion and wars, such as the invasion of resource-rich regions (and other “diplomatic” influence such as assassinations).

Certain powerful people (as in judges AKA warlords, popes, etc) define what is cheating and what is not. To the diamond cartel, they effectively defined synthetic production of jewelry-grade diamonds as cheating. They lobbied and protected a monopoly.

If a court system monopolized access to diamond mines (and protected their monopoly through coercion so that synthetic production of diamonds did not interfere with their monopoly), then the court system could claim tax liabilities from people (which is otherwise known as extortion) and the court system could require that the taxes (extorted protection money) be paid in whatever form of payment the court system dictates, such as diamonds or gold. If the physical substance used in the  currency is rare and access to it is monopolized by the court system, that is a viable currency.

In fact, that is how gold coins came to be used as money. Gold was rare, so it was easy for secret societies like the Vatican and the Babylonian Kabbalists to obtain a monopoly or near monopoly on gold and gold mines, and then demand payment in the substance that only they possessed. They could have done the same thing with platinum or palladium, but gold along with silver were the main currency metals within the imperial churches of Babylon, Egypt, and Rome (which still rules today).

When court systems compete against reach other, then you have forex markets in which there are very precise measurements of how currency values fluctuate. How much organized violence does a particular currency buy from the soldiers of a particular court system? When the US Confederacy was defeated in the US Civil War, their currency went from having purchasing power (representing the military force AKA “full faith and credit” of the Confederacy) to having no purchasing power, since there was no network of coercion to back the little coupons of ink on paper.

So, what I promote is refraining from condemnation (see my prior blog post) to promote clarity. What you are terrified by and ashamed of, you cannot calmly study and understand. So, it is important that the Zionists and the Vatican traumatize the masses with emotional repulsion from certain subjects so as to keep people from recognizing the simplicity of their systems of social influence, to forbid most people from clarity and knowledge about “good and evil.” On the other hand, I have no condemnation for their system. In fact, I may be quite committed to maintaining it.

Vatican Gardens

Vatican Gardens (Photo credit: MarcelGermain)

surprises, bail-outs, and values

March 26, 2012
Cough and the Common Cold

Cough and the Common Cold (Photo credit: RobertFrancis)

Surprising complications, political bailouts, and valuable opportunities

Sometimes, some people are surprised by something new to them, for instance when they notice that an economic trend is changing or when a medical emergency develops suddenly. Such surprises may be experienced as interruptions, complications, failures, frustrations, or, generally speaking, as problems.

People may first react to their new experience by wishing for a quick and easy solution. For instance, perhaps some politicians can just fix all the changes that may have been perceived as problems. What could be more convenient?

This is like the idea that in response to a medical emergency, a person who is choking can have any obstructions cleared out quickly so they can breathe again easily. When someone is choking and facing death, they want other people near them to know it urgently, so they can get help to return to normal breathing as soon as possible.

However, some medical emergencies require more than a single, obvious intervention. Someone may seek relief in some pills or surgery, while others may seek months of physical therapy or years of in-patient psychiatric care, and perhaps only a few will address the roots of how the complications developed, perhaps supplementing any obvious deficiency and then refining their practices to promote lasting functionality.

Yet, what could be more convenient than when someone else simply adjusts conditons for us so that our old methods can still produce the results we value? Imagine someone who is confusing their private hallucinations with the common perceptions that anyone else could also experience. Wouldn’t it be convenient to just keep their hallucinations- or perhaps have some drugs that suppress their mental function in general- and then just live the rest of their life in a government facility? Isn’t that the most convenient possibility- simply manipulating the circumstances so that the symptoms are no longer experienced as a problem?

Yes, it may be very convenient for the government to fix things by ignoring the root issues and only alleviating the

Uncle Sam recruiting poster.

Uncle Sam recruiting poster. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

complications related to any symptoms: like give someone a lot of free drugs plus free room and board for the rest of their life. However, the most convenient solution may not be the most valuable to some people. Further, in the case of global economic changes, a promise for an isolated local solution may further complicate or aggravate the underlying issues.

For instance, if someone is choking and trying to cough up the obstruction, they might be interested in a cough suppressant. All that loud, violent coughing can be quite disturbing to other people around. However, of the two basic ways for all that annoying coughing to stop- death or a return to normal breathing- there may be a strong preference between the two, rather than just whichever one is most convenient.

So, to be more specific about the emerging shift in global economic trends, some people have recently been surprised to find that the value of their old investing methods are changing quickly- in fact- declining faster than they may have even recognized as possible. Let’s say that, nationwide, real estate prices fall 25% and then some politicians get some media coverage and says this: “we can see that real estate prices are falling nationwide and that homeowners are upset about this, so we’d like to take care of this for you by giving a gift to all the people who own real estate. We are going to give them a gift of money in the amount of however much they lost in real estate value. If real estate values continue to fall, we will keep this up as long as we can continue to take money from all the taxpayers who do not own any real estate in order to continue this program.”

That is a very convenient solution for homeowners, isn’t it? What could possibly be more convenient than that: you do nothing at all and we will change circumstances back to how they used to be for you!

Next, stock prices fall 50% and so the government does the same thing; taxpayers who do not own stocks generously cover the losses of those who owned stocks. Then, prices for wristwatches, VHS tapes, dogfood, and a certain brand of cigarette all fall by 75%. Naturally, the government steps in to the rescue, bailing out the least competitive insurance companies with money extracted from everyone else. What could possibly be more convenient?

Now, imagine that your Uncle Sam needs another liver transplant, his fourth in ten years. How convenient is this: the government can just find someone else who has taken excellent care of their liver, take it from them, and give it to Sam (plus $100,000 for shipping and handling, but we promise that some taxpayers will cover that). If you or I happen to be that person generously giving a liver to your Uncle Sam, well, that does not change how convenient that intervention would be for Sam, does it?

How will the taxpayers afford all of this? The obvious, convenient answer is… credit cards.

If the taxpayers cannot pay back their credit card debts because they are dead because someone patiently let them die when choking so they could get their liver, well, we can do the obvious thing: invade Mexico and take all of their vast wealth so that we can bail out “our” banks who aggressively issued all those bad credit card debts. Plus, any of our banks that did not participate in the credit card scheme, we will punish for their lack of blind patriotism… by declaring them part of Mexico, and thus confiscate their assets, discontinue their operations, and use all that money to make a big statue of a credit card to put in the World Trade Center plaza.

Remember, there is no problem created by the latest political solution that another politician will not tell you can be fixed. Even more convenient, everything can be fixed easily and quickly and free of any expense whatsoever, at least none to that politician!

Then again, that would be presuming that everything needs to be fixed, which implies that something must obviously be wrong with everything. Is that right that everything is wrong?

What if the response of coughing is actually the precisely most relevant response for someone choking on some food stuck in their throat? What if every single thing does not need to be fixed, but perhaps only one or two things could be adjusted, then everything would be working well again? What if resulting symptoms (complications) can provide us exact guidance for what to do more and what to do less?

Uncle Sam Русский: Дядя Сэм

Uncle Sam Русский: Дядя Сэм (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Maybe Uncle Sam could find another way to relax besides drinking a six-pack every evening. Maybe he would find that he is less likely to choke on his food when he is not drunk- or was he choking on his own vomit again? Maybe he would also be more relaxed if instead of waiting on some government program to bail him out of his collapsing investments in real estate and stocks and the whole VHS industry- which your Uncle Sam still says is guaranteed to rebound very, very soon- he sold some of those investments for other investments that are gaining in purchasing power, investments that the rest of humanity apparently thinks of as increasingly valuable day after week after month after year.

It’s just like the fact that the railroad industry should have been bailed out to protect them from the competition of the automobile industry, and the automobile industry should be bailed out to protect it from the airlines, which should also be protected from the telecommuting industry. In other words, perhaps none of them should be protected.

Perhaps we would benefit by adjusting “progressively” to the changes that are emerging, rather than reactively trying to interfere politically with new developments which could be guiding us directly into the adjustments that are apparently most fitting by now. That way, if you really want to keep all those old VHS tapes, yes, the ones next to the 8-track tapes and the vinyl LP albums and the antique telegraph, that would be a choice that you could easily afford to make.

The Amish still may use candles a lot (and horse-drawn carriages). That is apparently perfect for them, or they would probably do something else, huh? The fact that you and I may keep some candles and maybe even a covered wagon does not require us to also be opposed to occasionally using electrical lighting or a skateboard.

If you prefer an old-fashioned hut over a brick house, then by all means invest in a hut! It depends on what you value, so if you eventually are surprised to find that some strong gusts of wind blow your hut away, your values may suddenly change just as surprisingly. As for me, I prefer investment strategies that consistently produce larger gains than the vast majority of the other investment strategies available, but you may not be like me… yet.

By the way, beginning in early 2003, I published warnings of an emerging global shift in economics, forecasting a credit crisis that would result in declines in both real estate and stocks internationally. In 2004 and 2005, I published details of an imminent rise in fuel prices that would surge up sharpply and puncture the credit bubble in housing, stocks, and the mainstream financial industry. After that, I have continued to report and comment on the ongoing developments, as well as develop the expertise relevant to the present conditions. I can help you fulfill your values with methods that best fit changing circumstances- including asset sheltering, settling of debts for a discount, investment services, and private consulting.

As this global shift continues, trends will change in business, politics, social order, culture, and everything else that you

Uncle Sam
Uncle Sam (Photo credit: IrishMBO)

could imagine. If your Uncle Sam still has some hallucinations about reactive political solutions to global shifts- shifts that could only seem to be a problem for those who are not competitive yet- I propose that those hallucinations will be recognized as hallucinations eventually… one way or another.

Anyone can look for themselves and confirm that prices of stocks and real estate have dramatically changed in recent years. One can compare these recent changes to changes in prior decades and thus notice that the recent changes are rather unprecedented- especially when considering the wide range of regions globally where the same dramatic economic fluctuations are clearly evident.

But if your neighborhood or county or state can insulate themselves from the international shift underway, so be it. The Amish have been reasonably successful at maintaining their ways in isolation for hundreds of years. The primitive Aborigines also survived for centuries oblivious to the advances of the industrial world, though they have not been quite as successful lately. If you are willing to take your chances on resisting time, go ahead with staying behind!

By the way, honey, I think I may have gambled away a million dollars of our retirement savings on the VHS industry. However, I know a friend with political connections who says that she will lobby for a bill to have the Amish and the Aborigines pay for it all- every cent that I foolishly speculated on the VHS industry (okay, maybe around three quarters of that million were on borrowing to purchase inflated real estate, but I have a list of very convenient excuses of who else besides me is responsible for the decline in real estate). Anyway, a couple more things about this friend I mentioned: first, she assured me that the best thing to do is to just hold steady no matter what; do not ever adjust your methods no matter how unsatisfied you are with the results they produce- well, except if the “right” politician tells you to do so. Plus, briefly, well, she’s not just my friend either; so, here are some divorce papers for you to sign.

Finally, before I go, one last thing: I also promised your Uncle Sam that I would convey this message to you; he was slurring pretty severely, but I think what he said is that he desperately needs your liver, but for a really good cause. He’ll be here in about an hour to, uh, borrow it.


Experience lasting relief from mental strain, financial uncertainty, and physical stress.

Published accurate advance forecasting of all major long-term financial trends beginning in early 2003, including the surging and discounting of fuel prices, real estate values, stock markets, and rates of foreclosures and bankruptcy

Experienced in Budget Simplification, Asset Sheltering, and Debt Negotiation

Professionally Trained in Communication, Neuro-Linguistics, Learning Acceleration, and Relaxation Therapy

Professionally Certified in Therapeutic Massage and Hydrotherapy

Studied in Physiology, Human Digestion and Primitive Nutrition (not supplemental nutrition, as supplementation is only for those whose primary dietary practices lack complete nutrition)


Published on: Sep 19, 2009


Related articles

what does life value

February 12, 2012

in reply to:

I liked the article. However, the way of presenting an idea along the lines of “all men oppress all women” is odd to me, though.

, *1938-07-21, 78th Attorney General of the Un...

, *1938-07-21, 78th Attorney General of the United States (1993–2001) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In the West, there is a great value on young, virgin femininity- or at least the appearance of feminine, virgin youthfulness. Certainly men value it, as do women. No, a crumpled old George Burns at age 95 is not especially sexy and neither is Janet Reno or Margaret Thatcher– at least not to any heterosexual men that I know.

English: Margaret Thatcher, former UK PM. Fran...

Margaret Thatcher –  Image via Wikipedia

Yes, there are ideals of male and female physique– some more universal and some more cultural. Besides physique, other qualities are valued in a mate. However, with the whole thing about women being the ones who actually get pregnant and bear and nurse children, maybe it is a simple fact of nature that for the future evolutionary viability of an offspring, the health and physique of the female parent is more important than the health and physique of the male parent. (Also, I have noticed that among the healthy, fit, teenage women that I know, there may be a relatively low frequency of complaints about societal valuations that honor healthy, fit, teenage women.)


In the West, it is sometimes celebrated that in recent decades, women have become more involved with commercial activity, like taking on jobs more or less the same as men have since the industrial revolution and concentrating of humans in to cities to work at factories. When a society‘s population grows to a point of excess or saturation relative to present resources and infrastructure, it is natural for the social value of the act of child-bearing in particular (and in general the value of women and children) to decline, sometimes suddenly, like during wars.

Girls may be sent off to public schools just like boys. That does not indicate a huge value by families on their children of either sex, but a lack of value. A society in which children are more valued shelters them and apprentices them- at least the aristocratic ones. A society in which children are less valued sends them off to warehouses, but that is a much more sheltered life than abandoning them totally, or shipping them to an orphanage, or selling them like slaves (which may happen much more in impoverished families than sheltered westerners may wish to think).

So, let’s say that in a particular society and culture, there are a set of values in my midst- though those values are subject to change. I could be a newborn or a visitor from afar or a native of many decades. So what are some ways that I could relate to the values in my midst? Do I reject the actual values in my midst? Do I condemn them, or question them, or insist that they are inherently the best, denying the entire history of anthropology and economics? Values change. Values vary.

Institutions organize society by influencing different folks in different ways. The same is true in a bee colony in which one embryo (though genetically the same as hundreds of sisters) is nourished distinctly (with nutrient-rich “royal jelly” rather than the regular honey for the masses of bees). Should we condemn this injustice and intervene to bring equality to bees? If beekeepers tried to do that, it might hasten the extinction of bees.

Life has dictated that bees favor particular embryos and nurture those in to queens. All of the other bees cooperate to gather honey for the “lower class bees” and to gather royal jelly for the selected future queen. The queen is not elected democratically after maturing and campaigning. She is “advantaged” from the earliest age. However, to say “advantaged” is a bit odd.

Are the heart and brain “advantaged” over the skin or the digestive organs when there is a hormonal shift resulting in the directing of resources like oxygen-rich blood to those organs and tissues rather than toward others? Isn’t it that for the benefit of the entire body, lower priority functions like growing hair and growing fingernails will lose nutritional resources (resulting in things like baldness) when other functions are “valued” by the hormonal system of the physiological genius of that particular creature (which could be a mammal or a fish or a reptile)? Is the hormonal system of mammals or fish or reptiles “the best?” It is a silly question, right?

Many humans have been programmed or indoctrinated to relate to life (through language) as something to be rejected, judged, condemned and fixed. When I relate to life as something to be rejected, judged, condemned and fixed, I am life too.

Do I criticize celebrities (including politicians) arrogantly, as if I really know what their lives are like and have some special insight that they should have known to humbly come to me to learn? Do I criticize their arrogance or their naivete or their ambition or what?

Spiritual traditions may teach us to refer to that manner of operating as hell or sin or maya or agonizing or even mental illness like anxiety or paranoia. The archetype of the accuser or slanderer (or, from the Greek word “dia-bolos:” the devil) is referenced as a particular spirit or attitude and many humans are warned about it. We may be taught of “the spirit of the divisive one” as distinct from the spirit of the sage: one who recognizes persona as like a branch of a larger tree. Ego or the identifying of individuality is a process in language as in a process of symbolic metaphor or spirit, and the process is not observable in matter, or at least not without mapping complex neurological patterns of language and perception.

The ego is just a process or pattern of neuro-linguistic biochemistry, and that process is the system of the filtering of all perceiving. The ego cannot remove the ego. The ego is not a mistake. The self-image is the relating to life as if one is isolated from life. We can label the ego as a distinct developmental stage among others.

The ego is one linguistic function of life, like reading these wordy letter shapes is a linguistic function of miraculous neuro-chemistry. Reading does not require the linguistic identifying of an isolated individuality, but reading does require language. Likewise, the perceiving of an ego does not require reading, but the perceiving of an ego isolated in language and through language and by language does require language.

So, life prioritizes by favoring certain functions and capacities over others. Hormones do it when directing blood to various organs and tissues. Bees do it when selecting an embryo to nourish in to a queen. Human populations do it through wars and propaganda and trade- with particular human populations coming to global dominance or regional dominance or local dominance or whatever. When trends of the behaviors of lending and borrowing balloon prices of real estate, that reflects a temporary shifting of social values. When prices of fuels (like crude oil) rise from $11 in 1999 to $148 in 2008, that reflects a temporary shifting in social values.


Values change, sometimes quickly, like when your child starts choking or when a war ends. How do you relate to the fact that there are values that vary from place to place and time to time? How do you value your own life, life in general, and human social values?

Do you reject, judge, condemn, and obsessively to try fix? Do you practice the spirit of inner and outer divisiveness, of the devil? Do you condemn condemnation? Do you judge against judgmental systems of valuation and evaluation? Do you de-value values? Do you value the relationship between that particular function of life labeled “language” and all of the other functions of life?

Is language better than the rest of life? Is language isolated from the rest of life? Is language a function of the rest of life?

How to adapt to economic trends

January 8, 2012
International Money Pile in Cash and Coins

Image by via Flickr

Forex Money for International Curency

Image by via Flickr

Comedy (?): How to adapt to changing economic seasons- whose advice to follow? 

People sometimes ask me: whose advice should I follow in regard to adapting to changing economic seasons? You tell me: should you focus on the advice of people who have a significant shared interest in your results, like profit-sharing partners who make money and lose money with you, on the advice of people who have no interest in your results, or on the advice of people who have a vested conflict of interest with you?
As soon as you know the answer, then contact me. If you don’t know the answer yet, then keep listening and I will explain.
In particular, some people get really interested in what I mean by a conflict of interest. It means that someone else’s economic interests are directly conflicting with yours. Here are some examples.

Go to a car wash and ask the attendant which service to buy: the $5 car wash or the $50 make-over, wax, massage, pedicure, and anti-rust treatment
art gallery and ask the painter what to buy: $500 piece or the $5,000 piece?
car lot and ask the sales mgr what car to buy: $5,000 used car or the $50,000 new foreign car with horrible mileage and super-expensive to maintain?
realtor: $50,000 home or $500,000 home?
annuities: insurance co. promises to pay a set amount no matter how well the underlying investments do
(and people wonder how AIG went bankrupt, like it was all on real estate speculation…
guess what: the insurance agent makes a huge bonus for selling you that! )
Professional experts promote the things that benefit them to sell (things with big commissions and big profit margins). That’s it!
When a farmer grows corn, someone might buy $5 of corn from the farmer, then package and sell that same amount of corn for $50. So much was that amount of corn worth: $5 or $50? To the farmer it was worth $5. To the consumers who bought it, it was worth $50. It’s the same corn!
However, if the car sales manager or the insurance agent or the realtor or the painter or car wash attendant could get you to pay $5,000 or $5,000,000 for that same amount of corn, then they would be doing their job well, right? Now we are talking about some BIG profit margins, right? If I pay $5 at Starbuck’s for some coffee and some farmer in Central America would charge me 50 cents for the exact same coffee from the exacts same beans that the farmer grew, then that farmer would probably be making a lot more profit than they are by selling the coffee beans to Starbuck’s!
So, what’s the difference in value between a $500 piece of art and a $5000 piece of art? $4500! However, the same piece of art could be sold for those two prices at different times, right? The artwork does not change when the price changes, right? What REALLY changed? What changed is how much someone valued the money that they used to buy the art. Maybe one person had more money available at a particular time, maybe they had a brand new credit card account and felt rich. However, it is the same piece of art, just like the same amount of corn or coffee beans.
Now, if I buy a home for $100,000 and a decade later, after making virtually no improvements to the house, I sell it for $500,000, great: that is a big unearned capital gain for me. However, that change in price does not mean that the actual functional value of the home changed much. It means that the price changed. The value of the dollars used to buy the home may have changed a lot, like due to expectations of continuing inflation. If inflation rates drop far enough then expectations of future inflation may also drop, and eventually, housing prices could drop.
So, what’s the difference between the $5 cup of coffee and buying the same cup of coffee for 50 cents? $4.50! It means the purchaser values their dollars more and the coffee less.
What’s the difference between paying $10 for a new DVD and then selling the exact same DVD still in the wrapping for $1 at a garage sale a year later? $9. It shows the difference between how much different purchasers value the DVD and the dollars are various times.
What’s the difference between paying $100,000 or $500,000 or $200,000 for a house? It shows the difference between how much different purchasers value the house and the dollars are various times. With housing, the dollar issue is not just about cash dollars, but debt as in mortgages or borrowed dollars.
Now, let’s quickly go back to the issue of why the insurance company would give the insurance agent a huge bonus for selling an annuity that sounds too good to be true because it is. Why do they give such a big bonus for selling that? Because selling that gives the insurance company a huge profit, since actual practical value of the annuity contract may be so much less than the price that some consumers are actually willing to pay for it.
It’s like owning a home and saying to a realtor: here is a home that cost exactly $100,000 to build last week. However, if you can sell it for $200,000 or even $500,000, then we the owners will give you a huge bonus- in proportion to the amount that you can sell it for. So, whether the realtor sells it for $200,000 or $500,000 or does not sell it at all, that does not change the fact that the home cost exactly $100,000 to build or that the farmer only got $5 for the bag of corn, does it?
If an insurance company can get someone to pay them $100,000 for a particular policy or $1,000,000 for the exact same policy, that does not change the value of the policy, but only the price and profit margin of the policy. If I can get the exact same cup of coffee for 50 cents from a farmer or for $5 from the store around the corner, those are just differences in price, not in the actual cup of coffee, right? If I can get a brand new perfectly good DVD from a garage sale for $1 or the same DVD for $10, which price would I rather pay?
Why are prices of real estate and stocks falling? Because so many people are valuing their cash money more and other things less. Why are prices of corn and coffee and cars and art and gold and silver and platinum and copper all falling? Because so many people are valuing their cash money more and other things less.
So, whose advice is best?
You tell me: should you focus on the advice of people who have a significant shared interest in your results, like profit-sharing partners who make money and lose money with you… or anyone else?
Do any of these folks actually make money and lose money with you: Mass media? Politicians? Popular financial institutions?
No, let’s look at what a guy with a PhD in Economics said, Dr. Paulsen:
Sept 2005:

“when most seem bogged down worrying about when the housing bubble is going to burst or when oil prices are going to cause the consumer to capitulate, investors should be focusing away from such issues towards the many positive things… yet to occur.”

6 years later, he still works there! He’s still the chief investment strategist there! That might be amazing, unless his job is not to give advice that benefits the public, but that benefits his employer, right?
In a separate video, I will say more about what he wrote in September 2005, which I criticized in a December 2005 publication. I will also detail what I recommended and what I recommend. In brief, what I recommend is that people who want valuable advice can focus on the advice of people who have a significant shared interest in your actual results, like profit-sharing partners who make money and lose money with you.
For now, below is an image from Paulsen’s September 2005 publication. Here is a link to my 2005 article:
Again, please share this with others could benefit from it or at least enjoy the humor of it. Also, if you are willing to begin to receive the full benefits available from adapting wisely, contact me now.
By September 2005, I had already identified the beginning of the bursting of the US real estate bubble because I had been looking for it since 2002. It happened in Phoenix and Las Vegas in mid-2005. I had been warning about the global credit crisis since 2003. Since 2004, I had been warning about the effect of rising fuel prices on the global economy, including global trends in lending and borrowing, in real estate speculation, and in stock market speculation. In other words, I saw the global economic crisis coming since 2002, but I did not identify rising fuel prices as the trigger until 2004. By the way, global fuel prices had been rising since 1999.
Why did housing prices begin to drop first in the sprawling desert metros of Phoenix and Las Vegas? Perhaps because those areas are so sensitive to rising energy prices. Many big homes in Phoenix have summertime electricity bills of more than $400 per month just for air conditioning.
Here’s  Paulsen’s actual content from 2005:
He frequently appears on several CNBC and Bloomberg Television programs. BusinessWeeknamed him Top Economic Forecaster. He’s been honored by Money magazine.
Beware of the advice of those who do not have a shared interest with you. Share this and contact me about how you can benefit from a partnership with a competent specialist.

Responding with a curious courage… to recent financial developments

April 5, 2009

Responding with a curious courage… to recent financial developments

Quickly, let’s be clear what it does and does not mean to respond with a curious courage. I wonder if you can recall a time when you were not just already curious, but when your curiosity then led you to perceive a risk or danger that you only could have directly recognized through your own exploring, and then, after this discovery that you just made, you courageously redirected your behavior away from the perceived risk and toward a valuable opportunity that, again, you only discovered through the practice of curiosity. Let’s call that time now.

In contrast, what a curious courage does not mean is this: to identify how reality should have been, whether or not it was, then, when some pattern of reality did not fit with how it allegedly should have been, then to identify that pattern of reality as having been a problem, and then choose not to take any new initiative toward personal responsibility for one’s own future, but instead focus anger on whoever was convenient to blame for that problematic reality, and finally, identify whoever first provided you someone to blame for that problematic reality as the one to blindly rely on to almost fix that problematic reality next, since reality may persistently thwart reactive efforts to fix it by first blaming someone else for why it was not how it should have been (according to whoever denied that reality should be however reality actually already is).

Now, with a curious courage, we could be asking how did this particular apparent reality develop- yet with a specific concern for one’s own prior practices and the resulting effects produced from one’s own prior practices. That personal identification of one’s own prior practices as the primary issue related to the results produced by those practices is what may take courage.

So, let’s imagine that someone went to a casino and did very well for quite a while. They soon developed confidence and came back to the casino again and again. They made consistent unearned gains by using a certain method that worked for them over and over.

However, yesterday, they used that same old method but got a different result, that one which they do not value. Then, they kept trying that same method again and continued to get the result that they do not value. Soon, they lost quite a bit of their prior unearned gains- or even all of those gains as well as all of their original investment or even more.

Maybe they were afraid to even think about or look at their recent results. They may have been focusing on how much they used to have as if that was somehow more relevant than what they have left.

What would it mean to respond to this situation with a curious courage? Would it be courageous to look for someone else to blame for the recent results? Maybe you blamed the casino itself, or the government regulators, or a certain current or former employee of the casino, or perhaps your neighbor or even your neighbor’s dog.

Now, I might suggest that the particular investing method that you used is what produced the unfavorable result. Of course, it could be possible that the casino or government regulators did change some relevant rule, yet even if that were true, identifying such a change would not make your old method back into one that produces favorable results. If some rule had been changed and that is the single reason why your old method was no longer valuable, then knowing what rule has been changed might provide some insight into what other method might be valuable now, but you may not be interested in that yet.

After all, if the reason the rule was changed is because of your neighbor’s dog, then you could continue to use the method that stopped working but just get really angry at the dog. Or, while you continue to use the method that stopped working, maybe you could kill the dog, and then maybe someone would change the rule back so that your old method that stopped working might work again one day eventually, and you could just keep using it for as long as it takes, even though until that might happen you may be producing results with that method that you definitely may not value, because one day it could work again- you know, hypothetically.

That all could be true. One other thing though that someone with a curious courage might wonder is this: what about discontinuing the use of whatever prior method already stopped working to produced unearned capital gains? Sure, maybe the dog can be killed and the rule can be changed back to how it was and so one day possibly in the not-too-distant future the old method that stopped working may work again, but how about now? Sure, maybe someone can identify the neighbor that might have been in some way responsible for preventing you from continuing to multiply the unearned capital gains that you used to compound, and then maybe someone can get that neighbor to remedy the situation by paying to bail out the casinos that have suffered incredibly all because of that one dog. However, what about reconsidering the investing method which however long ago stopped working to produce the results you value?

Even if you advocate for a possible return back towards the prior situation, another possibility is that you explore modifying your investing method, at least until all dogs are killed so that you can know that no other dogs will ever prevent you from multiplying unearned capital gains with the single method that is most familiar to you, which is probably borrowing money to invest in real estate, but it could also be dumping money into various stocks and hoping that those stocks go up in value at least enough to balance any inflation and taxes.

I know a lot of people who I warned many years ago about the specific market developments that have since rendered their previously valuable methods worthless, resulting in losses of some or all of their unearned gains in real estate equity (or in US tech stocks or UK financial stocks and so on). Some of them even owe more on their mortgage than the collateral property is worth.

I also know a lot of people who have watched me make consistently accurately predictions of a variety of ups and downs in a variety of markets. Some of them may never give up the methods that they previously used to produce consistent unearned gains for them but that recently stopped working. Some of them may not ever explore a principle that works in all market conditions: partnering with the reality of market conditions and even partnering with someone who knows how to find opportunity in all market conditions now.

That might require a curious courage. Not everyone has that. For those of us who do have it, the fact that not everyone else has it is related to what distinguishes our results from their results, which includes the curiosity to be honest about the reality of market conditions, rather than defining some patterns of reality as “problems” to be automatically reacted to with personal blaming and blind devotion in the latest emergency rescue fix proposed, whether that is a political “solution” or some other silver bullet, like, whenever one has been confused, just investing in silver (or real estate etc) as the one magic solution to the persisting problem of reality not being the same as someone told you it should be.

Consider that reality is only a problem for those who insist on investing in opposition to it. For those with a curious courage, reality is an opportunity to partner. Now, with me and the investing methods that fit with partnering with the reality of market conditions, certain people get consistently favorable results in all market conditions. Not everyone will contact someone committed to partnering with reality to let me know that they are interested in consistently favorable results, but what about you?


“Life is not what it’s supposed to be. Its what it is. The way you cope with it is what makes the difference.” Virginia Satir (1916-1988)

%d bloggers like this: