Of course, when I say "Classic," I'm referring to when Sci-Fi really started to gain speed; so, 1940-ish through the mid-1960's.
Nearly everything I'm going to mention here is freely available in the Public Domain - just go online and look. Things I'm going to talk about where originally broadcast on radio shows like "X Minus One" in the 1950's.
COURTESY (aired 18AUG1955, X-1) - An offworld outpost begins to experience a plague among the human staff - all except one man. Why is this one man not bothered? Give it a listen. I think it shows potential for what could happen when the lubrication of social nicety is removed from the operating machinery.
THE COLD EQUATIONS (aired 25AUG1955, X-1) - She just wanted to visit her husband - but didn't think things through. What happens when people act impulsively on their "feelings of entitlement" (however they were generated)?
SKULKING PERMIT (aired 15FEB1956, X-1) - In attempt to "appear civilized," a colony that has been out of contact for some 200 years or so decides to appoint a criminal - because they don't have one. Kinda makes you wonder - just how civilized are we?
SEA LEGS (aired 01MAY1956, X-1) - Shows the contrast between a "free society" (spacers and offworld colonists) vice a repressive society (what's left on Earth.)
MR. COSTELLO, HERO (aired 03JUL1956, X-1) - How far are we willing to go in the name of "collectivism" and "brotherhood" - and what will it cost us? And, will we learn before it's too late for us?
SNOWBALL EFFECT (aired 14AUG1956, X-1) - Shows how far a political movement can go - whether we want it to or not. Then what?
CHAIN OF COMMAND (aired 21NOV1956, X-1) - What are the results of our experiments? What can happen if a project gains its own momentum?
RELUCTANT HEROES (aired 19DEC1956, X-1) - Let's think about the people at the forefront of exploratory efforts. Sure, they'll benefit Man as a whole, but what's the individual cost?
REPORT ON THE BARNHOUSE EFFECT (airdate unknown, Dimension X) - A scientist accidentally discovered a power of the mind. A great power. He wants to use it to improve the world - world powers want to use him as a secret weapon. What happens next?
These should provoke enough thought to get you going while I dig up something else. I've seen archives of both X Minus One and Dimension X online, freely available, so you shouldn't have any trouble digging this stuff up.
Discuss.
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Check this out -
I've started a few petitions at the White House site that are nearest and dearest to my heart. I'm not on track to get many signatures - but check them out, and see if you want to join in. I think there's about three weeks left to get enough signatures - so spread the word!
Rescind the Gun Control Act of 1968, et seq. - https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/rescind-gun-control-act-1968-et-sequelae/6P4PYkkD
Rescind the National Firearms act of 1934, et seq. - https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/rescind-national-firearms-act-1934/MFDX881L
Fix American English as the Official Language of government - https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/fix-american-english-official-language-government-and-business/1986Qz54
(I know that last one is ironic, considering I tend to favour the use of International/Australian English and I'm fond of archaics, but I figure American English will be easier to accept. This was pointed up to me a few days ago - I thought it amusing, myself.)
Perhaps it's just me, but I think they're also about the best-written petitions I've seen on the site. I could be being egocentric, tho...
Discuss.
Rescind the Gun Control Act of 1968, et seq. - https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/rescind-gun-control-act-1968-et-sequelae/6P4PYkkD
Rescind the National Firearms act of 1934, et seq. - https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/rescind-national-firearms-act-1934/MFDX881L
Fix American English as the Official Language of government - https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/fix-american-english-official-language-government-and-business/1986Qz54
(I know that last one is ironic, considering I tend to favour the use of International/Australian English and I'm fond of archaics, but I figure American English will be easier to accept. This was pointed up to me a few days ago - I thought it amusing, myself.)
Perhaps it's just me, but I think they're also about the best-written petitions I've seen on the site. I could be being egocentric, tho...
Discuss.
What is it out here?
Is there something in the water that makes people drive stupid?
I had to run errands to-day. This is something I try to avoid, because if I did it regularly I'd need antipsychotics.
Since when does a Ford Excursion fit into a parking spot marked "COMPACT?" It's bad enough people out here can't figure out you're supposed to park BETWEEN the lines instead of ON them - but when you are parking ON one line and OVER another, YOU DON'T FIT. Get used to it.
At least I caught her when she had just pulled in and was unloading her yuppie larva. I had four inches - four inches - between my door and the side of her truck. I'm a big guy (6'3", 288# as of Monday,) and I wouldn't be able to fit into a door I could open four inches in the first place. With my knee and hip acting up, it just...
Will. Not. Happen.
Yeah, I could probably stick my cane in the door, but not me. And it's not a bench seat - I can't slide across, unless I was the gearshift up my ass.
So, I leaned against the back of the car while she was futzing around with her spawn (another problem - since when do you need a Ford Excursion to ferry around one kid? I know a family with three kids that does just fine with a U100 (full-size) Bronco!
When she was coming around, I held up my hand. Pointed to the (nearly non-existant) gap between vehicles. Pointed to me. Held up my cane a couple of inches, to show that I'm at a disadvantage. Then stood there and grinned.
At least she got it - I kept an eye on the kid in the pram while she backed out. Then I backed out while she watched the kid. Then I watched the kid while she pulled into the space I was in (it was an end space, so there was more "give.") Then I yielded the kid back when she'd pulled in and locked up.
Took five minutes for me to get into my car and get room to back out, because she couldn't be bothered to think.
She had a "blue tag" on the rearview mirror - but it wasn't a handicapped spot. I guess "hard of thinking" is now a recognisable mobility disability? She didn't make it to "So stupid you can't eve move."
Had another halfwit on the freeway - in the rain! - who decided he needed to turn right. Right now. From the left-hand lane!
He cut across three lanes of traffic, in the rain, and missed me by about six inches. If he'd hit me, I wouldn't have asked for his liability insurance information - I'd have asked if his health coverage was paid up and current. Sorry, but that's just too damned stupid to go unanswered...
My psychologist says I shouldn't commute, and should interact minimally with the general public. I'm either an atavism or borderline psychotic, but everyone is safer if I can work at home.
So, I work at home. A good thing I do - I'd probably be running people over just for drill before too long! Anyone want to start a pool on when I have a psychotic break? I get half of the pot - I'll need it for bail...
I swear - a good 95% of the "drivers" in CA (I use that term euphemitsically) are outright incompetent. Four out of the five remaining (per 100) are passable. Half of one percent could be considered actually competent, and the other half of that one percent could actually be called "good."
The primary reason that the cops all have clean driving records (based on observations) is simple professional courtesy. I see black-and-whites doing things that make me go "What the fuck, over?" on a regular basis as well.
Gotta be the water. I'll stick to booze.
I had to run errands to-day. This is something I try to avoid, because if I did it regularly I'd need antipsychotics.
Since when does a Ford Excursion fit into a parking spot marked "COMPACT?" It's bad enough people out here can't figure out you're supposed to park BETWEEN the lines instead of ON them - but when you are parking ON one line and OVER another, YOU DON'T FIT. Get used to it.
At least I caught her when she had just pulled in and was unloading her yuppie larva. I had four inches - four inches - between my door and the side of her truck. I'm a big guy (6'3", 288# as of Monday,) and I wouldn't be able to fit into a door I could open four inches in the first place. With my knee and hip acting up, it just...
Will. Not. Happen.
Yeah, I could probably stick my cane in the door, but not me. And it's not a bench seat - I can't slide across, unless I was the gearshift up my ass.
So, I leaned against the back of the car while she was futzing around with her spawn (another problem - since when do you need a Ford Excursion to ferry around one kid? I know a family with three kids that does just fine with a U100 (full-size) Bronco!
When she was coming around, I held up my hand. Pointed to the (nearly non-existant) gap between vehicles. Pointed to me. Held up my cane a couple of inches, to show that I'm at a disadvantage. Then stood there and grinned.
At least she got it - I kept an eye on the kid in the pram while she backed out. Then I backed out while she watched the kid. Then I watched the kid while she pulled into the space I was in (it was an end space, so there was more "give.") Then I yielded the kid back when she'd pulled in and locked up.
Took five minutes for me to get into my car and get room to back out, because she couldn't be bothered to think.
She had a "blue tag" on the rearview mirror - but it wasn't a handicapped spot. I guess "hard of thinking" is now a recognisable mobility disability? She didn't make it to "So stupid you can't eve move."
Had another halfwit on the freeway - in the rain! - who decided he needed to turn right. Right now. From the left-hand lane!
He cut across three lanes of traffic, in the rain, and missed me by about six inches. If he'd hit me, I wouldn't have asked for his liability insurance information - I'd have asked if his health coverage was paid up and current. Sorry, but that's just too damned stupid to go unanswered...
My psychologist says I shouldn't commute, and should interact minimally with the general public. I'm either an atavism or borderline psychotic, but everyone is safer if I can work at home.
So, I work at home. A good thing I do - I'd probably be running people over just for drill before too long! Anyone want to start a pool on when I have a psychotic break? I get half of the pot - I'll need it for bail...
I swear - a good 95% of the "drivers" in CA (I use that term euphemitsically) are outright incompetent. Four out of the five remaining (per 100) are passable. Half of one percent could be considered actually competent, and the other half of that one percent could actually be called "good."
The primary reason that the cops all have clean driving records (based on observations) is simple professional courtesy. I see black-and-whites doing things that make me go "What the fuck, over?" on a regular basis as well.
Gotta be the water. I'll stick to booze.
Saturday, November 10, 2012
When I'm President:
Or, "Why I'd never get elected in the first place."
These would be my goals as POTUS, in no particular order (I'll work on them as I'm able, once I can get Congress to play ball...)
- Rescission of NFA34 in toto. It's a pointless law, it's stifled development of small arms for military uses, and the "funding" derived from the programme doesn't even pay for the programme itself.
- Heavy modification of 18USC44 et seq - let it be known that I am categorically against laws that prohibit anyone from owning firearms. People who should not own firearms will get themselves filtered out of the gene pool in short order, but it should be a personal choice. And, self-defence is a basic human right. Besides, what part of "... shall not be infringed." is giving Washington all of the trouble?
- Wholesale rescission of 26CFR (The Internal Revenue Code,) replacement of the income tax in toto with EITHER a "flat tax" of 7-10% or a "National Retail Sales Tax" of 5-7% (the NRST will tap the money in the "underground economy," while the "flat tax" will only draw from payroll.) No, neither of these proposals is "revenue neutral." They're not intended to be. Government doesn't need more money, they need to learn to more efficiently spend the money they're getting.
- Co-operation between executive departments. There's too much duplication of mission between departments, forcing co-operation will allow us to eliminate a few (and there are a few that aren't required at all, and some that could be done away with once a few other things are handled.) A good example is the Department of Homeland Security - they're duplicating functions of NSA, CIA, and DoJ - if those three departments can learn to play together, we can strike DHS entirely. (The IRS? Once we have a flat tax or an NRST in place, we don't need the IRS to administer, audit, or generate Byzantine forms or regulations anymore.)
- The wholesale armament of Federal Departments needs to be reversed. The only personnel allowed to be armed at any time (officially) will be:
-- Department of Justice
-- Department of Defense
-- United States Secret Service (div. of Department of Treasury)
-- United States Coast Guard (div. of Department of Transportation)
Anyone else that requires an "armed response" can petition DoJ for it, and hope they get it (USSS and USCG have enough to do, DoD can't do it due to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.) HUD with guns? Bad idea. IRS with guns? Worse idea. There's no reason for it (yet nearly all Federal personnel are allowed to be armed, you just have to dig to find the regs that allow them to be.)
- Any bill that reaches my desk that takes me more than ten minutes to read and/or requires that I take notes to keep straight, gets kicked back for a rewrite.
- No "riders" - if it doesn't have anything to do with the basic subject matter, it doesn't get included. If it's not important enough to pass on its own, it doesn't need to be added to anything else.
- Nota Bene: I don't plan on wearing a suit every day. I'll be wearing plain fatigues in blue, black, or grey. Why? I'm there to work, not to look good. Similarly, I don't do much in the way of speeches, and I'm not going to campaign for re-election. If you think I'm doing a good job, you can re-elect me. If you don't, you won't. But, that's up to you, I'm here to solve problems.
- Obamacare. On the surface, their heart was in the right place - but their brains were not (below the surface? Let's leave that alone for the moment.) The primary issue is that they're dealing with a problem that's grown by accretion over the last 50 years or so - and tried a wholesale Band-Aid fix (and let's leave aside all of the stuff in that >2,000-page atrocimacy that didn't have anything to do with healthcare, healthcare payment, healthcare funding, ...) I see two ways that the problem should have been handled - neither of which was tried:
1) Write a new system from scratch, all at once. Plan it carefully. Implement it in such a manner that a "changeover period" of 3-6 months is allowed for companies to get used to the new system, and come up with policies for implementation. On the effective date, the old system is scrapped and the new one is implemented.
2) Triage the situation. Identify the major and minor problems, and prioritize them. Correct the worst issues first (first rule of triage - "Worst is First") and wait six months. Re-evaluate and triage again. Chances are a lot of the little problems will solve themselves once the big stuff is handled (this would take rather longer - which is probably why it wouldn't be done. Figure this for a ten-year process, easily.) Ask any ER doc - if you've got a patient with a broken leg that's crashing, you deal with the crash first, the broken leg later.
- Pay for elected officials shall be reduced by 50% until further notice. Once we get sorted, plan on getting paid on the DoD scale, not GS or GW. Elected service is service, not a career, and damned sure not a "get-rich-quick" scheme (someone explain to me how someone who next to squat for money can serve two years in the House and consistently end up a millionaire? I don't get it! These people should be investigated, not revered.) Besides, I'd be perfectly willing to bet (and I'd probably win...) that the typical E1 private soldier does more for the country in his first six months on duty (including Basic and AIT...) than the average Senator does in his first six years. And he confronts a good deal more personal danger, and for a Hell of a lot less pay. That strikes me as backwards...
CONSTITUTIONAL MEASURES I'D WORK TOWARD:
- Congress, et al, may not exempt themselves from any measure passed on the American public.
- No politician may serve any two elected terms consecutively, among any office. If you're in office, you're out of office for a like term afterwards. Elected to the Senate? For the next six years you're out of office, you're not eligible for election. Anywhere. After six years, you can run and try again. But, this should bring a lot of "fresh blood" into office. No one should be able to stay in office for 20-odd straight years - or more. (Ted Kennedy was in the Senate for forty-two years! And just what did he do in all that time, anyhow?)
- No "special" retirement is possible from public office. No pension is to be drawn. You want retirement? We've got Social Security, you can sign up for that with everyone else.
- Except in times of emergency, Congresscritters can travel on public means with the public. Should help keep them in touch with us that way. (And no flyin' First Class, ya pansies!) [Maybe this wouldn't be a Constitutional measure, but it should be codified somedamnwhere.)
- Need medical coverage? Medicare. If it's good enough for us, it's good enough for you. Don't think it's good enough? Fix it!
- No more "running mates." Originally, the guy who got the most votes was POTUS, the guy who got the next most was VPOTUS. Why? Because that would (theoretically) help get the parties to work together and reduce partisan politics. Why'd we stop doing this?
- Budget: until further notice, the Federal Budget shall be planned to spend 80% of what they bring in. 15% of what comes in is to be used to service the Public Debt, until it is eliminated. At which point, Congress shall be allowed to spend up to 95% of what comes in - the rest will be banked in a "rainy day fund" so we don't have any more of this "fiscal cliff" bullshit. I don't want to run government like a business, I want to run it like a household.
Oh - and I've had enough of the UN. Kick 'em out, all of their traffic and parking cites are due and payable, they can find a new headquarters, and we'll use the UN Building as a shelter for the homeless of New York City (which will probably be the first real useful purpose to which that building has been put.)
Eh, more later. Discuss.
ADD'L - People say we're a "democracy," when we're not. But, let me quote Mencken on democracy - "Democracy is based on the idea that the people know what government they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
A republic isn't a bad idea, but they've been losing touch with the people. I have a problem with this.
These would be my goals as POTUS, in no particular order (I'll work on them as I'm able, once I can get Congress to play ball...)
- Rescission of NFA34 in toto. It's a pointless law, it's stifled development of small arms for military uses, and the "funding" derived from the programme doesn't even pay for the programme itself.
- Heavy modification of 18USC44 et seq - let it be known that I am categorically against laws that prohibit anyone from owning firearms. People who should not own firearms will get themselves filtered out of the gene pool in short order, but it should be a personal choice. And, self-defence is a basic human right. Besides, what part of "... shall not be infringed." is giving Washington all of the trouble?
- Wholesale rescission of 26CFR (The Internal Revenue Code,) replacement of the income tax in toto with EITHER a "flat tax" of 7-10% or a "National Retail Sales Tax" of 5-7% (the NRST will tap the money in the "underground economy," while the "flat tax" will only draw from payroll.) No, neither of these proposals is "revenue neutral." They're not intended to be. Government doesn't need more money, they need to learn to more efficiently spend the money they're getting.
- Co-operation between executive departments. There's too much duplication of mission between departments, forcing co-operation will allow us to eliminate a few (and there are a few that aren't required at all, and some that could be done away with once a few other things are handled.) A good example is the Department of Homeland Security - they're duplicating functions of NSA, CIA, and DoJ - if those three departments can learn to play together, we can strike DHS entirely. (The IRS? Once we have a flat tax or an NRST in place, we don't need the IRS to administer, audit, or generate Byzantine forms or regulations anymore.)
- The wholesale armament of Federal Departments needs to be reversed. The only personnel allowed to be armed at any time (officially) will be:
-- Department of Justice
-- Department of Defense
-- United States Secret Service (div. of Department of Treasury)
-- United States Coast Guard (div. of Department of Transportation)
Anyone else that requires an "armed response" can petition DoJ for it, and hope they get it (USSS and USCG have enough to do, DoD can't do it due to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.) HUD with guns? Bad idea. IRS with guns? Worse idea. There's no reason for it (yet nearly all Federal personnel are allowed to be armed, you just have to dig to find the regs that allow them to be.)
- Any bill that reaches my desk that takes me more than ten minutes to read and/or requires that I take notes to keep straight, gets kicked back for a rewrite.
- No "riders" - if it doesn't have anything to do with the basic subject matter, it doesn't get included. If it's not important enough to pass on its own, it doesn't need to be added to anything else.
- Nota Bene: I don't plan on wearing a suit every day. I'll be wearing plain fatigues in blue, black, or grey. Why? I'm there to work, not to look good. Similarly, I don't do much in the way of speeches, and I'm not going to campaign for re-election. If you think I'm doing a good job, you can re-elect me. If you don't, you won't. But, that's up to you, I'm here to solve problems.
- Obamacare. On the surface, their heart was in the right place - but their brains were not (below the surface? Let's leave that alone for the moment.) The primary issue is that they're dealing with a problem that's grown by accretion over the last 50 years or so - and tried a wholesale Band-Aid fix (and let's leave aside all of the stuff in that >2,000-page atrocimacy that didn't have anything to do with healthcare, healthcare payment, healthcare funding, ...) I see two ways that the problem should have been handled - neither of which was tried:
1) Write a new system from scratch, all at once. Plan it carefully. Implement it in such a manner that a "changeover period" of 3-6 months is allowed for companies to get used to the new system, and come up with policies for implementation. On the effective date, the old system is scrapped and the new one is implemented.
2) Triage the situation. Identify the major and minor problems, and prioritize them. Correct the worst issues first (first rule of triage - "Worst is First") and wait six months. Re-evaluate and triage again. Chances are a lot of the little problems will solve themselves once the big stuff is handled (this would take rather longer - which is probably why it wouldn't be done. Figure this for a ten-year process, easily.) Ask any ER doc - if you've got a patient with a broken leg that's crashing, you deal with the crash first, the broken leg later.
- Pay for elected officials shall be reduced by 50% until further notice. Once we get sorted, plan on getting paid on the DoD scale, not GS or GW. Elected service is service, not a career, and damned sure not a "get-rich-quick" scheme (someone explain to me how someone who next to squat for money can serve two years in the House and consistently end up a millionaire? I don't get it! These people should be investigated, not revered.) Besides, I'd be perfectly willing to bet (and I'd probably win...) that the typical E1 private soldier does more for the country in his first six months on duty (including Basic and AIT...) than the average Senator does in his first six years. And he confronts a good deal more personal danger, and for a Hell of a lot less pay. That strikes me as backwards...
CONSTITUTIONAL MEASURES I'D WORK TOWARD:
- Congress, et al, may not exempt themselves from any measure passed on the American public.
- No politician may serve any two elected terms consecutively, among any office. If you're in office, you're out of office for a like term afterwards. Elected to the Senate? For the next six years you're out of office, you're not eligible for election. Anywhere. After six years, you can run and try again. But, this should bring a lot of "fresh blood" into office. No one should be able to stay in office for 20-odd straight years - or more. (Ted Kennedy was in the Senate for forty-two years! And just what did he do in all that time, anyhow?)
- No "special" retirement is possible from public office. No pension is to be drawn. You want retirement? We've got Social Security, you can sign up for that with everyone else.
- Except in times of emergency, Congresscritters can travel on public means with the public. Should help keep them in touch with us that way. (And no flyin' First Class, ya pansies!) [Maybe this wouldn't be a Constitutional measure, but it should be codified somedamnwhere.)
- Need medical coverage? Medicare. If it's good enough for us, it's good enough for you. Don't think it's good enough? Fix it!
- No more "running mates." Originally, the guy who got the most votes was POTUS, the guy who got the next most was VPOTUS. Why? Because that would (theoretically) help get the parties to work together and reduce partisan politics. Why'd we stop doing this?
- Budget: until further notice, the Federal Budget shall be planned to spend 80% of what they bring in. 15% of what comes in is to be used to service the Public Debt, until it is eliminated. At which point, Congress shall be allowed to spend up to 95% of what comes in - the rest will be banked in a "rainy day fund" so we don't have any more of this "fiscal cliff" bullshit. I don't want to run government like a business, I want to run it like a household.
Oh - and I've had enough of the UN. Kick 'em out, all of their traffic and parking cites are due and payable, they can find a new headquarters, and we'll use the UN Building as a shelter for the homeless of New York City (which will probably be the first real useful purpose to which that building has been put.)
Eh, more later. Discuss.
ADD'L - People say we're a "democracy," when we're not. But, let me quote Mencken on democracy - "Democracy is based on the idea that the people know what government they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
A republic isn't a bad idea, but they've been losing touch with the people. I have a problem with this.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Erection Day, 06NOV2012 (NSFW)
"Erection Day?" Yeah - we're all gonna get fucked. Hard (unless I'm wrong. Please let me be wrong! However, I've a reputation for being right far more often than I'm wrong, and - sadly - I tend to be right because I'm a pessimist. Being a real-life Cassandra is not happy-making, believe me...)
So, we've got Obama in office for another four years. Can we survive?
- I didn't vote against him because he's billing himself as Black (he's half-black, but I honestly don't care what colour he is anyhow. It's his politics I don't like)
- I did vote against him because he's a statist Democrat - worst kind.
- I did vote against him because I can't "read" him.
- I did vote against him because I don't like his backers.
- I didn't vote for him because he didn't have a record he could run on - he didn't finish his first term in either the Illinois Senate or the US Senate (such a meteoric rise says something - something I don't care to think about. The last politician who rose so quickly? Adolf Hitler...)
Barack Hussein Obama II is a statist Democrat who leans heavily Socialist. This is evidenced by his policies - he's pushed up the cost of petroleum to the point where working will impoverish people. The first step in a Socialist conversion is to impoverish the people - this primes them to receive government aid.
You're probably asking yourself, "What's a statist?" A statist is an individual who firmly believes that government has all of the answers and should be responsible for the day-to-day lives of its constituents.
I'm far from being a statist. Truth be told, I'm a mild-mannered anarchist - but I'm also intelligent enough to realise that we're not grown-up enough, as a people, to function in a true anarchy. So, some government is necessary. Politically, I'm somewhat farther to the right than the typical Libertarian - government should be the minimum necessary to ensure the following:
- Public safety - law enforcement, fire protection
- Public security - military forces against threats from without
- Preservation of knowledge and culture - libraries and musea (NB: Government should not be involved in the generation of art or culture, that's the province of the private artist. Nor should government be in the business of sponsoring generation of art/culture, the National Endowment for the Arts is a phenomenal waste of money.)
- Co-ordination of assets and response efforts in the event of a major disaster (they claim to do that now, but FEMA has screwed up its responses over the last 20-30 years. I can't wait to see how they're going to screw up response to Sandy...)
- Protection of commerce (this means maintenance of a level playing field - no preferential or predatory regulation or legislation. Minimal regulation passed to protect the customers.
- Protection of monetary system/economy as a whole (this would also mean that fiat money is right out - they knew this 230 years ago, but we seem to have forgotten this in my lifetime. Whatever happened to nothing but Gold or Silver to be used for money? We can expand that - I don't see any reason why platinum, diamonds, or other similar durable and assayable resource can't be used, but we essentially have the "petrodollar" - "fixed" to the price of petroleum, which is a limited and dwindling resource (metals and gems may be finite, but they're not being consumed anywhere near as quickly.)
- Provision of the "health and welfare" of the Nation as a whole, but not to the point where it becomes destructive to the economy (no multi-generation "welfare families," no-one should be able to live their entire lives on welfare and handouts. Yes, we should have pensions for the aged, funded by slight deductions from economic production. Similarly, we should help to provide for the disabled. I don't even have a problem with the idea of Medicare, but the wheels seem to be coming off in practise - largely because Congress looks at SSA and Medicare as places to borrow money from. What to know why Social Security is going broke? Blame Congress - they've stuffed the SSA treasury with IOUs. Congress should not be able to borrow from SSA unless such project to be funded can be shown to benefit the country or the human race as a whole - so far, the only case where that was proper was putting men on the moon. Speaking of - why haven't we done that in forty years?)
Not much else needed past that - safety, security, limited welfare, protection of commerce, protection of the consumer, preservation of knowledge and culture.
Now, look at what's happening under latter-day Democrats - how many of them are exceeding their directives?
Don't even get me started on riders, and stuffing crap into bills that can pass on popular pressure. If it can't pass on its own, it probably doesn't need to pass, and should be left out.
(Do you honestly expect me to believe that a bill over 2,000 pages is composed only of stuff that's strictly necessary? What are you smoking, and where can I get some? Obamacare is only the most recent example - I'd tried to read the versions of the bill that came out before it got to a vote, but I was thoroughly confused <5 and="and" couldn="couldn" figure="figure" i="i" in="in" out="out" pages="pages" parts="parts" t="t" the="the" what="what">did
read had to do with healthcare in general, or healthcare funding in particular!)
Taxation. We were told that taxes wouldn't be raised on households making less than $250K per annum. So why is there a new line on 1040 that tells me we're going to get W-4'd on PayPal payments? It's a pain for me because I run a business, but that means that anything you're going to sell on eBay is going to be subject to taxation - whether you do it as a business or not. Hmm...
Leaving aside the simple fact that any money removed from the economy through taxation is money removed from productive use. Taxation is theft, overtaxation is a mugging. Frankly, since God only wants 10% of what we make (cf: "tithing,") why do we give .gov 17% and up? (No, I'm not counting state-level taxes, nor am I considering all of the "incidental" taxes or "taxes that aren't, but are" - examples of both are: excise taxes, vehicle registration "fees" (an annualised sales tax, when you break it all down,) bridge tolls, sales tax, any government fees for licensing or permitting, ... Don't even get me started on the 55% "haircut" for any significant inheritance - even the IRS admits that the "estate tax" programme doesn't even make enough to fund itself...)
I take some small heart in the fact that the Right seems to have held onto the Senate, but the House is a close thing. Problem there - the money bills all start in the House. But, they can be blocked by the Senate (I'm not a big fan of partisan politics, but I hope that the Right can put the brakes on the Left enough to give us time to reach for the K-Y. As I said, we're gonna get fucked. Should I just go ahead and drive nails through my balls now?)
The good news? Unless they manage to change the rules, Obama is now ineligible to run for POTUS again. The bad news? Who is the Left going to run in 2016, and will the Right be able to fight them off then? (Given that the Republicans are moving toward the Left, I'll probably vote Libertarian by then. They're not as far to the Right as I'd like them to be, but they're better than the Republicans...)
So, we've got Obama in office for another four years. Can we survive?
- I didn't vote against him because he's billing himself as Black (he's half-black, but I honestly don't care what colour he is anyhow. It's his politics I don't like)
- I did vote against him because he's a statist Democrat - worst kind.
- I did vote against him because I can't "read" him.
- I did vote against him because I don't like his backers.
- I didn't vote for him because he didn't have a record he could run on - he didn't finish his first term in either the Illinois Senate or the US Senate (such a meteoric rise says something - something I don't care to think about. The last politician who rose so quickly? Adolf Hitler...)
Barack Hussein Obama II is a statist Democrat who leans heavily Socialist. This is evidenced by his policies - he's pushed up the cost of petroleum to the point where working will impoverish people. The first step in a Socialist conversion is to impoverish the people - this primes them to receive government aid.
You're probably asking yourself, "What's a statist?" A statist is an individual who firmly believes that government has all of the answers and should be responsible for the day-to-day lives of its constituents.
I'm far from being a statist. Truth be told, I'm a mild-mannered anarchist - but I'm also intelligent enough to realise that we're not grown-up enough, as a people, to function in a true anarchy. So, some government is necessary. Politically, I'm somewhat farther to the right than the typical Libertarian - government should be the minimum necessary to ensure the following:
- Public safety - law enforcement, fire protection
- Public security - military forces against threats from without
- Preservation of knowledge and culture - libraries and musea (NB: Government should not be involved in the generation of art or culture, that's the province of the private artist. Nor should government be in the business of sponsoring generation of art/culture, the National Endowment for the Arts is a phenomenal waste of money.)
- Co-ordination of assets and response efforts in the event of a major disaster (they claim to do that now, but FEMA has screwed up its responses over the last 20-30 years. I can't wait to see how they're going to screw up response to Sandy...)
- Protection of commerce (this means maintenance of a level playing field - no preferential or predatory regulation or legislation. Minimal regulation passed to protect the customers.
- Protection of monetary system/economy as a whole (this would also mean that fiat money is right out - they knew this 230 years ago, but we seem to have forgotten this in my lifetime. Whatever happened to nothing but Gold or Silver to be used for money? We can expand that - I don't see any reason why platinum, diamonds, or other similar durable and assayable resource can't be used, but we essentially have the "petrodollar" - "fixed" to the price of petroleum, which is a limited and dwindling resource (metals and gems may be finite, but they're not being consumed anywhere near as quickly.)
- Provision of the "health and welfare" of the Nation as a whole, but not to the point where it becomes destructive to the economy (no multi-generation "welfare families," no-one should be able to live their entire lives on welfare and handouts. Yes, we should have pensions for the aged, funded by slight deductions from economic production. Similarly, we should help to provide for the disabled. I don't even have a problem with the idea of Medicare, but the wheels seem to be coming off in practise - largely because Congress looks at SSA and Medicare as places to borrow money from. What to know why Social Security is going broke? Blame Congress - they've stuffed the SSA treasury with IOUs. Congress should not be able to borrow from SSA unless such project to be funded can be shown to benefit the country or the human race as a whole - so far, the only case where that was proper was putting men on the moon. Speaking of - why haven't we done that in forty years?)
Not much else needed past that - safety, security, limited welfare, protection of commerce, protection of the consumer, preservation of knowledge and culture.
Now, look at what's happening under latter-day Democrats - how many of them are exceeding their directives?
Don't even get me started on riders, and stuffing crap into bills that can pass on popular pressure. If it can't pass on its own, it probably doesn't need to pass, and should be left out.
(Do you honestly expect me to believe that a bill over 2,000 pages is composed only of stuff that's strictly necessary? What are you smoking, and where can I get some? Obamacare is only the most recent example - I'd tried to read the versions of the bill that came out before it got to a vote, but I was thoroughly confused <5 and="and" couldn="couldn" figure="figure" i="i" in="in" out="out" pages="pages" parts="parts" t="t" the="the" what="what">did
read had to do with healthcare in general, or healthcare funding in particular!)
Taxation. We were told that taxes wouldn't be raised on households making less than $250K per annum. So why is there a new line on 1040 that tells me we're going to get W-4'd on PayPal payments? It's a pain for me because I run a business, but that means that anything you're going to sell on eBay is going to be subject to taxation - whether you do it as a business or not. Hmm...
Leaving aside the simple fact that any money removed from the economy through taxation is money removed from productive use. Taxation is theft, overtaxation is a mugging. Frankly, since God only wants 10% of what we make (cf: "tithing,") why do we give .gov 17% and up? (No, I'm not counting state-level taxes, nor am I considering all of the "incidental" taxes or "taxes that aren't, but are" - examples of both are: excise taxes, vehicle registration "fees" (an annualised sales tax, when you break it all down,) bridge tolls, sales tax, any government fees for licensing or permitting, ... Don't even get me started on the 55% "haircut" for any significant inheritance - even the IRS admits that the "estate tax" programme doesn't even make enough to fund itself...)
I take some small heart in the fact that the Right seems to have held onto the Senate, but the House is a close thing. Problem there - the money bills all start in the House. But, they can be blocked by the Senate (I'm not a big fan of partisan politics, but I hope that the Right can put the brakes on the Left enough to give us time to reach for the K-Y. As I said, we're gonna get fucked. Should I just go ahead and drive nails through my balls now?)
The good news? Unless they manage to change the rules, Obama is now ineligible to run for POTUS again. The bad news? Who is the Left going to run in 2016, and will the Right be able to fight them off then? (Given that the Republicans are moving toward the Left, I'll probably vote Libertarian by then. They're not as far to the Right as I'd like them to be, but they're better than the Republicans...)
Friday, October 12, 2012
SPAM email and a thermonuclear LART party...
Probably the most irritating bit? They don't even do basic research before they send out their crap for me to delete.
Last time I checked, I didn't have boobs - so I don't need a boob enlargement (that, and I'd never get anything done if I suddenly had boobs...)
As far as the rest?
- I've never had a mesh implant/repair, so I don't care about compensation from having had one. (And, the overuse of the word "entitled" is making me nauseous...)
- I don't read Chinese. I've never been able to read Chinese. I don't plan on learning to read Chinese. STOP SENDING ME MESSAGES IN CHINESE! I probably don't want what you're selling anyhow, and I refuse to buy anything metal from the Chinese - they can't heat-treat for sour owlshit (TANGENT - I have a Chinese friend who refuses to buy anything made in China as well, so I guess I'm not too far off base...)
- Viagra/Cialis/whatever? Don't need 'em. Don't want 'em. Besides, my wife would probably kill me if I went around with more erections than I already do (I don't have a "sex drive," I have a "sex overdrive"...) Besides, while I don't need Viagra to have sex, Vicodin can make it easier for me to do so...
- Singles/dating services? I'm married. I'm happily married (I'm just unhappy with everything else.) We're very compatible, we have a high degree of partnership, and we have the best of both worlds - we're lovers AND friends. I've seen too many divorces, and I've even caused one (having been "the other man" - it just happened that way, I didn't set out to poach...) and I've told my wife that if she wants to be quit of me, she'll have to kill me instead. And no, I don't need to hook up for sex, either. I can get that here at home...
- Hair restoration? My hair is finally thinning out, and I'm glad! For the last forty years, it's been like having my head wrapped in an electric blanket, it's finally cooling off up here (Mum, that's why I liked keeping my hair so short. It was cooler, and it dried much faster. I've had long hair, and I can understand why Mags cut hers. I'm always mildly disappointed when a woman cuts her long hair down, but I do understand why...)
- Phallic enhancement (of whatever sort?) No, thank you. I haven't had any complaints from anyone yet. So, apparently, I'm not some thumb-dick wannabe there - I'm no John Holmes, but I seem to have done well enough for every partner I've had (just give him a chance - he's a grower, not a shower.)
Granted, that doesn't solve the basic issue. Can we backtrace all of this SPAM crap, round everyone up, and throw them in a bunker with a couple of SADMs? I'm tired of getting all of this crap - and the SPAM filter wants checking, because it sometimes ends up catching stuff it shouldn't. So, that's a further pain in the ass - I get probably 200 legitimate message a day across six email addresses, and another 400-700 in SPAM that need quick reviewing. Pain. In. The. Ass.)
If you're not going to let me use tacnukes, can I use a baseball bat instead? It would take longer, but it would be more satisfying. Or, perhaps, a regulation-size clue-by-four (as outlined in FM22-102, Wall-to-Wall Counselling. For my height and level of control, that would be a four-foot section of 2x4 dimension lumber...)
Oh - in case you haven't guessed, I hate SPAM. Bloody twenty-first century chain letters.
Last point - why is it that nearly every message I get that says "Check Snopes - it's true!" has failed its own test?
Last time I checked, I didn't have boobs - so I don't need a boob enlargement (that, and I'd never get anything done if I suddenly had boobs...)
As far as the rest?
- I've never had a mesh implant/repair, so I don't care about compensation from having had one. (And, the overuse of the word "entitled" is making me nauseous...)
- I don't read Chinese. I've never been able to read Chinese. I don't plan on learning to read Chinese. STOP SENDING ME MESSAGES IN CHINESE! I probably don't want what you're selling anyhow, and I refuse to buy anything metal from the Chinese - they can't heat-treat for sour owlshit (TANGENT - I have a Chinese friend who refuses to buy anything made in China as well, so I guess I'm not too far off base...)
- Viagra/Cialis/whatever? Don't need 'em. Don't want 'em. Besides, my wife would probably kill me if I went around with more erections than I already do (I don't have a "sex drive," I have a "sex overdrive"...) Besides, while I don't need Viagra to have sex, Vicodin can make it easier for me to do so...
- Singles/dating services? I'm married. I'm happily married (I'm just unhappy with everything else.) We're very compatible, we have a high degree of partnership, and we have the best of both worlds - we're lovers AND friends. I've seen too many divorces, and I've even caused one (having been "the other man" - it just happened that way, I didn't set out to poach...) and I've told my wife that if she wants to be quit of me, she'll have to kill me instead. And no, I don't need to hook up for sex, either. I can get that here at home...
- Hair restoration? My hair is finally thinning out, and I'm glad! For the last forty years, it's been like having my head wrapped in an electric blanket, it's finally cooling off up here (Mum, that's why I liked keeping my hair so short. It was cooler, and it dried much faster. I've had long hair, and I can understand why Mags cut hers. I'm always mildly disappointed when a woman cuts her long hair down, but I do understand why...)
- Phallic enhancement (of whatever sort?) No, thank you. I haven't had any complaints from anyone yet. So, apparently, I'm not some thumb-dick wannabe there - I'm no John Holmes, but I seem to have done well enough for every partner I've had (just give him a chance - he's a grower, not a shower.)
Granted, that doesn't solve the basic issue. Can we backtrace all of this SPAM crap, round everyone up, and throw them in a bunker with a couple of SADMs? I'm tired of getting all of this crap - and the SPAM filter wants checking, because it sometimes ends up catching stuff it shouldn't. So, that's a further pain in the ass - I get probably 200 legitimate message a day across six email addresses, and another 400-700 in SPAM that need quick reviewing. Pain. In. The. Ass.)
If you're not going to let me use tacnukes, can I use a baseball bat instead? It would take longer, but it would be more satisfying. Or, perhaps, a regulation-size clue-by-four (as outlined in FM22-102, Wall-to-Wall Counselling. For my height and level of control, that would be a four-foot section of 2x4 dimension lumber...)
Oh - in case you haven't guessed, I hate SPAM. Bloody twenty-first century chain letters.
Last point - why is it that nearly every message I get that says "Check Snopes - it's true!" has failed its own test?
Saturday, May 26, 2012
Oh, wow...
Turns out I can "activate AdSense" and "monetize my blog" using advertiser content.
Let me tell you why that's not going to happen:
- I find most advertisements to be insultingly stupid. Seriously - if you've got an IQ over room temperature, you probably think so too.
- It doesn't look like I'd get to review/approve adverts in the rotation. If I don't get to sign off on them, I'm damned sure not going to make it look like I'm endorsing them by allowing them to be displayed.
- Supposedly, AdSense is going to select adverts according to the content of my blog. You know, I'm half-tempted to see what it's going to suggest as "relevant adverts" to my posts here, then write AdSense and ask them why their advert selection algos don't worth worth a damn. Seriously - what advertised products could even begin to be relevant to what you've been reading here?
- Most people online use some variety of ad blocker anyhow. I do - mostly because adverts are stupid, or because the "streaming video" in ads is irritating and takes up resources I would rather have allocated to something else, or the "streaming audio" interferes with whatever I'm listening to at the time (and are repulsively stupid.)
I don't mind adverts that are reasonably well-written, somewhat intelligent, usefully informative, and can manage to be entertaining. The only ad campaign I can think of that's worth a damn by any of thise criteria are the Dos Equis ads with "The Most Interesting Man in the World" - even though I won't buy Dos Equis (I'm not big on beer, I prefer rum,) I find myself actually wanting to listen to/watch those ads just to see what they've come up with this time.
And the next time I have to hear "twenty-twelve" or "twenty-thirteen" on a car dealer's advert, I'm going to punch someone. Why can't you say "two thousand twelve" or "two thousand and twelve?" It's not a police-band radio using APCO brevity codes, it's public broadcast radio that doesn't need the compressed language for efficiency in communication! (I don't know why that irritates me so, but it does. Kinda like someone coming over and pawing everything on my desk and not putting it back where it was found, or sticking fingerprints all over my monitors, instead of pointing at something on the screen.)
Sure, I could probably make a few bucks using AdSense on here, but it's not worth it to me. If I were to get to where I'd attract advertisers, I'd insist on retaining final approval for any advertisements being posted or linked (not just the products being advertised, but the adverts themselves!) and anyone who can't agree to that doesn't get to advertise. If I want stupid adverts, all I need to do is turn on the televisor (which I generally only do immediately before or after turning the DVD player on. Typical broadcasts are silly, pointless, and insulting - and don't even get me started on the programming!)
Let me tell you why that's not going to happen:
- I find most advertisements to be insultingly stupid. Seriously - if you've got an IQ over room temperature, you probably think so too.
- It doesn't look like I'd get to review/approve adverts in the rotation. If I don't get to sign off on them, I'm damned sure not going to make it look like I'm endorsing them by allowing them to be displayed.
- Supposedly, AdSense is going to select adverts according to the content of my blog. You know, I'm half-tempted to see what it's going to suggest as "relevant adverts" to my posts here, then write AdSense and ask them why their advert selection algos don't worth worth a damn. Seriously - what advertised products could even begin to be relevant to what you've been reading here?
- Most people online use some variety of ad blocker anyhow. I do - mostly because adverts are stupid, or because the "streaming video" in ads is irritating and takes up resources I would rather have allocated to something else, or the "streaming audio" interferes with whatever I'm listening to at the time (and are repulsively stupid.)
I don't mind adverts that are reasonably well-written, somewhat intelligent, usefully informative, and can manage to be entertaining. The only ad campaign I can think of that's worth a damn by any of thise criteria are the Dos Equis ads with "The Most Interesting Man in the World" - even though I won't buy Dos Equis (I'm not big on beer, I prefer rum,) I find myself actually wanting to listen to/watch those ads just to see what they've come up with this time.
And the next time I have to hear "twenty-twelve" or "twenty-thirteen" on a car dealer's advert, I'm going to punch someone. Why can't you say "two thousand twelve" or "two thousand and twelve?" It's not a police-band radio using APCO brevity codes, it's public broadcast radio that doesn't need the compressed language for efficiency in communication! (I don't know why that irritates me so, but it does. Kinda like someone coming over and pawing everything on my desk and not putting it back where it was found, or sticking fingerprints all over my monitors, instead of pointing at something on the screen.)
Sure, I could probably make a few bucks using AdSense on here, but it's not worth it to me. If I were to get to where I'd attract advertisers, I'd insist on retaining final approval for any advertisements being posted or linked (not just the products being advertised, but the adverts themselves!) and anyone who can't agree to that doesn't get to advertise. If I want stupid adverts, all I need to do is turn on the televisor (which I generally only do immediately before or after turning the DVD player on. Typical broadcasts are silly, pointless, and insulting - and don't even get me started on the programming!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
