The Prophet

24 posts / 0 new
Last post
pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
The Prophet

Knowledge knows what, when, where and who. Experience knows how and wisdom knows why. You gain knowledge from someone who possesses more and is willing to teach you. You gain experience by imitating someone who has it. You gain wisdom by listening to someone whose vast knowledge and experience has enabled them to anticipate the consequences of their actions even if they have not taken them. This is gained by being able to recall or deduce the consequences because they had occurred under similar circumstances in the past. For example; we put a man on the moon because someone knew the various pieces necessary to accomplish it had been or could be built and then assembled to make it happen. They are the true prophets.

The false prophets now encourage us to put a man on Mars all the while knowing that if we did that man would not be alive to confirm it. So, there must be another motive other than a wasteful expenditure of resources for no other purpose than the mere knowledge that it can be done. At least the moon effort of putting a man on the moon provided some practical return even though it could have been gained eventually through other more constructive objectives.

I mention the false prophets because they are everywhere in our midst and they are called Progressives and the worst ones inhabit our educational institutions where they contaminate our youth with how to think rather than what to think. It is why Hitler and all those who want to dominate people first go after the schools, break down the family and denigrate religion. Unfortunately their dogma is enticing because, unlike real life, they are able to reward people who succumb to it. More unfortunate is the fact we can no longer stop it until it runs its course and some people are actually starving to death. The reason is that the people who made these rules fall only into two categories and the only difference between them is the speed at which the inevitable will make it come.

Melvin Udall
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 41 min ago
Joined: 05/01/2002 - 12:01am
Another message of daily

Another message of daily uplift.

Perhaps a suggestion of how we might remedy things would be a thoughtful addition.

The bouquets of a dozen black roses aren't as appreciated as you might have hoped.

Cheech
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 36 min ago
Joined: 03/15/2014 - 8:56am
http://www.dailymail.co.uk

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2770905Revealed-Eric-Holder-quit...

Perhaps the dozen black roses could be forwarded to holder, (aka numbnutz jr.), as his resignation is apparently for health reasons according to the Daily Mail. Does ProFlowers do cactus?

Bruce Libby
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 17 min ago
Joined: 01/17/2006 - 7:08pm
That was coooollllldddd!

That was coooollllldddd!
But funny!

Roger Ek
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 11/18/2002 - 1:01am
The evil is debt that can

The evil is debt that can NEVER be repaid. The evildoers are those who create that debt. They are called progressives. Some are just delusional, but the leaders are the personification of evil and they know exactly what they do,

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Mel: Become a Progressive if

Mel: Become a Progressive if they will admit you. At least you will enjoy the ride a little better. The only alternative that works is having a government that prevents and punishes theft instead of becoming a thief itself and that will work only so long as there is enough food to keep the population alive. Man has been trying to find a substitute for God for thousands of years and all of them have failed because nothing but self-control can quell man's avarice when he can find a way to sate it. When government does more than play a god someone wins and someone loses.

Having said the above I would ask you what would happen if the government immediately stopped all payments except for its own employees wages?

Murphy
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 11 months ago
Joined: 07/08/2011 - 12:06pm
Pmconusa-I am surprised that

Pmconusa-I am surprised that you can't imagine any "practical return" with from a human landing on mars (dead or alive). Do you think their will be nothing gained through the experience? Do you think that children watching it will not be inspired? Have you researched the goals and timetable as laid out by Mars One?

Perhaps you simply refer to NASA. I'll agree that they are too political but I would still disagree with it being a waste when compared to the multitude of other projects that we pour money into.

I agree about self-sacrifice/control, but would take it a bit further by saying that the universal default is might makes right. You can observe might makes right from the atomic scale to the galactic scale; big atoms swallowing smaller atoms, large galaxies cannibalizing smaller galaxies. So far religion is the only proven method of getting individuals to balance might makes right with self-sacrifice. I find this quite depressing in that humans are much more likely to believe in Godly magic and miracles than to just look at the historical facts that clearly show life is better for all when we respect each others property and liberty. Those that believe religion is the only way to produce humility and respect for property and liberty are in essence saying that no one can observe for themselves the wisdom in honoring property and liberty without having it explained through parables. Hogwash. There is a way to encourage respect for property and liberty without the need of tales of magic, fantastical occurrences, and the undesired development of a moral superiority complex. It just hasn't been discovered yet.

IAC
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 06/03/2008 - 11:34am
Exactly, Murphy. Arthur C.

Exactly, Murphy. Arthur C. Clarke's 3rd law: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

His 2nd law is a prediction of optimism: The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.

His 1st law is extremely apt here and in every other exercise in redundant gloom and doom by pmconusa:

When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Murphy: You supplied your

Murphy: You supplied your own answer. When it comes to spending money that doesn't yet exist or even money you have saved for a rainy day one must set priorities. Its called minimizing the risk.

The government has been printing money ever since it issued the first T-note and is now in hock to the tune of $17 trillion and it growing almost as fast as the time it takes to print the number. This debt is reflected in the real value of money. If you check the inflation clock you will find that it takes $23.30 of today's currency to buy what $1.00 did in 1914. This averages out to about 3+% per year but during the Obama years it has risen significantly faster.

Roger Ek
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 11/18/2002 - 1:01am
Good grief! "The government

Good grief! "The government has been printing money ever since it issued the first T-note and is now in hock to the tune of $17 trillion and it growing almost as fast as the time it takes to print the number."

The last person to order the printing of a "T-note" was John F. Kennedy. Look what happened to him. That was half a century ago. Know what the national debt was under JFK? Look it up.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Roger: The government hasn't

Roger: The government hasn't stopped printing money but they have stopped selling T-notes because no one will buy them so they now have to go to short term lending and dropping the interbank rates to near 1. You are becoming like a Progressive who stops thinking when he reaches the answer that suits him. You have got to keep asking yourself why until you reach the "right" answer.

Roger Ek
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 11/18/2002 - 1:01am
Technically our mint does

Technically our mint does print money, but it is like Joe's Print Shop for the Federal Reserve. We have not printed US Treasury Notes since Lyndon Johnson pulled the plug. on that some 50 years ago.

Melvin Udall
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 41 min ago
Joined: 05/01/2002 - 12:01am
I'm just a baby in such

I'm just a baby in such matters compared to those here.

Yet it appears to me that you-all might just be confusing currency with borrowing notes.

OK, let it rip.

Roger Ek
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 11/18/2002 - 1:01am
pmconusa,

pmconusa,
Go to the library and get Amity Schlaes' outstanding book, "The Forgotten Man". She documents the great depression in brilliant detail. She names names. I spent the summer four years ago with that book. We have been set up for another repeat of 1929, but this will be much worse. Even I didn't think Obama and his czars would incur more debt than all previous presidents combined, but I underestimated the incompetence of Congress. When the American people elect legislators who think a billion is ten million we are hosed.

Maine Guide
Offline
Last seen: 11 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 01/27/2014 - 8:45am
Just to stir the pie fight,

Just to stir the pie fight, the mint does not print money, it mints coinage; currency is produced by the Bureau of Printing & Engraving.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Roger: The Great Depression

Roger: The Great Depression of the 1930s was caused by agricultural practices that caused the dust bowl and the sever drop in wheat and corn production in the Midwest. The domino effect on the food chain was enormous but everyone hunkered down and relied on their savings to get them through which again triggered a lack of money for investment. Other countries came out of the Great Depression quicker because they were not as significantly impacted and did not lose any of their domestic food production.

Exchange, be it in the form of coin or scrip, is just a proxy for food. Man exists because he has access through food to the energy he needs to survive. Wheat, for example, can provide one of the highest number of calories per acre and is grown in abundant quantities in the U. S. because we have the land. It takes 1.5 acres of land growing wheat to feed a man for a lifetime of 70 years.

Here are some facts to ponder. In 1914 the U. S. had a population of 100 million and harvested 55.6 million acres of wheat that produced 16.1 bushels per acre and its price was $1.00 per bushel. In 2013 the population was 317 million and we harvested 45.2 million acres but produced 47.2 bushels per acre but the price per bushel was $7.32 per bushel. The only constant in these figures is the yield per acre which is becoming a constant because there is only so much that can be grown on an acre and we have about reached its limit. Even if you concede it to be 50 the standard of living if based only on wheat has decreased per person. The yield per acre has been artificially achieved through the use of irrigation and fertilizer. My point being that we are decreasing the average standard of living by the continued addition of people be they natural born, legal immigrants or otherwise because rich or poor in gold denominated wealth we all consume the same amount of calories.

Melvin Udall
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 41 min ago
Joined: 05/01/2002 - 12:01am
I'm missing something. 55.6

I'm missing something. 55.6 million acres times 16.1 bushels equates to 895 million bushels.

45.2 million acres times 47.2 bushels equates to 2,133 million bushels.

And you say yield per acre is becoming a constant? Or are you suggesting it is approaching some sort of practical limit?

Here are some facts to ponder. In 1914 the U. S. had a population of 100 million and harvested 55.6 million acres of wheat that produced 16.1 bushels per acre and its price was $1.00 per bushel. In 2013 the population was 317 million and we harvested 45.2 million acres but produced 47.2 bushels per acre but the price per bushel was $7.32 per bushel. The only constant in these figures is the yield per acre which is becoming a constant because there is only so much that can be grown on an acre and we have about reached its limit. Even if you concede it to be 50 the standard of living if based only on wheat has decreased per person. The yield per acre has been artificially achieved through the use of irrigation and fertilizer. My point being that we are decreasing the average standard of living by the continued addition of people be they natural born, legal immigrants or otherwise because rich or poor in gold denominated wealth we all consume the same amount of calories.

Mainelion
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 22 min ago
Joined: 08/11/2005 - 12:01am
We've reached the limit Mel.

We've reached the limit Mel.

Oh...and we're running out of whale oil too. We're all going to starve in the dark.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Mainelion: In mathematics a

Mainelion: In mathematics a constant is a number whose value does not change over time. Everything whose value varies over time is represented by the formula T =(1+ X) squared or T= (1- X) squared, where X is less than 1 and T is time. Let's say you borrow money at Zero interest from a relative who has some he is not using. So long as you pay it back no one gains any advantage. If they want you to pay for the privilege they charge you interest and give you a specified period of time to pay it back. For example a bank loan for repayable over 30 years at about 2.35% will return to your lender twice the amount you borrowed. Obviously it does not cost the lender that much so the amount above his actual cost of servicing the loan is profit. This difference is called usury and should be illegal as it is under Sharia law.

During the Depression banks had used their depositors money to make loans and so long as people didn't need it and the lenders paid it back all was fine. Time healed all wounds. When people lost their income and had to dip into savings the banks did not have the cash and many went broke depending on how well they were capitalized because not everyone had to pull out their savings. Further discussions on how the government has gotten us into this predicament of being $17 trillion in debt the consequence is the banks are still making money but the government holds the IOUs.

The point of my argument is we are burning fuel (food) today that will not be produced until tomorrow and the tank is being refilled at a slower rate. In a democracy so long as 51% can make the rules to keep this Ponzi scheme going and there is enough food produced to keep them alive it will continue. The problem the 51% does not seem to be able to control is the population which is beginning to overwhelm the food supply.

Melvin Udall
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 41 min ago
Joined: 05/01/2002 - 12:01am
" Everything whose value

" Everything whose value varies over time is represented by the formula T =(1+ X) squared or T= (1- X) squared, where X is less than 1 and T is time."

There's one I confess I didn't know.

My graduate schooling, and the math associated with it (Calculus of Variations and other curiosities), obviously missed some important relationships.

Or I was out refilling my red solo cup.

IAC
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 06/03/2008 - 11:34am
Perhaps this was covered in

Perhaps this was covered in math after I switched major to computer science. Or you have to buy his book to get the nitty-gritty.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
It is the same as the

It is the same as the compound interest formula. It is how the bankers make money. Practically you can't borrow something that doesn't exists yet but the British banking system printed it when they didn't have it and charged more to borrow it to cover their cost their potential risk losses on default and a large profit. If you have ever been in the military you would know that just before payday most were broke and would pay most anything to have a few dollars to spend in town. Being one of the more frugal ones I always had money before payday and was happy to loan it out at $10 to be paid back in one week at $15. Now that was usury big time. Under a free market capitalist system and Sharia law which prevents the charge of interest if I wanted to borrow $500 first, the bank would have to have it and second could charge only what they estimate it would cost to service the loan. If I wanted to borrow $100,000 say, I would have to have at least 20% to put down and the bank would own the house until I paid the loan back. If the actual cost to service the loan was equal to the bank's estimate say $5,000 I would in essence be getting $95,000 and could buy a house that cost $115,000 for which I would have $20,000 equity to start..

Over 30 years, if there is no currency inflation, the cost of servicing a loan no matter what the face amount is is fixed and anything the bank can charge over the percentage necessary to recover its actual cost is pure profit.

When the states agreed to the Constitution the first thing Alexander Hamilton wanted to do was set up a government bank that was privately owned and he convinced Washington to sign the law that both Jefferson and his Attorney General opined as unconstitutional and it was because there is nothing in the Constitution to allow the federal government to charter corporations, a power the states had that they did not cede to the federal government. It was to be a one time deal and its objective was to use the government's taxing power to obtain the money to pay off the government's debts to private citizens in the form of notes that Hamilton and his friends had bought up after the war for ten cents on the dollar. Some of the remaining framers made their fortunate buying and selling government land for which the government got from Great Britain for nothing just like they did from the Indians. The treasury was opened to the politicians when John Marshall ruled the Congress had the power to legislate on any matter that was in the broad interpretation of Article 1 Section 8 that was not specifically prohibited. The sky was the limit when they violated the first power and that was to tax to pay the debts and to provide for the cost of government and instead started borrowing to do so. The consequence is the paper currency issued by the government is not backed by anything except a bunch of IOUs backed only by taxes to be collected f rom people yet to be born.

IAC
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 06/03/2008 - 11:34am
(No subject)

From Wikipedia: A formula for calculating annual compound interest is as follows:


where

  • S = value after t periods
  • P = principal amount (initial investment)
  • j = annual nominal interest rate (not reflecting the compounding)
  • m = number of times the interest is compounded per year
  • t = number of years the money is borrowed for

Please show how to transform this into your formula. Use steps that can be understood by someone who has studied advanced mathematics and computer science, and has 40+ years experience applying those studies in areas of science, military, medical and financial applications.

If you don't, or choose to blow it off as too trivial for you to bother with, you'll confirm what we all suspect anyway: This is just more of your pseudo-scientific hogwash.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
IAC: I assumed for the sake

IAC: I assumed for the sake of simplicity that m=1. The main thing I was trying to illustrate was when you introduce interest you no longer have a straight line relationship over time but a curve. When we went off the gold standard and the dollar was allowed to float on the full faith and credit of the United Sates. But what is that? Its maximum is the kcal produced in agriculture since that is what keeps us alive and we need 2000 of them every day to survive. We get them by either earning them ourselves, sharing them with others who have a surplus or we get the government to steal it from them and give it to us. We are such a rich country and the government wants to keep its monopoly on charity so you are dependent on them if you try to steal it yourself you will fare better. than you would on your own.

I apologize for any confusion with the mathematics but when you try to use mathematics instead of words in order to shorten the argument is can be confusing. I may also have made a mistake in illustrating the interest principle but unlike you I am still unable to figure out how to illustrate the formula you so correctly illustrated with my keyboard.

Log in to post comments