OT: More than Disturbing UAP testimony

[Scottysabres]

I haven't said anything on our hockey site about this yet. I've been following closely, and have most my adult life, statements from individuals that made allegations and/or claims on UAP's/UFO's. A multitude of events coming forward now, including released footage from us military aircraft is really fascinating. The fact the Pentagon is even allowing such footage out there is a hurdle that appears to have been overcome.

But David Grusch's testimony to the congressional committee is very disturbing to say the least. My wife and I watched it live, others in my circle, family, friends, work peers, also watched it in its enterity either live or recorded.

None of us were really surprised by the testimony, but one thing sent chills down everyone we chatted with about it, the following question and answer.

Congressman Tim Burchett asked Mr Grusch if anyone had been “murdered” as part of government efforts to cover-up information.

“I have to be careful asking [sic] that question,” he responded, citing an investigation into whether or not he was the subject of retaliatory action for whistleblowing. “I directed people with that knowledge to the appropriate authorities.”

Murder is murder, I don't care what the subject matter is. Murder to hide a program involving US tax dollars in a cover up, is Murder 1, punishable by death. A few of us spoke on it at length this evening. We all agreed.We also viewed Micheal Herrera's interview, as well as the confirming of the Bob Lazar story from the early 90's.

It appears the largest event in human history is unfolding, the confirmation that not only that UAP/UFO's exist, non human biologicals came with some of the craft recovered, but also that our government may have murdered US Citizens in an effort to hide the program and the private corporations involved, and the most disturbing fact, our citizens barely bat an eyelash about any of this.

[TheAud]

There has never been any dispute that UAP’s exist. The question is whether any of them are aliens.

Some of them may be aliens. But Grusch’s testimony doesn’t prove anything. It’s second hand, from a questionable source, without corroboration or physical evidence. 
 
My belief is that, in general, the government is so incompetent that the idea of multi-decade massive cover-ups of the largest ‘story’ in human history, especially in this day and age, is incomprehensible. 

That said, I’m not opposed or in opposition to the possibility that aliens have already, or will make contact with us. But my guess is we’ll not fare well in such an encounter as their technological superiority will be overwhelming, given that they apparently achieved interstellar travel.

[Zamboni]

The US govt has had secret projects and programs since it’s birth. And they kill and will continue to kill to keep those projects secret. Why do you think gasoline is still the prominent reliable fuel in the world to power vehicles? why do you think metered electrical power is the predominant energy source for homes? do you think the technology hasn’t been created? A cheaper or free technology? Why do you think certain drugs and vaccines come on the market, and allegedly it’s the only game in town to help or cure a human condition? it’s all about the Benjamins. Once they figure a way to monetize it, then it gets exposed or brought into the light. It always has and it always will. 
On the topic of UFOs, it will be interesting to see the next step in monetizing that exposure now. Instill a certain level of fear. Then … Buy this, wear that, eat this, avoid that, increase tax, spend more money etc.

and I frankly couldn’t care less if someone thinks that sounds completely insane and impossible to happen or have happened.
 

[MattPie]

5 hours ago, TheAud said:

That said, I’m not opposed or in opposition to the possibility that aliens have already, or will make contact with us. But my guess is we’ll not fare well in such an encounter as their technological superiority will be overwhelming, given that they apparently achieved interstellar travel.

It is possible that by the time a civilization gets to the technology to travel between the stars, it has gotten past "This is mine, I put a *flag* on it. Now then, who are these beings living on my planet?".

[Weave]

56 minutes ago, MattPie said:

It is possible that by the time a civilization gets to the technology to travel between the stars, it has gotten past "This is mine, I put a *flag* on it. Now then, who are these beings living on my planet?".

Possible, but mankind knows no species that won’t attempt to dominate.  Evolution kind of requires it.

[ddaryl]

55 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

Every govt has had secret projects and programs since it’s birth. And they kill and will continue to kill to keep those projects secret.

fixed that for you


 

 

56 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

 Why do you think gasoline is still the prominent reliable fuel in the world to power vehicles? why do you think metered electrical power is the predominant energy source for homes? do you think the technology hasn’t been created? A cheaper or free technology? Why do you think certain drugs and vaccines come on the market, and allegedly it’s the only game in town to help or cure a human condition? it’s all about the Benjamins. Once they figure a way to monetize it, then it gets exposed or brought into the light. It always has and it always will. 
On the topic of UFOs, it will be interesting to see the next step in monetizing that exposure now. Instill a certain level of fear. Then … Buy this, wear that, eat this, avoid that, increase tax, spend more money etc.

and I frankly couldn’t care less if someone thinks that sounds completely insane and impossible to happen or have happened.
 

 

 

Although I understand your pessimism with humans in positions of power (heck humans in general are this way) but we don't have that technology yet for energy producing. They are working Nuclear fusion but that is decades away. Serioulsy think about how long we have been a modern society, basic power production started in 1882, so only 140 years. Having the ultimate cheap free power that was invented in such a small timeline isn't very conceivable. Computers have been around since the 1940's but we are just now venturing in quantum physics / computing so I seriously doubt we have reached the level you think they are hiding from us. 

 

But I do believe they will try to monetize it before ever letting people have it for free..... Capitialism will be a major downfall for humanity eventually, what rises from the ashes we can only hope will represent what humans can truly be going forward. Humans around the world will need to unite for the betterment of humanity, today's humans are in it for themsleves, which is the end results of our monetary systems. We are all still cavemen in the big picture. Hoarding anything and everything that makes our lives better for our ourself, we need to get past this mentality and that will take a horrific event to change the mindset. 

 

 

[Curt]

52 minutes ago, ddaryl said:

Capitialism will be a major downfall for humanity eventually, what rises from the ashes we can only hope will represent what humans can truly be going forward.

It’s the best economic model that humans have come up with so far.

53 minutes ago, ddaryl said:

today's humans are in it for themsleves, which is the end results of our monetary systems. We are all still cavemen in the big picture. Hoarding anything and everything that makes our lives better for our ourself, we need to get past this mentality and that will take a horrific event to change the mindset. 

I don’t think this is a result of an economic system.  I think it’s the result of human nature as shaped by evolution.

[Scottysabres]

It is all fascinating. And Aud is correct, Grusch's testimony has not yet been corroborated, but he did just testify in the past 30 days.

We just found the testimony fascinating.

[RochesterExpat]

2 hours ago, Zamboni said:

Why do you think gasoline is still the prominent reliable fuel in the world to power vehicles? why do you think metered electrical power is the predominant energy source for homes? do you think the technology hasn’t been created? A cheaper or free technology?

If the US government--or any government for that matter--created a cheaper (or 'free') energy alternative it would be exploited to the fullest and I have absolutely zero doubt of that. Unless you believe that all the governments of the world are working together cooperatively to keep you poor, the idea that the US government would achieve something like a functional fusion reactor and then not use that leverage to dominate the globe just doesn't mesh with reality. Energy and their associated sources are the leading cause of conflict either directly or indirectly. The ability to produce cheap energy would catapult the US ahead of everyone and create a global dependency.

If you're going to argue that people don't want the world to be globally dependent on the US, then you can't simultaneously argue that everything is about the Benjamins. A world that is in a subservient state to the US because of our ability to produce cheap energy would make everyone in the US wealthier than imaginable. We would outcompete the entire globe.

Also, to your first point, gasoline is prominent for two reasons. First and foremost, it's the most energy dense source that's easily and readily available that also is relatively stable at normal temperatures. The second reason is simply inertia. If we're going to start going down "Who Killed the Electric Car?" road, I'd like to cut that off at the start by stating it's a truly awful film that creates straw man arguments and uses half truths in order to present a very singular view of the CARB ZEV mandate.

9 hours ago, Scottysabres said:

Murder is murder, I don't care what the subject matter is. Murder to hide a program involving US tax dollars in a cover up, is Murder 1, punishable by death. A few of us spoke on it at length this evening. We all agreed.We also viewed Micheal Herrera's interview, as well as the confirming of the Bob Lazar story from the early 90's.

I doubt anything more about this will surface. Even if the (literal) smoking gun appears, no one will be held accountable. Maybe I'm just overly pessimistic at this point.

Americans are, by and large, placated by excess and conditioned such as to have little willpower or desire to hold our authority figures accountable. In fact, an appeal to authority is basically our nightly news' counter to any dissenting opinion. Then, when the dissenting opinion turns out to be true, the news will do a complete 180 and continue on as if we've always been at war with east Asia. It's all a show.

No one cared when we killed Abdulrahman al-Awlaki. No one held Obama accountable. His press secretary said it was because his father was a terrible parent. The US executed a 16 year old US citizen in a foreign country we were not at war with and had no congressional mandate to operate in using a missile fired from a drone. Most Americans don't even know that happened. Even fewer care. Says it all.

[pi2000]

It's all bunk.   

You're telling me these supremely advanced beings can build anti-gravity craft, travel through wormholes or from other dimensions, but they crash in our atmosphere?

This kinda stuff is gaining traction now for two reasons.

1. The rise of social media which promotes this type of garbage to keep the population at large distracted.

2. At no point in our history has the minority had a larger voice than they do now.

That said are there skunk works type military programs testing advanced tech? Of course.

In this day and age where everyone has a high res recording device in their pocket, there is still no verifiable proof.

[RochesterExpat]

5 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

You're telling me these supremely advanced beings can build anti-gravity craft, travel through wormholes or from other dimensions, but they crash in our atmosphere?

Maybe what we're really learning is you can travel through all of time and space but you still can't escape lowest bidder contracts and preventative maintenance.

I'm just saying, if the TARDIS were built to industry standards instead of simply going to the lowest bidder, and if the Time Lords weren't so cheap as to forgo maintenance contracts, Doctor Who would have been a far less interesting show.

[ddaryl]

52 minutes ago, Curt said:

It’s the best economic model that humans have come up with so far.

I don’t think this is a result of an economic system.  I think it’s the result of human nature as shaped by evolution.

yes it is, but it is beyond obvious the system will consume itself. You can't deny the rich are getting richer and poor poorer.... Kids today will be expected to have 3-4 million saved if they want to retire. And then there is inflation. Zero $$$ is Zero $$$ but what used to be considered middle class keeps rising faster than overall wage and benefits. So that gap from zero to middle class is getting larger and more and more are falling into that gap. My grandparents only had one parent working fulltime. When I was growing up Dad worked fulltime and Mom was part time  and benefits had no co-pays and the bills coming in were much less regarding healthcare. Me and my wife both had to work fulltime to live a similiar life and we spend $5k a year on medical crap. Today both parents better be working fulltime and best have a side hustlle and who knows what it will take to maintain healthcare. Parents tommorow might start denying themsleves healthcare do to cost. And thats just off the top of my head

Eventually it will consume itself and chaos will reign... 

Yes I also agree human nature is shaped my evolution which is why I made the caveman reference....

Edited August 11, 2023 by ddaryl

[That Aud Smell]

8 hours ago, TheAud said:

My belief is that, in general, the government is so incompetent that the idea of multi-decade massive cover-ups of the largest ‘story’ in human history, especially in this day and age, is incomprehensible. 

I agree with this wholeheartedly.

Now, listen. The U.S./NASA put a man on the moon and has done some other incredible sh1t. Incredible. 

But once matters get down into office settings, record keeping, and a variety of people (e.g., Arnold, Gladys) having access to the documents or information? Then it's on like Donkey Kong and any and all big truths will leak.

The X-Files was (is!) a cool show. It's also fictional.

24 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

This kinda stuff is gaining traction now for two reasons.

Ironically, the overall sentiment of the internet was essentially: "Okay, aliens are real and they're here. Can we please do something about how much rent is where I live? It's ridiculous. Also, I need better health care coverage."

Edited August 11, 2023 by That Aud Smell

[Randall Flagg]

31 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

It's all bunk.   

You're telling me these supremely advanced beings can build anti-gravity craft, travel through wormholes or from other dimensions, but they crash in our atmosphere?

This kinda stuff is gaining traction now for two reasons.

1. The rise of social media which promotes this type of garbage to keep the population at large distracted.

2. At no point in our history has the minority had a larger voice than they do now.

That said are there skunk works type military programs testing advanced tech? Of course.

In this day and age where everyone has a high res recording device in their pocket, there is still no verifiable proof.

This is very dangerous of me to come forward. Don't wanna say too much. Some of it is classified. Cannot confirm or deny they kill people to keep it quiet. Anyway, yeah here's my full name and face, thanks for putting me on tv!

 

Also I'm pretty sure proper whistleblowing channels are emphatically NOT what this guy is using lol

Edited August 11, 2023 by Randall Flagg

[matter2003]

10 hours ago, Scottysabres said:

I haven't said anything on our hockey site about this yet. I've been following closely, and have most my adult life, statements from individuals that made allegations and/or claims on UAP's/UFO's. A multitude of events coming forward now, including released footage from us military aircraft is really fascinating. The fact the Pentagon is even allowing such footage out there is a hurdle that appears to have been overcome.

But David Grusch's testimony to the congressional committee is very disturbing to say the least. My wife and I watched it live, others in my circle, family, friends, work peers, also watched it in its enterity either live or recorded.

None of us were really surprised by the testimony, but one thing sent chills down everyone we chatted with about it, the following question and answer.

Congressman Tim Burchett asked Mr Grusch if anyone had been “murdered” as part of government efforts to cover-up information.

“I have to be careful asking [sic] that question,” he responded, citing an investigation into whether or not he was the subject of retaliatory action for whistleblowing. “I directed people with that knowledge to the appropriate authorities.”

Murder is murder, I don't care what the subject matter is. Murder to hide a program involving US tax dollars in a cover up, is Murder 1, punishable by death. A few of us spoke on it at length this evening. We all agreed.We also viewed Micheal Herrera's interview, as well as the confirming of the Bob Lazar story from the early 90's.

It appears the largest event in human history is unfolding, the confirmation that not only that UAP/UFO's exist, non human biologicals came with some of the craft recovered, but also that our government may have murdered US Citizens in an effort to hide the program and the private corporations involved, and the most disturbing fact, our citizens barely bat an eyelash about any of this.

Everyone who hasn't had their head buried in the sand or simply refused to believe no matter what evidence they were shown already knew that. I'm shocked the government is finally coming clean for the most part but that likely means it's because there is an agenda over the next decade or two to start revealing more and more things to us but in small measured doses so as not to freak the population out.

[RochesterExpat]

2 minutes ago, ddaryl said:

yes it is, but it beyond obvious the system will consume itself. You can't deny the rich are getting richer and poor poorer.... 

I can deny that because it's factually wrong.

You do realize the poor are getting richer too, right? Not only that, they're doing it at a rate that exceeds the "rich getting richer." That's statistically undeniable. The number of people lifted out of poverty over the last 30 years is one of the greatest achievements in the entirety of the human race and the only reason it isn't celebrated is because it's an inconvenient truth (to steal the phrase). The single greatest solution to poverty is free market capitalism. Wealth creation is not a zero sum game. Wealth creation is not at the detriment of the human race as a whole. It's quite literally the opposite.

Yes, there is a gap between rich and poor. Yes, that gap is "widening" but that's a pretty biased use of statistics. If you have a billion dollar net worth and your net worth increases 10%, you are now worth $1.1 billion, or an increase of $100,000,000. If I am surviving off of a dollar a day and my income doubles, I am now making $365 more a year--despite a 100% increase in income. But the "wealthy" person's income increased 274,000X what the poor person's did. So, yeah, the rich guy is getting richer and the gap is widening, but the person making inroads toward the global middle class is seeing wealth increases at a faster rate.

The reality is the number of people who are seeing wealth increases from $1b to $1.1b a year is less than 274,000X the number of people globally seeing their wealth increase by a higher percentage each year as the global middle class develops. That is a true fact. So, again, the wealthy person is getting wealthier but that argument ignores the entirety of things like the middle class of China--something that only developed after China adopted capitalist reforms.

It also goes beyond just numbers. People that are "rich" are providing goods and services which improve the lives of people beyond just themselves. Now, I'm a believer that not all of it is positive, but it remains a fact. I personally think Facebook, Instagram and whatever else are woefully detrimental to society; however, more than a billion people worldwide take advantage of them for entertainment and personal enjoyment. Is that not increasing value?

And it goes beyond tech companies to things even simpler than that. People in western Africa that now can afford eyeglasses for their children when 20 years ago that was an impossibility. This allows children to attend school and see the whiteboard. Those children grow up to be more successful than their parents. Maybe they won't have to join one of the 300,000 Sierra Leoneans who still mine diamonds by hand all so some American can spend $5,000 to ask his girlfriend if she'll want to go to a courthouse with him and get a government seal of approval for their relationship.

Meanwhile in the US, we're busy debating whether we want the iPhone 14 or iPhone 14 Pro and only stopping these materialistic debates to complain about how Jeff Bezos used his own wealth to build a rocket and go into space. Wealth that he generated by providing services and goods that the overwhelming majority of us take advantage of. And we use this to complain that capitalism has failed because we read some book that we got same-day delivered from Bezos' book store.  That's comical. 

You are basing your critique of capitalism on a very western view and simultaneously arguing for a global authority and global cooperation. 

1 hour ago, ddaryl said:

Humans around the world will need to unite for the betterment of humanity, today's humans are in it for themsleves, which is the end results of our monetary systems. We are all still cavemen in the big picture. Hoarding anything and everything that makes our lives better for our ourself, we need to get past this mentality and that will take a horrific event to change the mindset. 

I realize this is idealistic and you intended it as such, but I will address it anyway. Humans are not intrinsically altruistic and evolutionary theory substantiates the predilection toward accumulating ("hoarding") ever greater amounts of goods. This idealist view is fundamentally flawed. In order for this to happen, you'd need to remove tens of thousands of years of evolution.

I accept that our version of capitalism is imperfect, but it's the best system we've got. That being said, I also reject any assertion that we live in a truly capitalist society. Most of the criticisms of 'capitalism' are due to cronyism which is effectively what we, in the West, currently have. The irony is that most of these supposed criticisms of capitalism and the solutions proposed to fix them ultimately only yield more cronyism. It's a cycle that repeats over and over again. The greater the authority figure (in your class global) the greater the likelihood of exploitation and abuse. You don't think a global government wouldn't have global lobbyists?

I realize that's not what you're saying directly, but we do not have a better economic model than otherwise allowing people to trade between each other freely and exchange goods and services voluntarily. There simply isn't a better model. That is indisputable. That being said, we do not really have that economic model in practice. We have something approaching it, but we're still far from realizing it.

Capitalism is not things like excessive occupational licensing. You should not need to attend a school, pass a state license, and complete continuing education credits in order to thread someone's eyebrows. You should not need to spend upward of $70,000 in order to get the appropriate permits and business licenses for a lemonade stand in NYC. Those barriers were created to impede market entry by new forces. That is cronyism. That is what prevents people from generating wealth. It is a corruption of capitalism that we all tolerate because we're conditioned to do so.

Rather than create a global government, we would be better off limiting government to the extreme and holding corrupt politicians and the corporations that corrupt them accountable. But that will never happen so it's all a moot point.

Maybe we should all question why large corporations are the ones pushing the message that we need greater regulation and greater authoritarianism. People act like anti-capitalism is some kind of dissident world view, but it's the one most promoted on social media and given air time on mass media. We have no problem criticizing billionaires for having billions, but if you criticize a poor person for being poor, you're evil.

If you can say '<bleep> the rich, why do they have all the money?' but someone else can't say '<bleep> the poor, why don't they have any money?' without being ostracized--maybe there's a problem? We used to look up to wealth creators (Henry Ford, for example) as a society. That changed. Why? 

[inkman]

Lemme know when these terrifying aliens start thinning out the population.  I’ll pop some corn and set off some fireworks.  

[Scottysabres]

Just now, inkman said:

Lemme know when these terrifying aliens start thinning out the population.  I’ll pop some corn and set off some fireworks.  

I'm excited to see one of them in net.

[ddaryl]

13 minutes ago, RochesterExpat said:

I can deny that because it's factually wrong.

You do realize the poor are getting richer too, right? Not only that, they're doing it at a rate that exceeds the "rich getting richer." That's statistically undeniable. The number of people lifted out of poverty over the last 30 years is one of the greatest achievements in the entirety of the human race and the only reason it isn't celebrated is because it's an inconvenient truth (to steal the phrase). The single greatest solution to poverty is free market capitalism. Wealth creation is not a zero sum game. Wealth creation is not at the detriment of the human race as a whole. It's quite literally the opposite.

Yes, there is a gap between rich and poor. Yes, that gap is "widening" but that's a pretty biased use of statistics. If you have a billion dollar net worth and your net worth increases 10%, you are now worth $1.1 billion, or an increase of $100,000,000. If I am surviving off of a dollar a day and my income doubles, I am now making $365 more a year--despite a 100% increase in income. But the "wealthy" person's income increased 274,000X what the poor person's did. So, yeah, the rich guy is getting richer and the gap is widening, but the person making inroads toward the global middle class is seeing wealth increases at a faster rate.

The reality is the number of people who are seeing wealth increases from $1b to $1.1b a year is less than 274,000X the number of people globally seeing their wealth increase by a higher percentage each year as the global middle class develops. That is a true fact. So, again, the wealthy person is getting wealthier but that argument ignores the entirety of things like the middle class of China--something that only developed after China adopted capitalist reforms.

It also goes beyond just numbers. People that are "rich" are providing goods and services which improve the lives of people beyond just themselves. Now, I'm a believer that not all of it is positive, but it remains a fact. I personally think Facebook, Instagram and whatever else are woefully detrimental to society; however, more than a billion people worldwide take advantage of them for entertainment and personal enjoyment. Is that not increasing value?

And it goes beyond tech companies to things even simpler than that. People in western Africa that now can afford eyeglasses for their children when 20 years ago that was an impossibility. This allows children to attend school and see the whiteboard. Those children grow up to be more successful than their parents. Maybe they won't have to join one of the 300,000 Sierra Leoneans who still mine diamonds by hand all so some American can spend $5,000 to ask his girlfriend if she'll want to go to a courthouse with him and get a government seal of approval for their relationship.

Meanwhile in the US, we're busy debating whether we want the iPhone 14 or iPhone 14 Pro and only stopping these materialistic debates to complain about how Jeff Bezos used his own wealth to build a rocket and go into space. Wealth that he generated by providing services and goods that the overwhelming majority of us take advantage of. And we use this to complain that capitalism has failed because we read some book that we got same-day delivered from Bezos' book store.  That's comical. 

You are basing your critique of capitalism on a very western view and simultaneously arguing for a global authority and global cooperation. 

I realize this is idealistic and you intended it as such, but I will address it anyway. Humans are not intrinsically altruistic and evolutionary theory substantiates the predilection toward accumulating ("hoarding") ever greater amounts of goods. This idealist view is fundamentally flawed. In order for this to happen, you'd need to remove tens of thousands of years of evolution.

I accept that our version of capitalism is imperfect, but it's the best system we've got. That being said, I also reject any assertion that we live in a truly capitalist society. Most of the criticisms of 'capitalism' are due to cronyism which is effectively what we, in the West, currently have. The irony is that most of these supposed criticisms of capitalism and the solutions proposed to fix them ultimately only yield more cronyism. It's a cycle that repeats over and over again. The greater the authority figure (in your class global) the greater the likelihood of exploitation and abuse. You don't think a global government wouldn't have global lobbyists?

I realize that's not what you're saying directly, but we do not have a better economic model than otherwise allowing people to trade between each other freely and exchange goods and services voluntarily. There simply isn't a better model. That is indisputable. That being said, we do not really have that economic model in practice. We have something approaching it, but we're still far from realizing it.

Capitalism is not things like excessive occupational licensing. You should not need to attend a school, pass a state license, and complete continuing education credits in order to thread someone's eyebrows. You should not need to spend upward of $70,000 in order to get the appropriate permits and business licenses for a lemonade stand in NYC. Those barriers were created to impede market entry by new forces. That is cronyism. That is what prevents people from generating wealth. It is a corruption of capitalism that we all tolerate because we're conditioned to do so.

Rather than create a global government, we would be better off limiting government to the extreme and holding corrupt politicians and the corporations that corrupt them accountable. But that will never happen so it's all a moot point.

Maybe we should all question why large corporations are the ones pushing the message that we need greater regulation and greater authoritarianism. People act like anti-capitalism is some kind of dissident world view, but it's the one most promoted on social media and given air time on mass media. We have no problem criticizing billionaires for having billions, but if you criticize a poor person for being poor, you're evil.

If you can say '<bleep> the rich, why do they have all the money?' but someone else can't say '<bleep> the poor, why don't they have any money?' without being ostracized--maybe there's a problem? We used to look up to wealth creators (Henry Ford, for example) as a society. That changed. Why? 

 

 

Capitialism at some point will consume itself. We can debate this but I'm not interested in doing so because I will have to retort all your views and that will just go on and on.

I stand 100% behind my thoughts... I see whats happening. The system will collapse upon itself.... eventually and probably within a few generations

Edited August 11, 2023 by ddaryl

[RochesterExpat]

Just now, Scottysabres said:

I'm excited to see one of them in net.

"With the 32nd selection of the 2045 NHL Draft, the Buffalo Sabres are very proud to select, from the Andromeda Athletes of the Intergalactic Hockey Federation, '⎍⍻ µ⍼' "

"You know, John, I really like this selection by Buffalo. µ⍼ is a really solid goaltender. At 14'4" and weighing in at four tons, he's basically a slug in the front of the net. In the Intergalactic Juniors, he posted an impressive 0.2 GAA across fives games with his one goal against happening when he fell asleep and rolled out of the net. Now, he's not the most mobile goalie and we know that the TKKXK species have trouble with cold climates, but if they can keep him awake and warm, he might just be the solution to Buffalo's net problem."

[Eleven]

31 minutes ago, RochesterExpat said:

I can deny that because it's factually wrong.

You do realize the poor are getting richer too, right? Not only that, they're doing it at a rate that exceeds the "rich getting richer." That's statistically undeniable. The number of people lifted out of poverty over the last 30 years is one of the greatest achievements in the entirety of the human race and the only reason it isn't celebrated is because it's an inconvenient truth (to steal the phrase). The single greatest solution to poverty is free market capitalism. Wealth creation is not a zero sum game. Wealth creation is not at the detriment of the human race as a whole. It's quite literally the opposite.

Yes, there is a gap between rich and poor. Yes, that gap is "widening" but that's a pretty biased use of statistics. If you have a billion dollar net worth and your net worth increases 10%, you are now worth $1.1 billion, or an increase of $100,000,000. If I am surviving off of a dollar a day and my income doubles, I am now making $365 more a year--despite a 100% increase in income. But the "wealthy" person's income increased 274,000X what the poor person's did. So, yeah, the rich guy is getting richer and the gap is widening, but the person making inroads toward the global middle class is seeing wealth increases at a faster rate.

The reality is the number of people who are seeing wealth increases from $1b to $1.1b a year is less than 274,000X the number of people globally seeing their wealth increase by a higher percentage each year as the global middle class develops. That is a true fact. So, again, the wealthy person is getting wealthier but that argument ignores the entirety of things like the middle class of China--something that only developed after China adopted capitalist reforms.

It also goes beyond just numbers. People that are "rich" are providing goods and services which improve the lives of people beyond just themselves. Now, I'm a believer that not all of it is positive, but it remains a fact. I personally think Facebook, Instagram and whatever else are woefully detrimental to society; however, more than a billion people worldwide take advantage of them for entertainment and personal enjoyment. Is that not increasing value?

And it goes beyond tech companies to things even simpler than that. People in western Africa that now can afford eyeglasses for their children when 20 years ago that was an impossibility. This allows children to attend school and see the whiteboard. Those children grow up to be more successful than their parents. Maybe they won't have to join one of the 300,000 Sierra Leoneans who still mine diamonds by hand all so some American can spend $5,000 to ask his girlfriend if she'll want to go to a courthouse with him and get a government seal of approval for their relationship.

Meanwhile in the US, we're busy debating whether we want the iPhone 14 or iPhone 14 Pro and only stopping these materialistic debates to complain about how Jeff Bezos used his own wealth to build a rocket and go into space. Wealth that he generated by providing services and goods that the overwhelming majority of us take advantage of. And we use this to complain that capitalism has failed because we read some book that we got same-day delivered from Bezos' book store.  That's comical. 

You are basing your critique of capitalism on a very western view and simultaneously arguing for a global authority and global cooperation. 

I realize this is idealistic and you intended it as such, but I will address it anyway. Humans are not intrinsically altruistic and evolutionary theory substantiates the predilection toward accumulating ("hoarding") ever greater amounts of goods. This idealist view is fundamentally flawed. In order for this to happen, you'd need to remove tens of thousands of years of evolution.

I accept that our version of capitalism is imperfect, but it's the best system we've got. That being said, I also reject any assertion that we live in a truly capitalist society. Most of the criticisms of 'capitalism' are due to cronyism which is effectively what we, in the West, currently have. The irony is that most of these supposed criticisms of capitalism and the solutions proposed to fix them ultimately only yield more cronyism. It's a cycle that repeats over and over again. The greater the authority figure (in your class global) the greater the likelihood of exploitation and abuse. You don't think a global government wouldn't have global lobbyists?

I realize that's not what you're saying directly, but we do not have a better economic model than otherwise allowing people to trade between each other freely and exchange goods and services voluntarily. There simply isn't a better model. That is indisputable. That being said, we do not really have that economic model in practice. We have something approaching it, but we're still far from realizing it.

Capitalism is not things like excessive occupational licensing. You should not need to attend a school, pass a state license, and complete continuing education credits in order to thread someone's eyebrows. You should not need to spend upward of $70,000 in order to get the appropriate permits and business licenses for a lemonade stand in NYC. Those barriers were created to impede market entry by new forces. That is cronyism. That is what prevents people from generating wealth. It is a corruption of capitalism that we all tolerate because we're conditioned to do so.

Rather than create a global government, we would be better off limiting government to the extreme and holding corrupt politicians and the corporations that corrupt them accountable. But that will never happen so it's all a moot point.

Maybe we should all question why large corporations are the ones pushing the message that we need greater regulation and greater authoritarianism. People act like anti-capitalism is some kind of dissident world view, but it's the one most promoted on social media and given air time on mass media. We have no problem criticizing billionaires for having billions, but if you criticize a poor person for being poor, you're evil.

If you can say '<bleep> the rich, why do they have all the money?' but someone else can't say '<bleep> the poor, why don't they have any money?' without being ostracized--maybe there's a problem? We used to look up to wealth creators (Henry Ford, for example) as a society. That changed. Why? 

 

17 minutes ago, ddaryl said:

 

 

Capitialism at some point will consume itself. We can debate this but I'm not interested in doing so because I will have to retort all your views and that will just go on and on.

I stand 100% behind my thoughts... I see whats happening. The system will collapse upon itself.... eventually and probably within a few generations

 

2 hours ago, Curt said:

It’s the best economic model that humans have come up with so far.

 

There's so much I want to say about this but it's probably not the right place for it.

I'll just say that I think we can do better than Anglo-American style unregulated capitalism.  Rhine capitalism and distributism are interesting to me.

Henry Ford knew that he needed to pay his line workers enough that they could afford a new car.  I'm not so sure that's the way anymore.

Oh, and if the aliens ever find us, we're dinner.

Edited August 11, 2023 by Eleven

[Weave]

A full blown manifesto!  I wasn’t expecting that today.

[SwampD]

43 minutes ago, RochesterExpat said:

I can deny that because it's factually wrong.

You do realize the poor are getting richer too, right? Not only that, they're doing it at a rate that exceeds the "rich getting richer." That's statistically undeniable. The number of people lifted out of poverty over the last 30 years is one of the greatest achievements in the entirety of the human race and the only reason it isn't celebrated is because it's an inconvenient truth (to steal the phrase). The single greatest solution to poverty is free market capitalism. Wealth creation is not a zero sum game. Wealth creation is not at the detriment of the human race as a whole. It's quite literally the opposite.

Yes, there is a gap between rich and poor. Yes, that gap is "widening" but that's a pretty biased use of statistics. If you have a billion dollar net worth and your net worth increases 10%, you are now worth $1.1 billion, or an increase of $100,000,000. If I am surviving off of a dollar a day and my income doubles, I am now making $365 more a year--despite a 100% increase in income. But the "wealthy" person's income increased 274,000X what the poor person's did. So, yeah, the rich guy is getting richer and the gap is widening, but the person making inroads toward the global middle class is seeing wealth increases at a faster rate.

The reality is the number of people who are seeing wealth increases from $1b to $1.1b a year is less than 274,000X the number of people globally seeing their wealth increase by a higher percentage each year as the global middle class develops. That is a true fact. So, again, the wealthy person is getting wealthier but that argument ignores the entirety of things like the middle class of China--something that only developed after China adopted capitalist reforms.

It also goes beyond just numbers. People that are "rich" are providing goods and services which improve the lives of people beyond just themselves. Now, I'm a believer that not all of it is positive, but it remains a fact. I personally think Facebook, Instagram and whatever else are woefully detrimental to society; however, more than a billion people worldwide take advantage of them for entertainment and personal enjoyment. Is that not increasing value?

And it goes beyond tech companies to things even simpler than that. People in western Africa that now can afford eyeglasses for their children when 20 years ago that was an impossibility. This allows children to attend school and see the whiteboard. Those children grow up to be more successful than their parents. Maybe they won't have to join one of the 300,000 Sierra Leoneans who still mine diamonds by hand all so some American can spend $5,000 to ask his girlfriend if she'll want to go to a courthouse with him and get a government seal of approval for their relationship.

Meanwhile in the US, we're busy debating whether we want the iPhone 14 or iPhone 14 Pro and only stopping these materialistic debates to complain about how Jeff Bezos used his own wealth to build a rocket and go into space. Wealth that he generated by providing services and goods that the overwhelming majority of us take advantage of. And we use this to complain that capitalism has failed because we read some book that we got same-day delivered from Bezos' book store.  That's comical. 

You are basing your critique of capitalism on a very western view and simultaneously arguing for a global authority and global cooperation. 

I realize this is idealistic and you intended it as such, but I will address it anyway. Humans are not intrinsically altruistic and evolutionary theory substantiates the predilection toward accumulating ("hoarding") ever greater amounts of goods. This idealist view is fundamentally flawed. In order for this to happen, you'd need to remove tens of thousands of years of evolution.

I accept that our version of capitalism is imperfect, but it's the best system we've got. That being said, I also reject any assertion that we live in a truly capitalist society. Most of the criticisms of 'capitalism' are due to cronyism which is effectively what we, in the West, currently have. The irony is that most of these supposed criticisms of capitalism and the solutions proposed to fix them ultimately only yield more cronyism. It's a cycle that repeats over and over again. The greater the authority figure (in your class global) the greater the likelihood of exploitation and abuse. You don't think a global government wouldn't have global lobbyists?

I realize that's not what you're saying directly, but we do not have a better economic model than otherwise allowing people to trade between each other freely and exchange goods and services voluntarily. There simply isn't a better model. That is indisputable. That being said, we do not really have that economic model in practice. We have something approaching it, but we're still far from realizing it.

Capitalism is not things like excessive occupational licensing. You should not need to attend a school, pass a state license, and complete continuing education credits in order to thread someone's eyebrows. You should not need to spend upward of $70,000 in order to get the appropriate permits and business licenses for a lemonade stand in NYC. Those barriers were created to impede market entry by new forces. That is cronyism. That is what prevents people from generating wealth. It is a corruption of capitalism that we all tolerate because we're conditioned to do so.

Rather than create a global government, we would be better off limiting government to the extreme and holding corrupt politicians and the corporations that corrupt them accountable. But that will never happen so it's all a moot point.

Maybe we should all question why large corporations are the ones pushing the message that we need greater regulation and greater authoritarianism. People act like anti-capitalism is some kind of dissident world view, but it's the one most promoted on social media and given air time on mass media. We have no problem criticizing billionaires for having billions, but if you criticize a poor person for being poor, you're evil.

If you can say '<bleep> the rich, why do they have all the money?' but someone else can't say '<bleep> the poor, why don't they have any money?' without being ostracized--maybe there's a problem? We used to look up to wealth creators (Henry Ford, for example) as a society. That changed. Why? 

Oh, those pesky poor. They just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, don't they? If I would have written a manifesto like this arguing the opposite, I'm pretty sure I would have been warned to move it to the club. And a thumbs up, to boot. Good stuff.

 

Back to the topic. Does anyone here think they have ever seen a UFO?

[Eleven]

8 minutes ago, SwampD said:

And a thumbs up, to boot.

Gotta consider the source...

I, too, could counter it with a lot of well-researched rebuttal, I'm just not doing it.

[Stoner]

1 hour ago, inkman said:

Lemme know when these terrifying aliens start thinning out the population.  I’ll pop some corn and set off some fireworks.  

What if their snack is calves?

1 hour ago, Scottysabres said:

I'm excited to see one of them in net.

We did.

27 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Oh, those pesky poor. They just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, don't they? If I would have written a manifesto like this arguing the opposite, I'm pretty sure I would have been warned to move it to the club. And a thumbs up, to boot. Good stuff.

 

Back to the topic. Does anyone here think they have ever seen a UFO?

I and my family saw one around dusk on a hot summer night in 1980. We lived below a cemetery. I spotted a triangle of lights and heard a low humming sound about 200 yards up the hill. We went into the backyard, and to my mom's frantic protestation, my World War II combat scout father walked up the road alone to find out for sure. He didn't come back for a good while, and it was almost dark. We were scared. Were the lights moving now? Was the sound more high pitched? My dad emerged from the darkness and flatly announced, "It's a dump truck. They're working on the road."

Edited August 11, 2023 by PASabreFan