Fuel / Ani DiFranco

Understand Objectivism for values.

Because Laissez Faire Capitalism is not based on duty (altruism) as is the forced backed politics of political pull and influence prevalent in the U.S.A., philanthropy can come from those with means, inclination and volition absent religious duty instead of the altruistic duty which forced backed government props up as the norm in human discourse. Self sacrifice for non-value is not normal, it is anti-survival. Man is NOT a sacrificial animal, but he is scripted as such, branded as a slave to any need or authoritative force backed whim- by altruism.

Financial Zombies

I heard today on NPR that Dr. Greenspan was not against the sub prime mortgages that became a means of entrance for many into the real estate market. He said it was the ARM backed securities that were insured to have higher ratings than they should have which were the cause of the Wall Street breakdown.

Of course, having worked long and hard for the repeal of the Glass Stiegal act would place Dr. Greenspan somewhere on the high road which lead to the dangerous financial deregulation that allowed banks and insurance companies to form one stop shop financial institutions in the first place. In his book " A Turbulent Age", Dr. Greenspan states that he did this because computer models indicated it would make the present financial institutions resistant to economic down turns. They would then be in line with the robust survivors of the great depression.

The clients repaying these bridge loans defaulted, this collapsed the ARM backed cash pipes (securities) which wiped out AIG who insured the securities, which caused exposed institutions to default on loans from international banks who then had no operating capital. Baling out the domestic institutions merely allowed them to pay back foreign banks. More money was then required to shore up the surviving institutions- a bail out of main street was not part of the Wall Street rescue package.

Therefore, domestic financial institutions were more interested in meeting their quarterly earnings forecasts than underwriting products with enduring values. So, they moved financial instruments quicker than anybody else. Dr. Greenspan and his too big to fail financial Zombie group are more responsible for the Wall Street breakdown than any body on main street.

The Amish have found the following to be true:

"If a person decides not to buy health insurance, that person by definition is not engaging in commerce," Cuccinelli said in recorded comments. "If you are not engaging in commerce, how can the federal government regulate you?" (From Reuters)

National Health Care you pay for by jurisdiction.

As long as I can't be forced to join a national health care plan, or pay for it fine. Majority rule is a bit like "2 wolves and a sheep deciding what's for lunch". I am not going to live forever. In time I will loose biological viability as a life form. Constitutionally, there is an apportioned tax on income. The 16th amendment allows for non-apportionment in these regards, and without regards to the origin of the income (your wages for instance). So, the old age and disability government insurance program (Social Security) is a non-apportioned tax assessed on your wages as though your wage was a corporate profit (unless you are an Old Order Amish, then your exempt because the Amish rely on the "providence of deity" for such things as old age and disability, and they don't make contracts with Federally entangled agencies such as banks, phone companies, the insurance industry, etc,etc.). The Supreme court granted them this exemption, but it did so to protect it's mandate that the wrest of us must pay. The problem with force backed compliance with respect to who will be covered and who will pay is more than a geriatric consideration or related to some terminal course of disease we will all eventually succumb to. It is a problem of Jurisdiction for the courts ruling on such measures. In the case of "Valentine Byler" and his Amish kinfolk, there was no jurisdiction. I have the knowledge and the inclination to opt out. I reason Government is not responsible for my well being as some type of entitlement, only for providing an environment where I can earn my way without threat, duress or coercion. Well being is a philosophical choice like philanthropy based in means (knowledge is more valuable than money here), inclination and volition. Right now, Duty has no part in this. If I get sick, it may be that I will go to the Veterans Administration Hospital for help, as I have served during the Lebanon Crisis. Presently, I will try to be responsible for my health.

Chinese Petitioners Committed to Mental Hospitals, Given Shock Treatments

Is this a beta testing of mental health policies for the western world or growing pains of the Chinese government as it moves to advance it's economic aspirations amid calls for human rights advances in China.

Economic and market Narcissism.

I think (once a person reaches adulthood) a robust sense of entitlement with no product, service or good is a kind of economic and market Narcissism. The latest Wall Street melt down exemplifies this! These financial officers assembled, marketed and sold fully insured cash pipes composed of soon to be in foreclosure adjustable rate mortgages which in turn were poorly granted to 1st time home buyers unable to qualify for fixed rate mortgages.

If they cared about anything more than the sales necessary to beat market analyst forecasts for their financial sector, to justify FAT sales commissions, I need to be shown WHERE that caring was in practice. The term of the fixed rate mortgages could have been increased to lower payments and boost sales that were sustainable to 1st time home buyers. 100 year fixed rate mortgages are common in Japan. They are secured by social security payments. If social security was an apportioned tax this could be done legally here in the United States. Instead, rewarding such lopsided behavior (investment fraud) with a bail out (protecting the wrest of us) needs to be balanced by fines and jail time for the perpetrators of this destructive loose witted practice and prospectus. Because there shall be no ex post facto laws here (retroactive punishment for things which were not crimes at the time but are now), it needs to be put into practice going forward that such unethical, destructive and rash economic and marketing behavior by financial officers will be quickly and costly punished.

Do you agree?