 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
100 trillion dollars,
That number isn't just a number thrown out to see if it will gain currency, in other words that number is not just a politically motivated falsification of the facts designed to cause potential victims to be victims.
That number represents actual reality, it measures reality, it measures a reality that is complex in detail, yet simple in principle.
If the simple principle is not understood the complexity can be confusing to a point of victimization.
The link at the top of the page reminds me of that Presidential "race" in 1992.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dR38yCC5js
That link is a reminder and other things.
The simple principle can be expanded into complexity or reduced to a razor sharp edge or refined into the smallest particle, or focused down to absolute clarity. I can't force anyone to do anything, but I can offer a competitive example of focus, or sharpness, or simple base principled perspective, and from that point the perspective can expand on avenues of greater understanding that lead to liberty or to whatever the viewer desires.
That may be a problem, of course, the problem of choosing something other than liberty once the person gains the power of self-determination.
The base principle is simple, or it isn't a base principle, so here is my competitive offering of the base principle:
- Planning on and then executing the plan to injure innocent people for profit is a method of thinking and living, a method of abusing human power, whereby that choice of actions, that pre-meditated path of life, has a name, and the name is crime.
- Not A
100 trillion dollars,
I can almost hear the gears turning in the brains of the people who read my texts, and my guess is that much of the thinking in response to the words above may be along the lines of "over-simplification". I have over simplified the human condition in reference to that number. Do you really think that? Is it better to be clear or clouded when viewing something as enormous as 100 trillion dollars?
If 100 trillion dollars is at your finger tips, you, yes you, a human being, a person, a living breathing willful creature of life, if you have 100 trillion dollars at your finger tips, what are you, if not a criminal?
How did you get that power? Is that power measuring something? What does that power measure?
Are these questions irrelevant or merely unpopular?
What does the measure of unpopularity offer in this effort to understand that number? Why would anyone not find that number to be worthy of note, worth the effort to understand it, and cause for careful and diligent concern?
From that base principle I am going to offer one possible and competitive avenue from which to move willfully. The perceiver sits at the one point, viewing the one event, where an innocent person is victimized by a criminal, and the perceiver measures that event with some measuring device of some kind.
- Criminal
- Victim
- Observer
If the criminal is smart (and I am leaping ahead some) the criminal will be mindful of any possible observers who may be measuring the event whereby the criminal is extracting a measure of victimization from the intended victim during the crime.
How much better for the criminal will it be to have the observer miscalculate the exact measure of the crime?
What would happen, for example, if the criminal manages to dress up the crime, spin the crime, adjust the look of the crime, so as to make the crime appear as if the victim is the criminal and the criminal is the victim, and do so in such a way as to be effective, economical, precise, exact, measurable, factual, actual, and real?
An observer views the crime in progress and the observer is led to believe that the victim is the criminal and the criminal is the victim, in some measurable way.
100 trillion dollars, one criminal, one victim, and one confused observer,
I've leaped so far ahead as to confuse the observer, perhaps, and all I have done is to stealth-fully add the factor of falsehood.
The point I intend to convey here is a matter of accurate currency, to find it, to use it, and to gain by it, at the expense of no innocent person anywhere, and unfortunately, if it must be so, at the expense of criminals.
Criminals may have to find productive work, real jobs, be competitive, produce something someone else wants, something someone else hasn't been tricked into wanting, and produce a higher quality product at a lower cost, once the observers employ accurate currency so as to avoid being either criminals or victims.
Why is that not simple?
I don't understand the confusion anymore. I once ran for congress, I didn't understand the confusion then either, what is to be confused about?
I can relate, I can sympathize, I can be empathetic, it isn't beyond my comprehension to know confusion, and for example, I am confused about why people are confused.
What is so confusing about the 100 trillion dollar number?
When criminals run things, what can the victims expect?
100 trillion dollar debt isn't so hard to understand.
Victims owe the criminals a measurable amount of victimization.
The number is just a number, add 100 trillion more zeros to that number, and it will be the same thing, it will have more zeros, but it will be the same thing, from the same source.
Who has the power to add zeros to their own legal monetary account?
What would you do with that power?
Would you buy puppets in foreign countries?
Would you teach poor criminals to be very good criminals in schools where torture and mass murder is taught, and then employed?
And why is my viewpoint so often demonized, what is the power behind that effort - exactly?