I’m Dreaming of a TUI

Unless you count XHTML, I don’t write code. I lack the mental framework to be any good at something like that. Feel free to extrapolate from there I’m also not smart enough to dress myself, but the point is, whatever else I can’t do, that includes writing code.

If I could, I would be working on a TUI. I’ve never been very happy with any of the graphical desktops. It’s not a matter of simplicity versus complexity; for simplicity I know how to use IceWM, FVWM2, or even TWM. I’m sorely disappointed with what changed since XFce 3, and still prefer GNOME 1 over 2. I thought Another Level was a great idea, if somewhat buggy at times. It’s not merely I’m a curmudgeon about fancy graphics, though that is true. It’s about making things to work better first, then worry about how it looks later. Far, far too many things don’t work right, but all we get is window dressing improvements.

I don’t doubt the new stuff draws more and younger users, and that’s fine. Linux should be for the masses; few things are better in the computer OS world. It’s not more widespread because people don’t give it a fair shot. They won’t give it a shot if it’s just more of the same. If security mattered that much to them, there wouldn’t be so many problems with Windows malware, because too much of that is a problem of user behavior. We do have plenty of fancier toys and lots of better ideas, but it’s hard to draw the users when we don’t have advertising. People are so used to that, precious few ever go looking for something better. The kind who do search have already found Linux. I’m not saying we should only attract those of like mind, because if more people used Linux, the Net would simply be a better place — I truly believe that.

Still, it’s not just a bunch of old geezers who are tired of the features race. How often have I read a whine about wishing we had a genuine text-mode word processor? Last time I checked, the same people are still asking for it. A couple of companies years ago did have something, but they never worked when I tested them. Some of us just don’t want a full graphical interface. There are toolkits for a sort of DOS-style or primitive interface kit running on the framebuffer. But I don’t want to run DOS, nor do a bunch of other folks I’ve heard from; we want Linux under the hood. Unfortunately, the big push with developers is the newest and flashiest.

I know there have been some attempts, like the Twin project, but they all keep dying. I know there is also a couple of libraries of TUI development, but I don’t think they are used that much. From what little I do understand, I suppose there is a way to port most bigger projects to a different toolkit, but I’m sure there is plenty of work involved. It would mean stripping out an entire batch of display factors, pointing to character cells instead of pixels or graphical vectors. So even if we had a solid TUI interface developed, I wonder if there would be anything to run with it. Unless there was a powerful groundswell of interest backing it, we would have one more toy. I can’t imagine what it would take to refit something like Firefox to a TUI display, rendering without graphics, re-rendering in a sensible character cell display. And I realize a real word processor would require quite a bit of work to duplicate the massive back-end work done back in the old DOS days for something like Word Perfect or Enable. To work the same, it would require bypassing the Ghostscript engine in favor of a more complicated character-based print engine. It would take a heavy demand to see that sort of work.

So I know I’m dreaming. Sure, you can talk about Screen, but that’s designed to scare away those of us who like Bash. Using Screen on Bash requires more work rewriting the default key strokes than it does to configure FVWM. On top of that, it’s not really a TUI, just a way to get more than one process to display on the same console. Imagine a TUI, with a toolbar where you want it, mouse-able so you can click on some character cell icons to move between desktops, the usual clock and system monitoring displays, menu buttons, etc., but all running in the framebuffer and no X server in sight.

Yeah, I’m dreaming.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 1 Comment

She Doesn’t Get It

Jojo Moyes says the scientists are wrong. When their research indicates chick-flix (“romantic comedies”) raise unrealistic expectations, which expectations cause needless conflicts in relationships, she says they don’t realize women know the difference between fiction and reality. Such stories are like any other: an entertaining escape from drab and un-entertaining reality. This may be true, but for only a tiny slice of society she inhabits. The vast majority of modern women in the romance marketplace, particularly those who consume large quantities of such entertainment, are truly deluded about reality.

How many of us remember the very public efforts by women to compel men to watch a certain romantic comedy movie so they’ll “get it”? You’ll note this film was loaded with horrendous immorality. You’ll also note this film reflects a sort of culmination of many years’ worth of conditioning and propagandizing from a godless feminist point of view. This isn’t some easy, throw-away line. It’s quite easy to prove Scripture assumes a wholly different cultural base, and does so because other cultural bases stand as a rejection of God’s revelation. At it’s very heart, Western Civilization itself is anti-Christian. If you can’t realize that, we a have very long way to go in explaining what’s wrong with the Moyeses of the world. Scientists are often wrong, but she misses the point.

This is more than just allegations her article is merely protecting her income. She is promoting a very badly broken society, if only one tiny portion of what makes that broken society possible. There’s nothing wrong with romance; I woo every day my wife of 30+ years. My duty in that department is never done. That is hardly a modern Western virtue, except as it was stolen from far older virtues. The Bible promotes that, assumes it, and shows it clearly in the likes of Song of Solomon. Nor do I promote the thousands of books from air-head prissy evangelical women authors, who are often little more than a Hollywood actress with a Christian paint job. There’s nothing wrong with the entertainment angle, as Scripture itself depicts several very romantic tales.

The fundamental difference is the sum of assumptions about human nature where modern feminist culture attacks the Bible. I’m not even referring here to the obvious sexual immorality of Hollywood, but the underlying assumptions about how human emotions work, and how they should be accounted for in making decisions. Love and romance should follow, and grow from, wise decisions regarding to whom we commit ourselves for life. We make those decisions about commitment on very real factors of what makes the most sense at the time we decide. Wisdom means we don’t wait for chemistry, for some unquantifiable and undeniable romantic wave washing over us. We examine what it is we honestly must have and must avoid, with the help and advice of those who know us best. Then we finally put ourselves in God’s hands and seize the moment when He presents it. We already know that grand romantic experience will grow as a gift from God’s hands, the Kingdom privilege of obeying in faith.

Frankly, you can develop a powerful longing and romance for just about anyone to whom you commit yourself. Love grows because it’s necessary, and God makes it happen. It does not precede the relationship, except in the sense we cultivate a general presumption of sacrificial love toward our world. That sort of “you are the only one” romantic attachment arises from the wise decision to accept God’s gift of this or that spouse. Yes, they may eventually fail miserably in making you feel loved, but the Bible permits no escape mechanism from our end of things. Marriage as romance is built from the trinity of man and wife under Christ. Any other structure is doomed.

Still, on a purely secular basis, the scientists are right. Women typically write scripts for each date, and God help the man who fails to perform, even though she would never tell him the script. That ruins it, of course. If he can’t discern the script by some sixth sense, or isn’t already tuned and tweaked to follow it by instinct, he’s not “Mr. Right.” That is, unless he manages to magically perform some other heroic act of romance which wipes away his mistakes. Even the gal in question has no idea what that might be, but she’ll know it when she sees it. Got that? It all comes from these idiotic movies. Yes, real people know the difference between fiction and reality, but I dare say the vast majority of likely female candidates in modern Western society will not even be conscious of their attempts to live by the movie scripts. They just assume such fiction is reality, and demand men reshape themselves to fit this fantasy world.

Don’t buy it, guys. Start dating women from a more sensible cultural background.

Posted in social sciences | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Morgellon’s Disease: Shut Up and Eat That GMO

You aren’t supposed to know. The good folks at Monsanto could care less about your well being, they simply want your money. And everyone else’s money, too. So they used DNA technology to modify food purely for market gains. If you don’t know enough about it, you really need to see the movie: The World According to Monsanto.

Of course, Monsanto is carefully buying and bullying every government they can to insure you don’t have any idea. Laws in the US already make it a crime to differentiate between Frankenfoods and stuff the way God intended it. Other countries have similar laws, and I pray for their sakes the Europeans and Africans hold out making this crap illegal to grow and sell in their lands. They have enough troubles without facing Morgellon’s Disease, too.

(Note: I read most sites with a plain text browser, due to a disability, so I have no idea how it will appear to you.)

Posted in globalism | Tagged , | Comments Off on Morgellon’s Disease: Shut Up and Eat That GMO

We Deserve to Lose

We are accountable for commands from God as found in the Bible. It helps if you have some grasp of the context in which that Bible was written. Jumping into the narrative with Western philosophical assumptions will simply get you lost. You will likely understand the most basic need to repent and make Jesus your Lord, but you will have a very tough time understanding His teachings if you reject the fundamental assumptions about the world Jesus made as a Hebrew man. If your education, even by the very best and most rigorous intellectual standards, is entirely Western, you will by default reject the very mind of Christ.

One of the basic assumptions in the Bible is there are two levels of human existence. God has two sets of commands. One applies to purely spiritual concerns. The other applies to practical concerns of living in this fallen world. The first is embodied in clinging to the Cross, offering your entire being for God’s purpose. The second is embodied in the Covenant of Noah, but specifically exemplified in the Covenant of the Law (Moses). The Apostle Paul said quite bluntly, nothing about the Law was intended to work spiritual salvation. It was only intended to make life sane so we could point to things spiritual. To mix the two is madness. It is also the most common form of American Evangelical Christian religion.

Evangelicals stand in God’s wrath for one thing in particular: Believing a human organization under fallen human rule is somehow sacred. Sacred to the point we must violate every known moral standard to protect the prerogatives of that organization. That organization is the United States. They somehow fail to notice the government and the governed have never once been the same set of people, but because the former has made it their official mantra, these Evangelicals have swallowed it. It sounds good, but was never actually possible. But let’s assume for the moment they are genuine in their concern for putting first the people of these United States, and not the State. Facetious on the face of it, yes, but let’s play that game for a moment. These American Evangelical Christians claim it is good and right to torture “terrorists” to extract from them information which would protect us from their dire intentions.

It has been demonstrated endlessly torture does not work. It only appears to work, and in just a precious few anecdotes at that. So much for the objective facts. It’s also a violation of every known standard of Scripture. However, if you confuse the Kingdom of Heaven with the United States, you won’t notice that. I wonder what they do with Arabic Christians who actually serve Jesus, and want to serve in defense of their nations, too? Oh, wait — you can’t claim to love Jesus if you don’t love the US government. Right?

Wrong. It’s bad enough they reject the Jesus who died for His enemies, and try to crucify their enemies instead. You see, crucifixion was partly torture. Don’t forget the beating Jesus took before that, a Roman lictor lashed Him not quite to death. Such a lictor had to face his victim for this job. What kind of man could do that? And don’t forget the humiliating abuse by the Roman soldiers and the Temple guards, slapping Him around. What kind of people must they have been? Would that be any different from the sort of CIA, military and other sorts of US government agents who torture folks? Or would they be any different from such agents who deliver prisoners to even more brutal torture? Just doing their job, all of them, never mind how much fun they thought it was.

Can a man claiming to follow Christ have any part of this? I mean, can a follower of Jesus perform water-boarding? Can he beat a prisoner? Can he turn prisoners over to those who would do far worse? Would Jesus do it? Okay, but I’ve said there was a lower standard for human governments under Noah/Moses. Would Moses do it? No. Read the Law. Yes, King David did it, but he also had Uriah killed. Not every deed recorded was given a note of approval; you were supposed to read that while understanding the Law and know David failed as often as he succeeded. He was also a spiritual man, as well, and the confused jumble of what sort of man he was cannot easily be answered by simply citing his actions. Context matters. Today, the US is not in any way equivalent with Ancient Israel, because Christ has come since then to set the record straight. “Do good to your enemies.”

If, on the purely pragmatic grounds of Noah/Moses, we have to torture to win, then we deserve to lose. We make ourselves odious in the sight of God, and fully deserve His wrath, fully deserve to have this land spew us out and we become vagabonds on the earth. The United States is not the Kingdom of Heaven, and this political entity is not somehow sacred and exempt from those things binding on all humanity. About the only way we can save our nation is to stop this madness immediately, and execute those who carried out this hideous work. Yeah, we really need such odious people on our side. American Evangelical Christians who don’t call for these same measures are serving Satan.

We are doomed.

Posted in social sciences | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Retirement Will Retire

Used to, only the wealthiest folks retired. Others simply died working, or got too infirm to make their own way, and moved in with family so they could die in peace. Most folks didn’t talk about retirement. A few got a pension from somewhere, but that was mostly a European thing.

Then along came this brilliant idea called Social Security, which was supposed to encourage folks to save up a little so they could retire. That is, you could pay into this fund, wherein you had an account. When you got to a certain age most workers didn’t see, you could begin drawing on this account to supplement your savings. Nice idea; never properly implemented. Nobody much bothered to save for old age, so they ended up nearly starving on Social Security payments.

But it served to get old folks out of the work force, along with mandatory schooling to the 12th year. This created a phony shortage of workers, which did manage to raise wages a bit. The other, unintended consequences are too many to name here — all bad. So consumerism went up, advertising supported the idea you had to have the next new toy, and recreation became a major obsession with us. Suddenly, working was something you had to do, it wasn’t supposed to be fun, and you forgot about it as quickly as possible.

Over the following decades, a lot of other nasty things were done to us. We quit saving, we started investing, and more than anything else, we borrowed and spent, and borrowed and spent, and… Then we all worked at jobs which really don’t create anything, while the jobs which built things were sold off to poor countries. We just bought that stuff from them; it was cheaper. We even borrowed the money from other places to pay for the stuff they sold us. Then, in our greed, we created some phony mathematical tools for creating wealth out of thin air. Actually, we were stealing it, but the process was so convoluted, everyone went along voluntarily. The momentum was like putting way too much air inside an ever-thinning stretching container — like a soap bubble. And it broke.

All of a sudden our jobs, most of which were meaningless anyway, are gone. A few real jobs remain, but those depend too much on the fake ones. Soon, too many people will be unemployed, and won’t be buying much. So all the dependent jobs will end. And unemployment will snowball. But wait! It’s just possible a few smart minds will realize we don’t need all that junk we used to buy, we just need food, shelter and clothing. So they’ll start making some of that stuff again, little by little, shifting all the unused labor resources to things we used to do quite well many years ago.

Meanwhile, all the retirement money? Gone, invested in those fancy mathematical formulas. All that government pension money, including Social Security payments? Gone, because government has been doing something similar, and is so far in the hole, it can’t climb out. All that money we used to borrow from other countries? Gone, because they bought the math formulas, too. In fact, all we left with is just a lot of debt. A mountain of debt, an ocean of debt, a solar system of debt. Should someone offer you any job at all, regardless of your age and condition, you better take it.

Posted in social sciences, Uncategorized | Tagged | Comments Off on Retirement Will Retire

Marketing Equals Lying

Back when Fred Reed attacked pitchmen, I rejoiced at the good sense he conveyed. In the process, he offers a very graphic lesson in economics:

The Industrial Revolution was the real villain. Supply — of virtually everything — outstripped demand. Used to be, nobody had squat. In say 1850, there was a vast pent-up demand for refrigerators, air-conditioning, and computers, even if nobody had heard of any of them. So when some rascal invented, say, a washing machine, everybody charged out to buy one. A washing machine actually had a purpose, so you didn’t have to advertise. Pretty soon everybody had everything he needed or could reasonably want. Warm dry house, plenty to eat, appliances, car, shoes.

Yet factories in their reckless lunge toward ill-considered fecundity produced more junk than anyone in his right mind could conceivably want. Things kept getting incontinently invented. You know, electric toothbrushes with New Miracle Bristles, or strangely colored toothpastes.

The stuff piled up and threatened to unbalance the planet, causing it to break into asteroids. Advertising exists to sell people things they wouldn’t buy if left to themselves, spreading the weight of the electric tooth brushes and thereby saving the earth.

When people have needs, there is a heavy market pressure to produce. When needs are sated, you are left with whims, which must be blown out of proportion in order to continue the high sales volume. This is the inherent deception in marketing: “You really need this useless toy.” For the past couple of decades, precious few new things actually needed have entered the marketplace. Most of it is mere convenience, and must be quickly replaced. In other words, the bulk of our corporate dealings with the consumer is downright dishonest. These corporate thieves are the ones who get to write the course material defining business ethics. They have zero interest in your actual welfare.

Instead, everything is designed to break down quickly, and the entire industry does it that way. There’s no competition, except in the area of useless features. It’s not a concrete collusion, but a collusion by culture. No one does anything differently because the dishonesty is built into the entire system. These days, “honest businessman” is an oxymoron. And by no means should the words “honest” and “marketer” be in the same paragraph.

None of this is news. You already had similar thoughts, I’ll bet. It even infects the mindset of Open Source projects, as noted in yesterday’s post. The saddest part of all is how this affects religion. Most of the big names in American Evangelical religion are selling something, trying to make a buck first, never mind they really have nothing new. But because this awful mindset has become so deeply rooted in our culture, not a one of them admits to it. They are hawking new features, but only superficially meeting any real needs. Instead, they create a lot of noise and build a shallow fad, making it seem so absolutely necessary and meaningful. And the average sheeple church member buys it without question. I can’t count how many people I once took seriously are gung-ho about the Purchase Driven Church model.

I don’t know anybody really looking forward to the coming economic collapse, and the attendant upheaval it will bring. Still, those things reflect God’s judgment on us for being so goofy. Christian faith has not changed in 2000 years, and human spiritual needs are far older than that. The only thing changed is the paint job by which we make the works of human religion vaguely resemble genuine faith. When it all comes apart, I wonder how the marketers will survive. Many of them are standing in church pulpits this weekend, and it won’t be pretty when it goes. Let me remind you, those huge investments in Treasuries were of the 3-month type, coming due in February. Should the US Treasury actually be able to pay these bonds, the dollars will be worth far less than now. And by then, there will be even fewer places to take those worthless dollars to protect the value of that wealth. Yes, it’s all just imaginary assets even now, but human behavior is the key here. If these big financiers realize they have nothing, it will change how they and a lot of other humans act.

God help us.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Half-right: Linux Complaints

Actually, he’s only got one valid complaint: big projects are never fixed, they just keep releasing new versions with a whole new set of bugs.

The GNOME Desktop has never ever been crash free since the birth of 2.x series. Every Linux distro, every GNOME release they used and promised to support, have always been buggy enough, at least the window manager crashed on me and made it unusable. I don’t know enough about the underlying technology, but the whole thing seems generally unstable at all times. Stuff keeps disappearing from the Panel, this or that simply doesn’t work as it should, or some major necessity can’t be adjusted, even if I use the arcane Config Editor.

KDE is no better. While stability hasn’t been much of an issue, it’s always something buggy which matters to me. Kedit and Kwrite both have the same flaw: When the text on screen gets beyond the first page on the screen, the application starts taking bigger and bigger bytes of the RAM, and every time I type a word or two, the CPU spikes. They never did fix the kerning issue with TrueType fonts through the end of the 3.x series. Not only do they display wonky in Koffice, but they print just the same. People complain of cluttered menus and configurations, but there are still too many critical items not available in any settings menu. For example, how about letting me choose smaller icons in the menu? No, I have to manually edit the right config file. Why did they have to invest so much energy making 4.x a silly over-wrought toy? Why not just fix what was wrong with 3.x?

Tell them to both to stuff it. You should refuse to use either one. In the next reinstall, I’m going to pick GNOME just for the tools, but will run IceWM. You can’t use any KDE tools without running those resource hogs MCOP and DCOP. Oh, and they don’t easily die when you are through.

Everything else the guy said is just a matter of taste or misconception. RedHat and clones do support any release for five years. Ubuntu has several selected releases which get long-term support, too. And I can use the screensaver and power config to get my desktop to drop down to low power overnight. The real advantage remains, though, the far greater security of Linux. We’ll never know if Linux is simply harder to crack, though, because there is insufficient stability in the major desktops to allow for a wider adoption.

Posted in computers | Tagged | 2 Comments

openSUSE: Linux for the Lazy

There was a time when I would spend hours, even days, exploring all the ins-n-outs, chasing down the various slick tricks and secrets of an operating system. I’ve run a half-dozen brands of Linux and four different versions of FreeBSD. I’ve tested Haiku, FreeDOS and eComStation (previously OS/2). Of course, like every one else, I’ve never been able to escape knowing something about Windows, from 3.1 up to XP. I hope I never encounter Vista, but there was a time I would relish the challenge.

Those days are gone. I know I prefer Open Source implementations of Unix. I know how it works and there are few surprises, because it works the way I do. There are several types of Linux which are a mountain of work, the same as FreeBSD, but you always get exactly what you want. Lately, I’ve grown weary of the chase. I had really thought I was home running Debian Lenny, because I knew it would go stable any day now. But stuff was broken, and it got tiring.

I gave PC-BSD a shot. Few things are easier to install, but they made a huge mistake jumping to KDE 4.x too soon. Parts of this new desktop just crashed all too often. At one point, the entire screen grayed out and neither mouse nor keyboard would work. I had to reboot. I tried regular FreeBSD, but it refused to mount my Linux USB drive. That was my entire backup, so it was a show-stopper.

Finally, I went back to openSUSE 11.0. I did a network install. I still have one minor glitch: the GRUB installer did not remove the FreeBSD Boot Manager, and I can’t get the system past that. I have to boot from CD, then use the “Boot from Hard Drive” option. It’s okay for now, but I need to find out how to clean that up. Since rebooting Linux is pretty rare, it’s not a major problem right now.

The point is, I’m too lazy to mess with a lot of things these days. I want it to work really soon and get back to my research and writing. That’s the nice thing about SUSE. There are some minor glitches, but most everything works and immediately. I love that. SUSE has become Linux for the lazy.

Update: I just learned there was some feature left out of the 11.0 release of SUSE which caused the boot issue, but it should be fixed in 11.1. I’ll probably upgrade for that reason alone. However, I will miss KDE 3.x. After reading quite a bit about 4.x, and having tested it, I think KDE developers made some huge mistakes. I also am convinced they are absolutely on the wrong track and it won’t ever be good again. Too many features I found necessary were removed, and junk for which I have no use has been made default, even mandatory, in a sense. How sad to see a good project become so utterly useless. I still hate GNOME, but don’t have much choice in the future, because it’s not as crazy as the new KDE.

Posted in computers | Tagged , | 8 Comments

All Too Soon

As mentioned previously, all this prognostication is just a guessing game. But you’d have to be completely blind to think we aren’t going to experience significant misery here in the US, and quite likely the whole world.

One of my favorite reads is Vox Day’s blog, and today he and his friendly commenting crew have given us a rather concrete time frame, and I tend to agree: as early as February 2009 may be when it all becomes really noticeable.

Keep in mind, there are tipping points, and they are usually visible only in retrospect. Don’t count on the stock market to tell you much, though it might. That’s merely the panic meter. And while public panic does have a strong effect on reality, it’s even harder to predict than any other factor. What it seems we can pin down is the momentum on lost jobs, closing businesses, along with the collapse of the dollar, should probably hit the point of no return in a couple of months. The biggest factor in how quickly, and how painful, is the rate at which people turn to other forms of employment when the currently inflated economic matrix comes apart further. If folks quickly discover other ways to get other folks to trade with them for their labor, we’ll do quite well. The mass of those who aren’t so adaptable will be the dead weight dragging down our national survival.

I tend to agree with the comment which posits the primary effect will be a loss of purchasing power with a matching loss in government services. At any rate, depending on your source of income, most of us have a couple of months left to create whatever survival stockpile we are going to have.

Just a guess, folks.

Posted in social sciences | Tagged | 2 Comments

Dire Predictions: Guessing Game

We are in recession; that’s official. Actually it’s far worse than that, but our government is notorious for torturing statistics, among other victims, and these statistics will confess to anything the torturer wants to hear. To the government’s advantage, the economy is so very large, fundamental changes take awhile to manifest completely. This gives them time to find an escape hatch before they are trapped in the sinking ship of state. Far too many people I know just don’t believe it’s that bad. They question whence comes these dire predictions I share with them.

Aside from their general acceptance of government sponsored propaganda from the mainstream media, they simply don’t know economics, and are woefully short on history. Not just the facts of history, but the meaning of it. When I confess to struggling with grand sweeping trends, they don’t confess to the existence of such a thing. For them, all trends are never more than a decade or two in length. I’m not some elitist intellectual. This material is out there for all to see. We didn’t begin this country during the 1930s, but you’d think so by the way folks refer to nothing prior to that, since they were born during that time. Even the things we have experienced are likely not the same for others elsewhere. We read history to have some idea what others went through before we were born. This points out human tendencies we might otherwise miss as we reflect on what is happening now.

Fundamental example: If a fad suddenly seizes upon the fancy of a nation wholly dependent on marketers for what new thing is a “must-have” toy, you will make a great deal of money selling that fad. So much so, you can probably afford to do little else. It’s glamorous, it makes you instantly rich, and as long as folks keep buying, your power and influence in this world is great. But then, something happens and everyone loses interest. Your business dies overnight and you are stuck with tons of useless inventory. If you were smart, you sold out just about the time some investor was knocking on your door with a big offer. If you were extremely intelligent, you would do this for every fad that comes along. But at some point, all this consumerism takes a hit from some outside force, and people quit buying fads. They are lucky to pay rent and eat. No fad is selling. The farmer who was plodding along with his low profits is not making any greater profits than before, but he’s also not out of work.

There’s great profits in manipulating human vanity. But those profits have to stand on top of something fundamentally sound in the economy. There has to be a valid reason, a substantial feeding of genuine human need, in place and efficiently produced so as to set others free to specialize in meeting higher needs. Over the past few decades, we have clawed out the very solid base underneath our prosperity, cannibalizing that underlying prosperity to feed the dizzying rise of high-stakes markets. We do build our own homes, just barely. The percentage of home-building labor has been just a little too high in foreign workers (okay, “wetbacks”), but we managed it well enough. However, we do not make our own clothes. We really do not grow our own food; plenty comes up from own soil, but most of the labor is imported. The rest of us are running around doing what amounts to each other’s laundry, supporting endless whimsy served up to each other, with no actual production of what life requires.

But there seems an endless supply of money, and it seems to have real value of some sort, so it calls out to some real shysters on a very high level. Taking a great deal of this economic surplus, we went off to make war. Few things consume excess money like war, because the military and it’s supporting industries is probably the most inefficient boondoggle in human activity. Naturally, we American make it even less efficient, because of the political friction which scrapes off huge amounts of wealth just getting stuff into production, then scrapes off a bunch more getting that product into the troops’ hands. Once there, huge amounts of it are wasted in training programs carefully designed to be wasteful. Finally, a bunch of it is destroyed because procedures require it all be done in the most inefficient manner, that we might have some mind-numbing uniformity to feed our sense of greatness and importance. Finally, at the battle front, we have ten cents worth of warfare costing ten thousand dollars, and it may not even be the best tool for the job.

Hey, we can afford it. We carefully select enemies who can’t even afford to fully exploit whatever resource it is we go to war on them for, and they are getting a dime’s worth of warfare for only a dollar. But since their economy is nearly dead, barely producing a subsistence level with precious little output or manpower to spare for war, we are able to win — sort of. Okay, in Afghanistan we aren’t winning, because sometimes they get a dime’s worth of warfare for only a dime. Must be something in their situation which is “do or die” that makes them so efficient. A handful of their guys manage to destroy several millions of dollars worth of our stuff. Oh, wait — that was a black ops thing, a false flag to blame someone else, so we can convince the sheeple they need to support a war against yet another country with stuff we want to exploit. I guess million-dollar attacks against weddings aren’t quite paying off enough in terms of rage and provocation.

Meanwhile, the sheeple are going broke. You see, the lack of underlying economic production to fund all this stuff is not only less efficient; it’s not there. We don’t produce anything of real value. In fact, we don’t even produce the fads we used to buy. We just spend and spend, and then suddenly realize we are in a hole. And we can’t climb out. We don’t have anything to sell, important stuff we have to have to live, not even to each other. All this time we’ve been living off loans from other countries, and they have run out of spare cash, too. That is, we have quit buying from them all that good stuff, along with all that cheap stuff we didn’t really need. The underlying engine of our economy is not only too weak, it’s flat out gone. We can put it back, but it will take a while to shift our resources and thinking over to doing the essentials again.

How that plays out for you where you live is variable. Some cities and states are so completely built from one thing, they don’t have a fall-back. When their one-and-only economic engine goes away, they’ll starve. Literally. Other states were never that rich in the first place, but that’s because they were chugging along doing stuff that was essential. That would be the US Heartland.

When people get hungry, and can’t even get food because there isn’t any at all in sight, they get rowdy. That’s just human nature. So we can expect riots in some big cities. Bet on it — blood in the streets, etc. No government agency can fix this, nor even prevent it, because all of them are going broke, too. Like all bureaucracies, there is nothing in the system which allows for reducing consumption of resources, no mechanism for adjustments, because bureaucrats are inherently more turf-oriented about nothing than any other human entity on the planet. Soldiers got nothing on them. Bureaucrats have this crazy notion those who feed them can’t get along without them, can’t go through life producing unless someone else is there sucking up lots of stuff and telling them how they can’t do this or that. Look for government officials to start turning up dead.

Now, you know that once bureaucrats are certain they are essential to life, they will not only be hostile to cutting back, but even more hostile to resistance in general. So we’ll have big showings of force, confrontations and crack-downs, and moves to disarm (in every sense) those who are being governed. Effective resistance is inconvenient to government. And government is not only unconscious of what you suffer when things change, but are openly hostile to reality itself when it changes. However, you will be the focus of their wrath. So we can expect a tremendous rise in social unrest. That’s why I said “blood in the streets.” Our unique American “culture” breeds one of the most difficult government bureaucracies in human history.

Yet, it remains a guessing game in terms of how bad these things play out along the lines of human tendencies.

Posted in social sciences | Tagged , , | 1 Comment