Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Our problems are because most people will not grow up

I will now explain my theory of maturity. When we are children and all is new, we learn by assumption and testing those assumption where the rules are not clearly expressed by our elders. We see what is on the surface, and eventually check it to see whether it is as it seemed or not. That applies to every single assumption we make based on surface and little more information, and as we mature we gain more and more about each area until we discover how they actually are wherever possible. This is a pretty basic and simple process, I see it in myself for areas of politics, social interaction, basically anything where I began with a clean slate and pretty much had to work things out for myself. But having been through that process at the age of 53 and remember each one as it happened, I then see many others out there, incredibly similar to each other which is a separate but related issue, who only drop a number of their assumptions and hold on to the rest as if because they prefer them to the reality they then refuse to learn what is actually the case as they simply do not like it.

It is that form of delusional hysteria which has allowed politicians and powerful others to collect society by the balls in the 21st century and twist them tightly, holding everything in our lives to their will by a severe grasp of its beliefs which are then reinforced by insidious propaganda. No different from learning Chinese or Japanese, languages with absolutely no elements in common with English bar a few borrowed words, if someone lies to you in Chinese by showing you a picture of an orange and saying the word for prostitute, so when you go to the greengrocer's and ask for a pound of whores someone with a hidden camera will get a good laugh. But take advantage of that weakness and you have 50 million sheep walking into shops asking the assistant if they are pimps. Of course once you learn enough of the language to understand it this will not be possible, and the language of propaganda is infinitely easier to learn than a foreign one even using our alphabet. But the problem here is people do not want to learn it as they think they are fluent already and the authorities do not lie to them so they are clearly speaking perfect English which they already understand perfectly.

Fracking is today's propaganda success, with the first good news in a decade or more (actually besides the government making squatting illegal recently and the minimum wage I can't think of many more) that we have centuries of cheap gas available in the world, what I can only describe as immature minded programmed individuals are fighting worldwide to ban it. Forget the plutonium which is blowing around the world from decades of nuclear leakage, and the deep coal mines which have caused around zero earthquakes since the 19th century, it's new, it goes against the 21st century religion of misanthropy, and is against everything the modern Green movement represent.

It's just another facet of applying Agenda 21, cheap energy means free and wealthy citizens who are much harder to restrict and control, and like doctors governments thrive when people have more problems they are employed to solve. Like firemen who set fires to occupy themselves (they do exist) these politicians deliberately invent imaginary problems like global warming and create more like multiculturalism and mass immigration to then step in and use draconian measures which break economies to pretend to sort them out. The facts on fracking are also about 50 years old and no one ever noticed it, proving it is not actually doing anything which could cause more problems if carried out elsewhere. If it were causing a tenth of the problems these cretinous protestors are claiming then it would have been banned some time after it began.

So bringing it back to my initial point, the sheep the authorities use to allow them to bring in new measures to extract cash and reduce our freedoms are only able to be manipulated as they have never grown out of the imaginary beliefs they developed as children as when the new evidence arrived over time they didn't like how it looked so refused to let go of their original views as they mean to them the world would be a better place. I expect given long enough I could try and remember pages of examples, but as the wrong answers are non-existent I tend to drop previous errors once I learn the truth. But two examples I did mention recently which can be measured and proved are reasonable ways to illustrate the point, low interest rates and high house prices are good. See my previous entry to discover the bottom lines are exactly the opposite to how they are presented by the utter criminals who promote them as good things. Suffice to say when was the last time you thought a massive rise in the price of anything was good, so ask yourself again, why exactly does that not apply to houses as well (unless you're investing in houses or other assets, which like shares can go down as well as up). Low interest rates however are not directly obvious so a perfect example of needing to scratch the surface, which few tend to do. Firstly, people need never borrow except for a house for personal use. I will say that again, borrowing is a choice exercised by people who cannot wait for something they don't need and end up spending more so not gaining anything.

I can't actually think of a single exception to that. If you need a car, then you need petrol and insurance. Borrowing for a car won't pay for them as well as they are regular outgoings on top of the car, after you've already committed £100 a month or so for the car so have less remaining for the upkeep. So if you can't afford it however much you'd prefer one then bloody well save up and wait. A car can be argued as the closest thing to an essential after a house as many areas mean it's the only way to get to 90% of the places you need to. But if you can't afford one then you must do what children and disabled people do, ie whatever has to be done instead. As for washing machines, TVs and least of all holidays, who on earth has the right to blow hundreds of pounds or more on something which is not actually required for their lives which is going to risk their wealth for a few years ahead, because they can't do without one? Yes, life is better with them, but it's better with a wife and millions of men like me have to make do without one as money is not a factor. You have to learn to manage without what is probably the most helpful luxury in the world, a partner, but these sheep insist on risking their chances of going broke by getting a TV or washing machine before they can actually afford them. Borrowing is like car crimes, people who break one law tend to break most of them, so no tax= no insurance and frequently no licence. Borrowing is the same, people with the mindset they can't wait of course don't just have a desperate yearning for an X Box (whatever the hell that is), but fourteen other items them and their usually larger than average families want as well. The income of such people tends to also be in inverse proportion to their spending habits, so most likely so irregular some level of default is almost inevitable.

So back to necessary borrowing as houses are simply normally too expensive to save for and essential, why aren't low interest rates good? Because estate agents do not work out prices by the value of the house alone, but directly because people must borrow the price is calculated by the cost of borrowing over a year, and what the customer can afford per year or month. So if the interest rate goes up 5% then the house price must fall as the customers still have the same maximum outgoings per month. If they go too high it means older borrowers will suffer, although the related problem of inflation actually helps them out as they are still probably paying far less than you as they bought at a fraction of today's prices, and when buying used to be advised to only buy if they could then afford future maximum rates or around 15% in historic terms. But as you can now see, low interest rates firstly encourage total borrowing, and even if they don't go up it burdens millions more people with items which could blow up in their face like time bombs at any point in the future. House buyers won't actually pay less as unless they remain that low for decades they'll be hit with a far higher hike than had they bought at mid to high rates, and have no choice but to remove that from their monthly budget or they'll become homeless. So, in a long and winding way, low interest rates do not help even borrowers, but the killer fact is 2/3 to 3/4 more people save than borrow, so the lucky winners when interest rates are low are outnumbered by the losers by 2-3 to 1. So even if it were possible to argue in some complex way borrowers could ever gain from low interest rates (which they can't, as prices are related to monthly total payments, so will be pretty much the same regardless when you buy), if most people lose then it is accurate to say low interest rates must be a bad thing.

The sheer effort required to weave a story complex enough to make people believe high energy prices are a good thing though, which they clearly have, shows the maturity quotient (related to the IQ as it reflects common sense rather than academic ability, something clearly shown not to be required to get marvellous exam results, much like social skills) to be far lower than expected, as the imaginary guff such greats as George Soros, George Monbiot, Al Gore, James Hansen and just the long list of usual suspects spout day after day persuading the already chronically hard of thinking masses paying more for energy of all types 'as you are saving the planet' is the greatest scandal since the holocaust. I am not exaggerating for effect, 3,000 poor and old people are killed by cold every year in Britain as they can't afford the heating bills, thousands of farmers are dying in the third world after having their land cleared for biofuel, and as prices rise annually we next have the promise of power cuts when the coal is banned. If people are dying of cold so much when they could turn the heating on, imagine the increase in deaths when there isn't any at all so even the rich old people can die of hypothermia, or have their home dialysis machines or oxygen generators pack up for a few hours or more. Yes, this idiocy is allowing a new gradual holocaust, worldwide in application, and so subtle it is almost impossible to tell it is happening, like the 20-30 year incubation period of cancer from low grade radiation leaks. If you wanted to kill millions of people undetectably, simply allow a nuclear power station to secretly or 'accidentally' breach its bounds, no one more than a few miles away will get the short term results beyond the high radiation limits, but for miles and miles beyond, carried by wind and water, long term low level exposure will kill as many people as a concentration camp.

If a way cannot be found to unravel the minds of these uneducable individuals they will vote through more and more legislation allowing any atrocities the governments wish to perpetrate, and block any rare good innovations their existing mindset is programmed to reject as it is outside their general programming. Because fracking is one of the few things which does not unanimously unite corporations and governments, as the profits available are far higher than any governments could afford to bribe with subsidies as they do for wind and solar power, we have the situation where the governments still disagree with cheap energy as it allows them massive revenue raising opportunities, but their usual friends the massive corporations can provide incredible economies of scale by fracking, making money by selling vast amounts of shale gas at reasonable prices just like we had in the 60s for coal and gas. But the governments and previously corporations had already programmed the sheep (as opposed to the goats who can think for themselves but a natural minority so void in effect) to be against cheap energy so while the governments do not unanimously want to ban fracking but are 50-50 split on it, simply due to a combination of conflicts of interest and sheer ignorance, the apparent majority of people they did persuade to 'go green' are doing their level best to nip it in the bud, at a cost to everyone.

I have identified the phenomenon, provided both an example and the result of its application. Hundreds of studies have been made on human judgement and the cause of errors, but although they explain how it works perfectly it does nothing to address actually solving the problem but simply describes it. I could devise a teaching programme for it myself for schools but trying to crowbar open the closed minds of adults for me seems near on an impossibility, if you grow up believing a falsehood it's very unlikely you'll ever drop in without a miracle.

No comments: