If Santa Claus is Real, Why Not the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

A thought occurred to me tonight. Young children believe in Santa Claus. They really do! Why? Because Mommy and Daddy tell them he is real.

Why is this significant? It testifies to the malleability of a child's brain—their thoughts, attitudes and religion. Yes, religion.

A child's idea of religion comes from his/her parents. As with Santa Claus, a child will believe whatever their parents tell them is true. If you can convince a child that a fictional elf at the North Pole flies around the globe in a single night with a sleigh pulled by reindeer, then certainly you can convince them to worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

The National Debt , The Federal Reserve & the State of the Monetary System

I've had many conversations on Facebook about our government's spending and the indebtedness of Americans. The most common point people bring up is that the government should start spending less and reducing the debt. Unfortunately, this reflects a very superficial view of the how the economy operates. Most people think getting out of debt would solve the world's problems. The reality is no so simple to explain and I will barely scratch the surface here.

The real issue isn't what the government owes or how much money it spends. It is the fact that ALL money is created by creating debt. New money is created in the amount of the debt, but interest is still owed. Therefore, if every person & nation paid off all debt, the global economy would still be in the red by trillions, because the money to repay it doesn't exist. Even much of the debt would go unpaid as well, due to the "multiplier affect" (another topic). By design, new money—debt—must always be created so that interest can continue to be paid, ad infinitum. It's a trillion dollar Ponzi scheme conceived by a small group of influential men on Jekyll Island in 1910.

At the moment, the increased spending is keeping things somewhat stable—softening the blow for the entire world. The US dollar is the currency standard for the entire global economy, therefore, it is the US who must bear the burden of debt. Our consumer economy has created wealth (and poverty) around the globe at our own expense.

The gap between the wealthiest 10% and the rest of the world is increasing exponentially because of the debt-based system. The middle class is getting poorer and more indebted, while the rich are getting richer. This is a direct result of our debt-based economy. If you are wealthy, you have no need for debt. Instead (for example), the wealthy will put 1,000,000 in the bank to draw interest, making them even richer. Where does the money come from to pay the interest? Those of us who are not wealthy and must borrow money just to survive. When you get an auto loan, a mortgage, or a credit card, you pay interest on the debt. That interest pays the interest of the wealthy man's investment. The ones getting richer are the very same who control the global economy.

DREAM Act: We Don't Punish Children of Murderers, Why Punish Those of Immigrants?

Many children of illegal immigrants grow up to attend top colleges despite the odds stacked against them. Imagine living in fear of a knock on the door, or seeing your neighbor taken away in a raid. They lived a life of relative poverty. In many cases, they have excelled beyond that of our own children. If anyone is worthy of naturalized citizenship, it is these young Americans.

We shouldn't punish children for the so-called "crimes" of their parents. In this case, the only "crime" was the desire for a better life. How many of our ancestors risked everything to come here? What ever happened to "Give us your weak, your tired, your huddled masses"?

The US is the only home they've ever known. They live the American lifestyle, play American baseball, eat American food, hang out with American friends, and strive for the same illusion of the American Dream. They are as American as apple pie and baseball. Deporting these kids to a strange land for which they are unprepared is a gross violation of human rights—especially when they've done nothing at all to deserve it. Is our country not above that way thinking?

This Could Be You

You're an average man, with an average family and a comfortable income. You aren't extravagant and have worked hard to save money and live frugally. You have $1000 left to pay on the car and then it's yours. You have no other debt, save a credit card you pay off every month.
Then, things get bad very fast. You lose your union job due to massive cuts at the factory.  The family cuts back and lives off your wife's part time income of $600/mo. and savings. You do alright for awhile, but are totally unprepared for the events which follow.

You're full of s**t, but you're not stupid

In every culture and many households, there are words which are considered taboo. What exactly is a bad word? In some households, using exclamations such as "Oh my god!" or "Jesus Christ!" would be unthinkable. In others, you can't say pee pee. Because you have to call it something, cute ways are found to use the same word—wee wee.

In my home growing up, swearing was by no means encouraged. There was one word we were absolutely forbidden to say to anyone—stupid. In my family, calling anyone stupid was worse than telling them to go to hell. In high school, I did find a way around this using my sense of humor along with some medical terminology. I once told my younger sister that the doctor called to schedule her annual pneumoencelphalectomy. She then asked me to spell it so she could look it up! If you know medical terminology, you will be able to figure out I was cleverly calling her an airhead. How come I can say poo and crap, but not shit? Do they not mean the same thing? Perhaps instead of saying, "You're full of shit", I should say, "You full of excrement". Personally, I think the former makes the point a bit better, don't you?

Why is intercourse okay, but fucking is equivalent to a bomb? "I want to fuck you" sounds much better than "I'd like to have intercourse with you". The guy who said the former is the one I'd pick. Isn't an explosive climax better than ending it by conversing with each other?

Vagina is okay, but not pussy. If pussy meant vagina in French, would it still be a bad word?

Are these laid out in the Bible? The Koran?

What or who determines which words are acceptable and which are not?

Seriously, words are not inherently evil. Please, if you're the one who determines which words are okay, and which are not, please enlighten me as to the determining formula.

An inquiring mind wants to know—word police, clue me in!

The "Real Reason" for Unemployment: Laziness?

Today on CNN, Tom Delay had this to say about the "real reason" for the high unemployment rate:

“There is an argument to be made that these extensions, the unemployment benefits, keep people from going and finding jobs.

In fact there are some studies that have been done that show people stay on unemployment compensation and they don’t look for a job until two or three weeks before they know the benefits are going to run out."

Candy Crowley asked: “People are unemployed because they want to be?”

Delay responded: “Well, it is the truth. And people in the real world know it.”

Delay is trying to support his argument that unemployment benefits cause laziness or apathy. Hmmm. As one of the "people in the real world", I seriously question that assessment.

Thieves Watcheth with the Dogs

"Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, a former chief economist at the World Bank, said that if a country had applied for World Bank aid during his tenure, with a financial regulatory system similar to the Federal Reserve's—in which regional Feds are partly governed by the very banks they're supposed to police—it would have raised alarms."
—Stiglitz, Nobel Prize-Winning Economist, Says Federal Reserve System 'Corrupt'

Stiglitz, author of Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy, has it right. You can't be a watchdog over yourself. This is a huge conflict of interest. The Federal Reserve recommended massive bail outs to the banks whose officers sit on its board of directors. I have no doubt this is just the tip of the iceberg. The real story is likely far more complicated and far deeper.

Every Man for Himself, No Matter the Cost?

Conservatives love to say they don't want to pay for the health care of another. Everyone should take care of themselves. The "every man for himself" philosophy might work well in an ideal world. In our current environment, this is an unobtainable and unrealistic goal.

"Insurance was designed to help in times of catastrophe. When we apply it to everyday health care, it becomes the catastrophe."