All my life I have tried to pluck a thistle and plant a flower wherever the flower would grow in thought and mind. – Abraham Lincoln

 RPG. Remember when that used to mean something? Role. Playing. Game. Role playing.  Immersive, complete, take over Role.  As much as a love a good MMOrpg , and the graphics that come with it, I can’t help but feel, there is something missing.  I enjoyed Neverwinter Nights beyond anything I could dream or fathom, and it was so close to perfect I still think about loading it up for another try.   Almost everything I wanted to imagine could be done with it.  I recreated my greatest characters, DMed games and made items and lands, quests, and even (dare I saw) dropped in few zingers.   But…I was missing something… That something about “The time when we [all our characters] were all splayed across the floor, every item used, every potion expended, and T Man stood up.., pointed at our DM and said ‘this is done. I’m rolling a 20.” Stepped back, and opened up the heaven of woop ass.”

We.  Our.  My.  It was real (within the context of the game world.).  I was invested, (and still am). I remember to this day, the incredible feeling and awfulness the first time (after years) my character died, and how it made my next character an obsessive defense master. 

But I also remember Diablo, and shouting and yelling as we had a “Leroy moment”[running into the room, activating all monsters] and realized someone had aggrooed all the guards in hell….that first character death was bitter, more so when I looked up from my computer walked out of the room to yell at my roommate who had gotten us all killed.  It wasin’t the playing, but the social interacting of the panic, the yelling at the screen and of course talking about it at lunch with the other Diablo players.  That shared experience about hell and wild panic.  A hidden geek social contract.

  Online playing vampire, and Mage and so many others, I still have stories about the man cliff hangers, the tension and the 20 character rooms waiting for the pin to drop.  RPG at it’s finest.   We knew each other by character colors, descriptions, methods of typing.  Who knew who ruled, in truth and online… it was a community.  What did they have in common?

1. The Social aspect.  Whether it’s net gaming, internet chat, or Xbox, being part of the group was always about… being part of the group.  Things happened in the group, the jokes, the Coke, the “I can’t believe you just jumped off a cliff” and GM reacting to the whim and craziness of the players. My chat room days was just as fun describing a battle as being in the battle afterwards, and my good friends relived mass moments of gaming lore, where someone did something we’d remember together.

2. I love seeing it, but I also like describing it.  Gamers talk with their hands, and their imagination.   There is not a GM, DM, storyteller, et al on the planet who has not had the perfect game fall apart, as the player does something ….unintentional.  Better yet, the adversarial (GM vs Players) nature of the game is preserved, and trust is rewarded.  The GM is not out to get you, because you CAN win…. But you can fail, and it will be more than creating another character or rebooting.

This game up because I saw a slide for a website. The slide had “RPG” on it, and described real mechanics, gorgeous graphics, storyline and epic quests, and strategy based battles, and right then I figured out what I didn’t like about modern RPG’s of the video game Varity. I figured out what was missing in today’s RPG’s.  They are Role playing  in title only.  You are not “Grandro, King of Servat.  Or Jim Danger, unlikely mage.” No, you’re playing a video game, where you get to make choices, sometimes, but it has an end, it has a story, and when you play again, it will be the same story, and no record of it will be kept.

Immersion is missing.   No, it’s not Mass effect.  Or Bio Shock. That’s just you, and some hanger on NPc’s you get to drag along, and when you die you curse and restart.  You’re forced to know about the world, because you need it to get the shotgun, and the “bio weapons of Boom” you really could care less about why.

Yeah, how many people know or care about the actually WORLD in Warcraft? Halo? It’s just a nice mechanics.  Very nice mechanics.  The backstory is Useful for if you raid or guild or which character you start as, but.. what about when you enter a town and the towns people boo? Or if you and the other players assemble to take the Castle and can’t overcome the defense.  Just long on and try again right?

Why does this matter? For years, I’ve had this game in my mind, and everyone who plays get’s invested in the game, their characters, and more importantly, the people they play with.  The game is mechanics heavy, but truly, it’s not (not if I can work it out) but it does require trust (as all rpgs) and time.

When White Wolf Studios closed their chat, I realized we’d lost something.  Many many people couldn’t find a group, lost the ability to really get into roleplaying as much as they could.  Furthermore, it was very much the way the game could  be played, exposed to sooo many people, and so many lives, it showed me a microcosm of life I didn’t know, as much as it sucked away my weekends.  I miss it.  I know it’s gone for the best (and my eventual growth) but just once, I wish to once again type out … “I enter.”

Understanding the spirit of our institutions to aim at the elevation of men, I am opposed to whatever tends to degrade them.-Abraham Lincoln

New ways of tackling Cancer are always being highlighted, -See below- but, there have been no advanced  changes in the fight of this disease.  One thing that has been identified at contributing to this slowness is the funding process (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/health/research/28cancer.html?em ). We think there is something else, we think capitalism wide, there is no real incentive to cure cancer. It’s not a conscious focus, it’s just the situation we’ve worked ourselves to.  

Cures, we believe, are one of the true governmental fixable problems.  Governments should dive in, collecting the Altruistic focus of us all, and then, finishing, switch gears.   A government should decisively work on curing cancer or anything else (like how they fund DARPA – Five years, all the money you like).  But the time limit is important.  The problem with Cancer now (40 year later since Nixon declared war) is the number of industries dedicated to it and a bureaucracy self interested need to survive.  This self interest now prevails, in the funding system- no one wants to fund a bad Grant so the grant system plays it safe, and few “leaps” can be made without risk-, in the Drug dispensing system, in hospitals and so on.

Admittedly the medical business model – for profit healing-; is flawed.  It’s not even cancer; seriously, where was the last time we cured something?  The capitalist business model for subscription based essential goods (or perceived essential –like internet service) is too compelling, and profitable.   Game developers and applications developers do it, Cellphone providers are doing it.  These are sure fire cash flow and so are cancer drugs and charities and sponsorships.  Entire industries (which have matured for 40 years) now solely exist on the cancer existing. There are numerous charities, charities events, grants, section of the NIH (national Institute of Health) dedicated to cancer.  Think of all the men, women, and events that would need to go away, find new jobs or even have to learn an entire new skill if cancer were cured.

Curing cancer is an end to a cash flow stream.  It means a couple of treatments, then done, over.  No 20 years of drugs and $100,000 medical bills.  No need to explore being an Oncologist in Medical college.   But if we, as a species, are going to say “There is something more than survival of the fittest, but also the extension of a health species.” We can’t keep figuring costs into keeping our fellow human alive.”

Ok, we are being too cynical. But if we cured cancer to morrow, I believe we’d have to slow roll a cure in over 10 years, so people know it’s coming, wind down. If a miracle cure were delivered tomorrow, shock would hit the medical community; people wouldn’t know what to do with themselves.   And you thought the bank collapse of 2008-2009 was interesting.

Promising Cancer technologies: Lasers (directly burning the cancer, Sasers vibrating the cancer,  Blocking protein and toxin injections.)

Lasers in Cancer

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/therapy/lasers

Nano-tech laser kills cancer cells, leaves regular sells intact.

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2005/august10/nanotube-081005.html

Injected Isotopes type Cures or Toxins

http://gizmodo.com/379952/guy-invents-potential-cancer-cure-with-radio-machine-built-out-of-pie-pans-and-hot-dogs

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/health/research/29drug.html?em

Red meat is not bad for you.  Now blue-green meat, that’s bad for you!  ~Tommy Smothers

Among the insatiable desires we, as humans have, is the need to constantly change and rework our food.  I marvel at the culinary delights we concoct, and just the natural ones. I’m not even going to go in to the lime green, day glow, chemical ones we also love

*shout out to Jello.*

Still, every so often I am struck -usually over dinner- about how odd it is I’m eating something, or something I’m eating is actually edible.  Let’s examine a few:

Coffee: Someone thought it was a good idea to ground up beans (mind you, black, dark beans instead of nice green beans) instead of eating them, and wait, pour water over this ground up soup…, and drink it!  Really?  A vile, bitter tasting stuff which tastes like licking the bottom of burnt wood?  Here…, taste this, isn’t this awful?

Blow fish: Who’s the second person to try this? If you don’t know, blow fish has a deadly nerve toxin.  I bet the first person didn’t know that.  Or the second, but really, how hungry do you have to be to keep trying to eat the damn thing?  Sure, put it on your spear and stab someone. However…, eat it? Really?!

Still, these are but two examples of things that I find interesting… the other? Deep fried Twinkies.

Nuff said.

The only reason for time is so that everything doesn’t happen at once.” -Albert Einstein

Naturally, there was some confusion with this post; The one about time. What was I really saying? Let me clarify.  The Speed of Light is awesome, but it limits our world and we’ve used it to limit ourselves. We’ve defined it as the benchmark of time when it itself is an artifical measure.  We’ve stated that nothing can move faster than light, there are many reasons but one is that time would slow down. I disagree Time doesn’t slow down…, we just don’t get a return we can observe. In effect, we are trapped at seeing something’s last returned state. 

Light therefore traps our known universe, locking it in the past.   

It gets confusing. So I shall Illustrate. 

I have a Cup, it has two states: red and green.  First it flashes red, then it flashes white, then red, then white, etc every 30 seconds. It’s at the distance of the sun away from me, so its light, or the reflection of light from the cup’s surface takes 8 minutes to get to me, on earth. It’s flashing. I can see the cup flashing and changing colors, but, really i’m seeing what it was 8 minutes ago.

If that cup moved faster than light (let’s just say it could.) and was white. let’s say it takes 35 seconds to travel the “8 min” distance (clearly faster than light)  It would be on my desk  35 seconds later and be red. 

Here i would have a cup, red infront of me. And yet, if i looked out to the sun, i would see a White cup. I would continue to see a white , red, white, red cup for 8 whole minutes!  One could say the cup would exist in two places. But it doesn’t. It really exists on my table.  The one i observe, way out there, is a ghost, not real, and doesn’t exist.  Every instrument I have, would record the cup in both places, until, yes, 8 minutes+” 35 seconds later. 

For the cub here? It has moved into the “future” a time before it has “moved” from the sun.  It could wait another 35 seconds and then go back to the original position and be red.  When observed from our end, it would have disappeared for 70 some seconds. 

This is why i say that things possibly move faster than the speed of light, we have no means to record or measure it.  Nothing we observe is real “time”  The dimension we live in is one of the past, not even current.  The actual “real” locations and state of things in timespace,(4th and 5 dimensions) is generally (without some serious math) unknown to us. 

Until we can tap subspace, we will never be able to accurately find something that moves faster than light. Thou I’m sure we can see the effects of it on our space, and probably do.  One effect is A Black Hole (gravity).  At the Event Horizon, some say Time is stopped.  Well, obviously it isn’t.  In effect, things falling to a blackhole past the event horizon exceed the speed of light, but we can’t see them moving. There is no “return” further more, any method we currently use wouldn’t be able to escape the black hole either. 

Wait, you say, what about that dark matter, that’s stopping Light from moving faster. Well, as I’ve said, gravity of such density as that warps space time. two things can be happening. A) if it stretches it, then the dark Matter is further spread out, allowing more space for light to pass. or B) the Dark matter itself moving faster than light, is accelerated further by gravity of the black hole’s singularity and changes the constant of “c”

Obviously this is all theoretical and one theory among dozens.  But there is still truths.  We don’t have the instruments to observe faster than light travel as it happens. Not yet. But we do have the ability to see the result of it.  We just have to figure out what we are looking for:  Two cups, but only one really exists. 

One key is measuring Gravity.  All things of mass give off a gravity field (and if big enough warp space). By measuring the gravity displacement of space of where the cup was, I would have been able to tell it’s not there anymore,  Just like in water.  But I am back to a problem. From earth, it would take 16 minutes for me to get that reading. Time to send out a reading and for the measurement to return.  We would get a reading of “not there” even thou the cup has returned only 70 seconds after it left.

To be able to figure out that the cup moved and returned, i would have to have been taking a reading of the entire solar system at the time. Yes that’s right, Observe Outside the bubble.  I would see the cup, move locations. Yes it would have moved faster than light but I wouldn’t be guessing at it’s location as I would have been taking a reading of the complete system. So yes, it’s hard to get a accurate reading of our dimension of 3+1 (x, y, z + time) from inside this dimension. 

We never see the universe for what it is, because we are always seeing the past. That is what being beholden to light does to us.

Clocks slay time… time is dead as long as it is being clicked off by little wheels; only when the clock stops does time come to life.  ~William Faulkner

In this plane of existance that we share and inhabbit.. time is the factor.
The fastest thing we know allows us to see ourselves and relativeisticly know when something happens, a state has changed and we can observe it. This is the true theory of time. Change.

When we move at the speed of light, time slows down (The General Theory of Relatively). Time may not stop, but we are moving so fast we (humans) cannot observe a change of state.

Time is therefore a change of state. When a state is frozen, it is “timeless” or unaffected by time. There is also a theory that to change state, something must have mass. further more, things with mass cannot move at the speed of light.

A neutrino blows this apart, in that it move at the speed of light, and has 3 states, which change. Infact, traveling from our sun, it changes states 3 times. Positive, negative and neutral.

I would think then there is a problem with our theory of Quantum Mechanics, or more importantly, our Accepted theory is correct, we don’t have a way to unaccept it. The theory holds An object observed changes it’s behavior. (in the simplest terms). Perfect. The moment I look at something, i bring it to my “relativity.” I look at a ball flying thru the air, and i relate it to something else moving thru the air. Not the faster object of the catcher moving to position himself under it.

Relativity is time based, and we need to stop thinking in terms of “Speed of Light” time. It’ makes all our calculations relative. Every calculation we make on a Speeding bullet train is correct, if you ignore the +100 miles per hour the train is also going. Every observation we make on earth is correct, if you ignore the fact we are hurtling thru the solar system, and so on, and so on. We are hurtling thru space in a soup of Dark Matter, all moving at a speed we can’t identify. Why? We are relating it to Light. I offer this. Dark Matter is moving faster than light and therefore we can’t get a return from it.

Using a theory of Parallelism, to go faster than light, you have to move dark matter, Space itself, out of the way. Understand now this is a big leap. As i previously stated, we are in a bubble, and this bubble has all our “observable universe” especially based on time and space. Here is my belief on Space and Dark Matter

Friction stops things from going as fast as in a vacuum Energy is transferred when a particle hits another particle (conservation of Momentum). A vacuum is simple a place with less particles so that there is nothing (very little) to transfer the energy into. Ergo, light is moving at it’s theoretical fastest speed. However I would postulate that Light cannot go faster, because some of it’s energy is transfered into the Dark matter halting it’s speed. Heat energy. It’s why mass shows up in Light calculations.

Time.

When i Turn on a light in a room, the light is -by my subjective definition.-” Everywhere”. First light is no where, then light is everywhere. I cannot, with my subjective eyes as instruments. ” calculate the time it took for it to spread about the room. With instruments I can see that light moves from the source, out, till it fills the room. But I am observing OUTSIDE the bubble of the room.

One more explanation. I have a cup at the left end of the table. If I move the cup to the right, Time has passed. The only way to make T=0 is to a) have a cup in every location in every part of the room, or have two cups. To move the cup i have to get it out of rest, speed it up, move it, slow it down and return it to rest. To move it faster than it can be observed, I have to make sure no return comes back from it, ergo, faster than light. to do that, I have to convert it into some sort of energy… faster than light. So i can move it, and it will always be observed, unless I can move it faster than anything we currently know, and to do that requires alot of power.

Faster than light travel is possible, we just can’t observe it. Since (at this moment) all instruments involve something going out, and returning with the information (radar waves, our eyes. ) something moving faster than light never shows up. The light goes out and never gets reflected back.). I

As I have postulated, you shall need to change the fabric of space itself. Bend it. now, I others have agreeed. What’s more, i’m still convinced gravity lies in the center of all we need to do. More importantly (and forgive the sci fi term)- Sub Space, or Extra dimensional Space. As 3 dimensional creatures we cannot observe a 4th dimension.. But we can fake it.

let’s not forget that Light is made up of objects with a Mass, neutrino’s with change state. we are not fully understanding the “light, mass, change of state ” thing yes.

Now, drop the cup out of our space time. accelerate it past the speed of light., pop it back in. to be truly instantaneous it would exist in both places at once, so in effect, while faster than light is possible, as of yet, faster than Time isn’t, because we can make t small, but never zero. Not yet.

We have come to use the speed of Light as the clock of time, we need to move past it. Our observable universe is locked at that number, but the universe we are in, isn’t. The march of time is universal, and so far has to be.  The speed of Light is a trap we must escape.

Every man is said to have his peculiar ambition.- Abraham Lincoln

Let us talk about Race, Just like we did before.

How acceptable is it to tell a stereotype joke if you are from that stereotype? and dO you have to tell a stereotype joke? We ask this because there are many comics out there in the world today and i like a great many of them.  Comics tend to pull from real life of course.

Take for instance the great black comics:  Richard Pryor, Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, all tell jokes from their experience and about being black. Yet, when i watch a comedy show and a black *relatively no name* comic comes on, i honestly don’t know what’s going to come out of his mouth, same with a white comic.  All [American] white people (if we may use that certainly gouache phrase), do not tell “trailer Trash jokes.” However…, when an Asian comic comes out, we can pretty much guess it’s about speaking bad and weird sayings with bad language translation.

The question is why is this so?  Arguable, does one have to tell a ethnic stereotype joke to be famous if you are not white? Gallagher speaks about political absurdity, and Sienfield speaks about life’s absurdity, yet famous “other” comics are usually famous for being Jewish, or their ethnicity or even, their accent.

We leave you there, pondering.

And in the end it’s not the years in your life that count. It’s the life in your years. -Abraham Lincoln

We humans are near the cusp of a break thru on human evolution and longevity and we shouldn’t do it. 

 Let’s work with some numbers (thou false, they illustrate the point).  Take for instance a normal cell. every time it divides it loses a piece of itself, so in effect, it has lost a limited life, say 300. Then it would be replaced, but even that has a limited number of replacements.  But a cancer cell does not have that limiter, meaning, cell life is a matter of chemistry and biology and so a long life of many cells is really possible.

Now, there are obvious problems with a really long life (or near immortality.)

  Reproduction.  Why do it? After all, the race goes down instead of every 100 years, down every 200, or 300.   Evolution of the human race would come to a general crawl as we learn to fix the many “shifts” in genetic code.”

Other problems that come to mind

• Murder becomes more of a  heinous crime, because you now stop someone from living potential centuries. 
• Their is the obvious overpopulation and overuse of resources by the living humans. Where will we put them all? 
• How about who gets the “drug?” who can afford it? will the rich be the only ones living the good life? Give it to people in america but not in India? What about people living on a small island in the pacific? Now it gets dicy. 

There are yet so many things to live for thou. The march of technology, living to see a woman president of the USA, or the first man on Mars, but, there is alway something to look forward to, and the past is just as always spots in the retold record.  I can find dozens of reason to live, but, unfortunately, Life is worth living because we die. 

“I claim not to have controlled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me.” -Abraham Lincoln

One may say humans are inherently lazy and when faced with obstylces we tend to take the lesser path. This reasoning comes from the fact that we evaluate things according to their benefit to us. When reason fails, passion takes over, a lower brain function. Passion drives us more than anything else, and yet, it requires this passion to push us past the the “bleh” stage.., the Heart we so often claim someone needs. It turns out with a lot of things we do, means, motive, and opportunity can account for much of it, including destructive tendencies.

As any criminalist knows, the means, motive, and opportunity tree is necessary for crime. And passion accounts for 1 half of the “murder” double. Passion also accounts for 1/2 of the suicide duality. Both groups of death are directly decreased by removing means, weather that is a bridge barrier as over the duke Ellington in Washington, or changing to cleaner forms of gas as in Briton or removing guns from the home, all these examples have clear and unambiguous empirical evidence that even about killing, humans can be lazy. The instant anger or pain that causes decisions to turn on a time can’t be stopped, but the lethality of action can be driven down.

What about the “they will find another way argument?” Well, for suicides there is even greater evidence this is not the case.

In the late 1970s, Seiden set out to test the notion of inevitability in jumping suicides. Obtaining a Police Department list of all would-be jumpers who were thwarted from leaping off the Golden Gate between 1937 and 1971 – an astonishing 515 individuals in all – he painstakingly culled death-certificate records to see how many had subsequently “completed.” His report, “Where Are They Now?” remains a landmark in the study of suicide, for what he found was that just 6 percent of those pulled off the bridge went on to kill themselves. Even allowing for suicides that might have been mislabeled as accidents only raised the total to 10 percent.
NYtimes, 7/6/2008 

90% of the people didn’t try again. That’s is fairly signgficatnt. I bet not allot of people get as angry as they did before to try and attack someone. The means, motive, opportunity triangle is prevalent in other crime also. OTher studies on theft are just as glaring. Petty theft is an impulsive crime. But unlike a passion filled act, (passion first, action second) it sometimes generates passion, when the opportunity presents itself. Means and motive are actually generated at the instant of the action. One may steal a wallet, not because one needed the money, but because one could in essence, shoplifting is often for the thrill, the passion.
What stops any of us from doing the things we do? Mortality, our sense and society’s sense of what’s acceptable. It creates the rationality and reason to ignore our base impulsiveness and think with higher brain functions. In this i suppose it’s good we are lazy and chose the second path because we are smart. We evaluate in almost all our decisions the triangle of action, and selfishly relate it back to ourselves.
I imagine we like to settle for second best, because we forget the past, and we think too much about the here and now.   Wouldn’t it be sad if it’s our higher brain functions that keeps us this way? This does not give me much hope for the future.

This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it. – Abraham Lincoln

I hope you remember this post, It’s about the EPA not enforcing a court order .  I also remind you about these two posts, one is on Presidents and choosing which laws to actually enforce (more, the executive branch) and the other is about News, and when you really should review it.  One will note this was a year ago, so it falls into the story is obviously crock (the one last year) turns out it was.

Well, in this update, it seems it’s not the EPA that was acting like a 12 year old, but the White House. What am I talking about, well, incase the article doesn’t link now, i’ll put the relevant quote.

The [Bush] White House in December refused to accept the EPA’s conclusion that greenhouse gases are pollutants that must be controlled, telling agency officials that an e-mail message containing the document would not be opened, senior E.P.A. officials said last week.

Yeah, you read that right.  They basically went “Out of sights, out of mind.” Here is the part where I don’t get.  The White House didn’t open the email, so the EPA just stopped moving forward.  Just like that. They could have walked it over, or gone ahead an implemented the original, none stripped down plan.  The original plan called for strict regulation of motor vehicle emissions that may (i say may) have saved $500 million over it’s policy term.
Remember the days when people who had an actually objection did their job? or Quit? I do my best not to criticize the present administration because they are doing what they believe in, and I can’t for the life of me think they are trying to destroy America, but it’s too … secretive. If one came out and said. “That’s not what we believe, and so we arn’t going to act on it” Then I have, 1) a sense of conviction, 2) a Sense of where you stand, and 3) who you are as a straight talking person.

Now, there is so much tape of our government backtracking, rewording and sometimes blatantly lying I don’t know what to think. Our government has become a rebellious child, so spoiled and self righteous that I ask this? What do you do when a time-out doesn’t work on your child?

Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. – Abraham Lincoln

A friend asked me about this post, the flow of invisible money, then asked me, which plan was better, was it, less corporate taxes, to help the people and the economy (the republican plan) or  was it tax breaks for the poor, then for good measure he tossed in the mortgage crisis. (democratic plan)

And the problem is …It’s complex.  We are dealing with what most economist like to pretend doesn’t exist: people don’t have perfect knowledge, and they act irrationally, even with damn good evidence.

Let’s take for instance, the mortgage crisis ( simplified, oh so simplified.)   When a human has allot of debt, or is risking his ability to take care of himself or his family, they horde. This is natural.  If i say, here is $600 dollars, go spend it, it will not be spent.  It will be saved.  There are allot of reasons but let’s just be reasonable here.  If you are in debt, if there are collectors at the door, or you may be faced with not knowing if your next paycheck may be your last, you are going to save money.   Which means business don’t make money.

The Republican Plan

Wall street (or just say Investment houses) want profits, and they don’t want the company to spend money. They don’t want extra capital expenditures.  If the stock market was run by the individual investor, then this wouldn’t be so bad, the same people needing money would get it from stocks, but in truth, (for example) Home depot, Dell and Bed bath and beyond, have a bundled stock plan in an investment house like Myrill Lynch.  The person running that invest plan does not want to lose his job, there fore he will leverage his controlling shares of “GE” To make sure that GE does not spend money on operations.

Did you get that? An Investment house does not want to lose business, a broker does not want to lose his job and an investment account (who could really care less) wants their money (big credit crunch), and because many boards are interlinked (A man on your board, and you may be on his, etc) suddenly, it’s all about keeping cost down, and paying out to to investors, who are usually very large controlling investors plans not individual people or small owners.  And thus, the republican plan now grinds to a halt, not because it wouldn’t work, but because in the end, we are all self serving bastards, who don’t want to lose our jobs. [And my belief that usually it takes 1 man to stop a big plan]

The Democratic Plan.
It’s also a good plan. What do Americans want? They don’t want to be saved, that’s not america, and not the American dream. What they want is the ability to help themselves, the possibility that they can climb out of their debt.
So the democratic plan to freeze the banks from collecting sounds good.  The people are happy, (And let’s be serious, 1 investment banker isn’t going to elect you, but 2000 home owners will.) The Debt collection process is halted for 2 months (or more)

What about the Bank? After all, they now have money to loan out. The bank isn’t going to loan out money. Why?  The bank is really there to make money and really, someone in debt is not a good investment.  Further more, they have to keep more money, just in case there is a bank run, and lastly, The bank does not want your home. It does not want to foreclose.  A house is useless to them, money is better, however, they have investors who want money, they are beating down the bank door for profits too.

2 Months later, you have desperate bankers, who definitely need money NOW, and are not up to negotiating with you (especially if you just got a 2 month reprieve).  They want to be sympathetic, these bankers, but they are losing money by the second, and every time money is pulled to pay someone, pay down bills, they lose more money.  While waiting for all this money, banks need to lay people off, and reduce spending, do only really secure loans.  Corporations are not able to secure funding and to keep solvent, they don’t want to spend money. It’s easier to lay off people,  reduce spending and wait for this crisis to pass.

And thus, the Democratic plan grinds to a halt.  Democrats have helped out the homeowner, or those in debt, and so doing, caused the same problem as the republicans.  But they’ll get re-elected.

A credit crunch is bad for everyone, but money, or the love of money, is the root of this problem. We are all different, and yet, we should still strive to help our fellow man.   Name something that doesn’t have a price in today’s world? The key to get out of this cycle is to work for your better man, yet, as this editorial states, we don’t know when someone’s slacking. Well then, how would one simulate the economy?

A plan has to be comprehensive and multi phasic:  it calls on getting companies and people to basically pretend there is no credit crunch and let people spend or save as they would normally. a) One way get companies to go along is to lower  demands for dividends and allow tax credit if it money goes to investing and employee retention (only). b) To get everybody (companies and people) out of debt lower cost of money including on the discount window, so interest rates are low, easing the rate people have to pay down their debt and some how make fixed rate lower-able.   Lower the poor tax rate, and even triple the “tax credit” amount people get for giving to charities.  Yes charities, a means to help your better man, while helping yourself and the government.

Basically, getting out of the problems we’ve had will require new ways of thinking. Not more welfare, not more blatant taxes or debt freezes.  We can’t know all the consequences of our actions, sometimes, it takes 4 years to see an impact, which is why we need to make small changes and have constant reporting.