Topic: Economic Devastation - page 59. (Read 504811 times)

Mega threads can be banned if they subsume the forum into a groupthink. So keep that in mind when posting in this thread. Redundant arguments should be avoided.

A great culling might change your prognosis. If only the technologically adept survive the NWO eugenics. I think nature is smarter than you attribute to it


I could literally do this (actually I think I could impregnate 10 women per month if I made it a full-time vocation), except the economic effects could be devastating to me, because the State will force me to corrupt every single one of those offspring.

It is the State that is causing the aberration, but I doubt it will be sustained. Males will drive evolution. Feminist apologists will go down with the Titanic. (again no offense intended to females who are capable of analytical contribution and also no offense to those who excel in traditional roles)

I am still working out my evolutionary strategy. I still have time, I am only 50.

Also I think it is important to note that evolution of ideas may now be more effective evolutionary strategy than genetically. I and MA can influence millions of people much more effectively via knowledge spread.

The men are still driving evolution. Genetics are MORE influenced by the ideas, because it influences on a wider scale who prospers in natural selection.

In effect, I am driving the genetic selection of others who mimick my genes. Much more efficient than fornication.

P.S. note a certain individual has been added to my ignore list which only has two persons in it.

Typical of you, just insults, and more insults.

My point was there that "power corrupts" ,yes that is the main issue.

The side issue with IQ is just natural law, you cannot do anything about that, that is irreversible natural behaviour.

But that in itself would not be an issue, if High IQ people would be moral (most of them are, yet the real powerful ones aren't), thus if they have power, atleast use that in a moral way.

Sure it can corrupt people if they have huge power, but there are the others who can stop them.


When a billionaire runs amok and starts to destroy things, it's not the little people who will stop him, but the other billionaires (preferably the ones with higher morality). Thing about that.

Men used to be the primary drivers of evolution via sexual selection but this is simply no longer the case. Most men in certain parts of Asia do have Genghis Khan's genes. Genghis Khan lived in a time when your statements above were true.

Today it is women who drive evolution and unless there is a dark age where we return to tribalism (unlikely) this trend will continue for the foreseeable future. The state requiring significant child support and providing basic resources to single mothers certainly cements and accelerates this trend but it would exist even without state involvement.  

In the past being physically intimidating, success at combat and violence, and multiple brief "romantic" conquests were huge selective advantages that would result in offspring. Today their importance is rapidly diminishing. Female fertility and reproduction is now completely under the control of females and this represents a profound and under appreciated shift in selective pressure.

Today it matters little how many romantic conquests a man has and expending significant amounts of time and energy to secure multiple brief conquests provides little reproductive advantage and may even be detrimental.  

This article provides a snapshot of what today's dating scene is like for many young people.

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2015/08/tinder-hook-up-culture-end-of-dating

An individual able to sleep with 30-40 women a year in the ancient world would have been setting himself up genetically as the next Genghis Khan.
Today it is quite possible that Marty has no children. The selective pressures have dramatically changed.

Compare that with this blog by a women named Julie who has six kids. It is obvious from the article that she decided to do so because she loves children and likely has identified a mate that helps her support this many children.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/julie-cole/6-reasons-to-have-6-kids_b_4182276.html

It is women like Julie not men like Marty who will drive human evolution over the next several generations.

I told you the NWO plan is a the largest capitalists trying to eliminate competition as the Industrial Age sinks into irrelevance.

Everyone needs to jump ship from that sinking top-down morass into the individually autonomous (grass roots, bottom-up) Knowledge Age.

---

...

Its always obvious to the Dunning-Kruger confidence.


Thank you God. You indeed work miracles.


You said you were leaving  

Earlier you said the real problem is low IQ people. Now you say it is centralization. So if only high IQ run the world, then centralization is the only possible outcome. So why are you bothering to even talk about what can't be fixed in terms of your logical basis.

That should give you a strong hint that your logical basis is flawed.

Scientific method is something you appear to not understand well. You quote a correlation between IQ and personal income. First of all, you should learn that correlation doesn't imbue causality, i.e. there can be other factors which may be at play and the correlation may not hold in every scenario past, future, and circumstantially. Secondly, if low IQ people are more numerous (hey its your assertion not mine!) then mathematically a higher number of lower income people can potentially have more economic impact thant a lower number of higher income people.

Things like that is where you diverge from reality. And there are many, many more instances where you've run aground and apparently didn't realize it.

High IQ men that mate with average IQ women, often produce high IQ offspring so it doesn't really matter if the high IQ women select themselves out of the gene pool.

The men drive evolution. That is why we feel the urge to impregnate many women.

I read that most men in certain parts of Asia have Genghis Khan's genes.

If the State wasn't dictating to men that they have to give up an arm and a leg for each child they produce, men would be much more reproductive.

Sometimes I feel I haven't done my duty to plant more children (only 2 thus far that I know of), but seeing the outcome with the first two has put a brake on my enthusiasm about planting more.

1. Not so; like any other debt, an entitlement can be discharged by release of the people's credits back to the debt-issuer via indorsement, alongside the acquisition of that debt which is effectuated as an exchange or set-off for the credits so released; for details, see the banking flow chart in the HJR 192 folder which is referenced in this link from the same blog.
For more details, contact me in private; this is a work in progress, but I am NOT the only one.
Another example: If you have already made "payment" on a debt with a debt note, then you can retrieve that "debt-payment" after discharging the initial debt by simply claiming it back via the tax collection agency. Then, you simply "re-process" the claimed payment and endorse it for discharge again.

2. Correct; it is the gov that enforces the law. The US gov is required to uphold the law of war (usufruct) in any emergency. The people set up a Constitution for the US gov (corporation) so that they could control the gov; the gov cannot work outside of that law (charter), so it must enforce that law. As long as you are classified as an "enemy" (debtor), you will not have any rights in the conqueror's State of Emergency, but when you stand in the right capacity and stand with the truth, then you can assert your remedy and have it enforced by the de jure (lawful) authorities.
A great history review of these matters is found here, see the front-page story: http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/950307.pdf

1. In which case, they would not receive the capital they otherwise would.

2. A law code does not enforce itself. (E.g., the steele whereupon the Code of Hammurabi was inscribed did not, itself, physically beat the violators of that law code.)

1. Most of the debt is owed to the people (e.g. entitlements), so the people can discharge the debt and then there is no need to postpone the settlement.

2. My proposal does not lack such an appeal, it is just that you have not looked into the lawful money which is referenced in 12 USC 411 and supported in other citations of US Federal law (as described in links already posted).
Kindly read the links and study this subject in detail, for therein is contained the remedy for this whole situation. I will link you to my first post in this thread:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12109249

(Though it makes the quick review of these posts tedious, the entirety of your post has been cited.)


1. A government can pay its loan(s) with (an)other loan(s) (essentially, postponing the settlement thereof ad infinitum).

2. Since government enforces law, the enforcement of law necessarily entails an appeal to government. Since your proposal seems to lack such an appeal, there is no (at least, standard) reason to anticipate the compliance of government with the enforcement of the special "lawful[ness]" (1aguar) of your "lawful money" (1aguar).

What are you asserting?

It is far from obvious to me...

I wanted to inform the readers of this thread about remedy...

I doubt that you were aware that a debt can be discharged by an individual who has the knowledge.

I would prefer if your replies to my posts would reference what I am saying directly and show how it applies (or not) to what you say. Otherwise, there is no way for me to see what you are asserting.

Again, I am proposing a remedy/solution to this issue, i.e. lawful money; what exactly are you asserting... and how does it relate to what I said?

1. An ellipsis was used to indicate the omission of "not," and the citation includes a hyperlink to the source material.

2. See the blue text of this post.

You have misquoted me.
I asserted that a note (debt) is NOT a payment and discharge of the debt.
Payment and discharge (of debt) cannot be accomplished by a note (a debt).
A POSITIVE CANNOT CANCEL OUT ANOTHER POSITIVE.
Only by realizing your creditor status can you discharge a debt.
I have knowledge and resources standing by for those inquiring on how to more-fully effectuate the remedies on the iuvdeposit website.

The post contends that "that is . . . a payment and discharge of the debt" (1aguar).

Your bald assertion carries an authority that is inferior to that of the article CoinCube cited.

---

Unlike within the natural environment, it is practical for a woman to acquire without male provision.

Well there are 2 things women want and need:  attractive man & resources.

Now socialism provides resources for women so they are not necessarly inclined to rich people, so they only look for hot men.

It's for note that socialism favors alpha-males, because alpha-males can conquer women without money (because they can just live on welfare) and only with their muscles and attractiveness.

Beta males have lesser luck with women and mostly only get MILFS , then they have to have bigger income to pay your MILF girlfriend and her kid.

But we know that this socialism wont last for long, or it should not last long.


So if the economy gets free without welfare, then "macho" boys will need to get to work, and earn money if they want to get pussy.

While beta males, are usually intelligent and they will earn tons of money and then get even more pussy then alpha males.


There is rivalry between males too, so it's not a uniform world in any case.

If a woman is to grow her career (as one might expect a more intelligent woman would), she will have to decide between the substantial amounts of time she could dedicate thereto and the substantial amounts of time she could dedicate to child rearing (if she, not someone else, is to also raise her biological children).

This is incorrect. The selective pressures going forward will increasingly favor nerds over "grunts"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1375720/What-women-really-want--money-Research-finds-women-look-paid-job-partner.html


http://bigthink.com/dollars-and-sex/do-women-really-value-income-over-looks-in-a-mate