Leaving Gainful Employment For The World Of The 24/7 Hustle

[Beaver...@live.com]

Because fuck work. Fuck that shit.

22 years of my life wasted.

Glad I finally got the guts to walk away.

[ItsJoan NotJoann]

On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 10:24:42 PM UTC-5, Beaver...@live.com wrote:
>
> 22 years of my life wasted.
>
> Glad I finally got the guts to walk away.
>
>

Why did it take you 22 years to get the nerve up and leave?
Did you tell your former employer what you posted here or do
you only feel safe saying it here?

[fratermus]

What will you be doing in place of work?
What was the last straw?

[Beaver...@live.com]

I am leaving on pretty good terms if I can hold it together the next week and they don't find out what I have been up to all year. Though I just found out about something I want to do taking place on Thursday about 500 miles away I am tempted to just walk away. Probably won't.

[Beaver...@live.com]

On Tuesday, August 16, 2016 at 3:51:13 PM UTC-7, fratermus wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 20:24:39 -0700, Beaver_Fever wrote:
>
> > Because fuck work. Fuck that shit.
> >
> > 22 years of my life wasted.
> >
> > Glad I finally got the guts to walk away.
>
>
> What will you be doing in place of work?

Identify and exploit price disparities.

> What was the last straw?

The mom and pop owners selling to a corporation.

[Beaver...@live.com]

15 years ago this would have had 100 replies by now. Minimum.

[Dennis]

On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:28:24 -0700 (PDT), Beaver...@live.com wrote:

>On Tuesday, August 16, 2016 at 3:51:13 PM UTC-7, fratermus wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 20:24:39 -0700, Beaver_Fever wrote:
>>
>> > Because fuck work. Fuck that shit.
>> >
>> > 22 years of my life wasted.
>> >
>> > Glad I finally got the guts to walk away.
>>
>>
>> What will you be doing in place of work?
>
>Identify and exploit price disparities.

So, basically, Buy Low and Sell High?
Radical idea! What could possibly go wrong?

Dennis (evil)
--
"There is a fine line between participation and mockery" - Wally

[Dennis]

You used to have more entertaining whines.

[wilm...@gmail.com]

Are you going to pack all your belongings in a handkerchief and hang it from a stick that you carry over your shoulder? Do shoes even have soles that flap when you walk? Don't shave for a week and have a cigar butt stuck in your mouth and the look will be complete!

Come move to Portland. We have numerous hobo camps, many with views. Some gated. Make sure you have a back story that will inspire pity and social outrage, thereby ensuring churches and other do-gooders to supply you with food, clothing, medical, and a tent with sleeping bag. Never mind the neighbors who worked their entire lives for their homes, you have a right to shit in a garbage bag and store it wherever you want.

Good luck.

[hchi...@hotmail.com]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:19:08 -0700, Dennis <dg...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:20:05 -0700 (PDT), Beaver...@live.com wrote:
>
>>On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 8:24:42 PM UTC-7, beaver...@live.com wrote:
>>> Because fuck work. Fuck that shit.
>>>
>>> 22 years of my life wasted.
>>>
>>> Glad I finally got the guts to walk away.
>>
>>15 years ago this would have had 100 replies by now. Minimum.
>
>You used to have more entertaining whines.
>
>Dennis (evil)

Yeah, it is ALL your fault. Aren't you ashamed?

BTW, where did you get those guts? I understand you can get them cheap
overseas.

If, OTOH, you had said you got your shit together, I would have suspected you to
be running for election. There does seem to be an impressive collection of it
this year.

In any event, this, bud, is for you -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TsRdkrxl4g

Complete with high class bed ticking background. Just put it on endless loop.

[Dennis]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 12:06:42 -0500, hchi...@hotmail.com wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:19:08 -0700, Dennis <dg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:20:05 -0700 (PDT), Beaver...@live.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 8:24:42 PM UTC-7, beaver...@live.com wrote:
>>>> Because fuck work. Fuck that shit.
>>>>
>>>> 22 years of my life wasted.
>>>>
>>>> Glad I finally got the guts to walk away.
>>>
>>>15 years ago this would have had 100 replies by now. Minimum.
>>
>>You used to have more entertaining whines.
>>
>>Dennis (evil)
>
>Yeah, it is ALL your fault. Aren't you ashamed?
>
>BTW, where did you get those guts? I understand you can get them cheap
>overseas.

I bet he's been trolling this website:
http://www.pennilessparenting.com/2012/12/eating-fish-scraps-and-fish-guts.html
Kudos on the frugal chops, Beav!

>
>If, OTOH, you had said you got your shit together, I would have suspected you to
>be running for election. There does seem to be an impressive collection of it
>this year.
>
>In any event, this, bud, is for you -
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TsRdkrxl4g
>
>Complete with high class bed ticking background. Just put it on endless loop.

Doot-doot, doot-doot, doot doo-doo-doo-doot...

[hchi...@hotmail.com]

Damned straight. I think it is one of those amendementals to the
constitutional. However, in Portland, you have to use the proper garbage bags
so the recylers won't get pissed off. They then have to race around finding the
proper recyclable bottle to piss in, before they can be properly pissed off. If
you first search the area where you will be shitting, and take away all those
bottles, you can then burst the bladders of dozens of recyclers by shitting in
the wrong bag, causing mayhem and great consternation over the fate of
indiginous mouse fleas in the area.

I am wondering how someone would work their entire life for a home, unless they
briefly lived in a casket?

[hchi...@hotmail.com]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 10:49:56 -0700, Dennis <dg...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 12:06:42 -0500, hchi...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:19:08 -0700, Dennis <dg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:20:05 -0700 (PDT), Beaver...@live.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 8:24:42 PM UTC-7, beaver...@live.com wrote:
>>>>> Because fuck work. Fuck that shit.
>>>>>
>>>>> 22 years of my life wasted.
>>>>>
>>>>> Glad I finally got the guts to walk away.
>>>>
>>>>15 years ago this would have had 100 replies by now. Minimum.
>>>
>>>You used to have more entertaining whines.
>>>
>>>Dennis (evil)
>>
>>Yeah, it is ALL your fault. Aren't you ashamed?
>>
>>BTW, where did you get those guts? I understand you can get them cheap
>>overseas.
>
>I bet he's been trolling this website:
>http://www.pennilessparenting.com/2012/12/eating-fish-scraps-and-fish-guts.html
>Kudos on the frugal chops, Beav!
>

From the site:
"Next was what I assume to be lungs. They might be liver though."

Uhhhhh. Fish. Lungs. Uhhhhh, o kay...

We need to suggest to this intrepid connesewer that chicken penis tastes
wonderful and he should ask for them at the processing plants.

>>
>>If, OTOH, you had said you got your shit together, I would have suspected you to
>>be running for election. There does seem to be an impressive collection of it
>>this year.
>>
>>In any event, this, bud, is for you -
>>
>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TsRdkrxl4g
>>
>>Complete with high class bed ticking background. Just put it on endless loop.
>
>Doot-doot, doot-doot, doot doo-doo-doo-doot...
>
>Dennis (evil)

Now I'm going to have to go put on my red shirt and start strutting. Damn you,
boy wonder.

[Beaver...@live.com]

It goes wrong all the time but lately I have been coming out ahead to the tune of a few thousand a week though it's going to slow down from November to February. I wish I figured this out years ago as it's getting harder.

My living expenses are $700 a month. Thanks in no small part to wonderful members of this group past and present.

[Beaver...@live.com]

On Thursday, August 18, 2016 at 8:19:11 AM UTC-7, Dennis wrote:

What would I have to whine about? Life is perfect.

[Beaver...@live.com]

I am thinking of Iceland though I guess I will have to come back at some point.

[fratermus]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 14:06:58 -0500, hchickpea wrote:


> Uhhhhh. Fish. Lungs. Uhhhhh, o kay...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lungfish

[fratermus]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 10:05:03 -0700, wilma6116 wrote:

> Come move to Portland. We have numerous hobo camps, many with views.
> Some gated. Make sure you have a back story that will inspire pity and
> social outrage, thereby ensuring churches and other do-gooders to supply
> you with food, clothing, medical, and a tent with sleeping bag. Never
> mind the neighbors who worked their entire lives for their homes, you
> have a right to shit in a garbage bag and store it wherever you want.

If the neighbors were concerned about shit-in-a-bag they'd ask the do-
gooders to provide a port-a-potty. Or provide it themselves. Win-win.

Folks are welcome to work their entire lives for their homes, of course.
But that choice does not confer moral superiority or the right to direct
the lives of others.

About the backstorythat will inspire pity and social outrage: are we
talking about the hoboes' stories or the one told above?

BTW, I'm not a hobo but I do love your city. It is my favorite city in
the US.

[Beaver...@live.com]

They tried porto-potties downtown LA about ten years. Became havens for drug use and prostitution, which is a bit inexplicable to me. Even my dick wouldn't stay hard in a skid row shitter.

Now if I can make my goal of $100,000 in the bank, I am going to hobo in style. I also want to go to Gathering Of The Juggalos at least once in my life.

[wilm...@gmail.com]

On Friday, August 19, 2016 at 10:13:22 AM UTC-7, fratermus wrote:

I'm glad you like Portland, but the 'homeless' population is getting out of control. The downtown is full of aggressive panhandlers, open intoxication, and increased violence. The Springwater Trail, a 40 mile bicycle path encircling the city, has become lined with homeless camps. The freeway embankments are open trash dumbs as the 'homeless' just throw their trash to the bottom of the hill. Many fires from open fire pits.

These 'homeless' communities are becoming permanent, they seem to be the seeds to slums that one sees in Mumbai and Manila.

Not a sense of superiority, but it is troubling to the decreased safety and quality of life for those who are paying a mortgage, and those but-for-the-grace-of-God-go-I unfortunates. Not to mention the tuffs and thugs who prey on both.

[fratermus]

On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:34:01 -0700, Beaver_Fever wrote:


> They tried porto-potties downtown LA about ten years. Became havens for
> drug use and prostitution, which is a bit inexplicable to me. Even my
> dick wouldn't stay hard in a skid row shitter.

LOL Didn't know about the LA test; thanks for the info.

> Now if I can make my goal of $100,000 in the bank, I am going to hobo in
> style. I also want to go to Gathering Of The Juggalos at least once in
> my life.

Sounds like a blast.

It looks like I'll be able to retire in a few years at 59 on a small
pension. I have always wanted to boondock in the Southwest so I am
researching a small RV in which to live and travel. I might meet you at
an ICP show. :-)

[fratermus]

On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 16:38:03 -0700, wilma6116 wrote:

> I'm glad you like Portland, but the 'homeless' population is getting out
> of control. The downtown is full of aggressive panhandlers, open
> intoxication, and increased violence.

It's an interesting thought that they should be controlled. :-P

I did see many beggars but all the ones that interacted with me were
pleasant. I concede that it may have been an exception and not a typical
experience.

I am not sure I am opposed to open intoxication, assuming they break no
other laws. If we wanted to be consistent we'd also criminalize being
generally stupid or a loud talker in public.

Full agreement about the violence; I am non-aggressive (although armed)
and would prefer that others be non-aggressive, too.

> The Springwater Trail, a 40 mile
> bicycle path encircling the city, has become lined with homeless camps.

Sounds like a good use of space. Assuming they are otherwise law-abiding.

> The freeway embankments are open trash dumbs as the 'homeless' just
> throw their trash to the bottom of the hill.

Anyone littering is in the wrong (homeless or otherwise).

> Many fires from open fire
> pits.

I wonder if this is an opportunity to workshop with the homeless about
traditional hobo cooking setups that do not have open fire. Thinking
something like the the first setup in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgMk-jhA974
although I would cut a small door out of the bottom for adding fuel to
the fire.

I think this would greatly reduce runaway fires, and would reduce the
amount of wood needed to cook.

> These 'homeless' communities are becoming permanent, they seem to be the
> seeds to slums that one sees in Mumbai and Manila.

I have no problem with permanent homeless communities. They are
*communities*, albeit with rough conditions.

Recently Dallas destroyed a homeless camp that was living under IH45,
basically because it was upsetting for homed folks and visitors to see
the homeless. There had been some violence there, but it's a short
distance to homes in South Dallas where violence and murders are
commonplace. I don't see Dallas destroying *those* communities.

> Not a sense of superiority, but it is troubling to the decreased safety
> and quality of life for those who are paying a mortgage, and those
> but-for-the-grace-of-God-go-I unfortunates. Not to mention the tuffs and
> thugs who prey on both.

I do understand your point.

Here's a thought experiment, not one that conforms to reality. Consider
the homeless camps in the same locations with the same people. But they
are as well-behaved as a typical person living in a house or apartment.
What would be your reaction to their presence in those circumstances?

Real question, one I am pondering right now. I am trying to understand
the underlying basis of our collective reaction to homelessness. I don't
have a firm grip yet on what informs my own opinion. :-)

[Bob F]

One of the problems of the homeless is that a number of homeless people
have significant mental problems. Not a large percentage, mind you, but
enough that behavior problems may stand out. Some of those people might
have been institutionalized in previous times, but that seems not to be
an option any more. So they are on the street, without care or treatment
in many cases.

[The Real Bev]

On 08/20/2016 06:35 AM, fratermus wrote:

> Real question, one I am pondering right now. I am trying to
> understand the underlying basis of our collective reaction to
> homelessness. I don't have a firm grip yet on what informs my own
> opinion. :-)

Around here a lot of the homeless are mentally ill. My automatic
reaction is to not make eye contact and walk quickly past. If
importuned for spare change, I politely say "No thank you" which makes
no sense at all but might confuse them for a moment. (I was once told
that a good thing for bicyclists being chased by dogs to yell was GET
OFF THE COUCH! for the same reason. )

A woman walking with a toddler was attacked by a loon with a hunk of
rebar a quarter mile from my house. The loon then went to a nearby
McDonald's and hit somebody there with the rebar. It took 10 minutes
for the cops to show up.

When you can't distinguish the loons from the merely homeless, you have
to assume that they're all loons.

--
Cheers, Bev
"One's chances of winning the lottery are not appreciably
improved by actually buying a ticket."

[The Real Bev]

On 08/20/2016 07:20 AM, Bob F wrote:

> One of the problems of the homeless is that a number of homeless people
> have significant mental problems. Not a large percentage, mind you, but
> enough that behavior problems may stand out. Some of those people might
> have been institutionalized in previous times, but that seems not to be
> an option any more. So they are on the street, without care or treatment
> in many cases.

1. It costs money.

2. According to lawsuits by (I think) the ACLU several decades ago, it
violates their civil rights to lock them up unless they are provably a
danger to themselves or others.

I approve of the ACLU, but just because something is right doesn't make
it pleasant.

[wilm...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 6:35:07 AM UTC-7, fratermus wrote:

> I do understand your point.

I don't think you do.

>
> Here's a thought experiment, not one that conforms to reality. Consider
> the homeless camps in the same locations with the same people. But they
> are as well-behaved as a typical person living in a house or apartment.
> What would be your reaction to their presence in those circumstances?
>
> Real question, one I am pondering right now. I am trying to understand
> the underlying basis of our collective reaction to homelessness. I don't
> have a firm grip yet on what informs my own opinion. :-)

My problem with blue tarp cities can be summed up by a few pictures. Look for pictures of the slums of Mumbai. Is this how we want to have a growing portion of our population to live? Will this become acceptable?

These encampments are breeding grounds for disease. They are fire hazards. They instill a sense of hopelessness, that breeds crime and a lack of respect for others. The camps are ecological disasters, chemicals and waste is discarded easily as possible with out regards. And then it comes down to me, where I don't feel safe using public spaces, my property is not safe, I even have to make sure I don't dally putting my trash to the curb, because the trash pickers will be coming on to my property to go through my containers and take what they find- trash or otherwise.

As technology increasingly makes workers obsolete, we should be looking to give everyone universal income, with the understand we are all entitled to food enough, shelter, and basic medical care.

[The Real Bev]

1. Where does the money come from? Who's going to decide that we
should grow food rather than corn for ethanol? What if they decide that
it's immoral to grow meat? Or make candy?

2. Do the homeless get individual 3-bedroom homes or SRO rooms in a
high-rise? Do you want a "project" near your home? Are you willing to
pay for homeless people to live in better houses than you do?

3. How are we going to get enough medical care to provide DECENT care
for everyone?

We're already stealing doctors and nurses from other countries, and the
ones that are here are retiring or cutting back to a few days a week. I
have the luxury of being able to go elsewhere if I don't like a doctor,
but this is clearly not possible for everyone because there aren't
enough good doctors for everyone to have one and some people are just
too dumb to know the difference.

What DO we do with the surplus people who are no longer economically
productive? What do we do with the economically unproductive people
we're importing from third-world countries?

--
Cheers, Bev
"We need to cut more slack for the stupid; after all, somebody has
to populate the lower part of the bell curve." -- Dennis (evil)

[Bob F]

And who are we to decide who is a productive member of society? Is
making money your only benchmark? How much? What do YOU do with people
YOU decide are surplus? Does retiring make you surplus? You are getting
into horror movie territory. I am sure the Koch brothers would be happy
to give us their "correct" answers. I hope they never get that opportunity.

Some people would say that immigrants are more productive than native
workers.

[wilm...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 8:59:18 PM UTC-7, The Real Bev wrote:

> >
> > As technology increasingly makes workers obsolete, we should be
> > looking to give everyone universal income, with the understand we are
> > all entitled to food enough, shelter, and basic medical care.


>
> 1. Where does the money come from?

Everyone gets $X amount of food stamps (enough for basic substance). If you are average earner, you'll get as much food as you are taxed. If you make more you'll be taxed more.

> Who's going to decide that we
> should grow food rather than corn for ethanol?

Common decency should be one factor determining.

> What if they decide that
> it's immoral to grow meat? Or make candy?

When has that happened? No one is deciding how you spend your food money.

>
> 2. Do the homeless get individual 3-bedroom homes or SRO rooms in a
> high-rise?

Shelter. Shelter, got it. Ain't no one going to be productive if they don't have a place to live.

Do you want a "project" near your home? Are you willing to
> pay for homeless people to live in better houses than you do?

Who said anything like that? Making up an argument where there is none? Look, Salt Lake City provided housing for its homeless. They wound up saving money by less hospital visits, less jail visits and some of the people able to stand up and get back on their feet. Look it up, plenty of articles on the subject.

>
> 3. How are we going to get enough medical care to provide DECENT care
> for everyone?

We do it now, anyway. If we provide preventative medicine, if we provide early diagnosis and treatment, we save a lot of money.

>

>
> What DO we do with the surplus people who are no longer economically
> productive? What do we do with the economically unproductive people
> we're importing from third-world countries?

I don't know. I'm not one to think we have "surplus people". I suppose we'll leave that type of thought to people like you.

As technology eliminates the need for labor, we are coming to a crossroad, we must determine if there are "surplus people" or if everyone is entitled to basic needs, without exception, without explanation and without judgement.

>
> --
> Cheers, Bev
> "We need to cut more slack for the stupid; after all, somebody has
> to populate the lower part of the bell curve." -- Dennis (evil)

And I do make allowances. If you need more "slack", just ask, it's free, donchaknow?

[fratermus]

On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 12:42:51 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:

> When you can't distinguish the loons from the merely homeless, you have
> to assume that they're all loons.

True. And one could say the same about the general population.

[fratermus]

On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 14:24:41 -0700, wilma6116 wrote:

> On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 6:35:07 AM UTC-7, fratermus wrote:
>> I do understand your point.
>
> I don't think you do.

It is possible to understand another's point without agreeing with it.

> My problem with blue tarp cities can be summed up by a few pictures.
> Look for pictures of the slums of Mumbai.

I am aware what they look like. I am not willing to try to control their
lives or cast (caste?) them out.

> Is this how we want to have a
> growing portion of our population to live?

Do we have control of how portions of our population live? If so, what
is to stop a majority from turning on the mortgaged and casting /us/ out?


> Will this become acceptable?

What I hope becomes acceptable is allowing others to live their own
lives, even if they are an eyesore.

1. repeal nanny state laws, including laws aimed at harrassing the
homeless and others the society doesn't like for whatever reason.
2. leave law-abiding folks alone
3. encourage and teach the unintentionally offending how to get right
with the communinty
4. take additional steps

> These encampments are breeding grounds for disease.

The suburbs are breeding grounds for obesity, heart disease, and
diabetes. Schools are breeding grounds for illness and lice. Get out
the bulldozer!



> They are fire
> hazards.

As are wood-shingled houses. Out with them!

> They instill a sense of hopelessness, that breeds crime and a
> lack of respect for others.

Like upside-down car loans and subprime credit mortgages?

I argue the intentionally homeless do not live in hopelessness. Those
that don't *want* to be homeless are the ones that live in hopelessness.

> The camps are ecological disasters,
> chemicals and waste is discarded easily as possible with out regards.

As are many home and storm drains. And Hummers and SUVs and big trucks.
And houses that waste power and water.

> And then it comes down to me, where I don't feel safe using public
> spaces, my property is not safe, I even have to make sure I don't dally
> putting my trash to the curb,

What if people in SUVs make me feel unsafe because they are heavy and
generally not designed with driving dynamics in mind? What if I feel if
driving a unnecessarily huge vehicle is, practically speaking, an
aggressive act?

I do not think legislation should be based on the fear of the
constituents.

> because the trash pickers will be coming
> on to my property to go through my containers and take what they find-
> trash or otherwise.

Sidewalk easements are generally not considered private property,
although the homeowners usually have to maintain them.

I have no problem with trash-pickers as long as they don't leave a mess.
Indeed, they are keeping materials out of the landfill and getting
further use out of items cast out by consumer society. I have put out
man useful items on my sidewalk easement and pickers take them away
quickly and with no drama.

> As technology increasingly makes workers obsolete, we should be looking
> to give everyone universal income, with the understand we are all
> entitled to food enough, shelter, and basic medical care.

I disagree, but I do understand your point. :-)

[fratermus]

On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 20:59:13 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:

> 1. Where does the money come from?

Taxpayers, or the Fed (making money (POOF!) in the reserve accounts of
whichever institution sells them tbills.

> Who's going to decide that we
> should grow food rather than corn for ethanol?

Well, congress has been putting their thumb on the scale in ethanol's
favor. Gotta keep midwesterners voting your way, amirite?

> What if they decide that
> it's immoral to grow meat? Or make candy?

I think it's more likely they'd say it's unhealthy. Therefore anyone who
partakes would have to pay a penalty under obamacare. As with smokers.

I will say that factory farming teeters on the edge of immorality. I
have raised my own animals for meat (chickens, rabbits, etc) so I am not
squeamish about butchering, but those factory animals have a craptastic
life.

> 2. Do the homeless get individual 3-bedroom homes or SRO rooms in a
> high-rise?

I would think lightweight shelters would be a good start.

In my area public transit provides lockable shelters for bicycles:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dickdavid/8461993280

I find it bizarre that we could provide these for free to protect a
bicycle but not a human. If built a bit differently it would be
practically rainproof, waterproof, etc. Lock it from the inside and you
don't get stabbed or your stuff stolen while you sleep.

> Do you want a "project" near your home?

I do not mind the presence of *any* law-abiding citizens. If folks start
acting wild (mortgaged or homeless) I call the cops.

> Are you willing to
> pay for homeless people to live in better houses than you do?

I am not sure that is what wilma is advocating. Some kind of baseline
minimal housing to keep people safe and out of the elements.

> 3. How are we going to get enough medical care to provide DECENT care
> for everyone?

By making *basic* medicine free (setting broken arms, appendicitis,
whatever, generic meds) and letting people buy fancy procedures and name-
brand Rx on their own.

> We're already stealing doctors and nurses from other countries, and the
> ones that are here are retiring or cutting back to a few days a week. I
> have the luxury of being able to go elsewhere if I don't like a doctor,
> but this is clearly not possible for everyone because there aren't
> enough good doctors for everyone to have one and some people are just
> too dumb to know the difference.

Dunno about stealing. It's a market that responds like any other. And I
would argue it is not my job to protect the stupid from the repercussions
they bring onto themselves.

> What DO we do with the surplus people who are no longer economically
> productive?

Careful now, or you'll have an army of bluehairs and fat-ass walmart
scooter riders out for blood! Muh Beetus!

> What do we do with the economically unproductive people
> we're importing from third-world countries?

In general, first-generation immigrants consume fewer resources than
"natives".

nominally Conservative source:
http://www.cato.org/blog/cis-exaggerates-cost-immigrant-welfare-use

nominally Liberal source:
https://www.aclu.org/immigration-myths-and-facts

[The Real Bev]

Can you support yourself without charity or governmental subsidy? Not
all that complex.

> What do YOU do with people
> YOU decide are surplus? Does retiring make you surplus?

See above. Did you pay into SS and Medicare? Those were extracted from
you on the assumption that you would get payback in retirement. Had my
mom invested her lifetime SS contributions in appropriate stocks she
would have been making far more than ~$3K/month in dividends.

> You are getting
> into horror movie territory. I am sure the Koch brothers would be happy
> to give us their "correct" answers. I hope they never get that opportunity.
>
> Some people would say that immigrants are more productive than native
> workers.

Do you actually have a solution or are you just hoping that everything
will work out because people want to be nice?

--
Cheers, Bev
"Sure, everyone's in favor of saving Hitler's brain, but when
you put it into the body of a great white shark, suddenly
you're a madman." --Futurama

[The Real Bev]

On 08/20/2016 11:40 PM, wilm...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 8:59:18 PM UTC-7, The Real Bev
> wrote:
>
>>> As technology increasingly makes workers obsolete, we should be
>>> looking to give everyone universal income, with the understand we
>>> are all entitled to food enough, shelter, and basic medical
>>> care.
>>
>> 1. Where does the money come from?
>
> Everyone gets $X amount of food stamps (enough for basic substance).
> If you are average earner, you'll get as much food as you are taxed.
> If you make more you'll be taxed more.

I see. It rains down from heaven, provided by The Unicorns.

>> Who's going to decide that we should grow food rather than corn for
>> ethanol?
>
> Common decency should be one factor determining.

Again, unicorns. How are you going to ensure a sufficient supply of
common decency, assuming such actually exists?

>> What if they decide that it's immoral to grow meat? Or make
>> candy?
>
> When has that happened? No one is deciding how you spend your food
> money.

But you're suggesting some sort of central authority that would make
these decisions. How would that work?

>> 2. Do the homeless get individual 3-bedroom homes or SRO rooms in
>> a high-rise?
>
> Shelter. Shelter, got it. Ain't no one going to be productive if they
> don't have a place to live.

Probably not. OTOH, how are the unskilled and mentally "challenged"
going to become productive? Ditch-digging used to be a viable low-skill
occupation, but then somebody invented machines that could do it better
and faster. Same with an increasing number of low-skill jobs.

> Do you want a "project" near your home? Are you willing to
>> pay for homeless people to live in better houses than you do?
>
> Who said anything like that? Making up an argument where there is
> none? Look, Salt Lake City provided housing for its homeless. They
> wound up saving money by less hospital visits, less jail visits and
> some of the people able to stand up and get back on their feet. Look
> it up, plenty of articles on the subject.

Around here developments are required to provide a certain percentage of
"affordable" units. The one currently in negotiation claims that the
"affordable" units will be the same as the regular ones, which means
that the regular tenants will be subsidizing the poorer ones. The
government might save money on these things, but at the expense of the
taxpaying public who are actually providing the subsidies.

>> 3. How are we going to get enough medical care to provide DECENT
>> care for everyone?
>
> We do it now, anyway. If we provide preventative medicine, if we
> provide early diagnosis and treatment, we save a lot of money.

No we don't. When was the last time a doctor actually FIXED your
problem? How many truly incompetent doctors have you met. In taking
elderly relatives and others to doctors, I've met a LOT -- one of whom
might have actually killed my husband had he not moved out of town,
enabling us to find a GOOD one purely by accident.

Preventive medicine is pretty much a crock. Don't smoke, exercise more,
eat less. Keep wounds clean. Don't do dumb shit. There, you've got
preventive medicine. You don't need a doctor for that. Been to an
Urgent Care installation recently? Even less competence there, but you
don't need an appointment to have them tell you -- after a reasonably
long wait -- that you need to go to the ER. Or that they'll give you a
band-aid. Or prescribe useless antibiotics.

>> What DO we do with the surplus people who are no longer
>> economically productive? What do we do with the economically
>> unproductive people we're importing from third-world countries?
>
> I don't know. I'm not one to think we have "surplus people". I
> suppose we'll leave that type of thought to people like you.

I would have thought that, given your strong opinion, you had a viable
answer.

> As technology eliminates the need for labor, we are coming to a
> crossroad, we must determine if there are "surplus people" or if
> everyone is entitled to basic needs, without exception, without
> explanation and without judgement.

Given the decreasing need for people, how do you feel about such
benefits being granted only to those who agree to be sterilized? I see
a difference between charity for those who are already here and
subsidizing the creation of more and more people who need charity.

[The Real Bev]

Indeed!

[wilm...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 1:55:57 PM UTC-7, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 08/20/2016 09:50 PM, Bob F wrote:

> >
> > And who are we to decide who is a productive member of society? Is
> > making money your only benchmark? How much?
>
> Can you support yourself without charity or governmental subsidy? Not
> all that complex.

So all those people who were good horse people should perish once the automobile took hold?

And those who'll be excellent space travelers should perish because their aptitude is not presently needed?

You would have us all remain at the present state without respect of just being human.

>

>
> See above. Did you pay into SS and Medicare? Those were extracted from
> you on the assumption that you would get payback in retirement. Had my
> mom invested her lifetime SS contributions in appropriate stocks she
> would have been making far more than ~$3K/month in dividends.

Or she might have invested in RCA and KMart, in which case she would destitute on the streets and she would have sold you for what the market would bear.

>
> Do you actually have a solution or are you just hoping that everything
> will work out because people want to be nice?

Because, we hang together or we hang separately.

>

[wilm...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 2:13:06 PM UTC-7, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 08/20/2016 11:40 PM, wilm...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 8:59:18 PM UTC-7, The Real Bev
> > wrote:
> >
> >>> As technology increasingly makes workers obsolete, we should be
> >>> looking to give everyone universal income, with the understand we
> >>> are all entitled to food enough, shelter, and basic medical
> >>> care.
> >>
> >> 1. Where does the money come from?
> >
> > Everyone gets $X amount of food stamps (enough for basic substance).
> > If you are average earner, you'll get as much food as you are taxed.
> > If you make more you'll be taxed more.
>
> I see. It rains down from heaven, provided by The Unicorns.
>

Might as well. Money has only the meaning we give it as a society. We all agree pieces of green paper has value. One day we may decide it has no value and marijuana seeds is the holder of value.

[The Real Bev]

On 08/21/2016 04:42 PM, wilm...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 1:55:57 PM UTC-7, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 08/20/2016 09:50 PM, Bob F wrote:
>
>>>
>>> And who are we to decide who is a productive member of society?
>>> Is making money your only benchmark? How much?
>>
>> Can you support yourself without charity or governmental subsidy?
>> Not all that complex.
>
> So all those people who were good horse people should perish once
> the automobile took hold?

Not should -- did or did not. The world was different then. Farming
was an option. So was factory work. Blacksmiths had skills that could
transfer to machinery repair. There were a lot fewer people and
factories were booming. "Give us your tired, your poor" wasn't a bad idea.

Now we have more people than our economy can support. Any ideas how to
change the economy so that our industries can hire significantly more US
residents and export significantly fewer jobs to China? When did you
stop shopping at Walmart?

> And those who'll be excellent space travelers should perish because
> their aptitude is not presently needed?

JPL laid off a lot of people. So, I imagine, did the rest of NASA. The
glamor field switched from physics to biology. Shit happens. It always
has. People adapt or die.

> You would have us all remain at the present state without respect of
> just being human.

Do you have a workable practical option that doesn't involve theft?

>> See above. Did you pay into SS and Medicare? Those were extracted
>> from you on the assumption that you would get payback in
>> retirement. Had my mom invested her lifetime SS contributions in
>> appropriate stocks she would have been making far more than
>> ~$3K/month in dividends.
>
> Or she might have invested in RCA and KMart, in which case she would
> destitute on the streets and she would have sold you for what the
> market would bear.

Still, the contributions were not voluntary and nobody should ever feel
like they're taking charity because they accept SS, Medicare or
unemployment insurance. We paid our dues.

>> Do you actually have a solution or are you just hoping that
>> everything will work out because people want to be nice?
>
> Because, we hang together or we hang separately.

In practice, what does that really mean? How many illegal immigrants
are you PERSONALLY willing to support? How many do you think I should
support? Surely you have a number in mind...

--
Cheers, Bev
I've enjoyed just about as much of this as I can stand.

[wilm...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 9:18:59 PM UTC-7, The Real Bev wrote:



>
> Now we have more people than our economy can support.

"Surplus people", "more people than the economy can support", you've already made up your mind as the value of a human. You value humans by dollars and I value them by a different consideration. There is nothing further to discuss. Stand aside and watch the world change.

[The Real Bev]

You're absolutely wrong. More like "the space they occupy" rather than
dollars. It's clearly different in small towns and less-populated
areas, but cities and suburbs have become crowded. There isn't enough
water in California to supply the growing population, we're importing it
from other states -- including states that have their own water problems.

I just don't want a lot of people around. I especially don't want them
around if I have to deal with them on a daily basis, and I REALLY don't
want them around if they want to steal things, blow things up, burn
things down and generally cause trouble.

If they can support themselves gainfully then they're entitled to the
same space I am; if, however, I am paying for their existence I damn
well ought to have some choice in the matter about what they do and
where they are.

--
Cheers, Bev
**********************************************
"I've had a Lucas pacemaker for years and have
never experienced any prob

[Bob F]

Do you want the job of beheading the ones you don't think are supporting
themselves gainfully?

[Beaver...@live.com]

If it pays enough to not end up homeless myself, sure.

[wilm...@gmail.com]

On Monday, August 22, 2016 at 10:42:54 AM UTC-7, Beaver...@live.com wrote:

> >
> > Do you want the job of beheading the ones you don't think are supporting
> > themselves gainfully?
>
> If it pays enough to not end up homeless myself, sure.

"Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin not; and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.

"If then God so clothe the grass, which is to day in the field, and to morrow is cast into the oven; how much more will he clothe you, O ye of little faith?"
Luke 12:27- 28

Well, there goes all that Christian nation idea.

[Beaver...@live.com]

What the fuck is this shit?

> Well, there goes all that Christian nation idea.

Never has been, hopefully never will be.

[The Real Bev]

That's a bit extreme, I think :-)

I really want to know if there's an alternative to a permanent dependent
class of incompetent consumers who just sort of hang around and do
nothing except get in the way. Imagine hundreds of millions of
unattractive broke Paris Hiltons...

--
Cheers, Bev
"I'm sorry I ever invented the Electoral College."
Al Gore 11/08/00

[The Real Bev]

We're NOT a Christian nation and shouldn't be. We have a lot of
Christians and people who pay lip service to Christianity, as well as
people of other religions likewise. NONE of them should have any
standing with anything involving government.

If god intends to feed and clothe all these homeless people he'd better
get busy.

[Michael Black]

Well there's Cyril Kornbluth's "Marching Morons" that has a future where
intelligence level has generally declined, and the masses think they are
doing things, but in reality it's small subset of the population, the ones
with intelligence, doing the work. I'm not sure that isn't the case now.
People can pariticipate by editing a wikipedia entry or retweet something
(or give a "me too" reply to a post somewhere), but it requires others to
do the work before them.

My great, great, great grandfather has a wikipedia entry, someone must have
read something about him and decided he
needed an entry. I don't know everything about him, but know more than
the entry. I'm still puzzling over why he's famous, I know of various
reasons, but I'm not sure which is the specific reason. Maybe just
because he wrote some books, including a couple about the early days of
the fur trade in the pacific northwest. It's a question I'd like
answered, but people putting in bits from here and there aren't going to
be able to answer. My family has other entries too, and they are mostly
detached, people not realizing they are connected. And just from family
history, I realize a bit of national history is a bit off. You need
people with a wider view, who can connect the pieces, rather than just add
bits to something someone else started.

And the theme continues, why bother reading anything when you can so
easily get an answer via the internet? Mobile devices can be neat, but I
think they've taken the place of some other things, so many are lost if
they lose their device (and that can be literal too, since they lose their
GPS if they lose their phone).

Things have broadened out, so people are using technology not imagined 20
years ago, but that doesn't mean they have raised themselves up. Instead
it's aimed at the masses, making life simpler for them without raising
them up.

Michael

[The Real Bev]

Well, maybe not. I think Venus needs colonists...

>> I really want to know if there's an alternative to a permanent dependent
>> class of incompetent consumers who just sort of hang around and do nothing
>> except get in the way. Imagine hundreds of millions of unattractive broke
>> Paris Hiltons...
>>
> Well there's Cyril Kornbluth's "Marching Morons" that has a future where
> intelligence level has generally declined, and the masses think they are
> doing things, but in reality it's small subset of the population, the ones
> with intelligence, doing the work. I'm not sure that isn't the case now.
> People can pariticipate by editing a wikipedia entry or retweet something
> (or give a "me too" reply to a post somewhere), but it requires others to
> do the work before them.

Is that the one where people are sent to <heh> colonize Venus? That one
sticks in my mind, along with a TV program I saw when I was a kid
wherein there was a sort of death race for the last 1-acre parcel of
land on earth not yet built on -- in Yosemite Valley. Imagine
contestants rushing through crowded (like the subway at rush hour)
apartment hallways with weapons... That program all by itself may
account for my serious horror of overpopulation.

...

> And the theme continues, why bother reading anything when you can so
> easily get an answer via the internet? Mobile devices can be neat, but I
> think they've taken the place of some other things, so many are lost if
> they lose their device (and that can be literal too, since they lose their
> GPS if they lose their phone).

I like having mine, and I like playing with it, but the phone function
(rarely used) is the only part that I actually use in any needful way.
If I lost it I'd have to change all my email passwords and maybe one for
the bank, but beyond that it would just be a nuisance rather than a
tragedy. My computer, OTOH, would be the first thing I'd grab if the
house caught on fire -- but then I'd realize that the backup I made last
week on the little 500GB USB drive would be almost as good and a lot
easier to carry!

> Things have broadened out, so people are using technology not imagined 20
> years ago, but that doesn't mean they have raised themselves up. Instead
> it's aimed at the masses, making life simpler for them without raising
> them up.

Hey, I LIKE dog videos! Next best thing to actually having a dog!


--
Cheers, Bev
The Marketing Professional's Motto: "We don't screw the customers. All
we're doing is holding them down while the salespeople screw them."
-- Scott Adams

[Nyssa]

I remember that TV show too. I'm brain-cramping on the
title though. I do remember that along with the acre of
land on what had been a national park, the couple got
a license for one child. Since the wife was already
pregnant, the guy had to win both the acre and the license
or his wife would have been arrested and jailed (plus
a mandatory abortion that was hinted at, but not stated
IIRC).

Yeah, that show made me even more allergic to crowds and
cities than I already was. I guess that's part of the reason
I live in a fairly rural area now.

I also agree with Michael about the "me too" not really
adding to discussions, just a bunch of hangers-on with
few thoughts of their own. They rely on others for fads,
fashion, and follow-the-leader activities. When you come
down to it, there are fewer "do-ers" with any creativity
and more dabblers with short attention spans who simply
nod their heads and click on whatever is being pushed to
the masses.

Thanks goodness that there are still some people willing
to put in the effort of learning, practicing, and creating
or we'd no longer have any orchestras, scientific discoveries,
or engineering breakthroughs.

Nyssa, who can't imagine being passive and not DOING something

[Michael Black]

On Mon, 22 Aug 2016, The Real Bev wrote:


> Is that the one where people are sent to <heh> colonize Venus? That one
> sticks in my mind, along with a TV program I saw when I was a kid wherein
> there was a sort of death race for the last 1-acre parcel of land on earth
> not yet built on -- in Yosemite Valley. Imagine contestants rushing through
> crowded (like the subway at rush hour) apartment hallways with weapons...
> That program all by itself may account for my serious horror of
> overpopulation.
>

I think there was a bit about Venus, but Pohl and Kornbluth's "The Space
Merchants" has a trip to Venus too (and I've read that more times so maybe
that's why I remember it more strongly

> ...
>> And the theme continues, why bother reading anything when you can so
>> easily get an answer via the internet? Mobile devices can be neat, but I
>> think they've taken the place of some other things, so many are lost if
>> they lose their device (and that can be literal too, since they lose their
>> GPS if they lose their phone).
>
> I like having mine, and I like playing with it, but the phone function
> (rarely used) is the only part that I actually use in any needful way. If I
> lost it I'd have to change all my email passwords and maybe one for the bank,
> but beyond that it would just be a nuisance rather than a tragedy. My
> computer, OTOH, would be the first thing I'd grab if the house caught on fire
> -- but then I'd realize that the backup I made last week on the little 500GB
> USB drive would be almost as good and a lot easier to carry!
>

I couldn't live without a computer, but then I've had some computer
continuously since April of 1979. But I'm thinking of skill set versus
templating. I go to a lot of used book sales, the dealers have always
been at the front of the line, but they are like me, they know the books
because they like them and visit the sales. But the people with the
barcode readers, they know nothing, but they scan the books to find the
ones that have better resale value. I don't respect them, since they
havent' aquired a skill, and they'd be lost without their smartphone.

>> Things have broadened out, so people are using technology not imagined 20
>> years ago, but that doesn't mean they have raised themselves up. Instead
>> it's aimed at the masses, making life simpler for them without raising
>> them up.
>
> Hey, I LIKE dog videos! Next best thing to actually having a dog!
>

I seem to have aquired a frugal dog, my sister's. So she pays for the
food, but he takes me for a walk every day, which then means he's glad to
see me. It's actually better than owning a dog.

I didnt' even say anything about dog videos, how observant that that is
some of what I'm talking about.

The funny part is, most of those "viral" videos, the only reason I know
about them is because they keep landing on the evening news.

Michael

[Dennis]

On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 13:35:54 -0400, Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca>
wrote:

>I seem to have aquired a frugal dog, my sister's. So she pays for the
>food, but he takes me for a walk every day, which then means he's glad to
>see me. It's actually better than owning a dog.

I have a dog. I pay for her food, actually put the food in her dish
twice a day, take her for walks, throw the frisbee, brush her, etc.
She is always glad to see me, but if I'm downstairs and my wife is
upstairs, the dog hangs out upstairs with my wife. I can't really
blame the dog, though -- I would rather hang out with my wife too.

Dennis (evil)
--
I'm behind the eight ball, ahead of the curve, riding the wave,
dodging the bullet and pushing the envelope. -George Carlin

[fratermus]

On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 11:04:22 -0700, wilma6116 wrote:


> Well, there goes all that Christian nation idea.

Then we're making progress.

[wilm...@gmail.com]

Social Darwinism is NOT progress.

[Beaver...@live.com]

this feels good

[hchi...@hotmail.com]

On Mon, 29 Aug 2016 15:08:26 -0700 (PDT), Beaver...@live.com wrote:

>this feels good


It might for you, but you have traumatized your tissues...

[Beaver...@live.com]

The future I always feared is finally here and I couldn't be happier.