Saturday, February 28, 2015

What in the World is Wrong with People?

As an electrical engineer who worked almost exclusively on analog to digital conversion (the key to our digital era), one would think I am a high tech junkie. I am not! I still own analog equipment and have a flip phone. I have been able to see the evils of technology along the way. I remember my bosses wanting to give me a corporate phone and hook me up with beepers or whatever the current technology was. I did not want them and I did not require anyone who worked for me to have these evil devices. Why are they evil? They enable your boss or workplace to harass you 24/7 so you can never escape work.

Facebook, Twitter, and other social mediums were developed by socially challenged engineers because they needed to figure out a way to communicate. Instead of talking to the guy in the office next to them, they could tweet them or send them a message on FB. In other words, there is nothing social about social mediums, it was used as a means to replace personal contact.

Sure, there are a lot of good things that come with the internet and social media. But, there is so much evil it surely outweighs the benefits:

· People are less personal and privacy is all but gone

· It is a medium for people to bully and stalk others

· People use it for other criminal reasons: recruiting terrorists and identity theft are on the rise

· People use it for divisive political purposes such as propaganda, hacking, and fear mongering

· The technology takes jobs away from people

· There are more leaks of proprietary information

· It makes unhealthy both mentally and physically

. Texting and or talking on phones has turned into the biggest highway killer

One could argue instead of making the world a better place by uniting and bringing people around the globe closer together, social media has done the opposite. If you ask me, the evils outweigh the advantages of social media. I would be all for shutting down the internet to stop groups like ISIS to brainwash and recruit people to commit acts of terror; I would be for shutting down the internet so people could once again learn how to interact with each other socially; I would be for shutting down the internet if it saved the lives of innocent drivers; and so on.

Monday, February 23, 2015

The Narcissistic Righteousness that is Hollywood

I could not but help to see all the political statements made by all the winners at the Oscars (I am paraphrasing them): This is for all the people with Alzheimer’s; This is for all the people with ALS; There are more black men incarcerated today then there were slaves at the end of the Civil War; It is time for women to be treated equally; and to stay weird.

The only one that made any sense is the one to stay weird. It was a very personalized story about one winner who attempted suicide, but he succeeded despite his weirdness. That is a message that is a good one that I can live with. The rest of statements were just flat out Hollywood narcissistic righteousness.

First, there is a big difference between being a criminal and a slave. Are some black people falsely incarcerated? Yes, but a very high percentage are guilty of the crime they were put on trial for. Criminals have a choice, slaves did not. And the statement about more blacks incarcerated today then there were slaves at the end of the Civil War is made by a man who does not know the concept of percentages in mathematics. Nearly half of all blacks were slaves in the early 1860s, today only 3.2 percent of blacks are under some type of correction control including being out of prison but on probation. Needless to say this is one of the most idiotic statements made by an award winner.

Secondly, I am sure it is little comfort to the people with ALS or Alzheimer’s that some Hollywood elitist is going to be a caretaker of a Oscar depicting their deadly disorder. Actually, Hollywood has been late to bring attention to these disorders. Both ALS and Alzheimer’s (dementia) receive comparable funding to any medical disorder from the government and through charities based on their prevalence factor. You would have to be living under a rock to have not heard of these horrific diseases before these Hollywood flicks came out. I know it would bring me no comfort knowing a person is polishing off an Oscar in their posh million dollar home at the expense of an ailment I have. But that is just me.

Thirdly, I am tired of hearing that women are not being treated fairly in our country. Maybe women would prefer to live in some Arab or Asian culture where women are treated as second rate citizens. My research of government and charitable funding for ALS and Alzheimer’s led me to find that billions more dollars are spent on women’s ailments. In fact, government laws discriminate against men to give women more opportunities. Title IX has dismantled many athletic opportunities for men. Diversity has given more opportunities to unqualified women at the expense of men. It happens every day. Yet, all we hear is that women are not being treated fairly – this is nonsense.

Fourth, it is completely condescending to make some kind of political statement after winning an award. This is narcissistic righteousness behavior at its core. They are instead making the issue about them and not what they preach. This is true especially coming from a group of people wearing expensive clothing, jewelry, and makeup and eating expensive foods. What have these people done to truly help the cause they are preaching for? They have done nothing, they are hypocritical fakes. Anyone can say and hide behind righteous words, but few can really act them. Think about it; none of these winners would have done their work without the reward of pay. In other words, they did not volunteer for these jobs or offer some percentage of their earnings to their cause. They are greedy fakes.

Friday, February 20, 2015

The Problem with Obama’s non-Islamic Narrative

Obama and his administration refuse to call ISIS and other terrorists groups in the Middle East radical Islam. Actually, I do not have a problem with this approach and agree with his argument that there are a few radicalized people that for the most part do not represent Islam in any way. But there are some serious issues with his thinking (he is a hypocrite and contradicts himself).

First, and probably the most troubling aspect of this approach is that Islam is still an archaic religion living in the past. For instance, many Islamic people may not be terrorist but many more still practice Sharia Law. And Sharia law discriminates against women, gays, and other groups of people. This is a liberal hypocrisy because they claim to be the Party that sticks up for these groups of people. For this reason, and to be consistent, liberals should call out radical Islam until it completely changes its ways to meet modern ethical standards.

Second, Obama and his administration have no problem calling out other groups of people even when there is no evidence. They have done this consistently - they pit white versus black (race baiting over issues such as Jeramiah Wright, Hurricane Katrina, Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and the Henry Louis Gates incidents to name a few), female versus male (war on women), and when Muslims are attacked he is quick to point out this is racism and a hate crime. But they fail to make the same analysis when Muslims kill Christians. In fact, the entire Democratic Party is guilty of placing every American person into some type of group or classification – old, young, wealthy, poor, Christian, Jew, White, Hispanic, Male, Female, Gay, etc. We are no longer individuals treated equally in the eyes of liberals, we are treated differently based on our classification or demographic. This is how they win elections – they pit groups of people against each other to win votes. So the fact Obama has an issue placing a name on Islamic terrorism is a completely different narrative then how he and liberals deal with every American citizen. Call it what you may, but this is once again convenient hypocrisy.

Tuesday, February 17, 2015

The Growing Liberalism in America

Many conservatives are practicing liberal ideas and they have no clue they are doing so. I saw a sign on the side of a car that supported Republican candidates which read: “Cure Juvenile Arthritis!”. This sign seems fairly benign, but it is not. I empathize with the family to have to go through any debilitating ailment with their kids or anyone in their family. No one should have to go through this. That being said, there are so many things wrong with sign and their approach to solve this problem.

First, why not put out a sign to “Cure Arthritis”, period. If arthritis is cured for adults, it will also be cured for children and vice versa. The word “Juvenile” is a play at people’s emotions and is purely political. This is no different than how liberals use ethnicities and genders to win votes such as the “War on Women”.

Secondly, I went to the website and found more disturbing information. The charity receives taxpayer money. The people who have a bumper sticker to lower taxes also have a charity that receives taxpayer funding. This is obviously hypocritical.

Thirdly, there are dozens of charities and even government funding programs for arthritis. These people created a new one for their child. These layers of bureaucracy are the essence of liberalism and big government. It leads to waste, inefficiency, and fraud. It should make sense to have one arthritis charity to try to solve the problem.

Fourthly, I do not so much have a problem with people asking for private funding. My problem is that money is only one small variable in the equation to find cures. The charity only knows how to raise money, but they really do not understand anything about finding a cure. Money is not a cure. Liberals are of the belief that money solves all problems. Trillions of dollars and 50 years later poverty is higher than when the “War on Poverty” initiative started. Trillions of dollars later and there is no cure for cancer. What people do not understand is that becoming a doctor or scientist will do more to solve the problem than raising money. Raising money is easy, solving the problem is the hard part. The sign makes it sound as if donating money will solve the problem. This is the liberal fallacy for every problem in life. Without good doctors, engineers, and scientists you can raise all the money you want and the problem will never be solved. None of the money raised for any of these arthritis charities goes to scholarships for kids to become a scientist. And unfortunately, doctors, scientists, and engineers are becoming a dying breed.

Fifthly, the sign places the onus on someone else to solve the problem. What are the people in the car doing to solve the problem besides raising money? Are they really doing all they can? Are they becoming biomedical engineers?

Sixthly, every liberal has a cause whether it is to save the environment, wipe out poverty, wipe out disease in Africa, and so forth. The people in the car created their own cause when they could have simply joined a cause that was already out there to cure arthritis. I call this our progressive righteousness desire. We have the need to feel important and we need to feel we are making a difference. Even if we are just hypocrites who raise a few dollars for a cause and that is it.

I have a neurological disorder and I would never ask for people and or the government to fund a cure for it. I do not believe that is right. If I want to spend my money to fund charities and set up my own study -that is okay. This is my choice. Besides, there are billions of dollars spent each year trying to solve neurological mysteries. Hopefully, the issue will be solved, but it is not up to me to advertise on my behalf to accept money from others.

Friday, February 13, 2015

The Forces of Humanity (Part II)

Posson, Neutson, and Negson groups are partially made up of a very small number of individuals called a Powson. Powson persons are the individuals who have the power to impact society the most. Powson individuals can be Fortune 500 CEOs, federal and state legislators, drug lords, media executives, Terrorist leaders, Heads of government agencies, Supreme Court members and so forth. Powson persons within the Posson group use their power for goodness and that is the force that holds the group together. This power or force can influence Neutson individuals and pull them over to the Posson group. Conversely, Powson people within the Negson group use their power for evil and use this force to influence as many Neutson individuals into moving over to the Negson group. Meanwhile Powson persons within the Neutson group can also positively or negatively impact individuals. These Powson individuals are more often than not divisive and polarizing personalities splintering the Neutson group into two factions of Posson leaning individuals and Negson leaning individuals.

Individuals within the Posson, Neutson, Negson, or Powson group or population can move between each group, but it is rare. Today, it is quite concerning because more individuals are moving towards Negson than vice versa. In an ideal society the number of people within the Posson group should equal the number of individuals in the Negson group and the number of Powson persons should be evenly distributed between groups for balance, equilibrium and symmetry. Posson, Neutson, Negson, and Powson are measured by their character and not by their gender, race, religion, or socioeconomic status. In other words, they are measured by their impact to society.

There is no doubt that money plays a big part in both power and anti-power. And it seems for the most part money affects a majority of the people negatively. People tend to become more materialistic and less compassionate. In other words, this is proof that the influence of anti-power is stronger than power.

Passon, Neutson, and Negson groups are not political, but there is no doubt that liberal policies can be a cancer and push more and more people towards the Negson group of thinking or inactivity making a negative impact on society. In fact, I would consider Obama a Powson in the Negson group. I see Obama as incompetent and a failure and therefore his power is anti-power because it is used in a negative way. Obama uses many deceitful propaganda techniques to implement his anti-power (as do many politicians, but this is troubling because these are tactics used by drug lords and terrorists): Fear mongering (climate change), dependency through spreading the wealth (welfare, ObamaCare), class warfare (war on women, race baiting), quid pro quo situations with lobbyists, hypocrisy, money as a means to solve all complex problems, redefining the rules as you go, and so forth. Unfortunately, most politicians act this way and have impacted society in a negative way. The bottom line is that Obama policies are making it easier for people to move from Neutson to Negson using anti-power and that is not good. This breaks the symmetrical balance of society. When the number of Negsons outnumber the number of Possons maintaining equilibrium becomes harder when there are less taxpayers to pay for more people on welfare for instance. Or when criminals outnumber the number of innovators our society is creating – this can be cataclysmic in its effect.

Think of the negative impact media executives have on power. They create brain numbing shows such as Big Brother, Jersey Shore, and Knockout. They use their power to push propaganda such as political points on issues like race baiting and class warfare. When Bush was President they ran negative stories on the Iraq war, today they run positive spins of Obama’s involvement in Iraq. This is the hypocrisy that the media spins on politics.

It does not take a rocket scientist to understand the outcome of having a larger knot on the anti-power side of the rope. This imbalance will break society. Unfortunately, Negson Powson leaders are becoming the norm today – incompetent, corrupt, weak, followers, indecisive, blamers, and excuse makers. This trend cannot continue.

It is also important to note that a huge imbalance towards the Posson group is not desirable either and could have a huge negative impact on society. This is what leads to economic bubbles or massive inflation. However, the economy usually adapts through recessions or depressions to get back to equilibrium. Moving towards an unbalanced state in the Negson direction can and will be more catastrophic to humanity and society. If the United States looks like it is weak and can be bullied, it will be and we are starting to see that with Russia and Terrorist organizations.

Tuesday, February 10, 2015

The Forces of Humanity (Part I)

There are many forces in the world. In the universe there are four main forces: the weak nuclear force, the strong nuclear force, the electromagnetic force, and gravity. There are said to be many more forces acting on our planet such as weather. I believe there is one main force acting on humanity and society as a whole and that is the force of power. After all, power seems to be the one thing everyone wants more of: Job advancement, fame, fortune, notoriety, a legacy, and power may be obtained from a variety of other means. However, not all power is good, in fact most power is bad, especially the means we go about obtaining it: lying, cheating, back-stabbing, deceit, and criminal activity to name a few.

Unfortunately, what most people do not realize is that only a select few people have enough power to change society for better or worse. And it is my theory that most are changing society for the worse. After all, who makes the biggest impact: a person donating 10 million to cancer research or a serial killer who has claimed 6 victims? I would argue the serial killer because that has an immediate impact on 6 families. The 10 million is just a drop in the bucket of billions donated to cancer research over the past century and there still is no cure for any cancer. Those people trying to obtain power through Facebook, YouTube, twitter, and other media outlets will be short lived and completely forgotten. For instance, some crazy dance or song will have no effect or tangible impact on society in the future.

Power is defined by ability and competence and there are dozens of synonyms such as capability, capacity, function, influence, potential, skill, talent, aptitude, bent, dynamism, effectiveness, efficacy, endowment, faculty, gift, potentiality, qualification, turn, and virtue. The list of antonyms for power is also long: evil, impotence, inability, incapacity, incompetence, lack, weakness, failure, inaptitude, loss, uselessness, debility, disability, impairment, inefficiency, infirmity, subservience, surrender, and yielding. Anti-power is a made up word by myself to help explain the forces of human nature. Anti-Power is more prevalent and powerful than power because it is power that can be used for negative outcomes and or the antithesis of power.

My theory of humanity looks something like a rope with a small knot on each end and a huge knot in the middle (symmetrical). The left end knot represents a group of people I call the Posson group (short for positive persons). Posson individuals are the people who make the biggest positive impact towards society. They are givers, honest, hardworking, listeners, thinkers, and innovators. The other end of the rope represents the Negson group of individuals (negative persons). Negson is the group that is classified by takers, liars, criminals, terrorists, slackers, bullies, and leave a large negative impact on society because they are completely irresponsible and unaccountable. The middle of the rope represents the Neutson group of individuals (neutral persons). Neutson persons should consist of a vast majority of the population because they are everyday ordinary individuals. Neutson people can lean towards either the Posson or Negson group. Neutson persons with high integrity, self-awareness, try to better themselves, and live as they preach lean towards the Posson group. Neutson individuals who are narcissistic hypocrites lean towards the Negson group.

Friday, February 6, 2015

The Laws of Symmetry and Equilibrium (Part II)

Uniqueness and features may be symmetrical but in most instances uniqueness and features are not symmetrical. Our government uses or bases fundamental principles on uniqueness and features when writing laws, rules, regulations, and mandates and not symmetry. For instance, race and ethnicity is a uniqueness or feature of an individual, but it is not symmetry. Race and ethnicity is no different a feature of an individual than a person having green eyes, or big feet. DNA which consists of the chemical makeup of individuals is symmetrical, but the order of molecular strands within DNA is unique to each living organism. Therefore, diversity laws are not symmetrical, there may as well be a law yielding people with Morton’s Toe (second toe is longer than the big toe) reduced educational standards to enter college and be eligible for scholarships. After all, people with Morton’s Toe have a tougher time finding shoes that fit properly so they can concentrate during school. This sounds ridiculous because that is the effect of applying laws based on uniqueness or features instead of symmetry.

Gay marriage is interesting issue to consider. For a marriage law to have symmetry it should be inclusive of all people. However, doesn’t a relationship between two men or two women violate symmetry?

The concept of symmetry may sound harsh and pessimistic, but there has to be a balance within not only the universe, but within our society and lives. This is not a new concept, the Chinese had the yin and yang to explain dark and light; fire and water; life and death; and male and female. Every word has an opposite or antonym. In science there is the conservation of mass and energy. Every force in nature is opposed by an equal and opposite force. Electromagnetic forces have positive and negative polarity. Any event within the universe cannot be explained without having an opposite or antithesis force, energy, word, or action to force balance and equilibrium. Nothing makes sense without symmetry. For language to take place (make sense), the number of words used to communicate cannot be random, but must fit a line with a slope that is symmetrical. This also explains why music is symmetrical and repetitious in nature. In math for every operation there is an opposite operation (add/subtract, multiply/divide, square/square root, integrate/differentiate and so forth). Politics is defined by opposite parties and opposing views on complex issues. Analog is converted digital using devices that are symmetrical. Our Constitution attempts to balance or offset power to form a state of equilibrium. Humans, animals, and insects are symmetrical. Structures are made from shapes that are symmetrical.

It would be great if we lived in utopia where nothing bad ever happened. But if only good things happened such as no one died, eventually resources would dry up and this utopia would come to a cataclysmic end. There is no way to have anything good without an opposite bad component eventually happening.

Is this God’s plan to create a universe that is perfectly balanced scientifically so life can exist? Quite possibly; it is hard to imagine the universe and its formation without thinking a greater being was not involved. To consider that everything that takes place within this universe is perfectly balanced and life would not exist without that equilibrium, it is hard to imagine how something this perfect can be created.

Without symmetry there would be no universe or life. And if our government continues to violate the commonsense laws of symmetry they will destroy society.

Tuesday, February 3, 2015

The Laws of Symmetry and Equilibrium (Part I)

I have talked in great lengths on this blog about how symmetry is the key to equilibrium for not only all matter within our universe, but for society and lives. Symmetry controls the stability of our economy, our educational system, religion, and even crime. Below are some examples of my laws of symmetry and any government attempt to change the outcome of these laws will lead directly to waste, chaos, and failure.

There should be as many poor people as there are rich people. When the government tried to make it possible for all of the poor to own a home, the housing market crashed and started the great recession. For fifty years the government has tried to eradicate poverty with no progress to show for trillions and trillions of dollars thrown into the system. Hence, socialism and spreading the wealth cannot undo Darwin’s laws of symmetry such as the survival of the fittest.

There are as many underachievers as gifted or advanced students in our educational system. To the same note there are as many geniuses as there are intellectually challenged in society. Not everyone is college material. The government pours billions into helping underachievers and very little to help advanced students. The result – the U.S. is falling further behind the rest of the world when it comes to reading, writing, math, and science. The school system may have just as much luck trying to convert athletically challenged students into top notch athletes or introverts into extraverts. This sounds silly, but that is the effect of non-symmetrical based policies.

There are as many evil people as heroes. This is why government attempts to reform hardened evil criminals’ fails at a rate greater than 95%. This also explains why our criminal system is failing good citizens because they hand down lenient penalties. Every act of goodness is opposed by an act of bad and this explains why bad things happen to good people. The same can be said of good and bad countries.

There are as many successes as there are failures. Therefore, government interference in the private sector with bailouts is not necessary. For instance, the Bush/Obama auto bailouts failed because GM and Chrysler went into bankruptcy anyway.

All government laws, mandates, regulations, and rules should be applied symmetrically. This means they should be applied equally amongst the population for which the law targets. However, this is not what has happened for ANY law since Calvin Coolidge was President. Laws are complex with thousands of pages of carve outs, earmarks, exceptions, inclusions, and overall convolution and disorder. The end result is chaos, fraud, mismanagement, and waste. Every big entitlement is a perfect example of this: ObamaCare, Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare to name a few.