a portrait - Ellen DeGeneres

"Mark L" wrote in message
...

You will find an excellent micro-example of this playing out in the
popular
TV show called "Survivor". If there was no monetary reward you would see a
very very different game being played. The most intelligent, wise, and
strongest would be the most valued members. I've lived in just such a
community for three years during the 70's. Living off the land on a remote
South Pacific island with approximately 50 to 100 others. Money had
absolutely no value to any of us there. I could play the TV game-show of
"Survivor" for a year while standing on my head, it would be an enjoyable
way to live, but I would not win their game. Instead (in the capitalists'
game of "Survivor") the most intelligent, wise, and strongest are very
often voted off first because they are a threat to the less intelligent,
less wise, but greedy. Eventually only the most self-serving,
manipulative,
and deceitful ones are left. (Does this remind you of any faction of your
own present society? Most call it "the government".) In a capitalist
promoting society you are getting a clear and frightening glimpse of the
evolutionary future of humanity being played out. "As is the fractal part,
so goes the fractal whole."


Was that the place they used bananas as currency?
I can just hear the parents yelling at their kids. "YOU MUST THINK MONEY
GROWS ON TREES."


--
Peter

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Chris H" wrote in message
...
In message , Neil
Harrington writes
A bigger and more important problem is that the more intelligent
people
practice some form of birth control. Many of the less intelligent do
not.

Absolutely, that is the greater problem by far.

However most of the Gays do seem to be of higher intelligence.
Certainly in the computing world.

To someone who feels an obligation to be politically correct in all
thoughts, words and deeds, I'm not surprised it should seem so.

In the real world I have never noticed a correlation one way or the
other. I will say that one or two of the most mind-numbingly stupid
people I've ever known happened to be homosexual, but I still wouldn't
take that as having any real significance as to correlation.


I think you will find a high correlation between openly gay people and
those in the arts. I have no statistics. It may also be that the climate
in the art world allows gay people to be more open about it.

Yes, I agree with you on both counts. But being active in the arts does
not correlate with high intelligence as far as I'm aware. There are, of
course, several different measures of intelligence (or perhaps more
accurately, different kinds of intelligence).

Most successful artists have higher than average IQ's.....People like
Tchaikovski, and Da Vinci were not stupid people.

"David Ruether" wrote in message
...

"Mark L" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 May 2010 18:45:05 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:

Yes. And when there exists a policy of stealing money from the rich
(successful) and giving it to the poor (unsuccessful) the average
intelligence of the human race deteriorates as a result. The unsuccessful
just have more children, and the successful, fewer.....

If you try to measure survival and evolutionary success in dollars you
are
sadly mistaken. For starters, intelligence and wisdom are in no way
equated
with financial wealth. Money just begets more money, with or without you.
The trait of greed, the only way to attain more material gain than
another
human, is an anathema to survival of the species. The greedy person's
only
goal is survival of themselves, not survival of the species as a whole.
The
greedy do the utmost harm to everyone else's environment because only
their
financial wealth matters to them. They cannot even think nor reason
beyond
that concept. They often have to be forced by laws and punishment or
threats of punishment to try to make them even consider the lives of
other
humans. They're not concerned with anyone's survival past their own
life-span. The person who disburses their material gains amongst all
equally are interested in survival of humanity, not survival of just
themselves. Nor will they make decisions to harm the survival of others
nor
their environment just to gain financially. If you use financial gain as
a
yardstick for evolutionary success there will eventually be only one
person
left on the planet, whoever is the most greedy. Even your own comments
proving that your desire for financial gain doesn't equal evolutionary
success.

Great post! (I respond not only to thank you for it, but so that
I will include it among all the posts preserved on my web site...;-)
--David Ruether
www.donferrario.com/ruether


If you believe putting all the wealthy people into the "greedy and
worthless" bag is a "great post", then you are sadly mistaken. The wealthy
people I know worked very hard for their money, and they invested a portion
of everything they earned, usually in American businesses, instead of just
spending it all. Many of these people own their own businesses, and give
jobs to others in those businesses....They are, in fact, what has made this
country great. To put them all down as being just a bunch of greedy *******s
is the height of stupidity.

"Bill Graham" wrote in message
...

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Chris H" wrote in message
...
In message , Neil
Harrington writes
A bigger and more important problem is that the more intelligent
people
practice some form of birth control. Many of the less intelligent do
not.

Absolutely, that is the greater problem by far.

However most of the Gays do seem to be of higher intelligence.
Certainly in the computing world.

To someone who feels an obligation to be politically correct in all
thoughts, words and deeds, I'm not surprised it should seem so.

In the real world I have never noticed a correlation one way or the
other. I will say that one or two of the most mind-numbingly stupid
people I've ever known happened to be homosexual, but I still wouldn't
take that as having any real significance as to correlation.


I think you will find a high correlation between openly gay people and
those in the arts. I have no statistics. It may also be that the climate
in the art world allows gay people to be more open about it.

Yes, I agree with you on both counts. But being active in the arts does
not correlate with high intelligence as far as I'm aware. There are, of
course, several different measures of intelligence (or perhaps more
accurately, different kinds of intelligence).

Most successful artists have higher than average IQ's.....

Presumably most successful people in any line of work have higher than
average IQs.

People like Tchaikovski, and Da Vinci were not stupid people.

Most artists are nowhere near that successful. There are a great many really
untalented artists. You never hear about them because their work is lousy,
but this has never stopped them from regarding themselves as artists.

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...


If you try to measure survival and evolutionary success in dollars you
are
sadly mistaken.

Fine. Now go explain that to Obama, carefully pointing out to him that
his central goal of "spreading the wealth around" (i.e., taking it away
from those who have worked, saved and invested to gain it and
distributing it to those who prefer to sit on their asses, watch TV and
wait for the welfare check) really is not going to bring "success" to the
recipients after all.

Learn from the banana republics. Learn from the communist revolution.
When society has two classes, haves and have nots, those of us who have
money tend to get more and more. Eventually the poor will rebel and we
will have chaos. Henry Ford has the right ides. He paid his workers
sufficient wages so they could afford to buy his cars.

And they went on strike anyway.

Likewise, for industry to be successful in the long term, people have to
have enough money to afford the products, both essential and
non=essential.

Yes. The idea, though, is for people to be productive enough to earn that
money -- not just have it handed to them. The principle of the Little Red
Hen applies here.

On Tue, 18 May 2010 20:15:17 -0400, "Peter"
wrote:

"Mark L" wrote in message
.. .

You will find an excellent micro-example of this playing out in the
popular
TV show called "Survivor". If there was no monetary reward you would see a
very very different game being played. The most intelligent, wise, and
strongest would be the most valued members. I've lived in just such a
community for three years during the 70's. Living off the land on a remote
South Pacific island with approximately 50 to 100 others. Money had
absolutely no value to any of us there. I could play the TV game-show of
"Survivor" for a year while standing on my head, it would be an enjoyable
way to live, but I would not win their game. Instead (in the capitalists'
game of "Survivor") the most intelligent, wise, and strongest are very
often voted off first because they are a threat to the less intelligent,
less wise, but greedy. Eventually only the most self-serving,
manipulative,
and deceitful ones are left. (Does this remind you of any faction of your
own present society? Most call it "the government".) In a capitalist
promoting society you are getting a clear and frightening glimpse of the
evolutionary future of humanity being played out. "As is the fractal part,
so goes the fractal whole."


Was that the place they used bananas as currency?
I can just hear the parents yelling at their kids. "YOU MUST THINK MONEY
GROWS ON TREES."

No. Your personality and what you could do for others was your only
"currency". Those without either could not "afford" to live there and left
on their own. That kind of currency does not grow on trees, nor can someone
else just give it to you, or leave it to you in their Will. Bananas, like
everything else, was shared for free. We used one large cave for what we
called "The Library". If you happened to be foraging and gathered too much
of something or received some item from a pass-through tourist and didn't
need it, it would be put into "The Library". Where anyone who needed
anything could go and get it without even having to sign it out. No need to
return it either, unless you wanted to. "The Library" was always packed
full. It contained a few books, many utensils, emergency medical supplies,
fishing/diving gear, maps, clothing (but nobody wore clothing there so that
was mostly used to make more functional items), etc. Since we liked fresh
foods there was a rather large stockpile of unused canned-goods and other
dry-goods in "The Library" too. We had more enjoyable meals by spearing our
food on the reefs or hunting inland. Lobster, wrasse, abalone, $90 per qt.
limpet-like shellfish delicacies that are sold in specialty shops today (I
would regularly lunch on those, they were 4x's the size you can find in any
store), mountain-goat, etc. Going up into the highlands of the valley to
find all manner of fruits, nuts, and vegetables that you pay an arm and a
leg for in any store today. Even coffee-beans were readily available. I
used to roast them in a pan over a campfire. All for free. Nobody had any
set "jobs" and there were no "rulers" nor "leaders". People just did what
they enjoyed doing and doing for each other. Somehow everything always got
done. Any conflicts were usually solved by talking during dinner. After
dinners those who had no hunting nor foraging skills might offer their
services as masseuses to those who worked hard all day. Others provided
entertainment. Some acted as valuable teachers for those that wanted to
learn. Some tried their hand at all of these things.

Many who came through couldn't afford to live there for free. There was
nothing in their personality that they could or would do for others. They
would just leave without even being told to. Total failures. Perfect
reflections of present society.

Before you even bother asking the most often asked question of me, "Why did
_you_ leave this paradise?" I'll answer with the only answer that came to
me one night while laying on the grass-covered helicopter landing and
staring up into the star-filled sky: "A student's lessons are for naught if
they remain sitting at their desk." After receiving that lesson there was
no choice, my time had come, I had to leave. But not without having to
convince many others first.

"Mark L" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 18 May 2010 20:15:17 -0400, "Peter"
wrote:

"Mark L" wrote in message
. ..

You will find an excellent micro-example of this playing out in the
popular
TV show called "Survivor". If there was no monetary reward you would see
a
very very different game being played. The most intelligent, wise, and
strongest would be the most valued members. I've lived in just such a
community for three years during the 70's. Living off the land on a
remote
South Pacific island with approximately 50 to 100 others. Money had
absolutely no value to any of us there. I could play the TV game-show of
"Survivor" for a year while standing on my head, it would be an
enjoyable
way to live, but I would not win their game. Instead (in the
capitalists'
game of "Survivor") the most intelligent, wise, and strongest are very
often voted off first because they are a threat to the less intelligent,
less wise, but greedy. Eventually only the most self-serving,
manipulative,
and deceitful ones are left. (Does this remind you of any faction of
your
own present society? Most call it "the government".) In a capitalist
promoting society you are getting a clear and frightening glimpse of the
evolutionary future of humanity being played out. "As is the fractal
part,
so goes the fractal whole."


Was that the place they used bananas as currency?
I can just hear the parents yelling at their kids. "YOU MUST THINK MONEY
GROWS ON TREES."

No. Your personality and what you could do for others was your only
"currency". Those without either could not "afford" to live there and left
on their own. That kind of currency does not grow on trees, nor can
someone
else just give it to you, or leave it to you in their Will. Bananas, like
everything else, was shared for free. We used one large cave for what we
called "The Library". If you happened to be foraging and gathered too much
of something or received some item from a pass-through tourist and didn't
need it, it would be put into "The Library". Where anyone who needed
anything could go and get it without even having to sign it out. No need
to
return it either, unless you wanted to. "The Library" was always packed
full. It contained a few books, many utensils, emergency medical supplies,
fishing/diving gear, maps, clothing (but nobody wore clothing there so
that
was mostly used to make more functional items), etc. Since we liked fresh
foods there was a rather large stockpile of unused canned-goods and other
dry-goods in "The Library" too. We had more enjoyable meals by spearing
our
food on the reefs or hunting inland. Lobster, wrasse, abalone, $90 per qt.
limpet-like shellfish delicacies that are sold in specialty shops today (I
would regularly lunch on those, they were 4x's the size you can find in
any
store), mountain-goat, etc. Going up into the highlands of the valley to
find all manner of fruits, nuts, and vegetables that you pay an arm and a
leg for in any store today. Even coffee-beans were readily available. I
used to roast them in a pan over a campfire. All for free. Nobody had any
set "jobs" and there were no "rulers" nor "leaders". People just did what
they enjoyed doing and doing for each other. Somehow everything always got
done. Any conflicts were usually solved by talking during dinner. After
dinners those who had no hunting nor foraging skills might offer their
services as masseuses to those who worked hard all day. Others provided
entertainment. Some acted as valuable teachers for those that wanted to
learn. Some tried their hand at all of these things.

Many who came through couldn't afford to live there for free. There was
nothing in their personality that they could or would do for others. They
would just leave without even being told to. Total failures. Perfect
reflections of present society.

Before you even bother asking the most often asked question of me, "Why
did
_you_ leave this paradise?" I'll answer with the only answer that came to
me one night while laying on the grass-covered helicopter landing and
staring up into the star-filled sky: "A student's lessons are for naught
if
they remain sitting at their desk." After receiving that lesson there was
no choice, my time had come, I had to leave. But not without having to
convince many others first.

Reminds me of a hippie I used to work with.....He was always extolling the
mesa top in Arizona where he used to live.....A colony of hippies that
"removed themselves from society" and "made it on their own" away from all
the trials and tribulations of the modern world. I asked him what they did
when one of their members got sick, or tripped and broke something. "Oh, we
had doctors there" he said.....Doctors who were trained in huge stainless
steel hospitals, I asked. He fell silent.....And where did you buy your
drugs? - Oh, we went into town to the drugstore.....Drugs that were made in
huge stainless steel factories? - Well, you get the idea....They were not
really independent of modern society at all.......

On Wed, 19 May 2010 01:04:56 -0700, "Bill Graham" wrote:


"Mark L" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 18 May 2010 20:15:17 -0400, "Peter"
wrote:

"Mark L" wrote in message
...

You will find an excellent micro-example of this playing out in the
popular
TV show called "Survivor". If there was no monetary reward you would see
a
very very different game being played. The most intelligent, wise, and
strongest would be the most valued members. I've lived in just such a
community for three years during the 70's. Living off the land on a
remote
South Pacific island with approximately 50 to 100 others. Money had
absolutely no value to any of us there. I could play the TV game-show of
"Survivor" for a year while standing on my head, it would be an
enjoyable
way to live, but I would not win their game. Instead (in the
capitalists'
game of "Survivor") the most intelligent, wise, and strongest are very
often voted off first because they are a threat to the less intelligent,
less wise, but greedy. Eventually only the most self-serving,
manipulative,
and deceitful ones are left. (Does this remind you of any faction of
your
own present society? Most call it "the government".) In a capitalist
promoting society you are getting a clear and frightening glimpse of the
evolutionary future of humanity being played out. "As is the fractal
part,
so goes the fractal whole."


Was that the place they used bananas as currency?
I can just hear the parents yelling at their kids. "YOU MUST THINK MONEY
GROWS ON TREES."

No. Your personality and what you could do for others was your only
"currency". Those without either could not "afford" to live there and left
on their own. That kind of currency does not grow on trees, nor can
someone
else just give it to you, or leave it to you in their Will. Bananas, like
everything else, was shared for free. We used one large cave for what we
called "The Library". If you happened to be foraging and gathered too much
of something or received some item from a pass-through tourist and didn't
need it, it would be put into "The Library". Where anyone who needed
anything could go and get it without even having to sign it out. No need
to
return it either, unless you wanted to. "The Library" was always packed
full. It contained a few books, many utensils, emergency medical supplies,
fishing/diving gear, maps, clothing (but nobody wore clothing there so
that
was mostly used to make more functional items), etc. Since we liked fresh
foods there was a rather large stockpile of unused canned-goods and other
dry-goods in "The Library" too. We had more enjoyable meals by spearing
our
food on the reefs or hunting inland. Lobster, wrasse, abalone, $90 per qt.
limpet-like shellfish delicacies that are sold in specialty shops today (I
would regularly lunch on those, they were 4x's the size you can find in
any
store), mountain-goat, etc. Going up into the highlands of the valley to
find all manner of fruits, nuts, and vegetables that you pay an arm and a
leg for in any store today. Even coffee-beans were readily available. I
used to roast them in a pan over a campfire. All for free. Nobody had any
set "jobs" and there were no "rulers" nor "leaders". People just did what
they enjoyed doing and doing for each other. Somehow everything always got
done. Any conflicts were usually solved by talking during dinner. After
dinners those who had no hunting nor foraging skills might offer their
services as masseuses to those who worked hard all day. Others provided
entertainment. Some acted as valuable teachers for those that wanted to
learn. Some tried their hand at all of these things.

Many who came through couldn't afford to live there for free. There was
nothing in their personality that they could or would do for others. They
would just leave without even being told to. Total failures. Perfect
reflections of present society.

Before you even bother asking the most often asked question of me, "Why
did
_you_ leave this paradise?" I'll answer with the only answer that came to
me one night while laying on the grass-covered helicopter landing and
staring up into the star-filled sky: "A student's lessons are for naught
if
they remain sitting at their desk." After receiving that lesson there was
no choice, my time had come, I had to leave. But not without having to
convince many others first.

Reminds me of a hippie I used to work with.....He was always extolling the
mesa top in Arizona where he used to live.....A colony of hippies that
"removed themselves from society" and "made it on their own" away from all
the trials and tribulations of the modern world. I asked him what they did
when one of their members got sick, or tripped and broke something. "Oh, we
had doctors there" he said.....Doctors who were trained in huge stainless
steel hospitals, I asked. He fell silent.....And where did you buy your
drugs? - Oh, we went into town to the drugstore.....Drugs that were made in
huge stainless steel factories? - Well, you get the idea....They were not
really independent of modern society at all.......

Too bad for them. We learned all the herbal cures of the culture of the
island we were on. There's a reason the emergency medical supplies were in
The Library. Nobody ever had need of them. The few that did use them were
newcomers that hadn't learned better ways yet. Did you know, for example,
that a simple Ti plant leaf can be used two ways to dress a wound? The dull
side is astringent and will help to close up a clean wound. The shiny side
has an anti-coagulative property and would allow a wound to drain and flush
out any infection. Both sides having an antibiotic property.

Did you know that during WWII when they ran out of penicillin that they
reverted back to an old "folk remedy" of using the spice Thyme to fight
infections? They found it worked better than penicillin. But since no
doctor or hospital can pay their light bills or the CEOs line their pockets
with sales of Thyme from the grocery story it's never prescribed.

Enjoy your "stainless steel factories" that the majority, and most at risk
of illness and disease, can no longer afford. The medical system of modern
society has an impending collapse of its own on the way. The incurable
world pandemic will start in whatever communities are the most financially
poor. You have ensured your own demise with greed. Do read "The Masque of
the Red Death" by Edgar Alan Poe. All the money in the world will not be
able to save you.

"Bill Graham" wrote in message
...

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Chris H" wrote in message
...
In message , Neil
Harrington writes
A bigger and more important problem is that the more intelligent
people
practice some form of birth control. Many of the less intelligent do
not.

Absolutely, that is the greater problem by far.

However most of the Gays do seem to be of higher intelligence.
Certainly in the computing world.

To someone who feels an obligation to be politically correct in all
thoughts, words and deeds, I'm not surprised it should seem so.

In the real world I have never noticed a correlation one way or the
other. I will say that one or two of the most mind-numbingly stupid
people I've ever known happened to be homosexual, but I still wouldn't
take that as having any real significance as to correlation.


I think you will find a high correlation between openly gay people and
those in the arts. I have no statistics. It may also be that the climate
in the art world allows gay people to be more open about it.

Yes, I agree with you on both counts. But being active in the arts does
not correlate with high intelligence as far as I'm aware. There are, of
course, several different measures of intelligence (or perhaps more
accurately, different kinds of intelligence).

Most successful artists have higher than average IQ's.....People like
Tchaikovski, and Da Vinci were not stupid people.


Another "statistic" pulled out of your ass.

--
Peter

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...

"Peter" wrote in message
...
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
...


If you try to measure survival and evolutionary success in dollars you
are
sadly mistaken.

Fine. Now go explain that to Obama, carefully pointing out to him that
his central goal of "spreading the wealth around" (i.e., taking it away
from those who have worked, saved and invested to gain it and
distributing it to those who prefer to sit on their asses, watch TV and
wait for the welfare check) really is not going to bring "success" to
the recipients after all.

Learn from the banana republics. Learn from the communist revolution.
When society has two classes, haves and have nots, those of us who have
money tend to get more and more. Eventually the poor will rebel and we
will have chaos. Henry Ford has the right ides. He paid his workers
sufficient wages so they could afford to buy his cars.

And they went on strike anyway.

Likewise, for industry to be successful in the long term, people have to
have enough money to afford the products, both essential and
non=essential.

Yes. The idea, though, is for people to be productive enough to earn that
money -- not just have it handed to them. The principle of the Little Red
Hen applies here.



Yup! "Earn" being the operative word. There is something morally wrong when
we pay people in menial jobs more than teachers.
But in real life there are people who come upon hard times, through no fault
of their own. Do we let them starve on the streets, or provide a safety net
to help them get back.
The problem is that a few will play the system. It may very well cost more
to root them out, than it is worth.

--
Peter