I used to dream of a Gulch to escape to.

:-) 16 points and 7 minutes looks a lot better than the reverse.

However, the bankers have had a 100 year run stealing our wealth. So they are capable of passing on their thieving DNA.

Hello j_IR1776wg,
Lots of options..all bad...
Keep your powder dry.
Regards,
O.A.

I was thinking the same thing this morning about the zombie progressives....sooner or later you run out of other people's brains.

Likewise Robbie53024. So true it is frightening. I do not know what to think anymore. Can it ever be reversed? Must we suffer a complete breakdown and a dystopian nightmare before sheople wake up? Never before has there been a greater need for a gulch to retreat to, or so few places left on earth to escape... I do see some people waking up... will it be enough or will the masses just shoulder more?
Regards,
O.A.

While those reasons are certainly good ones to be concerned about, keep in mind the motto of one of my favorite sites, Zero Hedge.com: "On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero." Yes, this even includes the wonderful Global Banking Elites. They stand to gain all from our death/destruction/dissolution/ etc. But for all their temporary power, they CANNOT outlive MORTALITY. >:D

Meanwhile, in my household...watching the AFC Championship...and "The future is so bright, gotta wear shades."

"Where does it all end?" Civil War, Military Dictatorship, the dissolution of the Union. The future is becoming clearer daily now and it doesn't look pretty or peaceful.

"War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength." - George Orwell

Robbie, it 's only a selfless act if they gave up doing something that was in their rational best interest. Just because it's done willingly does not necessarily make it virtuous. Ex : I donate lots of time at the soup kitchen and neglect my family as a result.

Hank Reardon practiced altruism and it made him miserable. That's the point. Altruism, implemented as a philosophical principle, demands that you practice self-sacrifice. It can only lead to misery.

The mother who does without food so that her hungry child won't go hungry is not altruistic. The choice to eat and let her child go hungry would be anathema to any moral mother.

Giving her meal to a stranger while she and her child both go hungry is an altruistic, and morally reprehensible, act.

The politician uses your own virtues against you. By appealing to voters' acceptance of altruism, he persuades them that the "moral" thing to do is to act against their own self interest.

John Galt explains this concept pretty clearly.

Hank Reardon supported his mother and brother from a misplaced sense of duty, it was not forced on him.

When government takes resources from me and my family, redistributing to people who government thinks deserves my money more than I do, that is altruism.

You have suffered such a
horrible tragedy, and not
being able to find info only
adds to the horror. I am
so sad for you.

Some were starved in portions of cities and others shot on the spot but for the most part the camps for those that did not resist. Are you making fun of this with your remark about car accidents? That seems insensitive at the best. I lost 18 of my family and everyone on my paternal side other than my father. I have been searching for years trying to find information on them but to no avail.

My point is about altruism, which is fundamentally unsuitable for human existence. I believe you confuse "charity" with "altruistic".

The Salvation Army solicitor rings his bell in front of my grocery store. I slip a $5 bill in his collection pot. He says thank you and I am happy that most of my $5 will make someone's lot in life a little better. My charitable act represents my good will toward my fellow man. I really won't miss the $5. That is charity, not altruism.

The politician appeals to his voters to raise their own taxes to help the less fortunate. If you do, fine. If you don't, the politician calls you greedy and sends the IRS to audit you. He is depending on you practicing voluntary self sacrifice. That is altruism.

1 unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others

When being "unselfish" is a choice, there is no problem. When being "altruistic" is forced, it is not altruism, it is tyranny. AR: "Never initiate force."

I just looked through rationalwiki and it looks like a haven for liberal talking points, especially when it comes to AGW.

You miss my point about altruism. From Merriam-Webster...

1 unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others

2 behavior by an animal that is not beneficial to or may be harmful to itself but that benefits others of its species

A mother who gives her dinner to her hungry child acts out of love and the responsibility she assumed when she chose to give birth to her child. An altruistic mother would give her dinner to a stranger, leaving both her and her child hungry.

You hit the nail on the head. Altruism, socialism, individualism, etc. are all social relationship constructs that have no significant meaning to an individual living alone on an island. As soon as you add one or more humans, these ideas become relevant. The fundamental issue for all social issues is, are all humans endowed with equal rights or do some have superior rights. Superior rights is always related to tyranny. Equal rights prevents tyranny. Equal rights requires the consent of all in a group/society. Socialism can range from full tyranny where all decisions are made for all individuals by the rulers (an individual dictator/king, an elite, a majority) without consent of those with inferior non-ruler rights, to full individual equal rights where only consenting individuals proceed to a particular course of action. I support the principle of equal rights where no one has the superior right to force their way on their neighbor and all have the right to defend their rights with what ever defensive force is necessary. If someone wants to speak a language that no one else understands, he/she should have that right but no right to force others to understand and speak it. This will make personal and free market buyer/seller relationships almost impossible but that is their right. Socialism with full consent can be good but without consent is evil and tyrannical no matter how altruistic it may be. 2 ".....yes, the time is coming that whoever kills you will think that he offers God service. (Joh 16:2 NKJ). The Christ was killed because he refused to submit to the tyrannical social commandments of the religious establishment of his day.