text:
One Great Challenge Facing America Today
August 26th, 2017 // 4:51 am @ Oliver DeMille
The Coming Fall
Only 15 percent of Americans are on target to fund 1 year or more of their retirement. One single year. Yet many will live twenty to thirty years after retiring. This one fact alone is a major blow against conservatism.
It may in fact kill conservative principles and ideals in the next two decades, and it could deeply hurt the American economy and our freedoms in the process. This is not an exaggeration. Put simply:
How can conservatives expect to win elections or, even if they are victorious at the ballot box, actually pass conservative laws and policies when more than 85 percent of the American people are going to be fully dependent on someone else's money for housing, food and clothing, health care, and other expenses during retirement?
With the massive Baby Boom generation moving into retirement, many analysts ask: how can the United States implement anything short of collectivist socialism in the next thirty years?
To cut away the safety net, or to default on the promised Social Security and healthcare benefits workers paid into for decades, would be immoral and create widespread poverty for many of our most vulnerable. To buck up and pay for these obligations, and supplement them with what will be needed for millions of retirees to just get by, will require levels of taxation and regulation that will truly be nothing short of…well, socialism.
Bottom Dollar
Few people want to admit this reality—Republican politicians least of all. But over sixty years of government promises, spending money that should have been saved, inflating the currency, and putting numerous regulatory hurdles in the path of entrepreneurialism, innovation, and economic growth have taken their toll. A national debt north of $20 trillion dollars (more than $100 trillion when all the obligations and liabilities are met, and a lot more as these obligations and interest on the debt increase every month) leave us little wiggle room.
There are two realistic responses. First, we can go after major economic growth. This will require a systemic change in our economy—meaning mass deregulation and getting the government almost entirely out of the marketplace. Tax rates must come down drastically, and foreign-held corporate money must be encouraged to repatriate without penalty. Foreign direct investment must also be recruited (another reason tax rates must be significantly reduced).
The second option is to keep on the current path until we default, then allow an IMF bailout of the U.S. and the replacement of the dollar as the world reserve currency with International Monetary Fund SDR currency or some other (probably electronic) legal tender. This will result in a major reduction of the standard of living for most Americans and an explosion of additional government handouts. Most retirement and other savings that do exist will be wiped out, and nearly all Americans will go on the dole, with a few elites at the top, and both socialism and globalism will dominate.
The amazing thing, to me at least, is that many of our nation's leaders right now—in both parties—actually prefer the second option. Moreover, a lot of them believe that this is the best course for our future. They deeply believe in globalism, collectivist economics, and the end of America's attachment to free enterprise, gun rights, family values, and religion. They believe that government is the greatest power on earth, and deserves our universal allegiance and support. Even, ultimately, reverence. Anyone who disagrees, they believe, is small-minded or caught in the past—or both.
New or Old
Not only do many Democratic leaders hold this view, but a surprising number of Republican officials believe it as well, or at least they vote like they believe it (which brings the same results). This is a real battle, and the globalist elites are winning. The media, most of academia, and a majority of politicians are on their side. In their view, the future of the world is at stake—either a bright future of globalism (with elites in charge) or a return to dark-age tribalism, as they see it (where the regular people rule through small-minded, unenlightened democratic influence), will ensue. They are determined to ensure the globalist outcome.
They literally consider it a war–and one that is worth winning, whatever the cost. If academia, media, Hollywood and the lobbyist/D.C. bureaucracy/political party-apparatus can force the Trump administration to back down from anti-globalist policies and behaviors, so be it. That's what the hubbub is about on the nightly news, investigations, etc.
But if not, they'll take more drastic measures. A currency default might do it, causing bank holidays and massive layoffs. Or a serious shakeup in the White House—brought on by the Special Counsel, indictment of the President, or something else that circumvents the will of the voters and instead chases the goals of the elite. Something unexpected, of the same magnitude, could trigger a return of White House alignment to globalist goals. Today's elites in government, media, finance, etc. can hardly remember a time when globalism wasn't the clear agenda. Most of them are outraged at the very thought.
The rest of America has a serious problem. Remember the 85 percent of Americans who don't (or won't) have enough retirement savings to last more than a year? How are conservatives going to effectively promote smaller government and a return to genuine free enterprise in a nation strapped with the $20 trillion-plus national debt, $13 trillion in consumer debt, over $100 trillion owed in debt plus unfunded liabilities, and many millions (and growing) of retirees who will desperately need financial support?
The Next Step
I'm an optimist, because I believe the best days of America and the world are yet to come. Usually I infuse my writings with optimistic ideas on how we can really improve things in the days ahead. But right now I have to admit that I'm concerned. I'm not sure how we get past the economic hole we've dug for ourselves—not just politicians, but the regular people as well. We are culturally, if not actually, dependent on government spending and government growth.
Yes, a lot of people want the government to cut back, but they can't agree on what to cut. Almost all Americans want the government to keep spending for things that benefit them directly. The ones that support cuts mostly only support cutting other people's government benefits. Thus Congress doesn't actually fix much.
Unless this changes, Democrats will continue to be the party of bigger government and increased socialism while Republicans will talk about smaller government, limits, and Constitutional boundaries—but when the votes come to the Senate, truly conservative changes won't have enough Republican support to pass, and when cases make their way to the Supreme Court, free enterprising systemic changes to the government-corporate-K Street nexus won't have enough Justices behind them. Too many officials simply aren't willing to do what needs to be done. It's too hard, and too unpopular.
I'm not sure what can change this.
Of one thing I am certain, however. History is absolutely clear on this point. As goes entrepreneurship, so goes our nation. Ultimately, a major increase in effective entrepreneurship, innovation, and business ownership is going to make or break us. It will create growth if it happens, and that changes everything. Also, the future of entrepreneurship is something each of us can influence. Our next three decades will either bring massive economic growth or the rise of rampant socialism to America. To choose the path of growth, our government can help (by deregulation and choosing to be smaller)—but a lot more people engaging effective entrepreneurship is the indispensible. Period.
Category : Aristocracy &Blog &Citizenship &Constitution &Culture &Current Events &Economics &Entrepreneurship &Foreign Affairs &Generations &Government &History &Leadership &Liberty &Mini-Factories &Mission &Politics &Postmodernism &Producers &Prosperity
"The Coming Tide"
July 25th, 2017 // 7:22 am @ Oliver DeMille
A Prediction
For decades the Democrats proudly saw themselves as the party of the little guy and the working poor. Republicans were considered the party of Wall Street, white collar professionals, and big business. But these alignments have changed during the opening years of the 21st Century. The Democrats are now, as The Atlantic put it, "a coalition of Millennials, minorities, and white professionals." The Republicans consist of whatever is left over, which amounts to a majority of people in the large majority of states.
Perhaps the most striking thing about this new political arrangement is that so many white-collar professionals are now Democrats. Moreover, a large number of them are genuinely liberal, even progressive. This is a major departure from historical trends.
The most obvious reason for this shift is something members of the professional class have in common: years of participation in and graduation from the modern American university system. To find success in today's campus environment often corresponds with embracing academe's general values, processes, and views. When such views emphasize diversity of thought and vigorous debate of different ideas, the result is a certain kind of learning—and a certain kind of graduate. This approach helped make American universities the best in the world.
But when such views and values include rejection of diverse ideas, religious values, and pressure to adopt one overarching political and cultural perspective (pervasively advanced by the Left), a different result is natural. A different kind of typical graduate is also inevitable. This is where we find ourselves today. As the American campus has moved increasingly Left, the culture experienced and accepted by a large number of its participants has followed suit.
College Flight
This leaves many conservative or religious families, and others who aren't particularly conservative or religious but don't want their college youth to be ridiculed for their views or indoctrinated with blatant liberalism, with a difficult choice. College, long considered a required rite of passage into adulthood by many families, is becoming less attractive to a lot of people. The rebuttal is that the financial rewards of a college degree make it unavoidable. This boils down to two widely accepted but currently weakening views:
- College leads to financial success
- Financial success requires college
Perception is never quite as accurate as reality. Belief #1 (college leads to financial success) is a partial truth. It turns out to be true for some people, not true for others. In the 2010s, it is false for more than half of college graduates. Belief #2 (financial success requires college), on the other hand, is patently false. There are many people with financial success and means who dropped out of college or never enrolled at all. Indeed, many business owners who never finished college find their company bombarded with resumes and applications of those who did.
Certainly college is an effective path to career for many people. However, a downside for parents who aren't committed liberal ideologues is the worry that many of today's universities will turn their children into exactly that. And the biggest losers in the current system—even in the few schools where religious or conservative values are acceptable—are students whose focus on career prep distracts them from getting a truly great education. Sadly, this describes a significant majority.
To be clear, all of this is part of a much larger national context. The bigger trend is that Americans are increasingly rejecting the 1960s promise of a society of experts who wisely and efficiently fix everything. The golden era of the American university was an outgrowth of this post-World War II zeitgeist: that everyone could participate in a society of experts, and that expertise and institutions held the solutions to all our national, world, community, material, and even personal problems.
Increased medical expertise and technology would make us truly healthy; better law schools and lawyers would ensure true justice to everyone; advanced technology and training in journalism would bring a golden age of media full of light and truth; business advances and expertise would eradicate poverty and bring prosperity to all. And so on….
The promise of what experts would bring the world was exciting, even intoxicating. True political experts, we were assured, would bring lasting peace, end conflicts, and spread happiness to every city and town. The Fed would ensure a stable and growing economy at all times, using modern expertise and financial algorithms to save us from major financial challenges. The promises were endless.
Over fifty years later, none of these expectations have been realized. Not even one of them. The entire "experts will fix everything" project is a bust. Just look at the current state of our politics, from the Clinton era to the Bush years, from Obama to Trump. Problems are far from solved. Many of our great national institutions, both public and private, have declined or lost their way. The citizenry's trust of our government, and of experts in general, is lower and lower each decade.
In truth, the era of the expert is insolvent. It's well past bankrupt, to be precise. We're still training more experts, but they still haven't solved the problems that caused us to want more of them in the first place. A lot of things have gotten worse. In short, something else is needed…
And soon.
What's Next?
While national debts continue to skyrocket (more than doubling in the past 8 years), markets show increased volatility, and governmental credit ratings are downgraded, many of the experts assure us that things are getting better. But all they've shown is that they don't really know what they're doing. They know how to keep themselves well paid and in power, but beyond that, they haven't fulfilled their purpose.
For example, imagine what would happen if we faced an economic depression like those the U.S. suffered in the 1930s, 1860s, or 1780s. When the Great Depression came, most Americans trusted the government, our leaders, and our national institutions. Today most citizens have very little trust in any of these; indeed, over sixty percent of Americas don't trust the government to do the right thing most of the time. If crisis comes in this atmosphere of mistrust, few solutions from Washington will find enough traction to be successful.
This is a dominant characteristic of our times: We can't seem to solve our national problems, big or small. We are mired in political squabbles, both between parties and within parties, and Washington accomplishes very little that actually helps the American people. It often causes harm, in fact.
As a people, we have largely lost trust not only in governmental officials and institutions but also in the media, Wall Street, Hollywood, the schools, big business…the list is long. Whom do we really trust as a people? Whom can we turn to in crisis—with real confidence they'll fix things? In short, which experts do we really believe have our backs anymore?
If the promise of "experts will save us, and all our youth should become experts" doesn't ring true anymore, what does? What is the answer? From the founding era through westward migration and the Industrial Revolution, the overarching goal of most Americans was to build a business and raise a family. This was our drive, our agenda. It was our national project, carried out by myriad individuals and families.
Then after World War II we turned our gaze in another direction: the career, a profession, education as job training, and daily life spent meeting the needs of the corporation or whatever organization employed us. In short, experts ruled and most people wanted to be experts. If they couldn't swing it themselves, they at least tried to make it a reality for their children. Even family goals were expected to bend or give way to the interests of employers. Schools, likewise, were reorganized to separate, grade, sort, and point young people in the direction most likely to meet corporate needs. Experts oversaw the entire process, literally from cradle to grave and almost everything in between.
As the evidence of expert limitations grows, and as our national faith in the power of experts to solve our problems erodes and crumbles, what is left? Where will we turn? A whole generation of Millennials grapple with this situation in their work life, and more decide to opt out of the system than join it. Where are we headed?
So far, nobody can definitively answer these questions. Time will tell, but in the meantime we must do our best to understand and prepare for the economy and world that is emerging in the post-faith-in-experts era. My opinion is that the most likely path forward is to reconnect with our American roots and turn our sights once again toward entrepreneurship. Business ownership is, in fact, the historical American pastime. The fact that many people abandoned it for half a century only worked because a few business owners did things on a big enough scale to employ the many.
But eventually, like any system where the many depend on the few for survival and progress, the few began taking more and more of the profits and power for themselves. In history this was called aristocracy, in more recent times it has been called socialism, and in our day it often gets away with calling itself capitalism. But whatever we call it, such a model is a far cry from the free enterprise system that turned America into a world leader—based firmly on freedom and the goal of most people to be independent owners and build their own businesses.
If and when this goal once again permeates our national mindset and our people's choices, we'll see the rise of a nation of problem-solvers. At that point, we won't be dependent on politicians to fix things, and as a result, things will actually get fixed. In the process, we'll naturally see a decreasing attachment to political parties and the rise of a non-political majority of business owners and family raisers.
There was once a name for just such goals: "The American Dream." It's time to bring it back.
To put it succinctly: Experts won't save us. Politicians won't fix what ails our nation. The solution will come, if at all, from a cultural change that marks the resurgence of a certain kind of person. At one point in history, people around the world had a word for such independent-thinking mavericks who took risks and then worked incredibly hard to make their businesses flourish and grow. They called them "Americans." What qualified one for such a title? A burning drive to build and lead one's own business, and to raise a family and community of young people with the same goal.
I think we'll witness the rebirth of this same "tide in human affairs" very soon. In fact, I believe it's already begun. But it faces strong headwinds blowing in the other direction, so we need to do better if we want the American Dream to succeed again. This is our key to the kind of future we want to pass down to our children and grandchildren.
Families, schools, communities and parents can either raise a nation of "independents" or a society of "dependents." One will bring freedom and opportunity, the other won't.
It's our choice, and the decision won't be made in Washington — or even at the ballot box.
Category : Aristocracy &Blog &Citizenship &Community &Constitution &Culture &Current Events &Economics &Education &Entrepreneurship &Featured &Generations &Government &History &Independents &Information Age &Leadership &Liberty &Mission &Politics &Producers &Prosperity &Statesmanship
Obama vs. Trump
July 17th, 2017 // 4:07 pm @ Oliver DeMille
The Reality of the Paris Climate Agreement—What it Really Means
What's Actually Being Said
When President Obama spoke of climate change as America's biggest challenge, and then touted what he called American "leadership" in the 2015 Paris global climate agreement, a lot of conservatives were confused. They wondered if Obama truly considered climate change a more dangerous threat than ISIS, Al Qaeda, Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, etc. "Really?" they wondered. "How can he possibly believe that?"
Likewise, when president Trump pulled the United States out of the global climate accord, many conservatives were surprised by the extreme media reaction. "Don't media members know that while nearly all nations in the world signed on to the agreement, funding it was put mostly on the backs of American taxpayers? We're already deeply in debt and financially strapped. Why would the media support that?"
In reality, this is all a simple misunderstanding. Most Americans don't know the hidden "code" that guided President Obama, the mainstream media, and many others who support the agreement. Only those who know the code realize what is actually happening. Everyone else is left to wonder. In fact, the large majority of Americans on the Left don't know the code either—instead they assume that Obama's climate agenda was driven by pure environmental concerns.
What is the code? Put simply, on one side we find leaders whose overarching objective is to maintain America's national freedom and prosperity. On the other side the major objective is to build a truly global society—maintained by global-level governance. This is the true, but somewhat hidden, struggle of our time. Not surprisingly, these two grand strategies frequently come into conflict.
Responsibility or Power Grab
This is the code. How does it play out in everyday life? Put simply: on one side the justification for promoting American freedoms and prosperity is our shared national heritage, goals, and values. The justification for globalism, on the other hand, is that some things must be dealt with at the global level, and national governments have no business interfering with such concerns. If a nation supports policies that are "best handled globally," it is "leading," according to this view. If not, it isn't.
Put another way, the only justification for national government is that it deals more effectively with certain issues than any local, provincial, or state government. Thus the need for a central power, or federal government. The American framers felt that two such issues existed: (1) national security, and (2) keeping peace between the states. This focus is foundational in the U.S. Constitution.
The framers saw no need for international or global level government, because no global threat existed that would require all nations to join together under one centralized command. The most that would be needed, the framers believed, was occasional treaties that allowed two or more nations to cooperate on shared goals. Such treaties could be discarded once the goals were met or the shared threats no longer existed.
Since government is "fire," as George Washington put it, meaning that the power of government has throughout history been abused and/or turned against its own people, the power of any and every government must always be kept in check. Limited. "Smaller is better" sums up one-half of the founding American view of government. The other half was clearly expressed in the first 10 Federalist Papers: government should be strong and vigorous in doing what it is designed to do (national security and protection of inalienable rights), and limited from doing anything else. More than one of the framers expressed the key idea that our government must be "shackled" and "bound" to its limits by the "chains" of the U.S. Constitution.
These are strong terms. Indeed, the founding generation couldn't think of any stronger words. The framers knew firsthand the pain and suffering caused by government that doesn't remain limited, and they wrote the Constitution accordingly. They bound and shackled the government to its basic limits. They did everything they could think of to keep it that way.
Today's Danger
Those pressing for global governance today know that only a truly global threat will create mass support for their worldwide agenda. An alien invasion would clearly accomplish this objective. Since no such threat confronts us, they seek the next best thing—a truly global environmental threat, one that endangers human survival, our very existence. If such a threat is accepted by the masses, the move to global governance will be certain.
This is the current appeal of environmental collapse as "the great global menace." Note that loving the environment, and wanting to nurture and protect it, is not the same as pushing the belief that worldwide environmental breakdown and even collapse are inevitable (or even imminent). The first (love and protection of nature) can and should be handled by individual nations, or even smaller governmental units working with private entities. The second (global environmental collapse) can only be achieved by global-level controls that are enforced—ultimately by military action if necessary.
This is the code. Those who are pushing for global governance want concern for a global environmental threat to spread and grow—because it is the strongest idea that supports their political agenda. When politicians or the media say that the U.S. must "lead" on the environment, they are calling for global governmental powers to be established. When they say the U.S. is caving on its values in leaving the Paris climate agreement, they want the masses to hear that conservatives hate the environment, but what they really mean is that such a move is against globalism. That's the one thing globalists can't abide. This is their litmus test:
You can be Republican or Democrat, white collar or blue collar, religious or not, short or tall or happy or sad, but you can't be against globalism and still represent the power elites. Such is heresy, pure and simple. It must be resisted at all costs. Globalism is the future.
This is the view of the power elites: in finance, media, academia, the sprawling federal bureaucracies, and top centers of the governing-industrial-lobbying establishment.
But the truth is different than the media reports. Specifically:
-Most conservatives care deeply about the environment.
-Most conservatives are against global governance.
-The Paris climate agreement does almost nothing to actually help the environment. (If the goal were truly environmental, the details of the agreement would be different.)
-The Paris climate agreement greatly promotes global governance. This is the real goal.
Sides and Purposes
Only those who understand "the code" actually understand current events. This applies to more than the Paris agreement, to be sure. For example, consider how globalist-leaning federal judges frequently insert the global agenda into decisions in ways that directly undermine the United States and even the Constitution. The goal is to replace the Constitution with global precedents and borderless jurisprudence, bit by bit.
Or consider how the pursuit of globalism impacts energy policy: oil pipelines from Canada create more energy independence in North America, thus reducing one of the major incentives of the U.S. to pursue globalism. Such pipelines should therefore be avoided at all costs, using any means necessary, according to globalists. The same globalist values governed Obama administration relationships with oil-rich nations in the Middle East.
Likewise, weaker borders, not stronger, are necessary for the shift to global governance; any strengthening of immigration controls is viewed by elites as a major setback. An actual wall between nations is considered downright medieval. Even "savage." It goes directly in the opposite direction as global governance. So does anything that weakens Planned Parenthood and free access to "planet-saving" abortions, or any policy that slows gun control in the U.S. from matching European levels. The push is consistently global.
Moreover, the Iran nuclear deal strengthened the institutions and powers of globalism (while tending to decrease long-term U.S. unilateralism), and a strong relationship with Israel was considered by the Obama administration to damage the overall global agenda because Netanyahu is frequently a holdout against globalism. Mottos such as "the American Worker" or "Make America great again" are anathema to everything the globalists seek. There are many other examples.
Americans who understand "the code" of the elites will know what is going on in U.S. policy, even when others are confused by what is really happening. They will also understand the urgency and vehemence of elites and the elite-run mainstream media in opposing anything and everything that puts American interests before the ultimate goal of global governance.
The louder the media protests, and the more strident its voice, the better the fight is going against anti-American elite globalism. And make no mistake: the push for global governance is anti-freedom, anti-Constitution, anti-Biblical morality, and anti-family. The battle is real, and it is happening right now.
Category : Blog &Culture &Current Events &Economics &Foreign Affairs &Government
A 2017 State of the Union!
June 28th, 2017 // 7:47 pm @ Oliver DeMille
Where are We Right Now as a Nation, and Where are We Going?
The Not-Quite-New Normal
This is the way we govern now: The White House is the prize. Majorities in Congress are the way to get closer to the prize. And the ultimate goal is to control the Supreme Court, because it now has almost ultimate power on whatever issue it engages.
This is the way we govern now. To win these prizes, the party out of power goes on the offensive. Its mantra is attack, attack, attack. Look at the last 8 years: the party out of the White House (Republicans) attacked the party in the White House (Democrats) with whatever scandal it could. Benghazi. Clinton emails. IRS targeting. Obamacare. Fast and Furious. Loretta Lynch on the tarmac. Obstruction of every White House project they thought they could slow down. Calling ISIS "the JV team." Debts and deficits. Some of these needed to be openly and loudly addressed, yes. But this is the way we govern now.
This eventually brought Republican majorities in the House. Then the Senate. Finally, the White House. The same happened in the 8 years before that, from 2000 to 2008, only at that point the roles were reversed. Democrats attacked Republicans, especially those in the White House, with everything they could muster. Hanging chads. No WMDs. The outing of Valerie Plame. The Great Recession. The rise of fuel prices from a little over $1 per gallon to about 4 times that. False allegations that President Bush repeatedly skipped out on required military service. Carl Rove and Scooter Libby in a Special Prosecutor gone wild. More debt, big deficits, using the Justice Department to investigate political rivals of the White House. Again, some of these needed to be opposed, but this has become the center-point of our governance.
The eight years prior to that followed the same pattern, with the party roles once again reversed. Republicans attacked the Democrats with allegations of Lewinsky-gate and abusive behavior toward Paula Jones and other women by President Clinton, Impeachment by the House of Representatives for Perjury, China-gate, White House handling of the Waco and Ruby Ridge standoffs, Hillary's proposed Health Care plan. In the decades before that it was Iran-Contra, "Read My Lips," etc.
This is how we govern now. It's not only the perpetual campaign, where even between elections both parties are fully engaged in tearing each other down, it's also a high-stakes game of thrones where both sides are out for blood—and the losers are the American people. In short, as mentioned, this is how we govern now. And it's not good for our nation.
Who, What, and Why
In fairness, a free media and open debate that keeps the government under constant scrutiny is necessary and helpful. It is a serious check on anyone in power. Where the American Framers put most of the checks in the hands of competing branches of government, modern technology has significantly increased the power of non-governmental actors such as media, academia, big business, and online providers, among others. When this increases the power and wisdom of the electorate, the changes are positive. But too often the reality is manipulative spin and constant attempts by media to sway the citizens rather than inform them, to guide and convince voters rather than just objectively tell them the facts.
Indeed, a great negative occurs where the electorate is dependent on powerful institutions for its knowledge of the facts and issues we face as a nation—or swayed by the tone in which elites attempt to skew the public's view of world events. The power of such institutions to prejudice people has only increased with each passing decade and year, and while this has sparked increased media savvy among some people, it has also created a mob mentality, even groupthink, for many others.
One of the reasons many in the media—both Left and Right—loudly decry President Trump's habit of tweeting is that this cuts such media personalities out of the picture. When top leaders speak directly to the citizens, the media model of the past three hundred years is turned on its head. If this ever works effectively on the large scale, many media professionals will need to find new employment.
But let's be clear. Accuracy in the news hit a two-decade low in 2009, according to the Pew Research Center (September 13, 2009). Then it hit another low by 2012 (August 16, 2012). In 2016 and 2017, many citizens feel that accuracy is hard to find in any media. In fact, a number of people consider British media outlets more factual about U.S. news than American media organizations that seem increasingly biased. When asked what news is most accurate, the public is split along party lines.
As for the ability of the media to accurately predict elections, it has become clear in the last 5 national-level elections (in 2016 and 2017) that the mainstream media and polling models have it all wrong. They keep predicting the opposite of what actually occurs. The biggest problem in media is that an increasing number of people simply don't trust it anymore. They want the media to be unbiased, objective, and share "just the facts," but this isn't what they experience when they read the daily paper or turn on the nightly news. Gallup reports that popular trust in the media is at an all-time low (wjla.com/news, June 18, 2017).
Important Questions
The solution, of course, is for the regular citizens to step up their game. As former CIA officer Bryan Dean Wright shared (Fox, June 20, 2017), intelligence officers vet their news by looking at "five different kinds of questions." Citizens today need to do the same. For example, whenever we hear or read a news report, we need to ask ourselves:
- Who is the person sharing the news? Does he really know what he's talking about? [If the source of news is "anonymous," give it very little credence.]
- Is the person sharing the news actually in a position to have access to the original details? Or is he just repeating something he heard or read? [If he's not the original source, be skeptical.]
- What is the motivation of the person/institution reporting the news? Liberal? Conservative? Independent? Objective? What is the reporter's goal? [In the case of the mainstream media, the goal is often to get better ratings and seek promotions from elite powerbrokers, or even to directly sway people to a different political viewpoint.]
- What bias does the reporter/institution have? [If you don't know, you can't possibly trust what he says until you find out why he's saying it.]
- Does anyone corroborate the story? Who? Are both sources trustworthy? [Journalists used to print nothing until they had at least two separate named sources confirming the same thing. Now media outlets frequently go to print or air without even one named source. Many such reports have turned out to be entirely false.]
It's not that journalism schools have stopped teaching the principles and rules of good journalism, but rather that many newspapers and electronic news organizations simply ignore the rules and steam ahead—as long as they feel they can promote their pre-planned agenda. Buyer beware. Or, in this case, consumers of media beware. We're frequently being lied to.
Indeed, much of modern media seems to approach journalism like the villainous media magnate Magnussen in Benedict Cumberbatch's recent rendition of Sherlock Holmes. When pressed on accuracy, he says: "Facts are for history books. I work in news."
Facts vs. News
There is a lot of wisdom in this short statement. It is one of the genuine mantras of life in the 21st Century, and it bears repeating:
"Facts are for history books. I work in news."
The news in our time has largely become reality television—scripted, planned, twisted to support a pre-determined narrative and agenda. The only antidote is a citizenry that sees through it and responds accordingly.
This is the way we govern now. This is where we are, and where we're headed—at least in the immediate future. Crisis after crisis after crises…repeated ad infinitum. If one crisis gets resolved, another is already in the wings—just waiting for prime time. That's Washington today.
Will something change it? Maybe. Maybe not. But that's not the important question. The true question is whether American citizens will see through the endless crises, attacks, spin, manipulations, and innuendo—and focus their attention on the things that really matter. If we do, and if we only support media and news that actually focus on the important things, and vote for leaders who do the same (regardless of media manipulation) in every election, we'll help keep the nation on track. The media will howl and moan and scream and whine, but they can be taken with a grain of salt. We should listen to the media, hear what they have to say, but we should take our own counsel as citizens.
Up Next
The following maxim for the 21st Century is needed:
Perception isn't reality.
Reality is reality. Wise citizens will grin at the uproar when the media is off base, because they know the real story is very simple:
- Is Washington deregulating the economy and people's lives, or increasing freedom-killing regulation? Same with state and local government? Why/Why not?
- Is the economy growing or contracting? Why/Why not?
- Are we more safe from our enemies or less? Why/Why not?
- Is freedom growing or decreasing? Why/Why not?
These four simple questions and answers tell us whether our government is helping us go forward or backward. We just need to keep our eye on the ball. Let the news wail and shriek. Hear what they have to say, and really examine their reports. Think about what you hear, and ponder, analyze, question.
Then apply the four questions outlined just above, and respond accordingly. That's the real news.
And one more thing: Help as many people as possible do the same.
Because this is the way we should govern: With the American people firmly, wisely, and independently in charge.
Category : Aristocracy &Blog &Citizenship &Current Events &Economics &Foreign Affairs &Government &Liberty &Politics &Prosperity &Statesmanship
Chaos in Current Events!
June 21st, 2017 // 8:50 am @ Oliver DeMille
History is Repeating Itself, But Do We Know Its Lesson?
Cycling Back Around
This is a chaotic time. Political scandals, media lies, shootings and violence based on political disagreements, terrorist attacks in formerly safe places. For the American people, it's both frustrating and scary.
It helps to step back and take a deep breath, then turn to history for answers. Since patterns frequently repeat, they can tell us a lot about what's actually happening—beyond the anger and intensity of nightly news reports. They can also tell us what's coming.
Here's how things work. Since the beginning of written history society has been split between three groups: 1) those in power, 2) those who have some power but are seeking more of it in order to be at the top of the power pyramid, and 3) other people who just want to live their lives. The good news is that in the United States today, a higher number of people are free to enjoy life and seek to live their dreams than perhaps any other society in known history. That's worth smiling about, no matter what the news tells us.
On the other hand, a lot of people today have a sense that things are heading in the wrong direction. We have a lot of problems, both here and abroad, and it often feels as if some spark will soon set off some kind of powder keg that leads to real crisis. It's a feeling like many Americans experienced in the late 1930s and early 1940s, or in the late 1850s and early 1860s. The American founding generation felt it at the beginning of the 1770s. In each of these cases, that sense of unease and anxiety was eventually followed by drastic challenges—Pearl Harbor, the Civil War, the Revolutionary War.
Indeed, according to the cycles of history, we're in that same turn of the pattern right now. It's unclear exactly what will happen to bring bigger national crisis, but a lot of people feel a foreboding sense that something momentous is about to come.
The Best of Times, The Worst of Times
To put this in clear perspective, the news right now is a tale of four nations.
One: the business news reports almost daily signs of an economic upturn, more financial opportunity, and budding growth in a rebooting economy.
Two: international news reports increasing terror attacks, alarming danger signs in North Korea, Iran and from ISIS, and a looming energy building for more conflicts ahead with Russia and China.
Three: the mainstream media portrays the Trump White House and the Republican Congress as ineffective, and throws out daily allegations of Administration corruptions, lies, conspiracies and hidden agendas to hurt the nation.
Four: conservative media debunks these mainstream reports and points instead to the kind of alleged corruption on the Left: Loretta Lynch, James Comey, the Clinton Foundation, illegal leaks, violent "Resisters", DNC collusion with the mainstream media, Hillary Clinton's emails, etc.
It is amazing how often these competing sources of media tell exactly the opposite story about a given event from the day's news. Most people listening to all the reports are left deeply confused, or cynical. And those who only listen to one news source are frequently surprised by what friends tell them about the news. "But I listened to the total opposite on the morning news! You must be remembering that wrong."
To make sense of all this, let's put aside the noise and distraction. Let's be as blunt and direct as possible: We are living in one of those historical periods where we face an existence-level conflict. We are literally in the midst of an existential war. Such wars are both cold and hot, violent and emotional. They are deeply rooted in the conflict between major ideas—with two cultures battling to survive, to win, and to thrive. But each side feels that it must fully defeat an opposing culture in order to survive.
Such intellectual wars have always existed, but they only reach a crisis-point like the one we are now experiencing when certain factors align. First, instead of a general conflict among ideas, the populace finds itself facing off in a dramatic disagreement between two major viewpoints, two overall paradigms that cannot peacefully coexist. Second, the stakes are high enough that almost everyone in the society firmly picks one of the two sides. Even people who are usually moderate, or generally centrist in their views, feel strongly enough about the current situation to put aside their typical willingness to see both good and bad on both sides. They now clearly see one side as right and the other as wrong. Many people go further—they see their side as Good, and the other as Evil.
Third, and this is where—according to historical patterns—the real danger sets in, more and more people find their emotions leading them, and they stop really thinking about current events. Symbols, which are always important in society, become the main thing in such eras. Symbols take over. For example, we now live in a nation where millions of people don't even consider a certain policy if it is supported by the Trump Administration. They immediately think they "know" it is bad, wrong, hurtful—as soon as the name Trump is attached. In contrast, millions of other people have the exact same emotional reaction to anything attached to the name Obama, or Hillary Clinton. Rationality, consideration, and even empathy, are largely ignored. Millions basically turn off their brains and simply react to symbols—and their reactions are emotional, charged, and frequently downright angry. This turns violent more often than in less extreme eras of history.
Diverging Paths
In the current environment, winning has become the only goal for many in leadership, and for a majority of the population. And winning itself is defined as having certain people in power and in office, and/or other specific people out of power and out of office. Nothing but winning is acceptable to far too many in positions of influence and power—both public and in the private sector.
But there is an even worse situation, and it is the one we are now living. This occurs when one side believes that winning is the only important thing, and is willing to go to any length, any extreme, to win, while the other side still believes that some things are more important than winning.
When this happens, the side that only cares about winning becomes truly extreme, loses its moral sense and ethical compass, and goes entirely on the attack, using any means and justification it can muster. The other side, still convinced that morality is more important than winning, holds back, tries to show restraint, and attempts to use reason and appeals to decency to make its case. The result, in history, is mixed:
- If an election is near, the anger gets channeled to the voting booth and a winning number of voters weigh in and throw their support behind the side arguing for decency, goodness, and wisdom.
- If no election is imminent, the anger grows and is expressed mostly by the political class: those on the full attack win, while the side seeking reason and decency loses.
We are now witnessing the latter scenario. And history is clear on this point: Nations are drastically hurt by this approach. It tore the United States apart in the 1960s, where we witnessed the assassination of a President and two other major national leaders, along with massive violence, cultural civil war, and the destruction of national trust and cooperation. Similar events tore nations apart during the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and Bismarck's Wars. The French and Indian War, the War of the Roses, the 30 Years War, and a number of others followed the same pattern. World War I took Europe for a similar ride—or, more precisely, a similar culture war culminated in the muddy trenches full of blood and machine-gun casings that webbed the continent in World War I.
In each case, it came down to two great, competing ideas or cultures, large or powerful groups supporting each side, and, eventually, the rise of symbol to extreme levels that incited violence, irrationality, and all-out culture war. We are now witnessing the same stew. Any who aren't alarmed, or at least deeply concerned, don't understand the ebbs and flows of history.
The solution, as history teaches, is to clearly identify which idea is right—and reject the other. This finally ended the great conflicts listed above, whether the conflicting ideas were communism vs. democratic free enterprise, a divine right of kings vs. the inalienable rights of all, Nazism vs. parliamentary democracy, imperialism vs. self-determination, slavery vs. individual rights, etc.
Follow or Lead?
To make matters even more challenging, today we are engaged in two such wars at the same time. First, there is the battle of radical Islamic terrorism vs. democratic inalienable rights. The clear winner will be democratic inalienable rights, which is more popular than terrorism among Muslims and pretty much everyone else around the world. Only the terrorists themselves, a very small minority of the world's population, think theirs is the right idea.
The second great war being fought right now for control of our future is more complex. More difficult. Indeed, it threatens to tear our modern societies apart. It consists of, to put it as directly as possible, the competing ideas of democracy vs. aristocracy.
Elites choose the latter. They think society should be run by a few, and that the rest of us should accept the rule of our "betters." And be grateful.
This is the underlying battle of our times. It is the war being fought in Washington D.C. between the Establishment and the American voters, and in most of our schools (where young people are largely convinced that success consists of getting a job working for elites, showing gratitude to elites, and kowtowing to elites in return for the promised salaries, promotions, and employee benefits). It is the war being fought on our campuses, and in most of the television programs and movies we consume.
Sometimes the message from schools, campuses, and the entertainment media is blatant, while other times it is subtle. But the message is nearly always the same: "the values of elites are best", and "the rule of elites in all walks of life is just the way things are—and the way things should be". This viewpoint is repeated over and over: "The best we can do is fall in line and get the kind of education and careers elites want for us." Few people are able to spend many years in this system without succumbing to its promises and threats.
Perhaps the very center of this war is the media. Nearly every mainstream media report today communicates the same message: elites are the answer, we all need to adopt and celebrate elite values, all other values are obsolete or inferior, the voters get it wrong when they don't follow elite media guidance, and the best path for our children is to embrace elite values and get the kind of good jobs that are mostly available working for elites and furthering elite agendas. The message is clear, and it is repeated from many of our most venerated institutions: "Everyone who isn't an elite, or working for elites, is a loser, an outsider, an inferior."
The Choice Right Now
This is not an exaggeration. Step back, look at our society today, the culture wars that are brewing, the leaders and their battles, and the news media. We are the world described just above—run "of the elites, by the elites, and for the elites." The United States is a society at war, and the war is democracy vs. aristocracy. Note that aristocracy is promoted by nearly all of our major societal institutions. We are a world where all men and women are created equal, to paraphrase Orwell, but some, the elites (and those who adopt elite values and work for their goals), are to be treated more equal than others.
When the voters put in presidents and other leaders approved by elites they are applauded by the same elites. Media, academia, television, movies and experts of all stripes laud such officials and those who voted for them. When voters elect anyone who threatens or challenges elite values or goals, these same institutions turn to full attack mode. It's like a pack of jackals going after their worst enemy. It's Lord of the Flies. The courts are brought to bear, the media is weaponized, schools and universities become arms of elite propaganda, and the bulk of professionals and experts turn their attention to reversing or amending electoral "mistakes." The voters must be kept in their place. Their superiors must rule.
Again, to history—it has always been thus. In fact, this is what Burke and Santayana were talking about when they warned that those who don't learn from the mistakes of history are bound to repeat them. Specifically: The aristocrats have always known how to respond when a bit of democracy raises its head in challenge. They lie, they attack, they use innuendo, they mischaracterize, they publish false reports—followed by more false reports. When they do tell the truth, they spin it to promote their narrative. Where possible, they employ character assassination. If these fail, they look for another way. Any way to bring back elite rule and control.
This can go two ways, history shows us. If the people are swayed by such elite manipulations and tactics, the elites quickly regain their power. If not, if the people hold strong against elitist lies, agendas, and domination, democracy spreads and free enterprise flourishes.
Make no mistake. No matter how it looks (and remember that elites almost single-handedly control how it looks), the battles we witness on the nightly news are not personality vs. personality or even political party vs. political party. Something deeper is afoot. Aristocracy and Democracy are at war. Rule by elites vs. rule by the regular people. This is a true fork in the road. We will either remain a democratic, free enterprise nation, or we will become a fully functioning aristocracy.
This is our choice. Right now. And it boils down to whether we let the media sway our views, or not.
Category : Aristocracy &Blog &Citizenship &Community &Constitution &Culture &Current Events &Economics &Education &Generations &Government &History &Independents &Information Age &Leadership &Liberty &Mission &Politics &Producers &Prosperity &Statesmanship


text:
Take Out #14
Ubisoft has amazingly done something unprecedented, by taking a long-running franchise that has focused on history, and actually created a purely educational mode to teach players about ancient Egypt; and it does it fantastically. Who would have thought the same game that has you planning and performing assassinations, would also be the same game that taught you about Egyptian city designs?
Here is to more game's in the future that not only provide fun, but a way to translate that fun, into education! Good job Ubisoft, good job.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Dry Areas
Dry Areas Victor Harbortest
The City of Victor Harbor has five separate dry areas.
Victor Harbor (Long Term)
Areas 1, 2 and 4 from 10.00pm each night until 8.00am on the following day for a continuous period.
Area 3 for a continuous period (24 hours a day).
Victor Harbor Dry Area Zones Map(59 kb)
An extension to Dry Areas for special events is as follows:
Schoolies Festival – Victor Harbor Areas 2 and 4
2018 Dates & Times TBA
Christmas Pageant – Victor Harbor Areas 1 and 2
2018 Dates & Times TBA
New Year's Eve - Victor Harbor Areas 1 and 2
2018 Times TBA
New Year's Eve - Hayborough Area 2 (Investigator Carpark)
2018 Times TBA


text:
Original TwentyThirty article
Rajah Lehal, Founder and CEO of Clausehound has an organizational role in activating the BMW Foundation Responsible Leaders Networks in North America.
BMW Foundation is a supporter of TwentyThirty, an online magazine that highlights social innovation activities leading up to the UN sustainability targets for the year 2030.
This week features Andrew Lamb and his team at Field Ready, who provide disaster relief with 3D printing technology.
They combat lack of supplies such as broken or missing key parts of medical equipment by printing it there, instead of waiting months of shipment, as well as training locals to use the technology themselves.
Read the full article here.
– – –
This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. It is not legal advice and should not be regarded as such. Any reliance on the information is solely at the reader's own risk. Clausehound.com is a legal tool geared towards entrepreneurs, early-stage businesses and small businesses alike to help draft legal documents to make businesses more productive. Clausehound offers a $10 per month DIY Legal Library which hosts tens of thousands of legal clauses, contracts, articles, lawyer commentaries and instructional videos. Find Clausehound.com where you see this logo.


text:
AT3 Leadership Symposium
AT3 ICT Accessibility Training
AT3 hosts an annual State AT Program Leadership Symposium in collaboration with CATADA and other partners designed to provide training on a wide range of State AT Program activities, policy, and management issues including data reporting. The Symposium provides an opportunity to learn from and engage with presenters, colleagues, and federal policy makers. Past Symposium documents can be found here: Archived Symposium Materials
Go to Events by State AT Programs
Go to a listing of Other National AT Events


text:
|Coordinates: 49°18′0″N 08°39′0″E / 49.30000°N 8.65000°ECoordinates: 49°18′0″N 08°39′0″E / 49.30000°N 8.65000°E
|Admin. region
|• Mayor
|Christiane Staab (CDU)
|• Total
|19.91 km2 (7.69 sq mi)
|110 m (360 ft)
|• Total
|• Density
|780/km2 (2,000/sq mi)
|Time zone
|Postal codes
|Dialling codes
|Vehicle registration
Walldorf is a town in the Rhein-Neckar-Kreis district in the state of Baden-Württemberg in Germany.
Walldorf is home to the world's seventh largest software company SAP, and the birthplace of the entrepreneur John Jacob Astor, of the Astor family.
The town is referred to, though not actually named, in John le Carré's novel Absolute Friends (2003), much of which is set in Heidelberg.
The neighbouring town to the east is Wiesloch. Both towns are strongly linked economically. Adjacent municipalities are Sandhausen, Leimen, Nußloch, St. Leon-Rot and Reilingen. The train station, named Wiesloch-Walldorf, is located between the two towns.
There is a group of Hallstatt culture barrows in the Hochholz woods, near the offices of SAP Deutschland;[2] the earliest documentary mention of the settlement occurs as Waltorf in a 770 deed issued by the Abbey of Lorsch. The Electorate of the Palatinate received Walldorf as an Imperial fief in 1230; the town suffered much during the Thirty Years' War of 1618-1648, and in 1689 was completely destroyed in the course of the French invasion during Nine Years' War. The area was settled anew by religious refugees, among them the predecessors of John Jacob Astor, Waldensians from Piedmont. With the 1803 German Mediatisation Walldorf fell to Baden. 1843 saw the building of the Rheintalbahn: this railway decisively promoted economic development. In 1901 Grand Duke Frederick I of Baden granted Walldorf town privileges. After World War II the companies Heidelberger Druckmaschinen (founded 1850) and of SAP (founded 1972; moved to Walldorf in 1977) were established in Walldorf.
Seats in the municipal assembly (Gemeinderat) as of 2019 elections:[3]
- CDU (Christian Democratic Union): 6 (29,03%)
- SPD (Social Democratic Party of Germany): 6 (24,80%)
- FDP (Free Democratic Party): 5 (24,24%)
- Grüne (Alliance '90/The Greens): 5 (21,93%)
SAP SE has its headquarters in the city since 1977.[4]
Twin cities[edit]
- Astoria, Oregon, United States, since 1963
- Kırklareli, Turkey, since 1970
- Saint-Max, France, since 1985
- Waldorf, Maryland, United States, since 2002
- Freeport, New York, United States, since 2003
The Astorhaus was built in 1854, from a pecuniary legacy of the deceased John Jacob Astor to his hometown. For decades, it served as an almshouse, and now hosts the register office and a museum.
The 19th century synagogue was devastated in the 1938 Kristallnacht, and is now in use as a New Apostolic church.[5]
Walldorf is most famous for its white asparagus, which one may enjoy in the months of April through June.
Notable people[edit]
- Joseph Anton Sambuga, theologian, born 1752 in Walldorf, died 1815 at the Nymphenburg Palace in Munich
- John Jacob Astor, at the time of his death the wealthiest man in the United States
- Dietmar Hopp, billionaire software entrepreneur[6]
- Timo Jouko Herrmann, composer, musicologist and conductor
- ^ "Bevölkerung nach Nationalität und Geschlecht am 31. Dezember 2018". Statistisches Landesamt Baden-Württemberg (in German). July 2019.
- ^ http://www.walldorf.de/2010/?seite=123
- ^ "Kommunalwahl 2019: Das ist der neue Gemeinderat in Walldorf". www.rnz.de (in German). Retrieved 2019-07-09.
- ^ "Legal disclosure." SAP SE. Retrieved on 10 April 2014. "Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16 69190 Walldorf"
- ^ Die Synagoge in Walldorf (Rhein-Neckar-Kreis). Alemannia-judaica.de. Retrieved on 2013-07-26.
- ^ "Dietmar Hopp". Forbes. Retrieved 4 January 2015.
External links[edit]
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Walldorf (Baden).


text:
By Marissa Jambrone, DATATRAK Marketing Project Specialist
Digital clinical (dClinical) data management solutions are a great option for clinical researchers looking to simplify their study. What study does not want to speed up the process of getting approved by the FDA?
According to a study by the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, "developing a new prescription medicine that gains marketing approval, a process often lasting longer than a decade, is estimated to cost $2.6 billion." From that same study, Tufts Center states that, "$1.2 billion of the $2.6 billion is time costs." [1] Any amount of time saved will equal a quicker return on investment AND save lives in the process. So why not use a dClinical solution?
It's time to let clinical researchers be clinical researchers by freeing them up to focus on their research rather than a solution that is frustrating, complex, and adds time to tasks making you miss deadlines. So, how do you know if a system is right for you?
Here are a few things you should ask yourself when looking for your next dClinical vendor:
- What do their current clients say about their system?
- Who chooses what enhancements are made to the system?
- How many of those enhancements came from current client suggestions?
- You're able to get the information in the system without a problem, but how easy it is to extract that data? Within this system, what can help you get your study in front of the FDA quicker?
- Is your data moving process complicating the review by regulatory agencies? Just because you aren't moving it doesn't mean it isn't moving. Ask your provider.
Well, before you sign your next contract, watch the following video from ZDoggMD.com – you're guaranteed to laugh. Like the video points out, not all technology solutions are created equally – and it's no different in the dClinical world.
What questions do you consider when choosing a dClinical vendor? Tweet us @DATATRAKINC with #dClinical
[1] "Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development." PR Tufts CSDD 2014 Cost Study. Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, 18 Nov. 2014. Web. 14 Sept. 2015. http://csdd.tufts.edu/news/complete_story/pr_tufts_csdd_2014_cost_study


text:
The Responsibilities of ParentingAugust 3,2017
Children are a gift from God; a gift that needs to be treasured and taken care of, a reward to claim, and a source of motivation. Are you a parentread more
Jesus' Power to HealJuly 26,2017
Jesus' main purpose in coming to earth is to reconcile man with God. True reconciliation between us and God brings spiritual and emotional healing,read more
The Proclamation of the WordJuly 20,2017
Do you believe in God? If so, do you know what is the importance of Proclamation of the Word? God speaks to us in the Liturgy of the Word, penetratingread more
Come to Jesus and Accept His BLESSINGS!July 13,2017
We all have needs in order to live and survive. As humans, we have these primary needs: food, shelter and clothing. We also need a job that will helpread more
TRUST IN THE SPIRITJuly 6,2017
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiriread more
BLESSED in the eyes of the LordJuly 6,2017
What does "being blessed" mean for you? Is it having a new car? Business growth? Job promotion? Most people consider these as blessings. So if youread more
God's PROVISION is More Than EnoughJune 29,2017
We all have our daily needs, dreams, desires, wishes and goals. We are planning to attain them in our own way -- striving hard to accomplish all of thread more
5 Ways to Achieve Your GoalJune 22,2017
Do you have goals? What are your goals and what are you doing to achieve them? And why do we need them? In Wikipedia, a GOAL is defined as a desireread more
Reap What You SowJune 15,2017
Are you tired of working? Are you tired of cooking every day? Are you tired of studying all day? And are you tired of doing good? We all have our rread more
The Church is a CommunityJune 8,2017
Do you belong to a CHURCH? Do you know why you are there? Why do you stay in the church? How does it help you? The church is the temple of God. It�read more


text:
The Selection of Jewish Children's Names- Some Emendations
In my paper 'New Light on the Selection of Jewish Children's Names'1 I set out the Portuguese Jewish naming custom. As far as I know this is correctly stated in respect of the first and second child of each sex; in this case, the information culled from seventeenth and eighteenth century genealogies was confirmed by contemporary personal testimony. How? ever, I went astray in respect of the third and fourth children, where I relied on genealogies alone, without the confirmation of personal recollection. The examples I gave all relate to the children of younger sons, and further examination of the evidence shows that in an eldest son's family the practice was different. The third son of an eldest son was not normally given his great-grandfather's name. For exam? ple, the children of Raphael de Abraham Mendes da Costa (1742-1788),2 of Amsterdam, were named asBecome a member to read the full article
Written by
Edgar R. Samuel
Published in
Volume 24
Other articles within the volume
- Norman Bentwich, 1883-1971*
- Jewish Colonies in Cyprus ? Further Information
- More Letters of Hazan de Sola
- The Selection of Jewish Children's Names- Some Emendations
- Jews and the English Stage, 1667-1850
- The Community of the Resettlement, 1656-1684: A Social Survey*
- Joseph Gortissos and the War of the Spanish Succession*
- The Literary Career of Joseph Jacobs, 1876-1900*
- The British Press and Zionism in Herzl's Time (1895-1904)*
- Abraham ben Naphtali Tang-A Precursor of the Anglo-Jewish Haskalah*
- On David Ricardo (1772-1823)*
- Naturalisation of Jews in England
- Foreign Trade of London Jews in the Seventeenth Century*
- Jewry of South-West England and some of its Australian Connections*
- The Letters of Israel Abrahams from Egypt and Palestine in 1898*
- Preface


text:
...and I thought it was the name of an electronic rock band...
Trolling through the booths at this year's Air Force Association convention in the DC area, a new UAV, or shall we say, OPA, caught our eye.
The L-3-made Mobius unmanned -- or, umm, manned -- aircraft is a swept-winged, push-motored prop plane that industry officials claim will horn in on the medium altitude, long-endurance UAV mission.
One might wonder what's the point of making a UAV capable of hosting a pilot...
Well, industry officials say the pilot option is a good one for flights through restricted airspace and areas where the FAA hasn't quite figured out how to accommodate UAVs in general. If a mission needs to be flown through those types of places, throw the stooge behind the stick and leave the AI at home.
Proponents of the system also argue the Mobius is a more cost-effective option than current UAVs like the Predator, which they claim cost about 40 percent more than the optionally-piloted aircraft. And that's a theme we heard quite a bit from the ever-growing UAV market at this year's AFA...price competition with existing UAV platforms.
It might be that the dominance of the Predator/Reaper and Global Hawk which ushered in the modern battlefield UAV era in the US market could be eroding.


text:
More than 10 years after the project was planned, the Mumbai Sewage Disposal Project (MSDP), in which waste water treatment plants were supposed to be upgraded to provide secondary and tertiary treatments, is yet to successfully start. Significantly, the delay has not only affected the plan for distributing the treated water to the city but also increased the estimated cost of the project from Rs2,300 crore in 2006 to Rs14,368 crore in 2018.
While the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) claims that the Colaba plant is nearing completion, tenders for other plants at Worli, Ghatkopar, Bhandup and Versova have already been floated. The upgradation work is expected to begin at all plants by October this year. The Malad plant is awaiting environmental clearance.
The terms of contract for the Bandra treatment plant includes upgrading existing infrastructure, increasing the diameter of the pipe carrying sewage water and installing new machinery for giving preliminary, secondary and tertiary treatment to sewage water. The Bandra plant is spread across 9.6 hectares of land and will be upgraded to treat 360 million litres of sewage water.
The delay in the upgradation, civic officials say, was caused as they were seeking environmental clearances from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF), and the Central Pollution Control Board on setting up new discharge norms for treated sewage into the sea or any water body.
Currently, seven places — Worli, Ghatkopar, Bhandup, Versova, Colaba, Bandra and Malad, have plants that provide preliminary treatment to sewage. Primary treatment involves segregating floating solid materials and sending them to dumping grounds. Secondary and tertiary treatment will involve separating organic and inorganic materials and other solid particles for recycling the sewage for non-potable use.
A senior civic official said, "There have been several additions of new components and machinery in order to upgrade the plants. We are using advanced technology to ensure the best treatment of sewage water. We received final environmental permissions for six plants only last year. The tenders were floated for five plants in February and the pre-bid is also completed. We have received a satisfactory response from the bidders so far."
These plants will treat more than 2,800 million litres of sewage daily and will distribute it to government offices, industries and help charge fire hydrants. If everything goes according to the plan, the BMC says it will distribute 1,700 million litres of water for non-potable purposes, treated from these plants, to residential and commercial structures as well, provided there is a demand.
The STPs will also treat sewage water before it is let off into the sea in order to avoid the damage to marine ecology. Currently, around 1,500 million litres of untreated water is disposed into the sea, which is affecting the coastline, said officials.
The civic body is also working on a parallel plan to provide treated water to the city for non-potable purposes. Civic officials said that according to the Development Plan 2034, plots above 20,000 square feet are supposed to treat their sewage water at source and use it for non-potable purposes.
Source: The Hindu


text:
Here's what's happening.
Tonkon Torp Hosts NYU Law Alumni Social
Tonkon Torp hosted a group of NYU Law alumni and admitted students for a social and networking event on March 18.
Shouka Rezvani Discusses Effective Bylaws Writing for Nonprofit Organizations
Shouka Rezvani facilitated a discussion at the March 13 "Nonprofit Law Un CLE: Tips From Pros and Practitioners" hosted by Oregon Women Lawyers and the Nonprofit Organizations Law Section of the Oregon State Bar. Shouka led a lively discussion on the…
Tonkon Torp Hosts ACLU for "Tinker Tour"
Tonkon Torp hosted the ACLU of Oregon for a stop on a speaking tour featuring Mary Beth Tinker discussing the 1969 landmark ACLU Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines.
Tonkon Torp Sponsors Girls Inc. Power of the Purse Event
Tonkon Torp was a Patron sponsor at the March 14 Power of the Purse event put on by Girls Inc. Turid Owren, the 2012 secretary and director of Girls Inc.
Tonkon Torp Sponsors OWLS Awards Dinner
On March 14, Tonkon Torp was a Gold Sponsor at the Roberts-Deiz Awards Dinner, hosted by Oregon Women Lawyers (OWLS).
Tonkon Torp Hosts OSPF Reception
On March 12, Tonkon Torp hosted the Oregon State Parks Foundation (OSPF) for a reception. Jon Stride, a trustee and treasurer on the OSPF board, brought the event to Tonkon Torp.
Tonkon Torp's Business Lawyers Share Information About Crowdfunding and General Solicitation Rules
Claire Brown and Drea Schmidt, members of Tonkon Torp's Entrepreneurial Services practice group, made a presentation to Oregon Executive MBA students on the topic of raising capital through "crowdfunding" and general solicitation. Their remarks…
Tonkon Torp Sponsors Dorchester Conference
Tonkon Torp was a presidential sponsor at the March 7-9, 50th anniversary Dorchester Conference, held in Seaside, Oregon.
Tonkon Torp Hosts AthletesTouch Portland Meeting
On March 6, Tonkon Torp hosted AthletesTouch for the inaugural meeting of their Portland branch.
Tonkon Torp Sponsors "Night of Excellence"
Tonkon Torp was a silver sponsor at the March 6 "Night of Excellence in Commercial Real Estate," a celebration presented by CAB (Commercial Association of Brokers), NAIOP, and SIOR.
Tonkon Torp Sponsors Renewable Northwest Project Event
Tonkon Torp was a table sponsor at Renewable Northwest Project's (RNP) 20th anniversary party on March 6.
Tonkon Torp Sponsors All Hands Raised Event
Tonkon Torp sponsored the annual All Hands Raised roast dinner on March 4.
Tonkon Torp Sponsors Freshwater Trust Gala
Tonkon Torp was a table sponsor at the Freshwater Trust's 31st Annual Gala and Auction on February 28. Jan Neuman filled Tonkon Torp's table at the event and attended along with Kurt Ruttum and others. The Freshwater Trust works to builds and…
Tonkon Torp Sponsors Ride Connection Gala
Tonkon Torp sponsored the February 28 gala held by Ride Connection. Drew Hagedorn organized Tonkon's involvement with the event. Ride Connection is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing responsive, accessible transportation options for…
Tonkon Torp Sponsors Classic Wines Auction
Tonkon Torp was a table sponsor at the March 1 Classic Wine Auction.
Turid Owren and Blerina Kotori Speak at Reed College
Turid Owren moderated, and Blerina Kotori participated in, a panel entitled Women in Law, held at Reed College's Working Weekend this February.
Jeanette Schuster Moderates Panel Webinar on CERCLA-Related Court Decisions
On behalf of the ABA Business Law Section's Environmental Committee, Tonkon Torp attorney Jeanette Schuster presented and moderated a panel discussion at a February 19 webinar on "Real Environmental Concerns in Real Property and Business Transactions…
Tonkon Torp Sponsors Youth Progress' Soup Smackdown
Tonkon Torp sponsored the "Soup Smackdown" event held by Youth Progress on February 26. Claire Brown led Tonkon's involvement with the event and was recently made a member of the Youth Progress board of directors. Youth Progress was established in…
Cronn & Materazzi Address Corporate Social Responsibility Questions
Tonkon Torp business lawyers Jeff Cronn and Marco Materazzi recently presented a continuing legal education seminar on Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting (CSR). Cronn and Materazzi examined why companies engage in CSR reporting, and…
Immigration Practice Group Sponsors International Film Festival
Tonkon Torp's Immigration practice group contributed to the Oregon State Bar International Law Section's sponsorship of the Portland International Film Festival (PIFF). The festival ran from February 6 to February 22. Alan Perkins, treasurer for the…


text:
Johnny Depp acknowledged he needed to "work his ass off" to fund his two million dollar-a-month lifestyle, his former managers have claimed.
Depp, 54, sued The Management Group (TMG) claiming they had cost him tens of millions of dollars and they retaliated with a suit saying they had repeatedly warned him about his excessive spending.
The firm handed Los Angeles Superior Court a batch of emails and records of phone calls on Monday in an attempt to "overwhelmingly establish" that the Hollywood actor was aware of his dire financial situation.
In one call in October 2009, the Pirates Of The Caribbean actor's sister and personal manager Christi Dembrowski is said to have told TMG co-owner Joel Mandel that he acknowledged his situation.
In a record of the call, Mr Mandel wrote: "She stated that she had spoken with her brother, and that he stated that he was well aware of his financial situation, and that he understood that he needs to 'work his ass off' to make the money that he needs to support his life."
In an email in December that year, Depp told Mr Mandel he was trying to limit his spending but wanted to treat his family at Christmas.
"I am doing my very best on holiday spending, but there is only so much I can do, as I need to give my kiddies and famille as good a Christmas as possible, obviously within reason," Depp wrote.
He added that he could only take private flights because commercial trips with paparazzi would be a "nightmare of monumental proportions".
Depp said he would be making 75 million dollars (£59 million) that year from The Tourist, the fourth Pirates Of The Caribbean film and Dark Shadows.
"I hope that by the amount that will be coming in from work in the coming year and also from back end proceeds, etc, will put everything straight," he wrote.
He also listed steps he had taken to shore up his finances, which are said to have taken a hammering from expenditure on a string of luxury properties and fine wines.
"Other than that, I got bikes, cars, property, books, paintings and some semblance of a soul left. Where would you like me to start??" he added.
Depp is seeking damages of more than 25 million dollars (£20 million) from the firm he sacked in March last year after 17 years together, while TMG is asking for 560,000 dollars (£433,000) in damages.
The case continues.


text:
SimCity DS ROM
SimCity DS NDS apk android for DraStic free download working on mobile and pc,Nintendo DS EmulatorBased on Sim City 3000 for the PC, the game features full stylus-based controls, mini games and a new adviser character who helps you out when designing your city. The DS title also includes three main modes of play: Build a New City, Save the City and Sister City. In Build a New City, you start a city from scratch.Blow into the DS microphone to put out fires
Sign documents with the stylus
Wireless trading of city data with other SimCity DS owners
SimCity DS ROM
Release Date: June 19, 2007
E for Everyone: Mild Cartoon Violence
Genre: Simulation
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Developer: syn Sophia
Supported Functions
Multi-cartridge Multiplayer
SimCity DS ROM
Direct Download:


text:
In addition to the vast range of products that RSM offers, it is also known as the leading waistcoat manufacturers in Chennai. After gaining a remarkable position in the market, we also extended our qualitative collection of waistcoat range to designing and offering a beautiful range of waistcoats for women and stand strong as popular women waistcoat manufacturers and work uniform suppliers. All our special waistcoats are designed and manufactured by an exceptionally skilled team of designers and experts who use high-grade fabric and modern techniques as per the industry standards.
We offer waistcoats in a lot of different sizes, patterns, designs and colours. We also offer customized styles as per the demands of clients and customers. Hence, we run it through a series of quality checks in order to ensure the perfect quality of all the products.Some of the most popular attributes of our products include elegant designs, durable standard, skin friendly and premium quality. Therefore, since its inception, our company has carved a niche in the market for manufacturing a wide range of waistcoats made using a high quality of fabrics and checked for the high level of resistivity and smoothness.


text:
14 Awesome Enrichment Activities [Sponsored]
Are you looking for after-school enrichment activities this year? Check out these local programs your kids are sure to love! Dan Beard... Read More
10 Under-the-Radar Fall Festivals in Cincinnati Festivals with duels, jesters, 800-pound pumpkins, U-Pick sunflowers and more!
Fall is just around the corner, and we are most excited for all the festivals! Nothing beats a fall festival, and here in... Read More


text:
The decision to go through rehab and get your life back in order is a big one for many individuals suffering from addiction. Once you've made the choice to go through rehab, however, there's still a big question remaining: Which center will you use to help you through the process of reclaiming your life? For many, recovering in a luxury drug rehab center is one of the most effective ways to reach sobriety. It's not a vacation, but it is a more comfortable location that will make it easier to achieve sobriety.
The Luxury Difference
There are two key attributes that set apart luxury drug rehab centers from their counterparts. First and foremost, at luxury centers, patients have access to top-tier doctors and addiction treatment therapists. Second, they're able to enjoy recovery in a luxurious setting that is specifically geared to help them be more comfortable throughout the process as it reinforces the rewards cycle. These simple differences aren't necessarily the magical formula to ending drug addiction, but they can help increase the odds of success as patients move forward with their lives.
Top-Tier Doctors: A Defining Characteristic
At luxury drug rehab centers, patients with top-tier doctors and addiction treatment therapists whose goals are improving their odds of success and providing them with the support they need to make it through addiction treatment. This includes:
Access to the latest medications to help make the process of withdrawal easier. Supervised use of medications like Suboxone and Methadone has been shown to offer improved outcomes to these patients, improving their odds of successful treatment.
Use of the latest treatment options. There are always new developments in treatment, and at luxury drug rehab centers, it's possible to get access to those new treatment options. In many cases, this can increase patient success and make it easier for them to move through the process.
Regular monitoring of any physical symptoms that go along with withdrawal and detox. At luxury rehab centers, there's a much higher focus on overall comfort–including monitoring of all the symptoms that go along with the process. From blood pressure monitoring to attention to all the details of comfort and more, these top-tier doctors will track symptoms and ensure that patients are receiving all the treatments they need.
Attention to all the details of recovery. Addiction recovery isn't a single-faceted process. That's why luxury drug rehab facilities have addiction treatment therapists on hand to observe the entire process and track the goals and needs of the whole patient.
Luxury Drug Rehab Environments
Heading off to a luxury drug detox center isn't just spending a few weeks at a spa, no matter how popular media might portray it. The process is still going to be work–and for many patients, there will be obstacles standing in the way that may be difficult to overcome. Having a luxury treatment environment, however, can offer a number of key advantages to patients who are genuinely ready to overcome addiction and return to their lives.
Enjoy an enhanced rewards system. At a luxury detox center, patients will receive access to many amenities that activate the pleasure centers of the brain, rewarding them for these new clean behaviors.
Appreciate the comfort of private rooms. At luxury detox centers, patients get their own private rooms, rather than having to share with other patients. This gives the time and space to focus on the patient's own recovery, rather than being dragged into whatever is going on with a roommate.
Partake in gourmet cooking. There's nothing quite like sitting down to a gourmet meal where you can enjoy all the flavors and textures that go along with the return of your senses as the rehab process proceeds. The luxury gourmet meals provided by many facilities offer special treats regularly throughout the day. This can be a great way to help put on weight that the patient lost during addiction or to help recover health through a specialized diet.
Enjoy recreational activities. At luxury drug detox centers, you'll find a wide range of recreational activities to enjoy when you're not participating in therapy. This can help you develop new hobbies to take the place of the habits you're leaving behind or simply help fill the hours while you're at the facility. Several common activities include:
- Art therapy, which can encompass everything from painting to sculpting
- Working with a personal trainer to get overall health back on track
- Adrenaline-filled adventures like rock climbing and ziplining
- Hiking and fishing in the great outdoors
- Gardening
- Exploring literature
- Board games to play with other patients
- Plenty of movies to watch
- An extensive range of health and fitness equipment
- Horseback riding
What to Expect
Depending on the facility you choose for your drug detox, you may experience a wide difference in amenities. Some treatment facilities engage in alternative treatments, while others stick to more traditional measures. Before selecting a drug detox facility, you'll also want to look into whether or not the facility offers sober support or follow-up after the detox process is done. The return to normal life can often be jarring and lead to increased struggles, making support essential. Knowing that there's support available will make it easier to move through those transitions.
Take the time to tour any facility before deciding whether or not it's the right one for you. Look at the amenities, consult with the staff, and learn more about how the facility operates. You'll quickly discover, however, what a difference a luxury facility can make. Take a look at the facility's treatment plans and discover whether or not they align with your wishes and goals. Then, prepare yourself for an experience that is designed to help you get your life back on track.
At a luxury drug detox facility, many patients will discover that they're able to increase their odds of success and ease the transition back to sobriety. Throughout the process, being supported by the best medical staff within a luxury environment can make it easier to meet your goals and progress down the road to recovery.


text:
Bayoxide® E 216 is a technical iron oxide adsorber in granular form. The product is based on a defined crystalline α-Ferric oxide hydroxide structure and has been developed specifically for the removal of arsenic and other ions from potable water. It is applied in a simple passive continuous pump-and-treat system for selective removal treatment of contaminated water.
Due to its particularly high surface area and adsorption capacity it selectively and safely adsorbs arsenic below the level of 10 µg/L. Relative to conventional adsorber media Bayoxide® E 216 allows significant longer operating times based on its advanced capacity. Bayoxide® E 216 has a much smaller particle size compared to Bayoxide® E 33, therefore the pressure loss in a filter bed will be higher and should be considered for the dimensioning of the filter.
Bayoxide® E 216 is suitable for use in following applications:
- Arsenic removal from potable water in which both, arsenate As(V) as well as arsenite As(III) are safely adsorbed below 5 μg/L.
- Phosphate removal from aquarium water
- Phosphate removal from surface water, such as ponds, lakes, pools
- Antimony, vanadium, and selenium removal from potable water
- Heavy metal removal from potable water, e.g., copper, lead, nickel, and zinc
|Color Index:
Technical Data sheet
Safety data sheet
|Legal Area
|Legal Entity


text:
What works for your skin could work for your hair
Experts are continuously developing new ways to beautify and strengthen the hair. The most recent trend companies are using, is the addition of ingredients more commonly used in skincare products.
So, could what works for your skin also work for your hair?
Understanding the differences between the hair and skin
The hair and the skin do contain a very similar structure. However, there are a few differences between how they function which could determine just how well these new ingredients will work.
Your skin is a living organ and it constantly renews itself, with the ability to heal itself when damage occurs. Your hair on the other hand, is technically dead. It doesn't heal once it becomes damaged. Instead, when it weakens, it simply snaps off and falls out. The only living part of it is located deeper within the scalp.
So, in order for the ingredients which help the skin to also help the hair, they'd need to be targeted at the area where it is still living – in the follicles.
Is it just a marketing gimmick?
So, are the products now advertising the use of peptides, antioxidants and stem cells just a marketing gimmick? Sadly, it appears they are.
Experts claim the only things that currently have any long-lasting effects on the hair are relaxants and dyes. The effects these have are mostly negative too. The trouble with the products using skin care ingredients, is that they contain too few ingredients to actually make much of a difference.
However, peptides do have the potential to help ageing hair. They're known for boosting collagen levels, so they can help to make your locks look thicker and healthier. So, leave-in products which contain peptides could potentially work.
In the grand scheme of things however, most products with skin care ingredients added do tend to be mostly a marketing gimmick, failing to deliver any real benefits in terms of thickening and preventing loss.
Overall, if you are worried about shedding or thinning, it's important to seek advice from a GP. There are numerous treatments available which will be much more effective than skincare ingredients, at both preventing and treating hair loss.


text:
One of my fellow bloggers, Just asked me Does physics have any melody ??? this question is one of the most asked questions to me, So today I'm gonna answer.
My Answer:
Yes, Physics has a melody. If I tell you that "everything is physics"., No matter we study as a subject or not. Everything ranging from small needle to the space technology all things dealing with the fundamentals of physics. the physics is most successful because it has the life companion, a life partner called Math.
Physics and mathematics are the most beautiful couples, nature is enclosed and created by the harmony between these two. these mathematical interpretations are the consequences of nature and its existence. and study of these we call physics. that harmony is generating a melody from the beginning of this cosmos.
we are made up of fundamental particles, even this entire universe and those fundamental particles have a rhythmic vibration/movement. Every cell in the living things is a part of this melody, DNA does this vibration in a very different way. (Which itself is a Big Subject of discussion)
The vibration of atomic particles, including electrons and nuclei, is a quantum phenomenon. which is still a mystery. I'm highlighting that melody of physics which is a secret of this cosmos.
Thank you for asking this question, will add more; Visit one of the unique writer's Blog, Akshaya 's Blog https://fromakshayasmind.wordpress.com/ all the best
Will add more post about this, visit my website for more https://www.melodiesphysics.com/, Happy to answer;
– Akshay Kumar Das
Copyright © 2018 by Akshay Kumar [Samal das akshay] All rights reserved. This Post or any portion thereafter may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the publisher.
Mail me: firstname.lastname@example.com
Share the wisdom!


text:
So to get to Chicago I decided to take historical research to a new level and in a bid to relive the Ballets Russes tour I got the train. The 18 hour from D.C. to Chicago. While train travel may have been glamorous in 1916 - it is not now. It was however a lot… Continue reading Adventures of a Travelling Historian – Chicago
Tag: Ballets Russes tour
Finding Nijinsky in NYC
The surprisingly successful failure Over the next month I am planning on following and researching (in a very small way) the route of the supposedly ill-fated Ballets Russes USA tour of 1916. This tour was led by Nijinsky and has often been deemed a failure, as has the première of his last ballet Till… Continue reading Finding Nijinsky in NYC