From Netflix Today: Harry Brown.
Harry Brown is played by Michael Caine who is a retired pensioner living in a depressed neighborhood somewhere in England. His best friend is another retired pensioner who he meets in a local pub for beers and chess. His friend is being harassed by some local young toughs and he vows to defend himself with a very large knife. The friend is murdered one night in a brutal and calas way by these thugs and Harry vows revenge.
Britain is one of those countries where socialism has failed miserably. It breeds a kind of human monster that cares nothing for productive achivement or anything noble. All they care about is their next high or how they can cheat a living out of another person's ability.
In this movie, Harry does manage to rid the planet of several completely useless individuals (any resemblence to true life is purely coincidental I suppose). It resembles the movie Death Wish in many regards, which is another one of my favorite films. I give this one 4 out of 5, but remind the readers that I am a bit prejudiced toward these kind of films.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Thursday, August 26, 2010
What is destroying the world?
Let's consider some basic facts:
Man does not have an automatic means of survival, he has no claws to hunt, isn't strong enough to bring down a water buffalo, and has only his mind to keep him alive.
From this it implies that in order to survive, man must produce. He must take raw materials provided to him and produce items that are useful and necessary for his survival. For example:
collect stones to build a shelter, kill animals for skins to protect against the elements, make products to trade with other men.
This implies that every single person is a producer. That's right, we are all producers. Every person alive must be a producer, otherwise they would die very quickly.
In order to survive, man must be able to keep what he produces. His very life depends on it.
If a man has a right to life, he has a right to property. Without a right to property, there can be no right to life. The two are as one.
Man creates government to protect his property from other men. The government's responsibility is to protect man's propery at all costs. This is the most important and vital function of a good government. When a government starts to seize man's property by the use of force, this is a rogue government and it has violated what should be it's prime directive.
And that is what is destroying the world. Governments are taking trillions of dollars in property and using it for their own vain and useless causes. In order for the world to survive, this must stop as soon as possible. Forceably taking the production of another man is theft. There is no other word for it, theft is immoral by any standard.
When a man has his property taken from him by force, he will cease producing that property. Why should he make the effort to produce, if his effort is not rewarded, but punished. This is the main reason why jobs are disappearing throughout the world. Men of production, which create such jobs, no longer exist due to government policy.
As soon as the world realizes that we are all producers; there is no such thing as a "consumer" unless one speaks of government, which consumes and gives back nothing. We are not sacrifical animals. Our existence is not to provide government with financing. Our existence is to produce, and be allowed to keep the products we produce and to trade with other producers. That is the other vital function of government. They must enforce contracts between traders. Without such a mechanism, trade cannot survive.
From this we can infer that government is necessary for human survival; however, if it becomes a rogue government, it becomes the destroyer of human life.
Anyone who has looked at history can see that it is obvious that all the countries that have practiced some sort of government theft have led to enormous loss of life, and countries that have recognized man's right to life and property have prospered beyond anyone's wildest expectations.
Anyone who advocates a government that allows the taking by force of people's property is guilty of gross ignorance of history, economics and philosophy.
It is every American's responsibility to educate themselves. The tools exist to do so and why Americans choose not to do so is something that I find incredulous.
Man does not have an automatic means of survival, he has no claws to hunt, isn't strong enough to bring down a water buffalo, and has only his mind to keep him alive.
From this it implies that in order to survive, man must produce. He must take raw materials provided to him and produce items that are useful and necessary for his survival. For example:
collect stones to build a shelter, kill animals for skins to protect against the elements, make products to trade with other men.
This implies that every single person is a producer. That's right, we are all producers. Every person alive must be a producer, otherwise they would die very quickly.
In order to survive, man must be able to keep what he produces. His very life depends on it.
If a man has a right to life, he has a right to property. Without a right to property, there can be no right to life. The two are as one.
Man creates government to protect his property from other men. The government's responsibility is to protect man's propery at all costs. This is the most important and vital function of a good government. When a government starts to seize man's property by the use of force, this is a rogue government and it has violated what should be it's prime directive.
And that is what is destroying the world. Governments are taking trillions of dollars in property and using it for their own vain and useless causes. In order for the world to survive, this must stop as soon as possible. Forceably taking the production of another man is theft. There is no other word for it, theft is immoral by any standard.
When a man has his property taken from him by force, he will cease producing that property. Why should he make the effort to produce, if his effort is not rewarded, but punished. This is the main reason why jobs are disappearing throughout the world. Men of production, which create such jobs, no longer exist due to government policy.
As soon as the world realizes that we are all producers; there is no such thing as a "consumer" unless one speaks of government, which consumes and gives back nothing. We are not sacrifical animals. Our existence is not to provide government with financing. Our existence is to produce, and be allowed to keep the products we produce and to trade with other producers. That is the other vital function of government. They must enforce contracts between traders. Without such a mechanism, trade cannot survive.
From this we can infer that government is necessary for human survival; however, if it becomes a rogue government, it becomes the destroyer of human life.
Anyone who has looked at history can see that it is obvious that all the countries that have practiced some sort of government theft have led to enormous loss of life, and countries that have recognized man's right to life and property have prospered beyond anyone's wildest expectations.
Anyone who advocates a government that allows the taking by force of people's property is guilty of gross ignorance of history, economics and philosophy.
It is every American's responsibility to educate themselves. The tools exist to do so and why Americans choose not to do so is something that I find incredulous.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Why Are Taxes Immoral?
Consider a variable 'M' which stands for a person or group of people and the variable PSC (Product, Service, Cash) which represents that entity, and the variable P which stands for people who can Provide PSC. I will use the variable G to represent a group of people who have the legal right to force, generally governments, sometimes not.
If M desires PSC (who doesn't?) and G Forces P to provide PSC to M, that is defined in this society as slavery.
Example:
M = plantation owner
PSC = cotton
P = slaves
G = government
That sorry period in American history when the above was considered an OK practice was what this country fought a Civil War over. The North defeated the South (well, that is what the history books tells us, my apologies to anyone out there who believes otherwise. :-) ) and slavery was abolished, at least that kind.
That was considered immoral and bad. It was also an outrageously impractical method to get cotton. Much better methods were discovered when the 'easy' method was abolished.
OK, consider the following:
M = People
PSC = Health Care
P = Doctors, Nurses
G = Government.
If the government forces care-providers to give health care to people, how is that different than slavery? It isn't. This country is attempting to turn doctors, brain surgeons, nurses, etc. into slaves. This is why nationalized health care doesn't work...ANYWHERE.. It is immoral and very impractical. Every country that has tried it claims that it "works", well, we still got cotton, didn't we, but that didn't make it right.
Again,
M = People
PSC = Cash
P = Working People
G = Government
Whatever you want to call the above, it doesn't escape the fact that it makes slaves out of every working person in this country. It's called income tax, which is completely wrong. It's actually a wage tax. Income is legally defined as a profit from a corporate operation. Wages are NOT income, it's a trade. You trade your time and effort to a company for money. Enough said. Wage taxes are immoral because slavery is immoral. At one time, slavery was legal, right now wage tax is legal, someday I hope it is not.
Now we must be careful to tell this to anyone, it will upset a great many people because there are a lot of them in the 'M' class. For instance, if we consider PSC to be Health Care in the form of Medicare and you attempt to tell a person who either directly benefitied from Medicare or whose relative did, you will get your head chopped off (literally) as they will claim that either they or their relative would have been far worse off if the practice did not exist (we still got cotton didn't we?).
If you were transported back into the mid-1800's and told a plantation owner or anyone who benefitied from slavery, you run the risk of disappearing forever. They were so convinced that they were right, no argument in the world would convince them otherwise, that is why a war resulted. It took awhile, but the practice was so heinous and destroyed the lives of so many people, a war was the only way to stop it.
Let no one tell you that in various forms today, slavery exists and is legal. This is not right, it is immoral and remember, that are are always alternatives to the use of force. It's just that people cannot seem to see beyond using the government to solve their wishes and desires.
It is common knowledge that you cannot force people to think. It's one thing to use slaves to pick cotton, which isn't the most complex task in the world, it's frightening to think that we are going to and alreay have slaves that are supposed to do extremely complex tasks.
Taxes are immoral because they turn people into slaves and slavery is immoral. Simple logic, but very few Americans see it that way, as logic is one thing that isn't taught, ah yes...
M = children
PSC = education
P = people
G = state, local and federal government
It's not that teachers are slaves, they are more like the plantation owners. They directly benefit from taxes collected to pay their salaries, and of course, they think that's just fine.
It's time to stop slavery in this country, ALL slavery of every kind.
If M desires PSC (who doesn't?) and G Forces P to provide PSC to M, that is defined in this society as slavery.
Example:
M = plantation owner
PSC = cotton
P = slaves
G = government
That sorry period in American history when the above was considered an OK practice was what this country fought a Civil War over. The North defeated the South (well, that is what the history books tells us, my apologies to anyone out there who believes otherwise. :-) ) and slavery was abolished, at least that kind.
That was considered immoral and bad. It was also an outrageously impractical method to get cotton. Much better methods were discovered when the 'easy' method was abolished.
OK, consider the following:
M = People
PSC = Health Care
P = Doctors, Nurses
G = Government.
If the government forces care-providers to give health care to people, how is that different than slavery? It isn't. This country is attempting to turn doctors, brain surgeons, nurses, etc. into slaves. This is why nationalized health care doesn't work...ANYWHERE.. It is immoral and very impractical. Every country that has tried it claims that it "works", well, we still got cotton, didn't we, but that didn't make it right.
Again,
M = People
PSC = Cash
P = Working People
G = Government
Whatever you want to call the above, it doesn't escape the fact that it makes slaves out of every working person in this country. It's called income tax, which is completely wrong. It's actually a wage tax. Income is legally defined as a profit from a corporate operation. Wages are NOT income, it's a trade. You trade your time and effort to a company for money. Enough said. Wage taxes are immoral because slavery is immoral. At one time, slavery was legal, right now wage tax is legal, someday I hope it is not.
Now we must be careful to tell this to anyone, it will upset a great many people because there are a lot of them in the 'M' class. For instance, if we consider PSC to be Health Care in the form of Medicare and you attempt to tell a person who either directly benefitied from Medicare or whose relative did, you will get your head chopped off (literally) as they will claim that either they or their relative would have been far worse off if the practice did not exist (we still got cotton didn't we?).
If you were transported back into the mid-1800's and told a plantation owner or anyone who benefitied from slavery, you run the risk of disappearing forever. They were so convinced that they were right, no argument in the world would convince them otherwise, that is why a war resulted. It took awhile, but the practice was so heinous and destroyed the lives of so many people, a war was the only way to stop it.
Let no one tell you that in various forms today, slavery exists and is legal. This is not right, it is immoral and remember, that are are always alternatives to the use of force. It's just that people cannot seem to see beyond using the government to solve their wishes and desires.
It is common knowledge that you cannot force people to think. It's one thing to use slaves to pick cotton, which isn't the most complex task in the world, it's frightening to think that we are going to and alreay have slaves that are supposed to do extremely complex tasks.
Taxes are immoral because they turn people into slaves and slavery is immoral. Simple logic, but very few Americans see it that way, as logic is one thing that isn't taught, ah yes...
M = children
PSC = education
P = people
G = state, local and federal government
It's not that teachers are slaves, they are more like the plantation owners. They directly benefit from taxes collected to pay their salaries, and of course, they think that's just fine.
It's time to stop slavery in this country, ALL slavery of every kind.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Movie Seen
This evening my wife and I watched "The Million Dollar Duck" which we received from Netflix today. It was made in 1971 and I recall it being funnier then than it is now.
It stars Dean Jones and Sandy Duncun (whom I had a crush on at the time). I just found some youtube videos where she plays Peter Pan (I had forgotten that).
Anyway, the duck in the movie lays eggs with golden yokes. His name is Charley. The next door neighbor works for the treasury and is quite curious where all the gold and money is coming from. According to the movie, it's against federal regulations to have a certain amount of gold in one's posession. Amazing, America was not America even in 1971, and you thought it was bad now! :-) Anyway I give the movie 2 out of 5 stars. It's quite dated and the comedy is mainly slapstick with keystone cop sequences several times in the movie.
It stars Dean Jones and Sandy Duncun (whom I had a crush on at the time). I just found some youtube videos where she plays Peter Pan (I had forgotten that).
Anyway, the duck in the movie lays eggs with golden yokes. His name is Charley. The next door neighbor works for the treasury and is quite curious where all the gold and money is coming from. According to the movie, it's against federal regulations to have a certain amount of gold in one's posession. Amazing, America was not America even in 1971, and you thought it was bad now! :-) Anyway I give the movie 2 out of 5 stars. It's quite dated and the comedy is mainly slapstick with keystone cop sequences several times in the movie.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Movie Seen and Music
My wife and I went to see "Despiciable Me" in 3D today. The movie was great! The 3D effects were OK, but stick around for during the credits, the minions attempt to get into the theater and off the screen.
This evening, we watched "Death Hunt" with Lee Marvin and Charles Bronson. This is a movie from 1981 about a trapper who attempted to rescue a dog that was being mistreated and close to death, but got into big trouble for his efforts. According to the credits, this was based on a true story about events from 1932.
The first fellow to get killed in Death Hunt looked familiar to me. I racked my brain until I finally figured out that he played Billy May's brother in the movie "Running Brave". It's tough to see a familiar face in a movie and not be able to place where one saw it before.
We streamed the movie from Netflix using our blu ray player. Netflix is supposedly expanding their range of movie for instant viewing. The # of movies to view instantly is quite limited, but if it's a good movie you haven't seen, it's worth viewing.
I just got an interesting free app for my iTouch. It's called DI radio and lets one listen to interesting internet radio stations. Right not I'm listening to something called "DJ Matte - Psytrance Mix December 2004". Nice beat, but hard to dance to. :-)
This evening, we watched "Death Hunt" with Lee Marvin and Charles Bronson. This is a movie from 1981 about a trapper who attempted to rescue a dog that was being mistreated and close to death, but got into big trouble for his efforts. According to the credits, this was based on a true story about events from 1932.
The first fellow to get killed in Death Hunt looked familiar to me. I racked my brain until I finally figured out that he played Billy May's brother in the movie "Running Brave". It's tough to see a familiar face in a movie and not be able to place where one saw it before.
We streamed the movie from Netflix using our blu ray player. Netflix is supposedly expanding their range of movie for instant viewing. The # of movies to view instantly is quite limited, but if it's a good movie you haven't seen, it's worth viewing.
I just got an interesting free app for my iTouch. It's called DI radio and lets one listen to interesting internet radio stations. Right not I'm listening to something called "DJ Matte - Psytrance Mix December 2004". Nice beat, but hard to dance to. :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)