Discussion:
Heaven...
Add Reply
islander
2018-12-02 20:46:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.

So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
CLOISTER
2018-12-02 21:28:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
So pathetic to say that your limited knowledge is all that you go by
Only recently a group of scientists said that your personality and
your spirit leave your body at the point of death. You are NOT your
body. HOSPICE nurses again and again can tell you stories that they
see all the time. Their patients can tell them who is coming for them and what time of the day they will leave. Staff members try to conceal the death
of residents and once in awhile a patient will tell them that "they saw them walk out"...not even knowing the person died.

Of course you are not going to be given scientific evidence of the spirit.
Winston Churchill saw Abraham Lincoln,while staying over night in the White
House. (what would he hope to gain by saying that?) Again and again Civil War soldiers ,killed at Gettysburg, can
tell folks what state they were from. It is not a matter of belief for me.
I am listening to professional people who have experienced it. Dr Kubler
Ross , who wrote books on DEATH and DYING, was going to retire and get
away from it all and walking to the elevator, one of her deceased
clients begged her not to retire because she was doing so much good.
You can analyze the hell out of such incidents but you can
not convince the folks who saw and spoke with a relative what happened
Quantum physicists are telling us that there are several
other dimensions You are living in just one dimension.
Sometimes when someone from another dimension literally "pops" into ours, there is actually a sounds like thunder
Native Americans had no hesitation knowing that they were still connected
with their deceased relatives.
It is only the pseudo-scientists, the "enlightened" (sarcasm) that
imagine themselves to be above such nonsense.
Many who see their deceased relative in their dream state wake up
happy and grateful that they saw them again. The debunkers have full
time jobs saying none of it can be proven.
CLOISTER
2018-12-02 21:44:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by CLOISTER
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
So pathetic to say that your limited knowledge is all that you go by
Only recently a group of scientists said that your personality and
your spirit leave your body at the point of death. You are NOT your
body. HOSPICE nurses again and again can tell you stories that they
see all the time. Their patients can tell them who is coming for them and what time of the day they will leave. Staff members try to conceal the death
of residents and once in awhile a patient will tell them that "they saw them walk out"...not even knowing the person died.
Of course you are not going to be given scientific evidence of the spirit.
Winston Churchill saw Abraham Lincoln,while staying over night in the White
House. (what would he hope to gain by saying that?) Again and again Civil War soldiers ,killed at Gettysburg, can
tell folks what state they were from. It is not a matter of belief for me.
I am listening to professional people who have experienced it. Dr Kubler
Ross , who wrote books on DEATH and DYING, was going to retire and get
away from it all and walking to the elevator, one of her deceased
clients begged her not to retire because she was doing so much good.
You can analyze the hell out of such incidents but you can
not convince the folks who saw and spoke with a relative what happened
Quantum physicists are telling us that there are several
other dimensions You are living in just one dimension.
Sometimes when someone from another dimension literally "pops" into ours, there is actually a sounds like thunder
Native Americans had no hesitation knowing that they were still connected
with their deceased relatives.
It is only the pseudo-scientists, the "enlightened" (sarcasm) that
imagine themselves to be above such nonsense.
Many who see their deceased relative in their dream state wake up
happy and grateful that they saw them again. The debunkers have full
time jobs saying none of it can be proven.
===============================
I never knew the details of Churchill talking to President Lincoln
------------------
Spirits in the White House

One of them would be Abraham Lincoln. He reportedly received regular visits from his son Willie, who died in the White House in 1862 at age 11 of what was probably typhoid fever. Mary Todd Lincoln, who was so grief-stricken by the loss that she remained in her room for weeks, spoke of seeing her son’s ghost once at the foot of her bed. There are also reports of her hearing Thomas Jefferson playing the violin and Andrew Jackson swearing.

After his assassination in 1865, Lincoln apparently joined his son in his phantasmal roaming. First lady Grace Coolidge spoke in magazine accounts of seeing him look out a window in what had been in his office.

Many more sightings would come in the decades and presidential administrations that followed. Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands was sleeping in the Lincoln bedroom in 1942 when she reportedly heard a knock on her bedroom door, opened it to see the bearded president and fainted.

Two years earlier, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, according to accounts, had just stepped out of a hot bath in that same room and was wearing nothing but a cigar when he encountered Lincoln by the fireplace.

“Good evening, Mr. President,” Churchill reportedly said. “You seem to have me at a disadvantage.”
================================
I would venture to say that "Willie" Lincoln came back to console his father that he was OK.
Some say they can see Dolly Madison working in the White House gardens and they try not to disturb where she was seen working. (Keep in mind that Dolly went through hell when the British were bombing the White House and she
was trying to save historic treasures.)
Weatherman
2018-12-02 21:52:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by CLOISTER
Only recently a group of scientists said that your personality and
your spirit leave your body at the point of death.
And, in your case, be reborn as a cockroach.
El Castor
2018-12-02 23:41:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
I tend to agree with you, however there are plausible arguments that
we could be living in a computer simulation -- perhaps future beings
studying the way humanity might have evolved if this or that had not
happened, or happened differently. If so, the existence of an
afterlife would be up to the programmer. I believe you claim to be an
agnostic. Agnostics leave open the possibility of just about anything.
Keep working on that open mind. (-8

"Is our world a simulation? Why some scientists say it's more likely
than not"
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
mg
2018-12-03 00:06:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 02 Dec 2018 15:41:15 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
I tend to agree with you, however there are plausible arguments that
we could be living in a computer simulation -- perhaps future beings
studying the way humanity might have evolved if this or that had not
happened, or happened differently. If so, the existence of an
afterlife would be up to the programmer. I believe you claim to be an
agnostic. Agnostics leave open the possibility of just about anything.
Keep working on that open mind. (-8
"Is our world a simulation? Why some scientists say it's more likely
than not"
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
I read a science fiction book, when I was about 18, with that exact
plot and I've always thought, ever since then, that was a possibility.
In fact, I wouldn't be too surprised if we have an option (with some
limitations) to determine, after we die, whose life we want to live in
our next life. And if that's the case, then the obvious question is
why did I pick me and why did you pick you? :-)
islander
2018-12-03 00:09:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
I tend to agree with you, however there are plausible arguments that
we could be living in a computer simulation -- perhaps future beings
studying the way humanity might have evolved if this or that had not
happened, or happened differently. If so, the existence of an
afterlife would be up to the programmer. I believe you claim to be an
agnostic. Agnostics leave open the possibility of just about anything.
Keep working on that open mind. (-8
"Is our world a simulation? Why some scientists say it's more likely
than not"
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
No, I am an atheist and have been for years. The probability of what
you describe as "just about anything" is so small as to be dismissed by
any thinking person. As to your computer simulation alternative, it is
amazingly difficult, if not impossible to model consciousness in a
computer, much less convince the models that they are real. Stuff for
science fiction.
El Castor
2018-12-03 09:29:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
I tend to agree with you, however there are plausible arguments that
we could be living in a computer simulation -- perhaps future beings
studying the way humanity might have evolved if this or that had not
happened, or happened differently. If so, the existence of an
afterlife would be up to the programmer. I believe you claim to be an
agnostic. Agnostics leave open the possibility of just about anything.
Keep working on that open mind. (-8
"Is our world a simulation? Why some scientists say it's more likely
than not"
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
No, I am an atheist and have been for years. The probability of what
you describe as "just about anything" is so small as to be dismissed by
any thinking person. As to your computer simulation alternative, it is
amazingly difficult, if not impossible to model consciousness in a
computer, much less convince the models that they are real. Stuff for
science fiction.
The Simulation Argument
https://www.simulation-argument.com/

There is a great deal of brain power behind the "possibility" we exist
in a simulation, but believe what you wish.

Some who would (reportedly) disagree with you ...
Rich Terrile director of the Center for Evolutionary Computation, JPL
Zohreh Davoudi, Physicist MIT
James Gates, Theoretical Physicist, Univ of Maryland - Retired
Elon Musk
Neil deGrasse Tyson
And at least two Professors of philosophy

Dr. Gates is on the list because as we delve deeply into the basic
construction of matter it all seems to come down to math. Without any
pre-conceved simulation belief, he stumbled on what appears to be
quantum error correcting code.
islander
2018-12-03 16:22:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
I tend to agree with you, however there are plausible arguments that
we could be living in a computer simulation -- perhaps future beings
studying the way humanity might have evolved if this or that had not
happened, or happened differently. If so, the existence of an
afterlife would be up to the programmer. I believe you claim to be an
agnostic. Agnostics leave open the possibility of just about anything.
Keep working on that open mind. (-8
"Is our world a simulation? Why some scientists say it's more likely
than not"
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
No, I am an atheist and have been for years. The probability of what
you describe as "just about anything" is so small as to be dismissed by
any thinking person. As to your computer simulation alternative, it is
amazingly difficult, if not impossible to model consciousness in a
computer, much less convince the models that they are real. Stuff for
science fiction.
The Simulation Argument
https://www.simulation-argument.com/
There is a great deal of brain power behind the "possibility" we exist
in a simulation, but believe what you wish.
Some who would (reportedly) disagree with you ...
Rich Terrile director of the Center for Evolutionary Computation, JPL
Zohreh Davoudi, Physicist MIT
James Gates, Theoretical Physicist, Univ of Maryland - Retired
Elon Musk
Neil deGrasse Tyson
And at least two Professors of philosophy
Dr. Gates is on the list because as we delve deeply into the basic
construction of matter it all seems to come down to math. Without any
pre-conceved simulation belief, he stumbled on what appears to be
quantum error correcting code.
I spent most of my career working with highly creative people and came
to believe that their optimism needs to be tempered with a strong dose
of reality. The CEO of one of the companies that I consulted with while
at Stanford is a case in point. He was an enthusiastic believer in
computing technology and the Internet and in his presentations about the
future, he would lapse into amazing possibilities for the future. I
advised him that he would be more effective if he stopped his
presentations after about 75% of what he had to say.

Personally, I am finally getting around to reading Dennett's
*Consciousness Explained* which is a serious look at how the human brain
works. Dreamers about simulation would be well advised to consider the
difficulty in modeling consciousness in a computer simulation, a step
that is essential to the simulation argument. It is fun to dream about
what might be possible, but quite another thing to see the path that
might lead to those possibilities.

Having said all this, I know that we need dreamers (and futurists). I
imagined myself to be one of them at one time. Still, I've become a
realist in seeing the difference between exuberance and reality,
especially in the public perception of what and when things are likely
to happen.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-12-03 19:04:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
I tend to agree with you, however there are plausible arguments that
we could be living in a computer simulation -- perhaps future beings
studying the way humanity might have evolved if this or that had not
happened, or happened differently. If so, the existence of an
afterlife would be up to the programmer. I believe you claim to be an
agnostic. Agnostics leave open the possibility of just about anything.
Keep working on that open mind. (-8
"Is our world a simulation? Why some scientists say it's more likely
than not"
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
No, I am an atheist and have been for years. The probability of what
you describe as "just about anything" is so small as to be dismissed by
any thinking person. As to your computer simulation alternative, it is
amazingly difficult, if not impossible to model consciousness in a
computer, much less convince the models that they are real. Stuff for
science fiction.
The Simulation Argument
https://www.simulation-argument.com/
There is a great deal of brain power behind the "possibility" we exist
in a simulation, but believe what you wish.
Some who would (reportedly) disagree with you ...
Rich Terrile director of the Center for Evolutionary Computation, JPL
Zohreh Davoudi, Physicist MIT
James Gates, Theoretical Physicist, Univ of Maryland - Retired
Elon Musk
Neil deGrasse Tyson
And at least two Professors of philosophy
Dr. Gates is on the list because as we delve deeply into the basic
construction of matter it all seems to come down to math. Without any
pre-conceved simulation belief, he stumbled on what appears to be
quantum error correcting code.
I spent most of my career working with highly creative people and came
to believe that their optimism needs to be tempered with a strong dose
of reality. The CEO of one of the companies that I consulted with while
at Stanford is a case in point. He was an enthusiastic believer in
computing technology and the Internet and in his presentations about the
future, he would lapse into amazing possibilities for the future. I
advised him that he would be more effective if he stopped his
presentations after about 75% of what he had to say.
Personally, I am finally getting around to reading Dennett's
*Consciousness Explained*
Excellent book, and I feel that, remarkably, the title is
not an exaggeration!
Post by islander
which is a serious look at how the human brain
works. Dreamers about simulation would be well advised to consider the
difficulty in modeling consciousness in a computer simulation, a step
that is essential to the simulation argument. It is fun to dream about
what might be possible, but quite another thing to see the path that
might lead to those possibilities.
Having said all this, I know that we need dreamers (and futurists). I
imagined myself to be one of them at one time. Still, I've become a
realist in seeing the difference between exuberance and reality,
especially in the public perception of what and when things are likely
to happen.
El Castor
2018-12-03 20:20:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
I tend to agree with you, however there are plausible arguments that
we could be living in a computer simulation -- perhaps future beings
studying the way humanity might have evolved if this or that had not
happened, or happened differently. If so, the existence of an
afterlife would be up to the programmer. I believe you claim to be an
agnostic. Agnostics leave open the possibility of just about anything.
Keep working on that open mind. (-8
"Is our world a simulation? Why some scientists say it's more likely
than not"
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
No, I am an atheist and have been for years. The probability of what
you describe as "just about anything" is so small as to be dismissed by
any thinking person. As to your computer simulation alternative, it is
amazingly difficult, if not impossible to model consciousness in a
computer, much less convince the models that they are real. Stuff for
science fiction.
The Simulation Argument
https://www.simulation-argument.com/
There is a great deal of brain power behind the "possibility" we exist
in a simulation, but believe what you wish.
Some who would (reportedly) disagree with you ...
Rich Terrile director of the Center for Evolutionary Computation, JPL
Zohreh Davoudi, Physicist MIT
James Gates, Theoretical Physicist, Univ of Maryland - Retired
Elon Musk
Neil deGrasse Tyson
And at least two Professors of philosophy
Dr. Gates is on the list because as we delve deeply into the basic
construction of matter it all seems to come down to math. Without any
pre-conceved simulation belief, he stumbled on what appears to be
quantum error correcting code.
I spent most of my career working with highly creative people and came
to believe that their optimism needs to be tempered with a strong dose
of reality. The CEO of one of the companies that I consulted with while
at Stanford is a case in point. He was an enthusiastic believer in
computing technology and the Internet and in his presentations about the
future, he would lapse into amazing possibilities for the future. I
advised him that he would be more effective if he stopped his
presentations after about 75% of what he had to say.
Personally, I am finally getting around to reading Dennett's
*Consciousness Explained* which is a serious look at how the human brain
works. Dreamers about simulation would be well advised to consider the
difficulty in modeling consciousness in a computer simulation, a step
that is essential to the simulation argument. It is fun to dream about
what might be possible, but quite another thing to see the path that
might lead to those possibilities.
Having said all this, I know that we need dreamers (and futurists). I
imagined myself to be one of them at one time. Still, I've become a
realist in seeing the difference between exuberance and reality,
especially in the public perception of what and when things are likely
to happen.
Personally, I see no harm in acknowledging possibilities. Of the men
that I listed, their degree of confidence ranges from slight (which
seems reasonable to me) to Elon Musk who believes there is one chance
in a billion we are NOT in a simulation. That does seem a bit over the
top. Elon Musk is also determined to see a man set foot on Mars, and
intends to do it himself. Good for him. We need more like him.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-12-03 16:46:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
I tend to agree with you, however there are plausible arguments that
we could be living in a computer simulation -- perhaps future beings
studying the way humanity might have evolved if this or that had not
happened, or happened differently. If so, the existence of an
afterlife would be up to the programmer. I believe you claim to be an
agnostic. Agnostics leave open the possibility of just about anything.
Keep working on that open mind. (-8
"Is our world a simulation? Why some scientists say it's more likely
than not"
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
No, I am an atheist and have been for years. The probability of what
you describe as "just about anything" is so small as to be dismissed by
any thinking person. As to your computer simulation alternative, it is
amazingly difficult, if not impossible to model consciousness in a
computer, much less convince the models that they are real. Stuff for
science fiction.
I've mentioned before that I have no recollection of ever
"believing in God", not even in England before I was six
years old.

As to the computer simulations though, I do feel that
one can easily argue that they can someday be as "real"
as you and I. We humans are, after all, very much like
computer simulations. The main difference is "desire".
If we add "desire" to a computer program, then we've
done it, and have become "gods" in a sense, but we
can't control what our creation does anymore.

In one Hindu myth, when Brahman created the first
humans, he made them perfect, but all they did was
sit under trees near the river and contemplate the
infinite. Brahman thought "This is boring". So he
made them disappear, and replaced them with
imperfect beings. That was lots more interesting,
with art, and ambition, and bloody wars, and marital
infidelity, and stuff like that.
mg
2018-12-04 00:14:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
I tend to agree with you, however there are plausible arguments that
we could be living in a computer simulation -- perhaps future beings
studying the way humanity might have evolved if this or that had not
happened, or happened differently. If so, the existence of an
afterlife would be up to the programmer. I believe you claim to be an
agnostic. Agnostics leave open the possibility of just about anything.
Keep working on that open mind. (-8
"Is our world a simulation? Why some scientists say it's more likely
than not"
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
No, I am an atheist and have been for years. The probability of what
you describe as "just about anything" is so small as to be dismissed by
any thinking person. As to your computer simulation alternative, it is
amazingly difficult, if not impossible to model consciousness in a
computer, much less convince the models that they are real. Stuff for
science fiction.
I've mentioned before that I have no recollection of ever
"believing in God", not even in England before I was six
years old.
As to the computer simulations though, I do feel that
one can easily argue that they can someday be as "real"
as you and I. We humans are, after all, very much like
computer simulations. The main difference is "desire".
If we add "desire" to a computer program, then we've
done it, and have become "gods" in a sense, but we
can't control what our creation does anymore.
Although the referenced article uses the word "simulation", I
personally have never thought of it as a simulation. The way that I
think of it is that brain activity was simply recorded by an advanced
civilization and is now being played back to people who life in the
future which may actually exist a million, or a billion, or a trillion
years from now in another galaxy, or even another universe.

The only time that a simulation would be necessary, in that scenario,
is if the person wanted the computer to produced a customized version
of the life someone lived instead of living all of it as it actually
happened.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
In one Hindu myth, when Brahman created the first
humans, he made them perfect, but all they did was
sit under trees near the river and contemplate the
infinite. Brahman thought "This is boring". So he
made them disappear, and replaced them with
imperfect beings. That was lots more interesting,
with art, and ambition, and bloody wars, and marital
infidelity, and stuff like that.
There might be some similarity with that story and the Garden of Eden
story. As I recall, Adam and Eve were created in a perfect
environment, and perhaps were perfect themselves, but were kicked out
of the garden when they disobeyed God when he said something like "Now
just remember that whatever you do don't eat the forbidden fruit, or
I'll kick your ass out of the garden". :-)
rumpelstiltskin
2018-12-04 07:25:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
I tend to agree with you, however there are plausible arguments that
we could be living in a computer simulation -- perhaps future beings
studying the way humanity might have evolved if this or that had not
happened, or happened differently. If so, the existence of an
afterlife would be up to the programmer. I believe you claim to be an
agnostic. Agnostics leave open the possibility of just about anything.
Keep working on that open mind. (-8
"Is our world a simulation? Why some scientists say it's more likely
than not"
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
No, I am an atheist and have been for years. The probability of what
you describe as "just about anything" is so small as to be dismissed by
any thinking person. As to your computer simulation alternative, it is
amazingly difficult, if not impossible to model consciousness in a
computer, much less convince the models that they are real. Stuff for
science fiction.
I've mentioned before that I have no recollection of ever
"believing in God", not even in England before I was six
years old.
As to the computer simulations though, I do feel that
one can easily argue that they can someday be as "real"
as you and I. We humans are, after all, very much like
computer simulations. The main difference is "desire".
If we add "desire" to a computer program, then we've
done it, and have become "gods" in a sense, but we
can't control what our creation does anymore.
You want to watch a movie you've already seen,
instead of a new one? I do watch Fawlty Towers
and Jeeves & Bertie movies repeatedly, but I
wouldn't want to see a Hollywood schlock movie
even the first time, much less over and over.
Post by mg
Although the referenced article uses the word "simulation", I
personally have never thought of it as a simulation. The way that I
think of it is that brain activity was simply recorded by an advanced
civilization and is now being played back to people who life in the
future which may actually exist a million, or a billion, or a trillion
years from now in another galaxy, or even another universe.
The only time that a simulation would be necessary, in that scenario,
is if the person wanted the computer to produced a customized version
of the life someone lived instead of living all of it as it actually
happened.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
In one Hindu myth, when Brahman created the first
humans, he made them perfect, but all they did was
sit under trees near the river and contemplate the
infinite. Brahman thought "This is boring". So he
made them disappear, and replaced them with
imperfect beings. That was lots more interesting,
with art, and ambition, and bloody wars, and marital
infidelity, and stuff like that.
There might be some similarity with that story and the Garden of Eden
story. As I recall, Adam and Eve were created in a perfect
environment, and perhaps were perfect themselves, but were kicked out
of the garden when they disobeyed God when he said something like "Now
just remember that whatever you do don't eat the forbidden fruit, or
I'll kick your ass out of the garden". :-)
I don't find it surprising to find similarities in the
various creation myths. There's not much going
on in them, so the possibilities are circumscribed'
mg
2018-12-04 07:35:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
I tend to agree with you, however there are plausible arguments that
we could be living in a computer simulation -- perhaps future beings
studying the way humanity might have evolved if this or that had not
happened, or happened differently. If so, the existence of an
afterlife would be up to the programmer. I believe you claim to be an
agnostic. Agnostics leave open the possibility of just about anything.
Keep working on that open mind. (-8
"Is our world a simulation? Why some scientists say it's more likely
than not"
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
No, I am an atheist and have been for years. The probability of what
you describe as "just about anything" is so small as to be dismissed by
any thinking person. As to your computer simulation alternative, it is
amazingly difficult, if not impossible to model consciousness in a
computer, much less convince the models that they are real. Stuff for
science fiction.
I've mentioned before that I have no recollection of ever
"believing in God", not even in England before I was six
years old.
As to the computer simulations though, I do feel that
one can easily argue that they can someday be as "real"
as you and I. We humans are, after all, very much like
computer simulations. The main difference is "desire".
If we add "desire" to a computer program, then we've
done it, and have become "gods" in a sense, but we
can't control what our creation does anymore.
You want to watch a movie you've already seen,
instead of a new one? I do watch Fawlty Towers
and Jeeves & Bertie movies repeatedly, but I
wouldn't want to see a Hollywood schlock movie
even the first time, much less over and over.
Post by mg
Although the referenced article uses the word "simulation", I
personally have never thought of it as a simulation. The way that I
think of it is that brain activity was simply recorded by an advanced
civilization and is now being played back to people who life in the
future which may actually exist a million, or a billion, or a trillion
years from now in another galaxy, or even another universe.
The only time that a simulation would be necessary, in that scenario,
is if the person wanted the computer to produced a customized version
of the life someone lived instead of living all of it as it actually
happened.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
In one Hindu myth, when Brahman created the first
humans, he made them perfect, but all they did was
sit under trees near the river and contemplate the
infinite. Brahman thought "This is boring". So he
made them disappear, and replaced them with
imperfect beings. That was lots more interesting,
with art, and ambition, and bloody wars, and marital
infidelity, and stuff like that.
There might be some similarity with that story and the Garden of Eden
story. As I recall, Adam and Eve were created in a perfect
environment, and perhaps were perfect themselves, but were kicked out
of the garden when they disobeyed God when he said something like "Now
just remember that whatever you do don't eat the forbidden fruit, or
I'll kick your ass out of the garden". :-)
I don't find it surprising to find similarities in the
various creation myths. There's not much going
on in them, so the possibilities are circumscribed'
I'm a total novice, of course, when it comes to Christian and biblical
history, but I wouldn't be surprised if one (out of many) good pieces
of evidence against the validity of the Christian religion is the way
that it copied so many ideas from other religions.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-12-04 17:01:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
I tend to agree with you, however there are plausible arguments that
we could be living in a computer simulation -- perhaps future beings
studying the way humanity might have evolved if this or that had not
happened, or happened differently. If so, the existence of an
afterlife would be up to the programmer. I believe you claim to be an
agnostic. Agnostics leave open the possibility of just about anything.
Keep working on that open mind. (-8
"Is our world a simulation? Why some scientists say it's more likely
than not"
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix
No, I am an atheist and have been for years. The probability of what
you describe as "just about anything" is so small as to be dismissed by
any thinking person. As to your computer simulation alternative, it is
amazingly difficult, if not impossible to model consciousness in a
computer, much less convince the models that they are real. Stuff for
science fiction.
I've mentioned before that I have no recollection of ever
"believing in God", not even in England before I was six
years old.
As to the computer simulations though, I do feel that
one can easily argue that they can someday be as "real"
as you and I. We humans are, after all, very much like
computer simulations. The main difference is "desire".
If we add "desire" to a computer program, then we've
done it, and have become "gods" in a sense, but we
can't control what our creation does anymore.
You want to watch a movie you've already seen,
instead of a new one? I do watch Fawlty Towers
and Jeeves & Bertie movies repeatedly, but I
wouldn't want to see a Hollywood schlock movie
even the first time, much less over and over.
Post by mg
Although the referenced article uses the word "simulation", I
personally have never thought of it as a simulation. The way that I
think of it is that brain activity was simply recorded by an advanced
civilization and is now being played back to people who life in the
future which may actually exist a million, or a billion, or a trillion
years from now in another galaxy, or even another universe.
The only time that a simulation would be necessary, in that scenario,
is if the person wanted the computer to produced a customized version
of the life someone lived instead of living all of it as it actually
happened.
Post by rumpelstiltskin
In one Hindu myth, when Brahman created the first
humans, he made them perfect, but all they did was
sit under trees near the river and contemplate the
infinite. Brahman thought "This is boring". So he
made them disappear, and replaced them with
imperfect beings. That was lots more interesting,
with art, and ambition, and bloody wars, and marital
infidelity, and stuff like that.
There might be some similarity with that story and the Garden of Eden
story. As I recall, Adam and Eve were created in a perfect
environment, and perhaps were perfect themselves, but were kicked out
of the garden when they disobeyed God when he said something like "Now
just remember that whatever you do don't eat the forbidden fruit, or
I'll kick your ass out of the garden". :-)
I don't find it surprising to find similarities in the
various creation myths. There's not much going
on in them, so the possibilities are circumscribed'
I'm a total novice, of course, when it comes to Christian and biblical
history, but I wouldn't be surprised if one (out of many) good pieces
of evidence against the validity of the Christian religion is the way
that it copied so many ideas from other religions.
If there's no evidence FOR something, one doesn't
need much, of even any, evidence AGAINST it.
b***@gmail.com
2018-12-03 01:38:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
islander
2018-12-03 04:12:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
Heaven can be anything you want it to be. Belief in the hereafter is
only a problem if that belief becomes an excuse for actions that harm
yourself or others.

Looks like the markets are having difficulty recovering after their high
back in Oct. There seems to be a lot of nervous investors out there.
b***@gmail.com
2018-12-03 08:10:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
Heaven can be anything you want it to be. Belief in the hereafter is
only a problem if that belief becomes an excuse for actions that harm
yourself or others.
Looks like the markets are having difficulty recovering after their high
back in Oct. There seems to be a lot of nervous investors out there.
I like Warren Buffet's quote of this but I don't do it. I hang out with losers.

"It's better to hang out with people better than you. Pick out associates whose behavior is better than yours and you'll drift in that direction."

Warren Buffet.
El Castor
2018-12-03 09:38:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
Heaven can be anything you want it to be. Belief in the hereafter is
only a problem if that belief becomes an excuse for actions that harm
yourself or others.
Looks like the markets are having difficulty recovering after their high
back in Oct. There seems to be a lot of nervous investors out there.
The Fed is raising rates. Tariff anxiety is also behind the
nervousness. Personally, I'm glad Trump is taking action on tariffs. I
naively believed that the North American Free Trade Agreement was, as
the name implied, free trade, without tariffs, but that proved to be
far from the truth. I was also shocked to learn that we were three
years from being out of the steel business, and then there is the
blatant theft of intellectual property by China.
islander
2018-12-03 16:01:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
Heaven can be anything you want it to be. Belief in the hereafter is
only a problem if that belief becomes an excuse for actions that harm
yourself or others.
Looks like the markets are having difficulty recovering after their high
back in Oct. There seems to be a lot of nervous investors out there.
The Fed is raising rates. Tariff anxiety is also behind the
nervousness. Personally, I'm glad Trump is taking action on tariffs. I
naively believed that the North American Free Trade Agreement was, as
the name implied, free trade, without tariffs, but that proved to be
far from the truth. I was also shocked to learn that we were three
years from being out of the steel business, and then there is the
blatant theft of intellectual property by China.
The steel industry in the US has been in decline for 70 years.
Following WWII when the steel (and aluminum) domestic production was at
its peak, there was a need to rebuild countries in Asia and Europe after
the destruction in the war. This required capital investment, not only
in steel, but had an impact on other industries including the auto
industry. New plants were built using the latest technology. Capital
was especially attracted to Japan where the combination of low labor
costs and the opportunity for green field investment was attractive.
Meanwhile, there was little incentive to replace aging plants. Look at
the steel industry in Pittsburgh, for example. Who would invest in
replacing those plants on the Ohio River which had been operating for 50
years? Much easier to move on and leave the mess behind - a time
honored practice of American industry. There was some effort in the
'80s to build boutique mills specializing in unique markets, but it
would never rise to the old glory days of US Steel.

The situation was different in China where the importance of steel was
recognized in Mao's Great Leap Forward. There, the emphasis was on
meeting state targets by any means and backyard smelters proliferated.
This was a disaster and famine resulted as individuals left agriculture
to staff the always marginal smelters. China did not succeed in steel
until the Great Opening-up of the late '70s and into the '80s. This
attracted capital and produced rapid expansion of the industry in China
at a time when steel in Japan was showing signs of decline. The
geography favored development in China which had cheap sources of energy
and iron ore, unlike Japan which had to import everything.

In the end, it was the movement of capital in the 70 years following
WWII that abandoned domestic production and tariffs are, at best, a
band-aid that is not likely to have much effect.

What Trump is very badly mistaken about is the belief that we can exist
and thrive in isolation. We have become very dependent on the rest of
the world and ultimately that is what free trade is all about. Friedman
was right! In that context, we need trade agreements, if for no other
reason than to assure that an otherwise unfettered industry will
continue to make decisions that benefit their shareholders at the
expense of everyone else. Sadly, we abandoned Trans Pacific Partnership
which was more about controlling the movement of corporations to China
(notably excluded from the agreement) than anything else. The demise of
the TPP was about politics, not jobs.
El Castor
2018-12-03 20:40:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
Heaven can be anything you want it to be. Belief in the hereafter is
only a problem if that belief becomes an excuse for actions that harm
yourself or others.
Looks like the markets are having difficulty recovering after their high
back in Oct. There seems to be a lot of nervous investors out there.
The Fed is raising rates. Tariff anxiety is also behind the
nervousness. Personally, I'm glad Trump is taking action on tariffs. I
naively believed that the North American Free Trade Agreement was, as
the name implied, free trade, without tariffs, but that proved to be
far from the truth. I was also shocked to learn that we were three
years from being out of the steel business, and then there is the
blatant theft of intellectual property by China.
The steel industry in the US has been in decline for 70 years.
Following WWII when the steel (and aluminum) domestic production was at
its peak, there was a need to rebuild countries in Asia and Europe after
the destruction in the war. This required capital investment, not only
in steel, but had an impact on other industries including the auto
industry. New plants were built using the latest technology. Capital
was especially attracted to Japan where the combination of low labor
costs and the opportunity for green field investment was attractive.
Meanwhile, there was little incentive to replace aging plants. Look at
the steel industry in Pittsburgh, for example. Who would invest in
replacing those plants on the Ohio River which had been operating for 50
years? Much easier to move on and leave the mess behind - a time
honored practice of American industry. There was some effort in the
'80s to build boutique mills specializing in unique markets, but it
would never rise to the old glory days of US Steel.
The situation was different in China where the importance of steel was
recognized in Mao's Great Leap Forward. There, the emphasis was on
meeting state targets by any means and backyard smelters proliferated.
This was a disaster and famine resulted as individuals left agriculture
to staff the always marginal smelters. China did not succeed in steel
until the Great Opening-up of the late '70s and into the '80s. This
attracted capital and produced rapid expansion of the industry in China
at a time when steel in Japan was showing signs of decline. The
geography favored development in China which had cheap sources of energy
and iron ore, unlike Japan which had to import everything.
In the end, it was the movement of capital in the 70 years following
WWII that abandoned domestic production and tariffs are, at best, a
band-aid that is not likely to have much effect.
What Trump is very badly mistaken about is the belief that we can exist
and thrive in isolation. We have become very dependent on the rest of
the world and ultimately that is what free trade is all about. Friedman
was right! In that context, we need trade agreements, if for no other
reason than to assure that an otherwise unfettered industry will
continue to make decisions that benefit their shareholders at the
expense of everyone else. Sadly, we abandoned Trans Pacific Partnership
which was more about controlling the movement of corporations to China
(notably excluded from the agreement) than anything else. The demise of
the TPP was about politics, not jobs.
Cheap labor is the reason most industry has left our shores. But, we
are entering an age of robots that should allow us to compete with any
country, China included. Unfortunately, the US is lagging in the
development of robots, while China has a major industrial robot
project underway, and could be #1 in the world in a few years. China
and the US have the largest rare earth deposits in the world, but we
lack the industrial capacity to refine it, so we ship our rare earths
to China to be refined and turned into hi-tech products. As I said, we
were three years from being completely out of the steel manufacturing
business. Are we fated to become a nation of farmers because our
politicians fail to understand what is happening in the world? Thanks
to Trump, maybe not.
islander
2018-12-04 15:49:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
Heaven can be anything you want it to be. Belief in the hereafter is
only a problem if that belief becomes an excuse for actions that harm
yourself or others.
Looks like the markets are having difficulty recovering after their high
back in Oct. There seems to be a lot of nervous investors out there.
The Fed is raising rates. Tariff anxiety is also behind the
nervousness. Personally, I'm glad Trump is taking action on tariffs. I
naively believed that the North American Free Trade Agreement was, as
the name implied, free trade, without tariffs, but that proved to be
far from the truth. I was also shocked to learn that we were three
years from being out of the steel business, and then there is the
blatant theft of intellectual property by China.
The steel industry in the US has been in decline for 70 years.
Following WWII when the steel (and aluminum) domestic production was at
its peak, there was a need to rebuild countries in Asia and Europe after
the destruction in the war. This required capital investment, not only
in steel, but had an impact on other industries including the auto
industry. New plants were built using the latest technology. Capital
was especially attracted to Japan where the combination of low labor
costs and the opportunity for green field investment was attractive.
Meanwhile, there was little incentive to replace aging plants. Look at
the steel industry in Pittsburgh, for example. Who would invest in
replacing those plants on the Ohio River which had been operating for 50
years? Much easier to move on and leave the mess behind - a time
honored practice of American industry. There was some effort in the
'80s to build boutique mills specializing in unique markets, but it
would never rise to the old glory days of US Steel.
The situation was different in China where the importance of steel was
recognized in Mao's Great Leap Forward. There, the emphasis was on
meeting state targets by any means and backyard smelters proliferated.
This was a disaster and famine resulted as individuals left agriculture
to staff the always marginal smelters. China did not succeed in steel
until the Great Opening-up of the late '70s and into the '80s. This
attracted capital and produced rapid expansion of the industry in China
at a time when steel in Japan was showing signs of decline. The
geography favored development in China which had cheap sources of energy
and iron ore, unlike Japan which had to import everything.
In the end, it was the movement of capital in the 70 years following
WWII that abandoned domestic production and tariffs are, at best, a
band-aid that is not likely to have much effect.
What Trump is very badly mistaken about is the belief that we can exist
and thrive in isolation. We have become very dependent on the rest of
the world and ultimately that is what free trade is all about. Friedman
was right! In that context, we need trade agreements, if for no other
reason than to assure that an otherwise unfettered industry will
continue to make decisions that benefit their shareholders at the
expense of everyone else. Sadly, we abandoned Trans Pacific Partnership
which was more about controlling the movement of corporations to China
(notably excluded from the agreement) than anything else. The demise of
the TPP was about politics, not jobs.
Cheap labor is the reason most industry has left our shores. But, we
are entering an age of robots that should allow us to compete with any
country, China included. Unfortunately, the US is lagging in the
development of robots, while China has a major industrial robot
project underway, and could be #1 in the world in a few years. China
and the US have the largest rare earth deposits in the world, but we
lack the industrial capacity to refine it, so we ship our rare earths
to China to be refined and turned into hi-tech products. As I said, we
were three years from being completely out of the steel manufacturing
business. Are we fated to become a nation of farmers because our
politicians fail to understand what is happening in the world? Thanks
to Trump, maybe not.
The news this morning is that Trump's claimed "breakthrough" with Xi is
only a 90 day moratorium on tariffs and it isn't clear if it starts on
Dec 1 or Jan 1. JP Morgan gave advice to investors in a note this
morning, “It doesn’t seem like anything was actually agreed to at the
dinner and White House officials are contorting themselves into pretzels
to reconcile Trump’s tweets (which seem if not completely fabricated
then grossly exaggerated) with reality.”

The bungler in chief seems to have only one strategy. Create a crisis
and then step in to claim credit for solving it. In this case, it
appears that Trump is seriously over-matched in his dealings with Xi and
in the trade war chaos, it is Trump who blinked first.

How long can the Republicans continue to support Trump when the big
banks are complaining?
El Castor
2018-12-04 17:10:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
Heaven can be anything you want it to be. Belief in the hereafter is
only a problem if that belief becomes an excuse for actions that harm
yourself or others.
Looks like the markets are having difficulty recovering after their high
back in Oct. There seems to be a lot of nervous investors out there.
The Fed is raising rates. Tariff anxiety is also behind the
nervousness. Personally, I'm glad Trump is taking action on tariffs. I
naively believed that the North American Free Trade Agreement was, as
the name implied, free trade, without tariffs, but that proved to be
far from the truth. I was also shocked to learn that we were three
years from being out of the steel business, and then there is the
blatant theft of intellectual property by China.
The steel industry in the US has been in decline for 70 years.
Following WWII when the steel (and aluminum) domestic production was at
its peak, there was a need to rebuild countries in Asia and Europe after
the destruction in the war. This required capital investment, not only
in steel, but had an impact on other industries including the auto
industry. New plants were built using the latest technology. Capital
was especially attracted to Japan where the combination of low labor
costs and the opportunity for green field investment was attractive.
Meanwhile, there was little incentive to replace aging plants. Look at
the steel industry in Pittsburgh, for example. Who would invest in
replacing those plants on the Ohio River which had been operating for 50
years? Much easier to move on and leave the mess behind - a time
honored practice of American industry. There was some effort in the
'80s to build boutique mills specializing in unique markets, but it
would never rise to the old glory days of US Steel.
The situation was different in China where the importance of steel was
recognized in Mao's Great Leap Forward. There, the emphasis was on
meeting state targets by any means and backyard smelters proliferated.
This was a disaster and famine resulted as individuals left agriculture
to staff the always marginal smelters. China did not succeed in steel
until the Great Opening-up of the late '70s and into the '80s. This
attracted capital and produced rapid expansion of the industry in China
at a time when steel in Japan was showing signs of decline. The
geography favored development in China which had cheap sources of energy
and iron ore, unlike Japan which had to import everything.
In the end, it was the movement of capital in the 70 years following
WWII that abandoned domestic production and tariffs are, at best, a
band-aid that is not likely to have much effect.
What Trump is very badly mistaken about is the belief that we can exist
and thrive in isolation. We have become very dependent on the rest of
the world and ultimately that is what free trade is all about. Friedman
was right! In that context, we need trade agreements, if for no other
reason than to assure that an otherwise unfettered industry will
continue to make decisions that benefit their shareholders at the
expense of everyone else. Sadly, we abandoned Trans Pacific Partnership
which was more about controlling the movement of corporations to China
(notably excluded from the agreement) than anything else. The demise of
the TPP was about politics, not jobs.
Cheap labor is the reason most industry has left our shores. But, we
are entering an age of robots that should allow us to compete with any
country, China included. Unfortunately, the US is lagging in the
development of robots, while China has a major industrial robot
project underway, and could be #1 in the world in a few years. China
and the US have the largest rare earth deposits in the world, but we
lack the industrial capacity to refine it, so we ship our rare earths
to China to be refined and turned into hi-tech products. As I said, we
were three years from being completely out of the steel manufacturing
business. Are we fated to become a nation of farmers because our
politicians fail to understand what is happening in the world? Thanks
to Trump, maybe not.
The news this morning is that Trump's claimed "breakthrough" with Xi is
only a 90 day moratorium on tariffs and it isn't clear if it starts on
Dec 1 or Jan 1. JP Morgan gave advice to investors in a note this
morning, “It doesn’t seem like anything was actually agreed to at the
dinner and White House officials are contorting themselves into pretzels
to reconcile Trump’s tweets (which seem if not completely fabricated
then grossly exaggerated) with reality.”
The bungler in chief seems to have only one strategy. Create a crisis
and then step in to claim credit for solving it. In this case, it
appears that Trump is seriously over-matched in his dealings with Xi and
in the trade war chaos, it is Trump who blinked first.
How long can the Republicans continue to support Trump when the big
banks are complaining?
Trump is acknowledging a problem that has been building since the end
of WWII. Previous presidents have let it slide until it reached crisis
proportions. It will not be rectified overnight. With the opposition
of people like yourself it may never be solved, but at least he is
trying.
b***@gmail.com
2018-12-04 23:00:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
The news this morning is that Trump's claimed "breakthrough" with Xi is
only a 90 day moratorium on tariffs and it isn't clear if it starts on
Dec 1 or Jan 1. JP Morgan gave advice to investors in a note this
morning, “It doesn’t seem like anything was actually agreed to at the
dinner and White House officials are contorting themselves into pretzels
to reconcile Trump’s tweets (which seem if not completely fabricated
then grossly exaggerated) with reality.”
The bungler in chief seems to have only one strategy. Create a crisis
and then step in to claim credit for solving it. In this case, it
appears that Trump is seriously over-matched in his dealings with Xi and
in the trade war chaos, it is Trump who blinked first.
How long can the Republicans continue to support Trump when the big
banks are complaining?
Trump is acknowledging a problem that has been building since the end
of WWII. Previous presidents have let it slide until it reached crisis
proportions. It will not be rectified overnight. With the opposition
of people like yourself it may never be solved, but at least he is
trying.
I've never understood the balance of trade problem. Suppose a country has all the resources to produce some gadget we want to buy and they buy nothing from us. What is the problem? But if they steal our intellectual property to make things easier on their end so we have to pay the cost of R&D, there is a problem. It's just like drugs selling cheap in other countries where we have to pay the cost of R&D. So, the tariff idea is just something to compensate us for the stolen property you used to sell cheap products that we own. Is that about right?
islander
2018-12-05 06:20:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
The news this morning is that Trump's claimed "breakthrough" with Xi is
only a 90 day moratorium on tariffs and it isn't clear if it starts on
Dec 1 or Jan 1. JP Morgan gave advice to investors in a note this
morning, “It doesn’t seem like anything was actually agreed to at the
dinner and White House officials are contorting themselves into pretzels
to reconcile Trump’s tweets (which seem if not completely fabricated
then grossly exaggerated) with reality.”
The bungler in chief seems to have only one strategy. Create a crisis
and then step in to claim credit for solving it. In this case, it
appears that Trump is seriously over-matched in his dealings with Xi and
in the trade war chaos, it is Trump who blinked first.
How long can the Republicans continue to support Trump when the big
banks are complaining?
Trump is acknowledging a problem that has been building since the end
of WWII. Previous presidents have let it slide until it reached crisis
proportions. It will not be rectified overnight. With the opposition
of people like yourself it may never be solved, but at least he is
trying.
I've never understood the balance of trade problem. Suppose a country has all the resources to produce some gadget we want to buy and they buy nothing from us. What is the problem? But if they steal our intellectual property to make things easier on their end so we have to pay the cost of R&D, there is a problem. It's just like drugs selling cheap in other countries where we have to pay the cost of R&D. So, the tariff idea is just something to compensate us for the stolen property you used to sell cheap products that we own. Is that about right?
No. Stealing stealing by foreign companies of intellectual property in
the case of putting products into the marketplace for which legitimate
patents, copyrights, or trademarks are owned by domestic companies is a
problem. But, it is not as simple as this. Trade secrets are also
considered to be intellectual property. When a company decides to open
a factory in another country, it has the right to use its own
intellectual property in that country. In fact, it is probably
necessary to operate the factory. At a minimum, the outsourcing of
domestic operations to other countries makes for a very leaky sieve,
intellectual property wise. While there is a lot of political
pontification about stealing of intellectual property, I think most of
it occurs with the willing participation of US companies. Secrets are
difficult to keep in the best of cases.

The drug problem is different. US drug companies sell to an
international market and prices reflect what the market will bear. If a
drug is sold at a lower price in another country, it is not like the
drug companies are being forced to sell at that price. The excuse of
high prices being due to the high cost of R&D is a red herring. The
drug companies get away with charging high prices in the US because we
are willing to pay. That and the fact that the large market for drugs
under Medicare and Medicaid is one of the few cases where the government
does not use competitive bids. Why do you think that is the case?
b***@gmail.com
2018-12-06 13:33:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
I've never understood the balance of trade problem. Suppose a country has all the resources to produce some gadget we want to buy and they buy nothing from us. What is the problem? But if they steal our intellectual property to make things easier on their end so we have to pay the cost of R&D, there is a problem. It's just like drugs selling cheap in other countries where we have to pay the cost of R&D. So, the tariff idea is just something to compensate us for the stolen property you used to sell cheap products that we own. Is that about right?
No. Stealing stealing by foreign companies of intellectual property in
the case of putting products into the marketplace for which legitimate
patents, copyrights, or trademarks are owned by domestic companies is a
problem. But, it is not as simple as this. Trade secrets are also
considered to be intellectual property. When a company decides to open
a factory in another country, it has the right to use its own
intellectual property in that country. In fact, it is probably
necessary to operate the factory. At a minimum, the outsourcing of
domestic operations to other countries makes for a very leaky sieve,
intellectual property wise. While there is a lot of political
pontification about stealing of intellectual property, I think most of
it occurs with the willing participation of US companies. Secrets are
difficult to keep in the best of cases.
The drug problem is different. US drug companies sell to an
international market and prices reflect what the market will bear. If a
drug is sold at a lower price in another country, it is not like the
drug companies are being forced to sell at that price. The excuse of
high prices being due to the high cost of R&D is a red herring. The
drug companies get away with charging high prices in the US because we
are willing to pay. That and the fact that the large market for drugs
under Medicare and Medicaid is one of the few cases where the government
does not use competitive bids. Why do you think that is the case?
I didn't know it was the case. According to this reference:

https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/Reports/Downloads/Hassol_DME_Report_Final_Feb_2011.pdf

"The DMEPOS Competitive Bidding Program was mandated by Congress through the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) (Pub. L. 108-173), in 2008 the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) began to phase in a competitive bidding program for durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics, and supplies (DMEPOS). The program was established
after the conclusion of successful demonstration projects conducted by edicare from 1999 to 2002. Those demonstrations found that competitive bidding for DMEPOS reduced Medicare spending, reduced beneficiary out-of-pocket costs, and did not adversely affect beneficiary satisfaction with DMEPOS goods and services."

It's not too clear about drug prices or bidding.
islander
2018-12-06 15:28:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
I've never understood the balance of trade problem. Suppose a country has all the resources to produce some gadget we want to buy and they buy nothing from us. What is the problem? But if they steal our intellectual property to make things easier on their end so we have to pay the cost of R&D, there is a problem. It's just like drugs selling cheap in other countries where we have to pay the cost of R&D. So, the tariff idea is just something to compensate us for the stolen property you used to sell cheap products that we own. Is that about right?
No. Stealing stealing by foreign companies of intellectual property in
the case of putting products into the marketplace for which legitimate
patents, copyrights, or trademarks are owned by domestic companies is a
problem. But, it is not as simple as this. Trade secrets are also
considered to be intellectual property. When a company decides to open
a factory in another country, it has the right to use its own
intellectual property in that country. In fact, it is probably
necessary to operate the factory. At a minimum, the outsourcing of
domestic operations to other countries makes for a very leaky sieve,
intellectual property wise. While there is a lot of political
pontification about stealing of intellectual property, I think most of
it occurs with the willing participation of US companies. Secrets are
difficult to keep in the best of cases.
The drug problem is different. US drug companies sell to an
international market and prices reflect what the market will bear. If a
drug is sold at a lower price in another country, it is not like the
drug companies are being forced to sell at that price. The excuse of
high prices being due to the high cost of R&D is a red herring. The
drug companies get away with charging high prices in the US because we
are willing to pay. That and the fact that the large market for drugs
under Medicare and Medicaid is one of the few cases where the government
does not use competitive bids. Why do you think that is the case?
https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/Reports/Downloads/Hassol_DME_Report_Final_Feb_2011.pdf
"The DMEPOS Competitive Bidding Program was mandated by Congress through the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) (Pub. L. 108-173), in 2008 the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) began to phase in a competitive bidding program for durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics, and supplies (DMEPOS). The program was established
after the conclusion of successful demonstration projects conducted by edicare from 1999 to 2002. Those demonstrations found that competitive bidding for DMEPOS reduced Medicare spending, reduced beneficiary out-of-pocket costs, and did not adversely affect beneficiary satisfaction with DMEPOS goods and services."
It's not too clear about drug prices or bidding.
This includes only durable medical equipment.

El Castor
2018-12-05 07:41:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
The news this morning is that Trump's claimed "breakthrough" with Xi is
only a 90 day moratorium on tariffs and it isn't clear if it starts on
Dec 1 or Jan 1. JP Morgan gave advice to investors in a note this
morning, “It doesn’t seem like anything was actually agreed to at the
dinner and White House officials are contorting themselves into pretzels
to reconcile Trump’s tweets (which seem if not completely fabricated
then grossly exaggerated) with reality.”
The bungler in chief seems to have only one strategy. Create a crisis
and then step in to claim credit for solving it. In this case, it
appears that Trump is seriously over-matched in his dealings with Xi and
in the trade war chaos, it is Trump who blinked first.
How long can the Republicans continue to support Trump when the big
banks are complaining?
Trump is acknowledging a problem that has been building since the end
of WWII. Previous presidents have let it slide until it reached crisis
proportions. It will not be rectified overnight. With the opposition
of people like yourself it may never be solved, but at least he is
trying.
I've never understood the balance of trade problem. Suppose a country has all the resources to produce some gadget we want to buy and they buy nothing from us. What is the problem? But if they steal our intellectual property to make things easier on their end so we have to pay the cost of R&D, there is a problem. It's just like drugs selling cheap in other countries where we have to pay the cost of R&D. So, the tariff idea is just something to compensate us for the stolen property you used to sell cheap products that we own. Is that about right?
No, although I guess that is part of it. Over the last century, and
especially since WWII, a lot of manufacturing has left the US for two
reasons -- cheap labor and corporate tax laws out of sync with the
rest of the world. With the advent of robot labor, cheap labor will
become less of an issue, but in the meantime US manufacturing is
disappearing. We are in danger of becoming a nation of agriculture,
resource mining, and service industries. Not good. In a very real
sense it's a national security issue.
islander
2018-12-05 06:17:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
Heaven can be anything you want it to be. Belief in the hereafter is
only a problem if that belief becomes an excuse for actions that harm
yourself or others.
Looks like the markets are having difficulty recovering after their high
back in Oct. There seems to be a lot of nervous investors out there.
The Fed is raising rates. Tariff anxiety is also behind the
nervousness. Personally, I'm glad Trump is taking action on tariffs. I
naively believed that the North American Free Trade Agreement was, as
the name implied, free trade, without tariffs, but that proved to be
far from the truth. I was also shocked to learn that we were three
years from being out of the steel business, and then there is the
blatant theft of intellectual property by China.
The steel industry in the US has been in decline for 70 years.
Following WWII when the steel (and aluminum) domestic production was at
its peak, there was a need to rebuild countries in Asia and Europe after
the destruction in the war. This required capital investment, not only
in steel, but had an impact on other industries including the auto
industry. New plants were built using the latest technology. Capital
was especially attracted to Japan where the combination of low labor
costs and the opportunity for green field investment was attractive.
Meanwhile, there was little incentive to replace aging plants. Look at
the steel industry in Pittsburgh, for example. Who would invest in
replacing those plants on the Ohio River which had been operating for 50
years? Much easier to move on and leave the mess behind - a time
honored practice of American industry. There was some effort in the
'80s to build boutique mills specializing in unique markets, but it
would never rise to the old glory days of US Steel.
The situation was different in China where the importance of steel was
recognized in Mao's Great Leap Forward. There, the emphasis was on
meeting state targets by any means and backyard smelters proliferated.
This was a disaster and famine resulted as individuals left agriculture
to staff the always marginal smelters. China did not succeed in steel
until the Great Opening-up of the late '70s and into the '80s. This
attracted capital and produced rapid expansion of the industry in China
at a time when steel in Japan was showing signs of decline. The
geography favored development in China which had cheap sources of energy
and iron ore, unlike Japan which had to import everything.
In the end, it was the movement of capital in the 70 years following
WWII that abandoned domestic production and tariffs are, at best, a
band-aid that is not likely to have much effect.
What Trump is very badly mistaken about is the belief that we can exist
and thrive in isolation. We have become very dependent on the rest of
the world and ultimately that is what free trade is all about. Friedman
was right! In that context, we need trade agreements, if for no other
reason than to assure that an otherwise unfettered industry will
continue to make decisions that benefit their shareholders at the
expense of everyone else. Sadly, we abandoned Trans Pacific Partnership
which was more about controlling the movement of corporations to China
(notably excluded from the agreement) than anything else. The demise of
the TPP was about politics, not jobs.
Cheap labor is the reason most industry has left our shores. But, we
are entering an age of robots that should allow us to compete with any
country, China included. Unfortunately, the US is lagging in the
development of robots, while China has a major industrial robot
project underway, and could be #1 in the world in a few years. China
and the US have the largest rare earth deposits in the world, but we
lack the industrial capacity to refine it, so we ship our rare earths
to China to be refined and turned into hi-tech products. As I said, we
were three years from being completely out of the steel manufacturing
business. Are we fated to become a nation of farmers because our
politicians fail to understand what is happening in the world? Thanks
to Trump, maybe not.
The news this morning is that Trump's claimed "breakthrough" with Xi is
only a 90 day moratorium on tariffs and it isn't clear if it starts on
Dec 1 or Jan 1. JP Morgan gave advice to investors in a note this
morning, “It doesn’t seem like anything was actually agreed to at the
dinner and White House officials are contorting themselves into pretzels
to reconcile Trump’s tweets (which seem if not completely fabricated
then grossly exaggerated) with reality.”
The bungler in chief seems to have only one strategy. Create a crisis
and then step in to claim credit for solving it. In this case, it
appears that Trump is seriously over-matched in his dealings with Xi and
in the trade war chaos, it is Trump who blinked first.
How long can the Republicans continue to support Trump when the big
banks are complaining?
Trump is acknowledging a problem that has been building since the end
of WWII. Previous presidents have let it slide until it reached crisis
proportions. It will not be rectified overnight. With the opposition
of people like yourself it may never be solved, but at least he is
trying.
You don't get credit for trying. You get credit for accomplishments.
El Castor
2018-12-05 07:48:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
Heaven can be anything you want it to be. Belief in the hereafter is
only a problem if that belief becomes an excuse for actions that harm
yourself or others.
Looks like the markets are having difficulty recovering after their high
back in Oct. There seems to be a lot of nervous investors out there.
The Fed is raising rates. Tariff anxiety is also behind the
nervousness. Personally, I'm glad Trump is taking action on tariffs. I
naively believed that the North American Free Trade Agreement was, as
the name implied, free trade, without tariffs, but that proved to be
far from the truth. I was also shocked to learn that we were three
years from being out of the steel business, and then there is the
blatant theft of intellectual property by China.
The steel industry in the US has been in decline for 70 years.
Following WWII when the steel (and aluminum) domestic production was at
its peak, there was a need to rebuild countries in Asia and Europe after
the destruction in the war. This required capital investment, not only
in steel, but had an impact on other industries including the auto
industry. New plants were built using the latest technology. Capital
was especially attracted to Japan where the combination of low labor
costs and the opportunity for green field investment was attractive.
Meanwhile, there was little incentive to replace aging plants. Look at
the steel industry in Pittsburgh, for example. Who would invest in
replacing those plants on the Ohio River which had been operating for 50
years? Much easier to move on and leave the mess behind - a time
honored practice of American industry. There was some effort in the
'80s to build boutique mills specializing in unique markets, but it
would never rise to the old glory days of US Steel.
The situation was different in China where the importance of steel was
recognized in Mao's Great Leap Forward. There, the emphasis was on
meeting state targets by any means and backyard smelters proliferated.
This was a disaster and famine resulted as individuals left agriculture
to staff the always marginal smelters. China did not succeed in steel
until the Great Opening-up of the late '70s and into the '80s. This
attracted capital and produced rapid expansion of the industry in China
at a time when steel in Japan was showing signs of decline. The
geography favored development in China which had cheap sources of energy
and iron ore, unlike Japan which had to import everything.
In the end, it was the movement of capital in the 70 years following
WWII that abandoned domestic production and tariffs are, at best, a
band-aid that is not likely to have much effect.
What Trump is very badly mistaken about is the belief that we can exist
and thrive in isolation. We have become very dependent on the rest of
the world and ultimately that is what free trade is all about. Friedman
was right! In that context, we need trade agreements, if for no other
reason than to assure that an otherwise unfettered industry will
continue to make decisions that benefit their shareholders at the
expense of everyone else. Sadly, we abandoned Trans Pacific Partnership
which was more about controlling the movement of corporations to China
(notably excluded from the agreement) than anything else. The demise of
the TPP was about politics, not jobs.
Cheap labor is the reason most industry has left our shores. But, we
are entering an age of robots that should allow us to compete with any
country, China included. Unfortunately, the US is lagging in the
development of robots, while China has a major industrial robot
project underway, and could be #1 in the world in a few years. China
and the US have the largest rare earth deposits in the world, but we
lack the industrial capacity to refine it, so we ship our rare earths
to China to be refined and turned into hi-tech products. As I said, we
were three years from being completely out of the steel manufacturing
business. Are we fated to become a nation of farmers because our
politicians fail to understand what is happening in the world? Thanks
to Trump, maybe not.
The news this morning is that Trump's claimed "breakthrough" with Xi is
only a 90 day moratorium on tariffs and it isn't clear if it starts on
Dec 1 or Jan 1. JP Morgan gave advice to investors in a note this
morning, “It doesn’t seem like anything was actually agreed to at the
dinner and White House officials are contorting themselves into pretzels
to reconcile Trump’s tweets (which seem if not completely fabricated
then grossly exaggerated) with reality.”
The bungler in chief seems to have only one strategy. Create a crisis
and then step in to claim credit for solving it. In this case, it
appears that Trump is seriously over-matched in his dealings with Xi and
in the trade war chaos, it is Trump who blinked first.
How long can the Republicans continue to support Trump when the big
banks are complaining?
Trump is acknowledging a problem that has been building since the end
of WWII. Previous presidents have let it slide until it reached crisis
proportions. It will not be rectified overnight. With the opposition
of people like yourself it may never be solved, but at least he is
trying.
You don't get credit for trying. You get credit for accomplishments.
Lowest Black unemployment in recorded history, sanity has been brought
to our corporate tax code, excellent GDP growth, genuine progress with
border security, and two Supreme Court justices -- to name a few. You
may not value those accomplishments, but I certainly do.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-12-03 17:35:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
Heaven can be anything you want it to be. Belief in the hereafter is
only a problem if that belief becomes an excuse for actions that harm
yourself or others.
Looks like the markets are having difficulty recovering after their high
back in Oct. There seems to be a lot of nervous investors out there.
That's why I'm mostly in CD's. I still have money in the Market,
but that's in two mutual funds one of which is a retirement fund.
I don't bother keeping track of it or interacting with it. I have
more interesting things to do, such as twiddling my thumbs.

My age came home to me when I made a contribution to
Wikipedia yesterday, and among the fill-ins for their demographic
survey, I had to check the button "70 to 79"! That seemed
REALLY old to me! I took early SS compensation at age 62,
figuring that I probably wouldn't make it to the break-even age
which I calculated as age 70, yet here I am, still moving though
not as fast, at 73.
b***@gmail.com
2018-12-03 19:10:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
Heaven can be anything you want it to be. Belief in the hereafter is
only a problem if that belief becomes an excuse for actions that harm
yourself or others.
Looks like the markets are having difficulty recovering after their high
back in Oct. There seems to be a lot of nervous investors out there.
That's why I'm mostly in CD's. I still have money in the Market,
but that's in two mutual funds one of which is a retirement fund.
I don't bother keeping track of it or interacting with it. I have
more interesting things to do, such as twiddling my thumbs.
My age came home to me when I made a contribution to
Wikipedia yesterday, and among the fill-ins for their demographic
survey, I had to check the button "70 to 79"! That seemed
REALLY old to me! I took early SS compensation at age 62,
figuring that I probably wouldn't make it to the break-even age
which I calculated as age 70, yet here I am, still moving though
not as fast, at 73.
You are the same age I am (73). I just had a birthday so I think you are about 10 months older than I am. We could have gone to HS together. BTW, Amazon is up $71 right now. Go Amazon, Go. Don't listen to all those negative economic forecasts. It's all fake news.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-12-04 07:25:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past. I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense. But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from? What was God doing before he/she created the universe? The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape, no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender assignment. It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring place to live. I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months. But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise I will die broke.
Heaven can be anything you want it to be. Belief in the hereafter is
only a problem if that belief becomes an excuse for actions that harm
yourself or others.
Looks like the markets are having difficulty recovering after their high
back in Oct. There seems to be a lot of nervous investors out there.
That's why I'm mostly in CD's. I still have money in the Market,
but that's in two mutual funds one of which is a retirement fund.
I don't bother keeping track of it or interacting with it. I have
more interesting things to do, such as twiddling my thumbs.
My age came home to me when I made a contribution to
Wikipedia yesterday, and among the fill-ins for their demographic
survey, I had to check the button "70 to 79"! That seemed
REALLY old to me! I took early SS compensation at age 62,
figuring that I probably wouldn't make it to the break-even age
which I calculated as age 70, yet here I am, still moving though
not as fast, at 73.
You are the same age I am (73). I just had a birthday so I think you are about 10 months older than I am. We could have gone to HS together. BTW, Amazon is up $71 right now. Go Amazon, Go. Don't listen to all those negative economic forecasts. It's all fake news.
I was a year younger than most of my classmates, because I
skipped second grade in a funny way. I am just about 10
months older than you though, I was born on Galileo's birthday
(February 15), 1945. It's also the birthday of Michael Praetorius
and Susan B. Anthony, plus doubtless some movie stars who'll
be the only people mentioned in the supermarket tabloids.

At this point in my financial life, I don't need more money, but
losing 2/3 of the money I have would hurt. So I'll continue to
play it extra safe.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-12-03 17:35:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death.
So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past.
I don't see how that follows, or how it makes any difference to the
argument whether or not there's a god (who existed for infinity
going into the past or who just sprang into being at some point).
Post by b***@gmail.com
I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense.
Existence itself IMO doesn't make sense. Yet here we are.
I'm convinced myself that no explanation for it is possible or
will ever be found.
Post by b***@gmail.com
But of course God doesn't make much sense since where did God come from?
Exactly. Postulating a god doesn't answer anything.
It just adds a complication for which there is no evidence.
Post by b***@gmail.com
What was God doing before he/she created the universe?
The answer is of course that God exists outside of space and
time and God has no physical dimensions. No size, no shape,
no weight, he/she just exists everywhere without any gender
assignment.
That's not an answer, because you're left with the same
question of what caused God/existence. The answer is that
there's no answer, but of course no answer is no answer.
Post by b***@gmail.com
It's hard to imagine where Heaven might not be a boring
place to live.
As Mark Twain wrote, "Heaven for climate, Hell for company".
Post by b***@gmail.com
I'd rather invest in Amazon stock and make 70% in 15 months.
But I leave it open to God to tell me what to do. I hear voices
sometimes that say I'm lazy and I should go to work, otherwise
I will die broke.
I tell "God" to go f. himself, which is fine since there
obviously is nobody home there, and it's more entertaining
to flip off this fictional god than not to flip "Him" off.
Gary
2018-12-03 17:51:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past.
I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense.
Infinity -- "without beginning and without end..."

When I was young, I heard a preacher describe infinity --

"Try to imagine two men standing side by side. Each being taller than the other.".
b***@gmail.com
2018-12-03 18:55:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gary
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past.
I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense.
Infinity -- "without beginning and without end..."
When I was young, I heard a preacher describe infinity --
"Try to imagine two men standing side by side. Each being taller than the other.".
I can't imagine that. But I can imagine infinity going forward but not in the past. In electronics, If you hook up a capacitor to a resistor and a battery, the capacitor will charge to about 62% of the battery voltage in one time constant. A time constant is the capacitor value multiplied by the resistance. So, a 1 farad capacitor in series with a 1 ohm resistor hooked up to a 10 volt battery will charge to 6.2 volts in one second. It will then charge to 62% of the remaining voltage in the next second or 8.56 volts total in 2 seconds and so forth. But the capacitor will never charge to the full 10 volts. It's an infinite progression going forward and I can understand that. But my mind is completely blown thinking about infinity in the past.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-12-03 19:04:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Gary
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
The thing that bothers me about religion is that for Atheists there is nothing after death. So, the Atheist has to assume the universe must have existed for infinity going into the past.
I have trouble with infinity since it's a long time and doesn't make much sense.
Infinity -- "without beginning and without end..."
When I was young, I heard a preacher describe infinity --
"Try to imagine two men standing side by side. Each being taller than the other.".
That, I think, is not a bad analogy!
rumpelstiltskin
2018-12-03 16:46:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by islander
As I have mentioned here before, I don't see any evidence that there is
a life after death, no heaven, no hell, just an ending of life.
So, it is reported that Jim Baker visited his old friend, GHW Bush on
his death bed and Bush, recognizing his friend, asked "Where are we
going?" Baker responded, "To heaven" and Bush said, "That is were I
want to go." Now, I don't know Baker's religious beliefs, but I think
that his answer was the compassionate thing to do and I applaud his
response. What would be the point of replying otherwise?
There's no point replying otherwise, but I'm always bemused
that intelligent people can persuade themselves that things so
obviously false can be true. I have to chalk it up to "fear of
death" for oneself and "diminution of grief" for the death of
others (I'm thinking at the moment of the death of Bush 41's
first daughter from leukemia in childhood), but even so I don't
see how fear can overwhelm reason so utterly.
me
2018-12-03 17:46:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
“Consciousness and logic are not reliable standards.” – Cogitors fundamental postulates
me
2018-12-03 17:44:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
“PSYCHOLOGY: The science of inventing words for things that do not exist.” – Erasmus

“When the observer truly believes the illusion, it becomes real.” – Swordmaster Zon Noret

‘Heaven’ is not the only word.
Loading...