Has the Verichip topic now died a death?

[torpidai.livejournal.com]

We are all aware of the fears and paranoia regarding the Verichip RFID tag, but I wonder, just how many people have looked further than what they have been told by paranoid types like myself and the "Well if you don't do anything wrong, what have you to fear" brigades, please, bear(sp) with me a short while.



Q) Do you know What company the VeriChip was originaly designed by?



A) Destron Fearing.



Me, with my sense of mischief and quick wit (Humour me) wonderred why anyone would fear Destron! So wondering who Destron was, hit good ole Gurgle, and as it Turns out, Destron was an international organization bent on conquering the world, through terror and destruction. Destron was formed under the guidance of the mysterious Great Leader by surviving members of Gel-Shocker. Although Destron had branches in every country and sought to dominate the entire planet, its main headquarters was in Japan and so Japan was Destron's primary target



Seemingly An alternative spelling would be Deathtron.



Now, To me, a company building a chip with the power of the Verichip, and naming itself after Fearing of a 1973 series's most evil of organisations hell bent on world domination, is beyond ironic satire, I'm sure we have all heard the Criminal psychologist speak about the intelligent evil criminal forever dropping hints just to prove how clever he is? It's a Game to some, It gets many caught (Well usualy All on the TV, isnt that strange)

Any new info kicking about on this now that the next generation of verichips will have more functions?

Child benefits cut - many well off families squeezed.

[mintogrubb.livejournal.com]

The BBC website gives the story here.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11464300

George Osborne, wishing to point out that 'we are all in this together', is axing child benifits for families where a single wage earner gets over 45 thousand a year.

It is reported in the news that in some families, the parents never actually touch the money - they simply put the benifits paid into the bank for a trust fund for when the child grows up.

Meantime , a family getting by on 20-30 k is paying for this rich kid's trust fund.

Ok, says George - no more!

To be honest, Britain is not awash with cash after the credit crunch. The Govt needs to make economies. Cutting back from the 'haves' will enable them to concentrate on the 'have nots'. The hated 'means test' is avoided - it is run on tax bands. If you get taxed at lower rate, you are still getting the benefits; if you pay higher rate, you don't.

Even so, we have a situation where a couple earning 39k each will keep their state child benefits, whereas a single earner supporting a family alone on 50k won't. It needs finer tuning, I think.

Another gripe is that this measure does put the well off into the 'we are all in this' class - but what economies will the Government impose on the mega rich? Will tax havens be closed? Will 'non-doms', who are not resident here or anywhere, just travelling the world on their yachts, be hit in any way? This remains to be seen.

However, I feel that taking State money from people who don't need it and giving it to the less well off - it's a good move forwards.

"How to Govern a Divided Nation" -- 1968 v. 2010

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

New York Magazine has published excerpts of letters from Daniel Patrick Moynihan to President-elect and President Nixon. In them, the academic Democratic brought on board as an advisor to Nixon writes to the new administration about the difficult task of assuming the mantle of the Presidency in turbulent political times.

One of the letters, in particular, stood out to me:

May 17, 1969
For the President

I think you are entirely right to have been disturbed by Pete Hamill’s article: “The Revolt of the White Lower Middle Class” [published in this magazine]. To be frank, I would have sent it to you myself, save that it seemed to me this is just what you were talking about during the campaign. “The Forgotten Americans.”

A new voice is being heard in America today. It is a voice that has been silent too long. It is a voice of people who have not taken to the streets before, who have not indulged in violence, who have not broken the law.

These forgotten Americans finally have become angry. They have not really found a voice in American politics, but they are indeed angry. And have reason to be. You ask, “What is our answer.” To which I suppose my first reaction would be to ask, “What is their question?” …

What is the question? It is this: How is the great mass of white working people to regain a sense of positive advantage from the operation of American government, and retain a steady loyalty to the processes of American society, at a time when those above and below them in the social hierarchy seem simultaneously to be robbing the system blind and contemptuously dismissing all its rules. …

In many respects, this sounds like the Tea Party (at the street level) in a nutshell. Bail outs may have been a tipping point to street activism, but the movement is also clearly populist in tone and embracing a real sense of cultural tension. And if Dr. Moynihan's observation is accurate, this means that, given the Tea Party's demographics, quite a lot of them have been angry since 1968 -- or that their parents were angry then as they are angry now. And yet, in the 40 years since 1968 and 2008, they did not take to the streets. Not during the energy crisis of the 1970s, nor during stagflation, nor during the Iranian hostage crisis, nor during the deep recession of the early 1980s, nor during the Savings & Loan bailout, nor during stock market cash of 1987....and so on and so forth.

So what is it that propelled populist conservatism, almost an oxymoron, from simmering anger to full blown street theater?

"I'm voting Republican" parody ad, Tip o' the hat to mzflux

[telemann.livejournal.com]

I'm voting Republican:

Clever ad that hits home exactly some important points Republicans and Conservatives really dance around: broad assertions of cutting the budget and reducing deficits, without a clear explanation of exactly how (e.g. Rand Paul never answered the direct question on how he would do this when interviewed on Fox this Sunday). This satirical commercial nails it for exactly what you can expect with a Republican win in both houses in Congress.

Weekly Topic

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

All right folks, time flies fast, doesnt it? The bi-weekly [Poll #1627478]
Feel free to suggest more.

It's Not About You...

[mintogrubb.livejournal.com]

I read the story that Futurebird posted here recently. I lift this quote therefrom.
"You're not really an athlete..." the coach had said "... If this is about fitness I don't want you on the team, this is sport not a way to just get in shape." I never returned after he said that.

And that seemed to spark something. that story was about a girl who ran for the joy of it. not to beat someoen else over the line, but just to feel free and enjoy the feeling of the wind on her face. And The System is not interested in that. ( Read more... )

Blast from the past time:

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

North Korea unveils first photo of Kim Jong-un as heir apparent

 

( cut for FLs )

This should surprise no-one but it appears that North Korea has been making plans for a while to handle Kim Jong Il's death, presuming it has not in fact already occurred and there's been dickering about what the new system will look like. North Korea remains one of the single ugliest legacies of the Cold War. A society led by a dead man and following one of the very last hardcore Stalinist regimes, incapable of feeding its own people, without *desire* to feed its own people, armed to the teeth.

Given the regime survived the one-two punch of the death of the elder Kim and the collapse of the Soviet Union, I do not see the death of Kim the younger causing it to collapse. What I am curious about is whether or not this new Kim will try to open the state to any degree. North Korea and the Soviet Union it more or less copied directly as far as governmental institutions are concerned show how possible it is for a state to survive even without making the least pretense of caring about the consent of the governed. What exactly do you guys think the future of North Korea's going to look like? I've no expectation that it will be much more pleasant under the new guy.

Shot in the foot

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

I wrote a post on the 10:10 "No pressure" video but my browser ate it. Now I've logged back in only to find that mividaloca99 has beaten me to the punch.

Even so, I'd still like to post some observations. Predictably people are outraged. But to me the video and people's reaction to it highlights a signfigant problem with both the issue and how it is presented.

In the words of a friend of mine:
It looked to me like a rather over-the-top attack on the green movement, done by people who really hate it. The fact that the teacher was such a genuinely nice lefty, right up to the bit where she murdered the dissenters, just made it all the funnier.

We were both shocked to find out that it was in fact genuine. (Poe's Law strikes again)

Perhapse the strongest argument against modern western enviromentalism is it's subtle anti-freedom/human emphasis. We are told that we must make sacrifices in the name of the greater good, yet no can seem to agree on what we'll get or if my sacrifice will even matter. Ironically in the last century its always been in the name of the greater good that non-believers get thrown in gulags.

How many mainstream enviromentalists have said that we need to reduce the human population to a sustainable level, and how many, do you think, have considered what those words (in a practical sense) actually mean?

Now to be perfectly clear, I am not against saving the Earth, I like this planet. I like clean water, fresh air, and I'm willing to bet that everyone else reading this feels the same way. If you tell someone that their food is poisened or that the air they are breathing is toxic, you will get a response, and it is in this arena that I feel that enviromentalists provide critical service.

In other words, it's easy to get people involved when there is a immediate threat and as immediate threats go climate change doesn't cut it. Humans are still around becasue we adapt, and we will continue to adapt.

No Pressure.





Now to clarify, I think that the video was intended as a joke/satire and not a call to violence. That said, it does raise some serious question about the creator's sense of humor. I assume that what they thought they were doing was dramatising just how serious the environment thing is. What they did was show teachers blowing up kids in class because they think the wrong thoughts.

10:10 Promotes Eco-Terrorism

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

The 10:10 Campaign, part of a global movement to reduce greenhouse gas carbon emissions by 10%, released/leaked a video to highlight their campaign.
( Cut for violence and gore - not for faint of heart )