Change

29 Dec 2011 1 Comment

by ctwfrank in Humanity Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Change [cheynj]

Source: Dictionary.com Unabridged

verb (used with object)

  1. to make the form, nature, content, future course, etc., of (something) different from what it is or from what it would be if left alone: to change one’s name; to change one’s opinion; to change the course of history.
  2. to transform or convert (usually followed by into ): The witch changed the prince into a toad.
  3. to substitute another or others for; exchange  for something else, usually of the same kind: She changed her shoes when she got home from the office.
  4. to give and take reciprocally; interchange: to change places with someone.
  5. to transfer from one (conveyance) to another: You’ll have to change planes in Chicago.
  6. to give or get smaller money in exchange  for: to change a five-dollar bill.
  7. to give or get foreign money in exchange  for: to change dollars into francs.
  8. to remove and replace the covering or coverings of: to change a bed; to change a baby.

    verb (used without object)

  9. to become different: Overnight the nation’s mood changed.
  10. to become altered or modified: Colors change if they are exposed to the sun.
  11. to become transformed or converted (usually followed by into ): The toad changed into a prince again.
  12. to pass gradually into (usually followed by to  or into ): Summer changed to autumn.
  13. to make a change or an exchange: If you want to sit next to the window, I’ll change with you.
  14. to transfer between trains or other conveyances: We can take the local and change to an express at the next stop.
  15. to change one’s clothes: She changed into jeans.
  16.  (of the moon) to pass from one phase to another.
  17.  (of the voice) to become deeper in tone; come to have a lower register: The boy’s voice began to change when he was thirteen.
  18. the act or fact of changing; fact of being changed.
  19. a transformation or modification; alteration: They noticed the change in his facial expression.
  20. a variation or deviation: a change in the daily routine.
  21. the substitution of one thing for another: We finally made the change to an oil-burning furnace.
  22. variety or novelty: Let’s try a new restaurant for a change.
  23. the passing from one place, state, form, or phase to another: a change of seasons; social change.
  24. Jazz . harmonic progression from one tonality to another; modulation.
  25. the supplanting of one thing by another.
  26. anything that is or may be substituted for another.
  27. a fresh set of clothing.
  28. money given in exchange  for an equivalent of higher denomination.
  29. a balance of money that is returned when the sum tendered in payment is larger than the sum due.
  30. coins of low denomination.
  31. any of the various sequences in which a peal of bells may be rung.
  32. Also, ‘change. British . exchange ( def. 10 ) .
  33. Obsolete . changefulness;  caprice.

Verb phrase

  1. change off,
    1. to take turns with another, as at doing a task.
    2. to alternate between two tasks or between a task and a rest break.

Idioms

  1. change front, Military . to shift a military force in another direction.
  2. change hands. hand ( def. 47 ) .
  3. change one’s mind, to change one’s opinions or intentions.
  4. ring the changes,
    1. to perform all permutations possible in ringing a set of tuned bells, as in a bell tower of a church. T
    2. o vary the manner of performing an action or of discussing a subject; repeat with variations.

 

Origin:
1175–1225;  (v.) Middle English cha ( u ) ngen  < Anglo-French, Old French changer  < Late Latin cambiāre, Latin cambīre  to exchange; (noun) Middle English cha ( u ) nge  < Anglo-French, Old French,  noun derivative of the v.

Synonyms

1.  transmute, transform; vary, mutate; amend, modify. Change, alter  both mean to make a difference in the state or condition of a thing or to substitute another state or condition. To change  is to make a material difference so that the thing is distinctly different from what it was: to change one’s opinion.  To alter  is to make some partial change, as in appearance, but usually to preserve the identity: to alter a dress  ( to change a dress  would mean to put on a different one).

3.  replace, trade.

4.  trade.

7.  convert.

10.  vary, mutate, amend.

18.  transmutation, mutation, conversion, vicissitude.

21.  exchange.

25, 26.  replacement.

Antonyms

10.  remain. 18.  permanence.

change  (tʃeɪndʒ) 

Source: Collins World English Dictionary

— vb  (sometimes foll by to or  into ) (when intr, may be foll by  into or  out of )

  1. to make or become different; alter
  2. ( tr ) to replace with or exchange for another: to change one’s name
  3. to transform or convert or be transformed or converted
  4. to give and receive (something) in return; interchange: to change places with someone
  5. ( tr ) to give or receive (money) in exchange for the equivalent sum in a smaller denomination or different currency
  6. ( tr ) to remove or replace the coverings of: to change a baby
  7. to put on other clothes
  8. ( intr ) (of the moon) to pass from one phase to the following one
  9. to operate (the gear lever of a motor vehicle) in order to alter the gear ratio: to change gear
  10. to alight from (one bus, train, etc) and board another
  11. change face  to rotate the telescope of a surveying instrument through 180° horizontally and vertically, taking a second sighting of the same object in order to reduce error
  12. informal change feet  to put on different shoes, boots, etc
  13. change front
    1. military  to redeploy (a force in the field) so that its main weight of weapons points in another direction
    2. to alter one’s attitude, opinion, etc
  14. change hands  to pass from one owner to another
  15. change one’s mind  to alter one’s decision or opinion
  16. change one’s tune  to alter one’s attitude or tone of speech
    -n
  17. the act or fact of changing or being changed
  18. a variation, deviation, or modification
  19. the substitution of one thing for another; exchange
  20. anything that is or may be substituted for something else
  21. variety or novelty (esp in the phrase for a change ): I want to go to France for a change
  22. a different or fresh set, esp of clothes
  23. money given or received in return for its equivalent in a larger denomination or in a different currency
  24. the balance of money given or received when the amount tendered is larger than the amount due
  25. coins of a small denomination regarded collectively
  26. archaic  ( often capital ) a place where merchants meet to transact business; an exchange
  27. the act of passing from one state or phase to another
  28. the transition from one phase of the moon to the next
  29. the order in which a peal of bells may be rung
  30. sport  short for changeover
  31. slang  desirable or useful information
  32. obsolete  fickleness or caprice
  33. change of heart  a profound change of outlook, opinion, etc
  34. slang get no change out of someone  not to be successful in attempts to exploit or extract information from someone
  35. ring the changes  to vary the manner or performance of an action that is often repeated

[C13: from Old French changier,  from Latin cambīre  to exchange, barter]

Word Origin & History
change

early 13c., from O.Fr. changier, from L.L. cambiare, from L. cambire “to exchange, barter,” of Celtic origin, from PIE base *kamb- “to bend, crook.” The financial sense of “balance returned when something is paid for” is first recorded 1620s. Phrase change of heart is from 1828.

Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper

Slang Dictionary

change definition

n.

money. (See also and change.) :  It takes a lot of change to buy a car like that.

Dictionary of American Slang and Colloquial Expressions by Richard A. Spears.Fourth Edition.
Copyright 2007. Published by McGraw Hill.

 Notes:

Dictionaries are so cool; they’re keepers.  Look at the slang definition!

Now, you know what it is, there’s no need to be afraid of it.

ctwfrank

…and while we’re on the subject of GOLD

01 Dec 2011 4 Comments

by ctwfrank in Money Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Okay, let’s continue being serious for a moment about GOLD.  The gold phenomenon, as I like to call it, is very closely tied to the events that led to where we are today, which can accurately be described as a cluster fuck, but on a planetary scale.  If we take this disease that is killing the human race (because our idiocy has become a disease) and boil it down to the simplest possible explanation, it would be this:  When we developed trade and commerce and an economy, it was good – very good; we shouldn’t forget that the human race went from being little more than a handful of half-starved nomads always moving and looking for food to having excesses, luxuries, slaves, titles, position and properties in the span of a couple of thousand years.  After 250,000 years of looking for food and water all the time, this was the blink of an eye.  Civilization, as it were, was gourmet fare for the human ego, which ate it up with gusto; the way only we can:  by gorging on what felt good now without giving a second thought as to…well, as to anything.  We just kept heading in the direction of MORE!  Why should anyone think that we could run out of anything – the first 3,000-4,000 years after the Neolithic revolution was phat!  There was plenty for everyone, in fact we wouldn’t come up with the concept of poverty for some time; remember, you have to be free to be poor and you would be surprised at the percentage of the human race that were slaves and for how long.  We acted without thinking, planning or considering the consequences.  Doesn’t that sound familiar?  It was the same 12,000 years ago.  We may have airplanes and computers but we have not curtailed our insatiable appetite for irresponsibility by even a little.  You can count on a human being to fuck something up, and that we did, especially when we picked a metal: gold, to be the raw material for this new thing we called MONEY.  Money was such an incredibly addictive and irresistible goodie that it simply froze our minds.  No one and I mean no one thought about or worried about what we would do when we ran out of gold.  Maybe there was some ignorance involved, but anyone who has ever been in charge of anything since we’ve had money had to have known that people multiplied, quickly, but not gold, in fact every year, it became just a tiny bit more difficult to find new gold.  We didn’t need to pinpoint a specific year, but just knowing that at some point in the future it just wouldn’t work anymore because there would be more people needing to use money than there was gold to be money was enough to act on.  It’s typical of us.  Right now, even at this stage of our descent into who-knows-what, if by some chance a huge asteroid made of pure gold were to pass within range of our rockets and we lassoed that planet-sized nugget of the stuff that dreams are made of, anchored it to the moon, took its measurements, and started to figure out exactly how much hold was on the asteroid, we would get to “more than what we need right now” and just stop counting.  Why bother?  We hit our nut!  We filled up the hole that we made!  We would, and we all know it.  We would have gold orgies and the filthy rich would become indescribably rich and be happy, and the poor and downtrodden would still be poor and downtrodden but happy because they would still have that shitty job that barely paid them enough to live on – the one that they lost at some point between 3 years ago and today.  We would continue to ignore half of all of us – the ones that there was never enough for in the first place and they would continue to starve to death because even though our own stupidity is killing us, we don’t want to change because change requires thinking and actual work and those things make our brains hurt – unless there’s money involved.

So we ignored the math and based our wealth on gold.  Fine, so how did the whole wealth thing work?  How was new money made?  Up until possibly the 1960’s (that’s a guess, but I think a good one) for there to be new money, there had to be new wealth. This requires a quick recap of the history of human wealth.   If you recall, the wealth  of the world and of nations had always been food, which may very well remain as the only real thing of value in human history, and then we came up with the concept of money to use as a medium of exchange because it was simply too cumbersome and tedious to trade in food directly.  We chose gold as the material from which we would make the money that would represent the wealth (food) and be much easier to carry and transact since it is a soft metal and easily formed into coins.  Then we got so used to dealing and transacting gold, that we forgot it only represented wealth and, just as Aristotle warned, we confused it with wealth – but no one said anything, we just took it as a given that gold was the wealth of the world and when food came up in conversation, it would quickly be referred to as a commodity, usually in the futures market – yes, futures, as in; not yesterday or today, but the future, you know that thing that we can not predict but for some strange reason can buy and sell.  This continued and evolved until trade and commerce became so widespread (because we love to fuck and reproduce like rabbits) that a sub-category of money had to be created: currency (including paper money).  The first bank notes appeared sometime in the 16th century of thereabouts, in Scandinavia (That’s an interesting story, remind me to write about it sometime.) and it caught on quickly.  By the 19th century, paper money was in common used and was valued at par with gold because they were redeemable for gold at just about any bank.  During all this time, gold was wealth.  Paper notes were portable representations of gold and therefore notes were only printed based on how much gold there was.  At some point we realized that the amount of gold was finite; that’s when wealth became a privilege and we began to acquire it by using war or theft or fraud, you know good old fashioned proven techniques.  Then, all of a sudden, just like that:  there was no more new gold.  That was it.  All the money there was, was all the money there was, but the human progress train didn’t notice, it kept right on going.  Oh Shit!  What do we do now!  There’s no more gold to make more money!  If people find out, it will be a freaking disaster!  What to do?  What to do?   It didn’t take us very long, we figured:  what the heck, if we’ve screwed the pooch, then let’s screw it properly!  Nobody said anything, not a word, then, suddenly (and I mean suddenly) in August of 1972, the President of the United States of America went on the air (TV and radio) early in the morning, before the markets opened and rattled off a list of “executive decisions” which included:  “a 90 day freeze on prices and wages, an immediate 10% import surtax and the severing of the link between the dollar and gold (meaning that one could no longer want into a Federal Reserve bank with a $20 and walk out with however much gold that got them).  It got a little attention at the time, it’s getting A LOT of attention now.  That single act literally killed the concept that we know as money.  The price of gold was fixed in dollars and the US dollar is the reserve currency of the world (gold being the official currency).   Here’s the part that we MUST understand if we are to survive this.  The link between the dollar and gold was cut, not because of any of the reasons given (which don’t matter); it was cut because WE RAN OUT OF GOLD and someone at some point realized that there were more bank notes floating around that there was gold, not much, but just enough to blow the whole thing to kingdom come if anyone found out.  They didn’t have to do it, they chose to do it because the alternative was to do what we’re going to have to do shortly:  build a new economic infrastructure.  They figures, what the heck?  Nobody knew what was going on, it would take YEARS before the decision would begin to stink as it does today, so they cut the link between gold and the dollar and the wealth that was gold stopped at however much there still is.  That did not stop us from propagating our species however and developing technology and adding more people every year to that exclusive club made up of people addicted to excess and other people’s envy.  We continued forward and our economy GREW.  (Screeching record sound)  Wait a minute; didn’t I just say that we had run out of gold?  How could our economy grow if there was no new gold?  No new gold, no new money, remember?  But there was new money.  Crisp and freshly printed dollars were pouring out of the US mint and currencies all over the world continued to be incrementally printed and introduced into circulation.  But how could anyone get away with this?  It was easy, we printed money based on new gold that was BORROWED (it also didn’t exist, because there was no actual gold to borrow, that was just how they did the math).  This fictitious quantity of borrowed gold didn’t exist; therefore the convertibility of paper currency to gold HAD to be cut – because there wasn’t enough gold, get it?  This new “way” of printing money based on the assumption that if there were gold that could be borrowed, we would, but there isn’t, but we would if there were, so we’ll act as if we did and print money based on the value of this new DEBT.  And there is was, that’s how the DEBT was born.  We owe nobody approximately 52 trillion dollars worth of  “borrowed” gold, which never existed but was used to print currency that was spent as legal tender.  It was made possible because our banks created this money by issuing, buying and selling LOANS.  In some part of our non-functioning brains, it could be said that these loans were what created the “borrowed gold”.  At first, loans were made by banks with our deposits; yes, the loan that you had for your car or for anything, 25 to 30 years ago was actually other people’s money, deposited at the bank that gave us the loan.  They had permission to do this and, after all, we weren’t using the money, we deposited it, remember?  Very quickly however, the banks didn’t need our money, the money that they created by lending out our money and charging interest on it was re-deposited by the banks, and by the 1980’s, they didn’t need our deposits.  They were making new money left and right, lending out larger and larger portions of this gold that doesn’t exist to themselves and then transacting money on that DEBT.  Our governments told us, “don’t worry about it, we’re good for it, trust us.” Maybe this is why it’s called fiat currency, because fiat means “authority” in the dictionary (sic), but authority is the basis for credibility and credibility is the foundation of trust. You see, the root morpheme fiat also forms part of two words that came from Latin and are used by romance languages:  confiar; which is Spanish for TRUST and fiar: which is also Spanish for TO EXTEND CREDIT TO, TO LEND.  Wow, is all of this a coincidence? I don’t think so.  Am I a conspiracy theorist?; hardly.  This is simply what we did.  When we ran out of gold and we borrowed the gold that we would need if the gold actually existed, but it didn’t, so the only way to get away with it was to treat the DEBT as real.  This would make the “borrowed gold” real, as it were.  And they did, and we bought it and theydid it more and we bent over and took it all.  

This “debt” that took Greece and Italy from our world (because they are no more) is not real, but it is killing us and it might just succeed.  Now if you’re thinking, if it’s not real, then it can’t kill us, then you get detention and here’s why.  It’s like WATER.

WATER?  Yes, water.  We need water in order to survive.  Without water, we die, quickly, of dehydration, this is a commonly known fact and the visual image that comes to mind is of a person in a hot and arid place like a desert, dropping dead from the thirst.  Scratch that image for a moment and replace it with this one:  You are in a life raft, floating in the ocean, lost and adrift.  You are the sole survivor of a shipwreck and you’ve been out at sea for two days now, in the raft, in the sun with no provisions left.  You start to get thirsty, very thirsty.  You become delirious and suddenly you realize Wait a minute!  I’m floating in an ocean of WATER!  You laugh and you drink and drink and drink and 8 to 10 hours later, your kidneys shut down and you die, of what is essentially DEHYDRATION, because it’s not really WATER, it’s SALT WATER.  Oh, they’re both wet, but the salt water is poison and will kill you.   The DEBT is our salt water.  We ran out of fresh water and just began drinking that salty debt water up in our delirium for more.  If you can imagine some math to convert salt water to debt and establish a parallel between the time it takes salt water to kill a person and the time it will take the debt to kill what’s left of the human race, you could say that we’re in the 6th hour of the last 8 hours of our life as we know it.  If we keep drinking the salt water for 2 more hours, we DIE, but if we stop drinking the fucking salt water we will have landed on a sandy beach with a beautiful fresh water spring nearby and we will LIVE.

I want to LIVE and I think that you do too.  Please, stop drinking the salt water, it’s NOT REAL WATER.  If we stop feeding this nightmare called the debt and stop believing that it’s real, then we can just throw away the civilization that we broke and BUILD ANOTHER ONE.  After all, whose planet is this, ours or the debts?

We can do better.

ctwfrank

Let’s be serious…just for a moment

26 Nov 2011 4 Comments

by ctwfrank in Money Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Seriously now, it’s already hard enough having to sit and watch us bullshit ourselves to the point of idiocy, but I just finished a tag surfing session and in addition to the usual endless droning about GOLD this and GOLD that, I just saw (for the first time) an article regarding a country that was “repatriating” its gold from the vaults in London and New York where the countries of the world have kept their gold since WWII.  The article stated that the decision to repatriate the gold had been made by the leader of the country “in view of the volatile nature of the world’s economy’.  That was just a bit much.  Up until now, the math more or less indicated that everyone knows that the whole GOLD thing is bullshit, but all of a sudden I’m not sure if I should doubt that math.  Is it possible that people actually BELIEVE this shit and are not just playing along because that’s what we think we must do?  I don’t know, but it’s scary.  Scary enough to motivate me to post this message:

Just in case anyone actually believes that GOLD has any actual value that makes it immune to anything that might happen to the economy or to human civilization, it should be noted that GOLD is actually worthless.  It is a fairly unremarkable metal that we selected to use as the stuff that we would manufacture MONEY from back when we decided that WEALTH (which has always been FOOD) should have a standardized measure of exchange to facilitate commerce.  We picked GOLD to be the “material” used to manufacture money because it was PLIABLE and we could shape it into coins more easily than other metals. In other words, GOLD became the manufacturing material for money because it was SOFT, period.  That’s about all there is to GOLD, the rest we made up and believed.  In summary; if the U.S., European or global economy should collapse (they actually already have, but I won’t go against the “grain”, I’ll play like it hasn’t happened yet) then what in the world is that country I mentioned earlier going to do with all of their repatriated GOLD?  It’s time for everyone to begin to digest the truth because it is the truth, regardless of how we feel or what we believe and the truth is that there IS no more money.  We spent all the money that there was, that there is and that there will be in the next 500 years and there is nothing left to substantiate any math that supports the concept of money.  The machinery that moves civilization is running today (albeit poorly) only because we BELIEVE that those little pieces of paper and GOLD are actually worth something, but this hallucination is quickly fading and sooner than we can imagine, MOST of us will have no choice but to face this truth and deal with it.  So I ask you:  when the MACHINERY that runs the “world”; the one that runs on “money” finally peters out and shuts down, ending commerce and production globally, what can anyone do with GOLD?  With no infrastructure in place, there will be no system in place to grow and distribute FOOD OR WATER and in 3 months there will be mayhem.  What good will 10 or 11 billion dollars worth of GOLD do when everyone is STARVING?  Who in their right mind would trade a can of beans that they found in the back of some forgotten cabinet somewhere for a mountain of GOLD at that point?  You can’t EAT the stuff!  It’s a freaking METAL, no different than tin, bronze or iron and no more or less valuable than whatever WE decide.  It was hard for me to digest, but I did.  This means that you can too, because we’re all the same.  I know that it’s hard to let go of the world as we know it, but WE BROKE IT and we need to build a new one, so we need to grow up, quickly, or in the simplest of terms, we’re fucked.  YOU know this, I know this and we ALL know this.  I refuse to believe that we are all idiots, but we are dangerously close to proving that to be true – and that applies to me as well, if we end up screwing ourselves because of idiocy, then that makes me an idiot too.  I don’t want to be an idiot.

We CAN do better.

The price of excellence

30 Oct 2011 Leave a Comment

by ctwfrank in OBSERVATIONS Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In today’s world we try to teach our children to excel and to do their best and we believe this, therefore it is fair to say that this is true. At the same time, whenever anyone excels or does their best or does something that is considered valuable or important and is recognized for doing what we have instilled in them since childhood, what follows the recognition is a barrage of envy, resentment, exclusion, rejection and even mistreatment on a personal level; not by everyone, but by almost everyone. If each individual instance of this negative response was to be analyzed and dissected, one would see that the reason and cause for it boils down to the simple thought: “Why couldn’t it have been me? Why did it have to be him/her?”

So widespread has this phenomenon become, and so used to it have we become that it is not only expected, but has become that which is desired, for which one of us can stand in front of a mirror and deny that some, or all of the motivation or inspiration that we may have to accomplish anything is based on how much others will envy us for being recognized and financially compensated.

It is very possible that this very real aspect of humanity may be the reason why so many arrive at the conclusion that it is futile to excel or contribute for any reason other than the financial benefit, the latter having become the only motivation we may have left. It is also very possible and quite probable that many people have actually solved this equation and concluded that the only way to not experience this phenomenon is to be mediocre.

If we look around, we can see that what we actually teach ourselves to aspire to is mediocrity, for what greater accomplishment can there be than to “not attract too much attention?” Just ask any celebrity.

An exceptional thought, action or creation born of any one of us requires the good will, acceptance and simple courtesy of the rest of us; for what benefits one of us, benefits us all. We already know this.

Isn’t it time to forgive the past and build a future? We’ve made enough mistakes to learn from them instead of repeating them.

We can do better.

ctwfrank

Playing the odds

20 Oct 2011 Leave a Comment

by ctwfrank in Money Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What we once mostly called the “economy” or at times the “financial infrastructure” at other times the “fiscal structure” and every once it a while we would call it the “banking structure” or the “commercial structure” of the world, or to be more general; the systematic functional management and administration of wealth and value – ended, or died, or disappeared or was replaced some time ago.  It’s hard to pinpoint exactly when, but it doesn’t really matter at this point.  If anyone might ask the question:  “If this is true, then what has existed in its place since?”  The answer to that would be a casino, with the only exception being that there is no house.

How to talk like THEM.

14 Oct 2011 1 Comment

by ctwfrank in OBSERVATIONS Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Have you ever wondered how they do it?  I’m referring to any of THEM (or “they”, you know; the same ones who “say” – ‘They say the economy will get better.’) who stand in front of large groups of people and give speeches.  It doesn’t have to be any particular one of them; it could be any one of them; politicians, corporate tycoons, millionaires, dictators and the like. How is it that they are able to stand up there for such a long time and talk as much as they do and say NOTHING at all, yet leave us in awe and impressed with the superlative oratory that we were fortunate enough to witness.  How is it that they do it?  They’re not THAT charismatic or charming or spellbinding, so how can so few talk so much crap and have it result in our applause, admiration, donations or votes? I’m not implying that an impressive and impacting discourse is never genuine, there are those who have the presence, power and passion to communicate a message to a large group of people and succeed with an impeccable power; it’s just there are far too many of them that don’t have any of these talents who manage to get away appearing as if they did every time they open their yapper and I think it’s about time a cat or two is let out of a bag or two.  Impressive, impacting, breathtaking and moving speeches can be made by anyone, with the assistance of a little math.  In this case; linguistic math. Would you like to learn how you can easily and simply give a knock-out speech that says absolutely nothing of any significance yet leaves the audience impressed, applauding and vowing life-long loyalty?  Let’s have some fun.

Below is what I call a ‘linguistic speech matrix’.  It breaks down key sections of sentences that contain words to which we are programmed from birth to respond to.  This is no joke, try it and you will be blown away.  The matrix is in the form of a table, with rows and columns.  There are four columns, numbered 1 through 4 which represent sentence segments.  These segments are interchangeable with other sentence segments containing the same component key words.  The matrix also has several rows and these are indexed by letter, alphabetically (A, B, C, etc).   Here’s how you use it: Starting with column 1, pick any row you like for the first part of what will be a 4-part sentence and then pick a different row for columns 2, 3 and 4 to form a sentence.  For example; you can start off with F1, D2, G3 and E4.  This gives you the following sentence, in this example the content of each cell has a different color font to help identify them: “The burden of daily life proves that the present structure of the organization facilitates the creation of new propositions.”  Afterwards, simply continue mixing and matching columns and rows, as long as they are in column sequence 1-2-3-4.  The more sentences you form, the longer and more impressive the speech sounds.

The matrix also has a bonus: it is flexible and adaptable so that it can mimic relevance.  It accomplishes this with column 4, which contains the wording which is the pivotal object of the sentence.   All of the rows in column 4 contain key words that sound important but mean nothing, however you can replace the words in column 4 from the matrix with something current, as long as it can follow “of” in terms of sentence structure.  Let’s use the same example as above but in this case, we’ll replace what is in E4 with something current and on the minds of many people, like the economy.  You can modify it like this: “The burden of daily life proves that the present structure of the organization facilitates the creation of a new global economic infrastructure.”  You can insert relevant topics into the column 4 segment here and there and voila! You’ve just made a top notch, expert level and knock-their’s-socks-off-speech.  Just imagine how much fun we could have with this knowledge!    Give it a try, it’s the real deal.  Now you not only know how to put together a world-class speech, you also have a tool to help you differentiate between an talented speaker and someone who is using a matrix: content.   Maybe this will level the playing field some, who knows?  Enjoy!

row/column

1

2

3

4

A

 My fellow citizens, In order to reach the goals of the program We are obligated to perform a detailed analysis of the existing financial and administrative conditions.

B

 On the other hand and given the present circumstances the complexity of analysis performed by management plays an essential role in the structuring of the development directives for the future.

C

 Therefore. the constant increase in the quality and quantity of our activities demand exact precision and the complete support of the main participating system.

D

 Regardless, we can not forget that the present structure of the organization assists in the preparation and completion of the member’s attitudes towards their unavoidable duties.

E

 Similarly, the new distribution of duties of the organization guarantees the participation of an important group in the formation of new propositions.

F

 The burden of daily life proves that the continuous development of different types of activities complies with important obligations in the determination of the learning curve, in terms of pogress.

G

 It is not an absolute necessity to argue the complexity and the meaning of these problems, given that our activity and progress in the areas of information and propaganda facilitates the creation of the structure of programs that relate to specific needs.

H

 A diversified base of meaningful experiences teaches us that the reinforcing and development of the structures prevents the appreciation of the importance of the conditions of the appropriate activities

I

 It is the eagerness of the organization and also that the advice of of several militants offers us an interesting opportunity to test the validity of the development model.

J

 Superior ideological principles are what allow that the beginnings of the process of forms the new attitudes which implies the process of reconstruction and modernization of the various types of action.

K

 Additionally, we could very well dare to suggest that a specific re-launching of all the implied sectors will have to indicate an authentic starting point of the basic premises as adopted.

L

 It is obvious to point out that that the overcoming of outmoded ways of thinking will, in any case, specify the fundamental basis of an actual wide-spectrum casuistry,

M

 But we would commit the sin of insincerity if we were to avoid the fact that an indiscriminate application of conclusive factors assures us, in any case, of having a sensible investment process of the resulting elements.

N

 Finally, and as a definitive final statement, it is necessary to add that the consensual process of various and other concurrent applications is derived by overcoming the indirect occurrence of a whole series of ideologically systematized criteria sharing a common front of regenerative acts.

A most interesting modification to the solution of the global economic crisis…

11 Oct 2011 Leave a Comment

by ctwfrank in OBSERVATIONS Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I most definitely hope to be able to say that I “spoke too soon” if I waxed a bit too critical in yesterday’s post: The solution to the global economic crisis.   I don’t have all of the details yet, but I just now learned that there is a “Global Insolvency and Restructuring Conference”.  From what I have seen so far, these conferences are occurring at regular intervals, given that the web page I just looked at was about the 17th Global Insolvency and Restructuring Conference.   Perhaps some of us are looking at possible ways to restructure after the present insolvency bottoms out, and at a good pace too!  They’ve already had 17 of them!  They must have these conferences on a weekly basis, or possibly on a monthly basis; the last 17 months have been the hardest so far.

What confuses me a little is that the web page for this conference lists the last one in May of 2011.  There should have been at least 3 more since May, if not 12.  It must be a typo; I mean, come on; there’s no way that this could have been the 17th annual Global Insolvency and Restructuring Conference, could it?  That would mean that they have known about the insolvent state of the world for at least 17 years, perhaps more.   That couldn’t be possible, could it?  17 years ago; in 1994; there was no clue that the massive hammer punch we took in 2008 would happen or that any of these economic “bubbles” that exploded would exist; right?  I mean; if this were the 17th annual Global Insolvency and Restructuring Conference, then. . .  have we been insolvent since then or did we know that we would become insolvent?  Since 1994?

Excuse me for a moment, I just got a headache; I’m going to take an analgesic.

A quick bit of reality.

10 Oct 2011 2 Comments

by ctwfrank in OBSERVATIONS Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Foreword

The constitution prohibits the establishing of laws based on a religious belief or religious law; it is the fundamental basis of the separation of church and state.  The constitution makes no such prohibition, nor virtually any other of any kind, to the private sector.  That is to say that a private company can base its policies and procedures and/or operating guidelines on religious law and/or religious belief.  This is guaranteed by the bill of rights (freedom of religion/freedom of speech).

The Meat and Potatoes:

The concept of “Lending Money” is one so absurd and ridiculous that it belies all logic, yet it is just one more “impossible” scenario that we make a part of our daily lives.  Our civilization, as it stands in 2011 could not function at all without the lending of money, after all it is how money is created; you deposit your money in a bank, let’s say $1000.00.  The bank, under the pretense that you will not withdraw that money immediately, can take a portion of it; let’s say $500.00 and lends it to someone else as if it were theirs and charges them interest on it.  By accepting the loan from the bank (of your money) the beneficiary of the loan now has $500.00 dollars of your money that they bank lent them, but you also have the same $500.00 in your account; you’re just not using it right now.  By doing this, the bank created $500.00 dollars, or at least that’s what we believe.   In this post, I will not write any math intended to demonstrate how or why money can’t be borrowed or lent, because even though it can’t; we do it every day. In this post, I’ll stick to our present reality – to the last detail.

The lending of money is based on an analysis of credit risk. The function of credit risk analysis is to establish a person or entity’s creditworthiness. Creditworthiness is established by companies like FICO who assign a score in relation to a person’s creditworthiness.  In order to determine this score, FICO’s slated objective is to predict the likelihood that a consumer will go 90 days past due or worse in the subsequent 24 months after the score has been calculated.  Barring the fact that it is not possible to predict the future, the commercialization of predicting the future is officially classified as fortune-telling.  Fortune telling is recognized in many states as a legitimate business as evidenced by the ability to obtain an occupational or business tax license to operate a fortune telling establishment (with a disclaimer that it is for entertainment purposes only).  The reason that fortune-telling is classified as a legitimate business category is that fortune-telling is considered an aspect of witchcraft and witchcraft is officially recognized as a RELIGION in the U.S.A. and is therefore protected by the constitution.

In conclusion, even though the lives of every person in the country and most of the world, even governments are determined by their creditworthiness, there is no law regulating creditworthiness, credit scoring or credit rating, if there were, the law would be invalid because it would be based on a religious premise (witchcraft). At the same time, determining a person or company’s creditworthiness is technically an attempt to predict the future, which technically; is an act of witchcraft.  When this is applied to the general public, we are able to glimpse our reality: Every person who has a loan, mortgage or credit card or in any way has borrowed money has (whether they know it or now) technically practiced witchcraft.  There, that should light a fire or two under someone’s butt; they can’t argue the facts, however.  Banks lend money by trying to predict the future of a person’s creditworthiness.  The lending of money is the principal financial mechanism of the world’s economy; it is also the active practice of witchcraft, in reality.

It doesn’t get much more real than this.

We can do better.

The solution to the global economic crisis.

10 Oct 2011 2 Comments

by ctwfrank in OBSERVATIONS Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I don’t understand what all of the fuss is about.  The entire world feels like it’s on the verge of a mass nervous breakdown over this “global economic crisis”.  So severe is this crisis that those few who actually know how bad it is will never divulge as much – and I am not one of those few; which may result my being asked how I can quantify “it” in any way.  The answer to all of these questions is actually very simple:  There is no financial “crisis” or a global “recession” or anything even remotely resembling the significant “slowing down” of the planet’s economy. According to the very authorities who define everything financial or economic; such as the IMF, the U.S. Federal Reserve, the World Bank and the rest of the endless list of “entities in charge” of everything related to monney; the present financial position of the human race stands as follows, using the basic, standardized, universal and official format called A BALANCE SHEET (expressed in US Dollars “US$”, as required, given that the official reserve currency of the world is the U.S. Dollar, as per the Breton-Woods Agreement, which is still being honored by recognizing gold as the official currency of the world):

Balance sheet for Homo-Sapiens as of October 10, 2011

Fiscal year-end:  December 31, 2011

Total Assets:               US$32 Trillion

Total Liabilities:         US$84 Trillion

___________________________________

Total Assets and

Liabilities:                  -US$52 Trillion

(The figures may not be exact, but they are close enough to be verifiable by any person through any number of official sources.)

As can be seen by our balance sheet, we have no economic crisis or recession; whenever ones’ liabilities are greater than one’s assets, especially to the degree seen in our collective balance sheet, it is called INSOLVENCY.  It’s in the dictionary, you can look it up.  It’s actually pretty clear; I don’t know how every “expert” in the world missed it.  On an individual basis, if any one person should become insolvent, the pestilence that is rained upon them is truly harsh, to the point where they must file for bankruptcy, after all; isn’t not being able to pay one’s bills one of the most despicable and shameful of all social positions? This is why it’s called “insolvency” – without a solution.  These days, most people are forced to deal with coercive threats and more if they are 3 days in paying a credit card statement and yet the entire human race is clearly and indisputably insolvent, and no one noticed?  I don’t know, but doesn’t that seem a little odd?  That’s beside the point, however; I don’t want to lose my place, where were we?  Oh yes, the inhabitants of Planet Earth are summarily and collectively insolvent; a fact which needs no further supporting evidence.  As such, what is required is that bankruptcy be filed, humanity’s existing assets and cash flow would probably be placed in receivership and eventually the court will discharge the debt by virtue of liquidation of assets, or something of the sort, right?  Those are the RULES; right?  That’s what any of us would be required to do individually, RIGHT?  If it applies to any person individually, then it must also apply to all of us collectively, given the same circumstances, RIGHT???

Here are the problems with this situation:

  1. Which court has jurisdiction over the entire human race?
  2. Assuming an answer for #1, to which address should all legal paperwork be sent?
  3. Who (and this is most important) speaks for all of us?  ALL of us; because it is all of us together who are bankrupt and insolvent.  Those few who may still think they “have a few bucks” can’t weasel their way out of being human, so it’s ALL of us, just look at the numbers.  Who could, or can, speak for all of us, should this impossible hearing ever take place?  That’s simple: All of us did not make, or even participate in the decisions as to the handling our global economy that resulted in insolvency.  It was only some of us who did so.  The fact that they didn’t get permission from all of us is irrelevant at this point; we believe the figures as written, therefore we are insolvent.  It would seem logical that it should be those same few who put all of us in this position who should stand up for the rest of us in this case – they did when they screwed up our books.  Wouldn’t you say?

Okay, I think that’s enough.  None of these things are actually going to happen.  All of us don’t even know who those few who put us all in this position are, or were.  It’s ridiculous to consider that the “human race” could file for bankruptcy, yet this doesn’t change the fact that we are bankrupt and insolvent.  We can’t play by some of the rules and ignore the rest when it’s convenient.  If humanity can’t file bankruptcy, then it can’t be insolvent either; why? Because we INVENTED both of those concepts, yet we believe them to be real and true individual “things” with their own will and presence.

What is truly comical to the point of being Machiavellian is how we have known this all along.  Of course we have, just look in the dictionary.  Look up the word “insolvent”.  The entire definition deals with money and bankruptcy.  From a linguistic point of view, however, the word insolvent is composed of two component morphemes; the prefix in-, which means NOT, and the word solvent, which of course, means everything that’s listed under the word insolvency, except for that one little detail that jumps out at you if you actually look up the word solvent: It also means “having the power to solve”.  Of course, that makes sense, doesn’t it?  Then why doesn’t the definition for insolvent include “The inability to solve?”  Maybe because when it comes to solving this mess, we are unable to.  Shit, we can’t even solve the right definition.   The entire financial crisis, wealth, value, currency, money and everything else isn’t even real, we just think it is which makes it real to all of us.  In the end, what this all means is that we are actually trying to run an insolvent civilization on a bankrupt planet and that somehow a solution will be found for making something out of nothing?  Look at it this way; each day that we continue to live believing this enormous pile of shit that came out of us is like driving a car with 4 flat tires; fast and a long way.  You know what happens eventually, right?

Okay, just don’t say I didn’t speak up.

We can do better.

Why?

09 Oct 2011 Leave a Comment

by ctwfrank in OBSERVATIONS Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Q:        Why are there many of us?

A:        Because it is necessary, otherwise there would be only 1.

Previous Older Entries

Calendar

June 2012
M T W T F S S
« Apr    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

1, 2, 3, many

  • 2,367 hits
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 59 other followers