First off, sorry it’s been so long since I’ve posted! It’s the end of the semester, and school is keeping me BUSY!
That being said, there’s something on my mind that can’t wait, so I’m taking a break from Statistics to share.
I’ve heard about three things recently that make me totally insane. They are – Swine Flu, Bank Bailouts (again/more), and Sequestration of CO2.
First, the Swine Flu.
WTF, over?! Haven’t we had enough of this media-hype bullshit? SARS, Bird Flu, Ebola, Swine Flu. For one thing, the news media in this country is a terrorist organization, and needs to be dealt with by the government appropriately. The Wikipedia definition of terrorism says that it’s composed of three parts. It: “(1) is intended to create fear (terror), (2) is perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a materialistic goal or a lone attack), and (3) deliberately targets (or disregards the safety of) non-combatants.”
Does that describe the news media (liberal or conservative), or not? Consider that for a second before answering…
Bank Bailouts
Several large banks are requesting additional money to help keep them afloat. I have so many problems with this, but I’ll sum them up by asking a question – At what point do you admit that something isn’t working?
Our debt-based economy is a form of slavery. Let’s turn to Wikipedia again, for a definition of slavery. “Slavery is a form of forced labor in which people are considered to be, or treated as, the property of others. Slaves are held against their will from the time of their capture, purchase or birth, and are deprived of the right to leave, to refuse to work, or to receive compensation (such as wages).”
How does that describe the bank bailout? It’s simple, really. If the banks have no money because people can’t pay them back, why is the government giving the money to the banks directly, instead of to the people who owe the banks money (and could then pay the banks back)? Is the debt owed by the banks, or is it owed by the people who owe the banks?
Obviously the debt is owed by the people who owe the banks. The largest portion of the bailout was intended to stop hemorrhaging due to defaults on home loans (that the banks had made other loans based on). But if you give the people money, and they pay the banks (and the banks then have money), there is no longer any debt. Then what happens? Well, everyone is free to do whatever they want. And freedom is very dangerous.
Of the three topics, this one takes the cake. I heard a piece on NPR, and coincidentally saw something online about this, recently. The concept is this – take the greenhouse gas emissions from factories, and pump them into the ground, where they are “stored” “indefinitely.”
I have a hard time speaking coherently about this, because it seems so stupid. Instead of limiting our production of greenhouse gases (i.e., limiting our ridiculous levels of consumption of things – anything), we think that we can get away with pumping our waste into the ground.
Now, I don’t know about you, but that sounds awfully familiar to me. In fact, I can point to a couple of times where we’ve already done something similar to this. The first time and place I saw this behavior was in myself, when I tried to hide my lima beans under my mashed potatoes, so I wouldn’t have to eat them. Sure enough, my parents were wise to the scheme, and they made me eat those beans, now covered in potato! Yuck!
The other time was more recent. Our disposal of other things in the earth comes to mind. The burying of nuclear waste in the earth has caused a lot of problems in certain areas (you basically can’t go there for 1,000,000 years), as has the burying of our solid wastes (landfills).
I’m unclear why sequestration of CO2 even seems feasible, when we know that we can’t just dump used car oil into the dirt. What happens, dear friends, when those big bubbles of CO2 get shifted (because the earth is always moving, don’t you know?), and they pop? What happens when huge amounts of CO2, sequestered over the course of years or decades, suddenly get released into the atmosphere? I for one don’t want to find out.
What do all of these things have in common? They’re all problems that have causes that are located in our way of dealing with the world. Swine Flu is an issue because most people in our country have compromised immune systems due to the overuse of antibiotics, and an underuse of healthy nutrition. Further, immune-resistant strains of illnesses like Swine Flu come about when we cram animals we want to eat into tiny boxes and then pump them full of antibiotics to keep them alive long enough to fatten up. If you’re reading this, please only buy meat that is “free range” designated, and antibiotic/hormone free.
With regard to the banks, our government and business leaders are not going to do anything about this in the near future. Lucky for us, the bank issue and the sequestration issue are closely related. They’re both about consumption levels. It is up to each individual to limit their consumption (of everything) as much as they’re able. Save your money in a bank account, or in long-term bonds that are based on more solid things (like governments, or government projects) than the whimsy of Wall Street.
Most importantly, when something isn’t working, don’t try to put a bandaid on it. Figure out what’s really wrong, and treat the problem, instead of the symptom. Then, maybe it won’t come back.