It was just after 11pm:
Quote Star: It is just after 11pm and it is closing time for a restaurant at Desa Sri Hartamas. Suddenly, three men with parang and sticks rushed in and started tearing the place apart, grabbing anything they could get hold of.
Comment: There is a style in the way the message was conveyed and it is intended to be dramatic and that is to stir emotion or force in the reader.
Whether the person realizes or not he is being deliberately graphic, it is a style and never natural but artificial, fabricated to be dramatic and that is tampering with reality that is conditioning or addictive so that the urge to be dramatic in what one says or does becomes irresistible, automatic and it is never a pleasure it is made out to be but suffering heading for insanity.
If you read it and see nothing wrong, don’t understand that what is said is spiced up to stir your mental force, you are a person who does not know what you are reading or a fool.
Nothing to go back to:
THE PAST ECONOMIC BOOM WAS BASED ON PRODIGIOUSLY EXCESSIVE BORROWING AND LENDING THAT WAS UNREALISTIC AND CRIMINAL (BECAUSE SECURITIZATIONS OF LOANS ENABLED FAR MORE LOANS TO BE GIVEN THAN AVAILABLE) AND NO AMOUNT OF BUYING TIME AND STIMULATING WILL ENABLE THE ECONOMY TO RECOVER. IF THE ECONOMY IN THE PAST WAS SOUND AND IT WAS HIT BY A SETBACK THEN IT WILL RECOVER GIVEN TIME AND SUPPORT IN LOW INTEREST RATES BUT IF THE ECONOMY IN THE PAST WAS AN ABUSIVE RECKLESS PARTY, NO AMOUNT OF BUYING TIME WITH STIMULUS WILL MAKE IT RECOVER BECAUSE YOU CANNOT RECOVER TO THE PREVIOUS ABUSES.
Malaysian banks have lowered the interest they pay on deposits.
The idea supposedly is to reduce savings and promote spending and borrowing because the economy is in trouble and needs a spending boost to tide over until things return to ‘normal’.
ALL OVER THE WORLD, GOVERNMENTS ARE LOWERING INTEREST RATES AND EMBARKING ON GOVERNMENT PROJECTS TO STIMULATE DEMAND TO OFFSET THE COLLAPSE IN SPENDING OF DEBT RIDDEN CONSUMERS.
THE IDEA IS TO ARTIFICIALLY STOKE DEMAND UNTIL THE ECONOMY RECOVERS.
BUT THIS IS FOOL’S LOGIC THAT WILL NOT WORK.
THE PAST ECONOMIC BOOM WAS BASED ON CONSUMERS BORROWING WAY BEYOND THEIR ABILITY TO PAY, BORROWING BASED ON THEIR OVERVALUED STOCKS AND HOUSES AND LENDING OF MONEY MUCH MORE THAN AVAILABLE BECAUSE THE LOANS WERE SECURITISED AND PASSED ON TO OTHERS WHO DID NOT KNOW THEY WERE LIABLE FOR MUCH MORE THAN THEY WERE TAKING ON.
IN OTHER WORDS THE PAST ECONOMIC BOOM WAS BASED ON PRODIGIOUSLY EXCESSIVE BORROWING AND LENDING WAY BEYOND THAT WAS UNREALISTIC AND CRIMINAL AND NO AMOUNT OF BUYING TIME AND STIMULATING WILL ENABLE THE ECONOMY TO RECOVER. IF THE ECONOMY IN THE PAST WAS SOUND AND IT WAS HIT BY A SETBACK THEN IT WILL RECOVER GIVEN TIME AND SUPPORT IN LOW INTEREST RATES BUT IF THE ECONOMY IN THE PAST WAS AN ABUSIVE RECKLESS PARTY, NO AMOUNT OF BUYING TIME WITH STIMULUS WILL MAKE IT RECOVER BECAUSE YOU CANNOT RECOVER TO THE PREVIOUS ABUSES.
THUS HERE AS EVERYWHERE, TOP ECONOMISTS AND LEADERS THINK THEY UNDERSTAND BUT THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND BECAUSE IF THEY UNDERSTOOD THEY WILL REALIZE THERE CAN BE NO RECOVERY BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING FOR THE ECONOMY TO RETURN TO.
Why no recovery:
If the economic crisis is based on sound lending and spending that has been hit by some unforeseen circumstances eg drought or earthquake then you can buy time with artificial spending to await the economy’s recovery.
However if the economic crisis is the result of borrowers being weighed down by excessive debts (even to prodigious levels) based on their overvalued stocks and property prices, it was based on lenders (banks) lending way beyond their capacity to lend through the shenanigans and alchemy of derivatives or securitizing and hiving off of loans for others to assume their underestimated responsibility, then no amount of government stimulation can cause a recovery because you cannot recover to the drunken boozing of the past, there was never so much wealth in the system anyway and the banks have not told you that they have wiped out all the people’s savings entrusted to them.
Thus the desperate measures of governments everywhere to bail out banks, lower interest rates, embark on spending and tax rebates reflects a lack of understanding of what the situation is and what measures are needed.
HERE AS IN MANY MORE PLACES THAN PEOPLE CONCEDE, EVEN THOSE WHO ARE EXPERTS, PROFESSIONALS DO NOT UNDERSTAND, THEY ARE ONLY VAGUELY COGNIZANT OF THE ECONOMIC (AND ENVIRONMENTAL) MESS FACING MANKIND.
Without securitization there would never have been so much money to lend:
Without securitization of loans to be hived off for unsuspecting others like insurance companies and pension and hedge funds to assume responsibility abetted by rating agencies who overrate the securities, there would not have been so much money in the system to be lent to borrowers to such monstrous levels.
Without borrowing short term to dangerously lend long term, UK’s Northern Rock would not have so much money to lend to mortgage borrowers to fuel the housing bubble.
Without globalisation, consumers in China would not have access to credit from somewhere else in the globe. It is the globalization of financial markets that dangerously allowed money to be lent from one point to another point anywhere in the world that much magnified the capacity to lend. In the past you could only borrowed locally and if your local banker is saturated, cannot lend then you have to do without borrowing.
With globalization, ‘investors’ or hedge funds can swiftly enter into an undeveloped stock market like India, push up prices by their massive buying power drawing in greedy local investors so that a stock bubble is built and even when prices collapse later, these foreign funds who bought early still make profits selling into a falling market.
(Profit taking enables these funds to support and progressively push up prices so long as there are enough suckers on the sidelines who can be sucked in. For example, a fund might buy a stock at $1 and push it up to $3 and when there is too much selling pressure, they will allow it to fall to $2 and they will sell because their cost price is $1 and once selling pressure has abated, they will use the money they collected selling at $2 to buy to push up prices higher perhaps past $3 and so with repeated bouts of buying and selling, they can push prices ever higher so long as there are fools on the sidelines who can be recruited to hold stocks at higher price. Someone who bought his stock at $2 is unlikely to sell it at less than $2 and so he provides support at $2.)
Without modern slaves in China, India and Indonesia providing the bases for cheap products, the western nations could not have lived so well so long.
IT IS THE SMOKESCREEN AND DECEPTIONS OF SECURITIZATIONS (DERIVATIVES) AND VARIOUS OTHER CRIMINAL PLOYS THAT ALLOWED A GLOBAL CREDIT BUBBLE TO DEVELOP TO SUCH MONSTROUS SIZE SUCH THAT ITS INEVITABLE FINAL COLLAPSE WILL BE BEYOND RECOVERY.
The absurdity of securitization:
You don’t need to be an expert to understand that securitization of loans (mortgages, credit card debts) and then hiving it off to others to insure is absurd.
Insurance companies are in the business not for charity but to make profit and the fact that many are desirous of entering the insurance business reflects it is a lucrative trade.
If you can make even ‘handsome’ profits from insuring an asset, why don’t the credit card companies and mortgage lenders insure the loans themselves rather than the complications and additional expenses of outsourcing the insurance to others?
You can argue that they can make much more money compared to that made from insuring their own loans but this is an excuse and unless there is substantial evidence that this is the case it is an excuse to get rid of loans to unsuspecting people and by being able to wash their hands off loans they made, they are encouraged to be more reckless lending since they are no longer in line for losses should loans go bad.
IF INSURING LOANS (CREDIT CARD AND MORTGAGES) ARE PROFITABLE SUCH THAT OTHERS ARE WILLING TO INSURE THEM FOR YOU, WHY NOT KEEP THOSE LOANS IN HOUSE, INSURE YOURSELF AND POCKET THE PROFITS FROM INSURING THEM? IT MAKES NO SENSE TO OUSOURCE INSURANCE OF THE LOANS YOU MADE WHEN INSURANCE IS NORMALLY A PROFITABLE BUSINESS AND IT ONLY MAKES SENSE TO OUTSOURCE YOUR INSURANCE IF THE LOANS ARE WORSE THAN IT APPEARS AND YOU WANT TO SPREAD THE SHIT AROUND TO OTHERS.
EVEN WELL EDUCATED PROFESSIONALS HAVE BEEN TAKEN FOR A RIDE, CONNED TO SEE NOTHING WRONG ABOUT SECURITIZATION AND OUTSOURCING OF INSURANCE FOR THESE LOANS WHEN ITS RATIONALE IS ABSURD.
Reason this out:
Loans are supposed to be profitable, otherwise why are banks in the business of giving loans?
Unless loans are getting increasingly more profitable with time, why not keep the old loans that are profitable (otherwise why make loans?) instead of the cost and trouble of paying others to assume responsibility for those loans so that you can make new loans that are no more profitable?
THERE ARE NO INDICATIONS THAT BANKS ARE GETTING OTHERS TO ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE LOANS THEY MAKE SO THAT THEY CAN FREE THEIR MONEY TO GET INTO MORE PROFITABLE BUSINESSES THAN LENDING BUT BANKS ARE DOING SO, SO THAT THEY CAN GET LOANS OFF THEIR HANDS SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE EVEN MORE LOANS.
THUS IF YOU ARE GETTING RID OF LOANS TO MAKE NEW LOANS, UNLESS LOANS ARE GETTING INCREASINGLY PROFITABLE, WHY PAY OTHERS MONEY TO INSURE YOUR LOANS WHEN YOU CAN AVOID MUCH UNNECESSARY WORK BY JUST KEEPING AND EARNING PROFIT FROM THE OLD LOANS?
THE ONLY REASON YOU WANT OTHERS TO INSURE YOUR LOANS AND YOU MIX THEM UP SO THAT OTHERS DO NOT KNOW THE NATURE OF THESE LOANS IS TO DECEIVE, YOU KNOW THE LOANS ARE SHAKY AND WHILST YOU WANT TO COLLECT INTEREST ON THOSE LOANS, YOU WANT OTHERS TO STAND SURETY FOR THOSE LOANS AND YOU PAY THEM PREMIUM FROM THE PROFITS OF THOSE LOANS WHILST THEY ARE STILL PERFORMING TO STAND SURETY FOR YOU.
ONLY IF THE LOANS ARE NOT SOUND SHOULD YOU WANT OTHERS INSTEAD OF YOU TO STAND SURETY AND THUS RID OF RISK YOU CAN ASSUME NEW RISKS OR MAKE NEW LOANS.
THUS EVEN BY A PROCESS OF LOGICAL DEDUCTION YOU CAN KNOW BANKERS ARE INDULGING IN HANKY PANKY SECURITIZING AND OUTSOURCING THE RISKS OF LOANS THEY MAKE SO THAT THEY CAN GREEDILY MAKE NEW LOANS.
HOW IS IT THAT A WIZENED OLD PRO LIKE GREENSPAN AND RUBIN NOT SEE THROUGH THIS OR IS IT BECAUSE THEY ARE FOOLS WHO SEE BUT DO NOT SEE OR ARE COMPROMISED, CONNIVING AND DO NOT WANT TO BE PARTY POOPERS?
Having the cake and eating it too:
Bankers use part of the profits from risky loans they make to pay others like pension funds to assume responsibility for their loans whilst they still reap profit from those loans and they are freed off risk to make even more loans.
BY MIXING THEM AND SECURITIZING THEM AND SELLING THEM OFF TO INVESTORS OR GETTING INVESTORS TO ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR LOANS THEY MAKE, BANKERS ARE NOT SPENDING ANY OF THEIR OWN MONEY, THEY USE PROFITS FROM LOANS THAT ARE STILL PERFORMING TO PAY OTHERS TO ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEM OR THEY PRICE THEIR COSTS INTO THE DERIVATIVES THEY SELL SO THAT THEY STILL COME OUT TOPS.
THUS IT IS A ‘WIN WIN’ SITUATION FOR BANKERS, THEY GET TO REAP PROFITS FROM LOANS EVEN IF THEY ARE RISKY BECAUSE THEY USE MONEY THEY MAKE FROM THOSE LOANS TO PAY OTHERS TO STAND SURETY FOR THEM OR THEY PRICE THEIR COSTS INTO THE PRICE OF DERIVATIVES/ SECURITIZED LOANS THEY SELL AND SO THEY GAIN FROM LOANS THEY MAKE WHILST THEY OUTSOURCED THEIR RISKS SO THAT THEY CAN TAKE ON MORE NEW LOANS. THOSE WHO BOUGHT THE SECURITIES BASED ON THOSE LOANS OR ASSUMED RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE LOANS DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE GETTING INTO, HAVE BEEN CONNED.
WHAT WERE THE REGULATORS DOING ALL THIS WHILE? ISN’T IT THEIR JOB TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THESE NEW INSTRUMENTS IMPLY AND EXAMINE THEM FOR FRAUD?
HOW DO YOU EXPECT THE ECONOMY TO RECOVER WITH LOW INTEREST RATES, PUBLIC SPENDING WHEN WHAT WENT BEFORE WAS NOT PRODUCTIVE, WAS WASTEFUL, USELESS UNPRODUCTIVE CONSUMPTION BASED ON CREDIT OR SPENDING OF MONEY YOU DO NOT HAVE, HAVE NOT EARNED?
Proceeds must be greater than costs:
No one is in any business to make losses but they always make profit.
Thus the proceeds or profits from loans bankers make must exceed the costs of paying others to stand surety for them or to sell them off as securities to unsuspecting investors otherwise why bother.
THUS BANKERS MAKE PROFIT WITH RISKY LOANS, USE PART OF THE PROFIT TO MAKE OTHERS STAND SURETY FOR THOSE LOANS AND THUS FREED OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR THOSE LOANS THEY GET ‘STUCK IN’ TO MAKE EVEN MORE LOANS.
Tkl
They always want to stir emotion:
Whatever people say may be true, false (they say they did not do when they did) or nonsense (makes no sense) but they always want to simultaneously stir the other person’s emotion to like, dislike, feel sad or hurt.
For instance when explaining why he is late, the person might say, “Huh, I could not get out of my place, at the lanes were blocked by indiscriminate parking by Malays attending mosque for Hari Raya Haji! (laughs)”
The substance of the message is true that he was delayed by indiscriminate parking but his motive may be to appease you not to be angry with him for being late and he is faking he likes what he disliked being inconvenienced by irresponsible parking.
HENCE BY WHAT HE SAID AND THE WAY HE SAID, HIS INTENTION IS TO APPEASE YOU, NOT TO PLAINLY TELL YOU WHY HE IS LATE AND BY LAUGHING AND SPEAKING IN A WAY AS IF HE ENJOYED WHAT HE DISLIKED, HE IS STIRRING EMOTION IN HIMSELF AND THE LISTENER.
Even when scientists discuss serious matters, for one who discerns what is happening as it actually is they are also simultaneously trying to stir emotion by putting forth what they say with aggressiveness, with liking or disliking.
WHATEVER PEOPLE WANT TO SAY OR DO, THEY ALSO WANT TO STIR EMOTION, LIKE OR DISLIKE, SADNESS OR HURT IN THEMSELVES OR OTHERS AND BECAUSE THEY WANT TO STIR EMOTION WHICH IS FORCE THAT IS MEANINGLESS, BLIND AND HARMFUL, THEY CANNOT BE UNDERSTANDING PEOPLE OTHERWISE THEY WILL UNDERSTAND THAT THEY INTEND TO STIR FORCE IN THEMSELVES AND OTHERS AND THIS IS BLIND AND MEANINGLESS.
Rehashing and composing:
Whether a person is rehashing or composing what he says or does fresh for the occasion can be known for every occasion by those who discern.
If you are rehashing you are like the cook who looks into his freezer and select one from a variety of meals to reheat and dish out.
If you are composing live (never seen in this world) you will select from the ingredients available at that moment to cook a meal specifically for that occasion.
Whatever is rehashed is insincere because it is standardized, not specific for an occasion but intended for every occasion with similarity to that situation and meaningless, just for show to please and impress.
Anyone who has style, who speaks with evident stretching of syllables, changes of speed and loudness is rehashing not composing fresh because the consistent style cannot be reproduced fresh but is memorized and reproduced by rehash based on memory.
Anyone who has style that must be rehashed cannot have genuine understanding because if he had genuine understanding he will surely understand his style is false, meaningless, stirring of harmful force in himself and others and he is rehashing or faking it to please and impress others.
Because all beings in this world, animals and humans can be demonstrated to have style, they are all rehashing and cannot genuinely understand.
Have doctors found a cure for alcoholism?
This is a false question that only the deluded will ask.
There is a cure for alcoholism but it is not where scientists are looking, in chemicals or psychotherapy or behaviour therapy.
Alcoholism is a substance abuse that is based on force never reason. Alcohol, like many substances of dependency has an allure to its addicts in that it ‘drowns their sorrows temporarily’, gives them a sensation of pleasure. But because alcohol is a chemical that attacks the mind with chemical reaction, a form of force transaction, it is conditioning or addictive. No one takes alcohol with understanding but they take alcohol by rote, taking alcohol is a ritual according to a plan of how to take it that differs in different alcoholics and once the plan is in place the addict is a slave to force doomed to repetitively execute the plan to take alcohol and each time he does so he is further bonding himself stronger to alcohol that will end in torment.
There is only one cure to alcoholism and it is the abolishment of all use of force to fabricate style, to use force to prolong, change speed and loudness that leads to insoluble increasingly mad stress, restlessness and distraction that pushes the person into the arms of alcoholism and all other forms of substance abuse to ‘drown out his sorrows’.
ANYONE WHO THINKS THERE IS A CURE IN DRUG, ELECTRO OR WHATEVER THERAPY, IN TAI CHI OR YOGA IS DELUDED BECAUSE THE END OF STRESS IS THE END OF A NEED FOR ALCOHOL AND TO THAT END, THE PERSON MUST STOP STRETCHING SYLLABLES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS. THERE IS NO OTHER CURE FOR ALCOHOLISM.
BECAUSE THIS IS THE ONLY ANSWER TO ALL SUBSTANCE ABUSES AND IT IS CRUCIAL TO ALL BEINGS WHO SUFFER, WHOEVER IS THE COUNSELOR JESUS DESCRIBED MUST ALSO SAY WHAT I SAY.
When Jesus spoke of the counsellor who will do the things he described, it means it will be impossible for anyone except the counsellor himself to say or do so, if it is possible for someone else to say so, Jesus has no right or is wrong to say what he said:
Jesus: "If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him; you know him, for he dwells with you, and will be in you.
"These things I have spoken to you, while I am still with you. But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit (The counselor is the Holy Spirit), whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.
But when the Counselor comes (he will not come immediately), whom I shall send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness to me; and you also are witnesses, because you have been with me from the beginning.
But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your hearts. Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.
And when he comes, he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness (goodness) and judgment: concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no more; concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. (When the counselor comes, it will be time for mankind to be judged)
"I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.
It is because the Holy Spirit will also come and he will speak that it is said:
Jesus: Therefore I tell you, every (not some) sin and blasphemy will (not may) be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against (disagree with) the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
Britney: My boobs are too big:
Only someone who is deluded, who will not deny herself as Jesus commanded, who is preoccupied with her body and life here and will therefore lose it will be conscious of whether her boobs are too big or small.
There is nothing too big or small about a person’s boobs, it something that is unessential that the deluded see as essential.
Liking disliking is more dangerous than you think:
Even if you are guided by reason or understanding why you should do or say something, why something or someone is good (to be trusted) or bad (not to be trusted) if in addition you liked or disliked what you do or say or what is happening, because liking and disliking is blind and based on force and it increasingly conditions the person to indiscriminately blindly like or dislike that thing, it will progressively overshadow understanding such that the person in time bases his action on like or dislike that is blind and will lead to disaster in certain circumstances.
YOU MAY UNDERSTAND WHY YOU SHOULD SAY OR DO CERTAIN THINGS IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS, WHY YOU SHOULD TRUST OR DISTRUST CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS OR THINGS BUT IF YOU IN ADDITION LIKED OR DISLIKED WHAT YOU UNDERSTOOD OR KNOW THE REASON FOR YOUR ACTION, BECAUSE LIKING AND DISLIKING IS BASED ON FORCE IT CONDITIONS SUCH THAT IN TIME LIKE AND DISLIKE OVERWHELMS REASON SO THAT YOU BASED YOUR ACTION IN WHAT YOU UNDERSTOOD NOT ON REASON BUT ON BLIND FORCE, BLIND FORCE DRIVEN ATTRACTIVE LIKING AND REPULSIVE DISLIKING THAT IN NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES MAY NOT MAKE MUCH DIFFERENCE BUT IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS MAY BE FATAL. LIKE AND DISLIKE IS LIKE A CANCER THAT GROWS MONSTROUS SO THAT INCREASINGLY A PERSON BASES HIS ACTIONS AUTOMATICALLY, HELPLESSLY ON LIKE AND DISLIKE AND REASON BECOMES INCREASINGLY OVERRIDEN AND FEEBLE.
THUS A PERSON MAY AROUSE HIS STRONG DISLIKE FOR WHAT I SAY EVEN WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING WHAT I SAID BECAUSE HIS DISLIKE IS NOW EASILY AROUSED TO INTENSE LEVELS THAT HE CANNOT RESIST AND THUS DISLIKING WHAT I SAY, IT DOES NOT REGISTER OR HE DISMISSES WHAT I SAY WITHOUT REGISTERING WHAT I SAY.
Example of the cancer of liking what you do:
For instance there may be reason for you to on occasions make a hand sign as if you are making a phone call by placing your hand with the thumb pointing up and little finger down near your ear but if you liked what you do because you think it is stylish, then increasingly you find excuses to display the sign such that in time blind like for what you do drives you to display the ‘phone call’ sign even when there is no reason to do it, you do it just for show because you liked doing it.
THUS THERE MAY BE REASON FOR YOU TO OCCASIONALLY MAKE THE ‘PHONE CALL’ SIGN WITH YOUR HAND, IF IN ADDITION YOU LIKED MAKING THE HAND PHONE SIGN THEN INCREASINGLY IT IS BLIND LIKE THAT DRIVES YOU TO MAKE THE PHONE CALL SIGN EVEN WHEN THERE IS NO REASON TO DO SO.
IN THE SAME WAY, PEOPLE HAVE FAVORITE PHRASES LIKE ‘WELL’, ‘OH MY GOODNESS’, ‘I SAY, I SAY, I SAY’ THAT THEY LIKED SO THAT THEY FIND EVERY EXCUSE TO USE IT UNTIL IT BECOMES ADDICTIVE AND INAPPROPRIATE AT TIMES.
Like for money, sex and food:
Initially you may understand the reason why you should have money or make money because money is useful but in addition if you also liked the money that you understand why it is useful to have, increasingly it is the blind like for money that becomes increasingly intense and compelling that compels you to make or hoard more money until it becomes an obsession, irrational and you do criminal things to make money.
In the same way a certain food dish may be tasty but if in addition you liked it, increasingly the forceful liking bonds you to the food such that you find it irresistible and becomes addicted to it, you eat not because of a need or hunger but for the sake of eating or adornment.
The same goes for sex, if you liked sex that like conditions to become intense and then you become a lust driven sex maniac who will do anything to satisfy his insatiable craving.
A PERSON WHO DOES NOT LIKE NOR DISLIKE MONEY, SEX AND FOOD APPRECIATES THE VALUE OF EACH BUT BECAUSE HE DOES NOT LIKE, HE IS NOT CONDITIONED TO BECOME INCREASINGLY IRRESISTIBLY LIKING FOR THEM, HE IS NOT BONDED AND DOES NOT SUFFER.
Liking is the underlying root to all addictions:
Liking is the underlying final pathway of all addictions like alcohol, drugs, food, clothes, shopping, etc.
Fear is the underlying pathway to all phobias.
Dislike is the underlying cause of all bigotry or prejudice.
YOU MAY UNDERSTAND THE REASON WHY YOU TREAT SOMETHING FAVOURABLY (FOOD, MONEY, CLOTHES) UNFAVOURABLY (CERTAIN INVIDUALS OF CERTAIN RACES) AND AVOID CERTAIN THINGS (EG SNAKES) BUT IF IN ADDITION YOU LIKED OR DISLIKED OR FEARED IT, IN TIMES THE EMOTION OR FORCE OVERRIDES THE REASON AND YOU BECOME SEIZED BY ADDICTION, PREJUDICE AND PHOBIA.
Controlled madness:
BECAUSE WHAT THEY DO IS MEANINGLESS, THEY ARE USING THEIR MUSCLES NOT TO DO ANY USEFUL WORK BUT FOR SOMETHING MEANINGLESS TO BE SEEN, THEY ARE PRACTICING CONTROLLED MADNESS THAT WILL END IN UNCONTROLLED MADNESS AND THE BUDDHA IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT DANCING IS INSANITY.
ANYONE WHO DOES WHAT THEY DO MUST HAVE A DISTURBED MIND, MUST FEEL UNEASY BECAUSE NO MATTER HOW THEY INSIST IT IS MEANINGFUL AND EXHILIRATING, EXHILIRATING IS JUST AN ATTRACTIVE STIRRING OF THE PERSON’S MENTAL FORCE, IT IS MEANINGLESS UNIVERSALLY AND THERE WILL BE CONFLICT AND MADNESS THAT MUST BE CONTROLLED THAT MUST LAPSE INTO LOSS OF CONTROL OR MADNESS.
No shortage of disappointing economic news:
Quote: There was no shortage of disappointing economic news on Monday.
This is a false style of speech that is euphemistic. Ordinary people understand falsely that ‘no shortage’ means ‘plenty of bad news’.
No shortage means just that ‘no shortage’ not plenty of bad news. To be euphemistic is to understate something and whenever something is understated it is no longer the truth that is never under or overstated.
The person who lets his yes be yes only says there was a lot of disappointing news, not no shortage of disappointing news.
‘NO SHORTAGE’ IS AN UNDERSTATED OR EUPHEMISTIC WAY OF PUTTING SOMETHING AND IT IS ALWAYS FALSE.
YOU MAY THINK WHAT I SAY IS UNIMPORTANT BUT YOU MAY BE THE PERSON THE BUDDHA SAID WHO SEES WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS UNIMPORTANT AND WHAT IS UNIMPORTANT (STYLE) IS IMPORTANT.
Being puzzled is all about stirring force:
You hear people talk as if it is full of meaning that “I was puzzled as to why he did it” when it is meaningless, what he is saying is that his mental force was stirred to be disturbed or upset or in conflict because he cannot reason out why he did it.
No matter how much you stir your mental force to be puzzled you cannot find a solution because not only is force blind and unreasoning but it is an obstacle to understanding the situation if it is possible.
Often people are faking being puzzled to impress others but when it is genuine it means their mental forces are stirred to be disturbed. No matter what happens why should anyone be puzzled, of what use is it to stir your mental force that leads to woe and is a detriment, makes it harder to understand? Therefore the person who speaks of puzzlement as if it is meaningful is a pervert.
IF YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT STIRRING OF FORCE TO BE UPSET BY SPEAKING OF PUZZLEMENT AND YOU THINK IT IS MEANINGFUL TO BE PUZZLED, YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, NOT JUST HERE BUT IN MANY PLACES YOU THINK YOU UNDERSTAND BUT YOU DON’T.
No shortage does not mean plenty.
When the person said there is no shortage of bad economic news he implies there is plenty of bad news when no shortage can mean a moderate amount not plenty of bad news.
Thus to say ‘no shortage’ is to understate it and introduce uncertainty for the sake of style.
The person who speaks truly, precisely either says there is a fair bit of bad news or there is plenty of bad news. No shortage is speaking falsely to make others presume it means ‘plenty’ when it is not necessarily so and thus the person is creating karma for himself.
IF YOU LIKE TO SAY ‘NO SHORTAGE’ INSTEAD OF ‘MODERATE AMOUNT’ OR ‘PLENTY’ OF BAD NEWS, YOU MAY THINK YOU SPEAK THE TRUTH, UNDERSTAND THE TRUTH BUT YOU DO NOT AND YOU ARE HEADED FOR PERDITION NOT SAFETY.
A styled understanding:
Because there is style or the use of force to prolong, change speed and strength of force in everything people do including how they see, hear, smell, taste and touch it is impossible that there is no style in their understanding.
Hence whatever people understand is tainted by force that is blind and meaningless and harmful. Whatever understanding that is styled is never genuine unblemished understanding but it is significantly tainted and so stylish emotional people are not capable of true or genuine understanding.
Whatever understanding that is styled is rehashed and so it is that people’s understanding of anything must first be programmed into the minds using force according to a plan and then rehashed from that recorded plan.
IN ORDER TO MAKE STYLISH PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU WANT TO SAY OR WANT THEM TO DO YOU MUST TELL THEM WITH CONSIDERABLE ADDED FORCE EVEN SHOUT AT THEM EVEN REPEATEDLY BEFORE IT WILL STICK OR BE RECORDED IN THEIR MINDS AND THUS RECORDED THEY ‘UNDERSTAND’ OR ARE CAPABLE OF CARRYING OUT THE INSTRUCTIONS CONVEYED THAT IS REPLAYED FROM A PROGRAM IN THEIR HEADS.
HENCE WHEN PEOPLE INSTRUCT ANOTHER, THEY ARE USING FORCE ACCORDING TO A PLAN TO PROGRAM THE OTHER PERSON AS YOU WOULD PROGRAM A COMPUTER AND WHEN THE PROGRAMMING IS SUCCESSFUL, THE PERSON MAY CARRY OUT WHAT YOU PROGRAMMED THEM TO SAY OR DO. OFTEN THEY MISUNDERSTAND, THEIR RESISTANCE OR INABILITY TO UNDERSTAND CAUSE THEM TO MIS PROGRAM THEMSELVES OR THEY THINK YOU ARE REFERRING TO PROGRAMS THAT ALREADY EXIST IN THEM AND THEY USE REHASH THOSE PROGRAMS THAT ARE DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU WANTED THEM TO DO OR SAY.
5000 Voters per Putra Jaya Seats:
Quote: MT: That is only because of Gerrymandering. Malay majority seats like Putrajaya, where the voters are 98% Malay, have only 5,000 voters while seats that are 80% or more non-Malay have 120,000 voters or more. That is why the government still won and not because the majority voted for it.
It seems there is one MP for 5000 Malay voters in Putra Jaya whilst in some opposition areas there is one MP for 120,000 voters.
This is clear cut cheating and how UMNO keeps itself in power unfairly.
BARISAN MAY BOAST IT STILL COMMANDS THE MAJORITY IN PARLIAMENT BUT IF IT RIGGED THE SYSTEM IN MANY WAYS INCLUDING CREATING ELECTORATES WHERE THERE IS 1 MP FOR ONLY 5000 MOSTLY MALAY VOTERS THEN THAT IS FRAUD.
Quaking in the boots:
Quote: If there is one word to get an economist quaking in their boots, it is deflation.
Comment: There is no basis for him to say that and he is falsifying to exaggerate the importance of deflation.
Few if any sane economist will quake in his boots at the mention of deflation. Suffice to say that deflation is one of the worst conditions for an economist to contemplate or face.
THE PERSON DOES NOT REALIZE HE IS COURTING FUTURE MAD PERCEPTION BECAUSE THERE ARE NO QUAKING ECONOMISTS AND HE HAS DEBTS FOR INFLUENCING OTHERS TO BELIEVE ECONOMISTS QUAKE AT THE PROSPECT OF DEFLATION.
A foolish girl with false logic:
Quote: Krystell Sidwell, wife of Aston Villa midfielder Steve, has hit back at Chelsea boss Luiz Felipe Scolari's claims that too many WAGs (wives and girlfriends) are flash party girls who lust the limelight. (Daily Star)
She does not realize she is irrational and speaking un-righteously to be judged.
Scolari did not say ALL WAGs or she was a flash party girl and so she is being sensitive and paranoid lashing out at Scolari. She identified with WAGs but felt she is not in that mould and being emotional, disliking or angered, she does not realize she has no case to lash out or verbally attack Scolari with kamma attached.
Lashing out is conditioning, is a form of attacking and so she is not going to heaven, even if she is right. As a result of repeated attacking others, many today are like the crab which cannot stop itself from snapping at whatever provocation.
No comments:
Post a Comment