Political Disfunction

"If a vice is made illegal..the more it seems to prosper. Take prohibition as an example. And yes...cops and politicians can be heavily involved. First off, they cover for each other ..secondly, there's money to be made.

I think the moral compass, which is largely taught as we are growing up, is the biggest factor in people being just and honest or the contrary.”

Well I think some things happened due to large scale attempts at basic manipulation. Government says, "no you can't do that" so we obey. Gov is going "hey that was kind of cool" and test that out a few more times on arbitrary things like a cartoon character touching its nose the first time it sees a mirror.

at that point we were willing to trust our government. we were small enough that we could dismantle it and re organize if need be and no one was too comfortable in authoritative positions yet to where anyone was difficult to remove. Also, it helped that the founding fathers as I understand it had a good sense of when not to stop drinking but also maintained a sense duty and approached the newly appointed authority as the privilege in which it was intended. This is why they came up with things like a government that switches leaders every 4 years. They may not have been the first to implement that. But they understood it’s purpose in that it was to avoid the "rise and fall” pattens of the prosperous ancient empires who stuck with a king until death and it only took one king to be too greedy or power-hungry or selfish or any combination of poor qualities to single-handedly bring down his entire empire by losing the faith of the people one new law and/or tax implementation at a time. That’s also where we began to understand that we an tax the citizens all we want but that doesn’t make the country rich. it just makes widespread poverty. They thought ahead the same way that I do and I know this because I have a distinct pattern that seems to bug people, or at least I think it does. I can’t help it, it’s how I think and it’s using the Straw Man Fallacy’s logically-sound counterpart (I think people are confused on the difference between real logic and fallacy so they hear the word structure of something they were taught was fallacy and they automatically discard it. the problem is that the people who want to lead are in general not the people that should. they just aren’t the brightest people we have but they are among the boldest which isn’t a useless attribute, Churchill was a great example of it’s use in more modern warfare and leadership. but it must be a secondary. if it’s primary then you have a bulldog leading a pack of pitbulls and rotweillers. you can’t do that. it causes small dog syndrome if it wasn’t there already The bulldog will be forced to think tactically which they aren’t known for doing and if the other dogs respect him they will follow but the bulldog will always feel like he has to prove to them why they should which I believe is something that should be felt by authority 100% of the time. but not in fear of punishment like this case where the bulldog would be challenged eventually and at that point would not be able to step down or the pack would question whether he was ever the right choice or if they had been duped into following a small dog with a dream of a big bone. Point is that what you create is a bully (go figure, right? Of course a bulldog would be the root of that definition as it pertains to canines) A bully with power is a terrible mistake. they will find insult in benign actions and even in acts of praise. Often they have a damaged sense of leadership because it takes poor leadership of someone who is loyal to a fault to create a bully. put this in leadership and you’ve given an ant farm a bully with a magnifying glass. The farm they were supposed to cultivate will only end up suffering in servitude

. So the founding fathers thought like I did. they had to. there is absolutely no other way to do reach the conclusion that they did, short of divine intervention because they had no way of imagining that our population would grow this size. the world didn’t have our current population in it I don’t believe (fact-check needed) and yet it was considered in planning because they made their plan scaleable.in the straw man fallacy you take the opposing argument and you twist one of it’s weightbaring supports just enough to where it won’t hold if you attack from the right angle. its usually by misquoting it or jumping to a conclusion and claiming it’s what they said or essentially because, and this is false dichotomy being introduced, they “can’t think of any other plausible outcome that could take place” which doesn’t mean there isn’t one but that they won’t acknowledge that they could be wrong until you come up with one that can’t be shot down. so then with this weakened version of you argument at their disposal they start holding it up to basic challenges from the angle of weakness but because the misquotation that caused this weakness was so minuscule at the time you probably thought about making the correction but didn’t and in all likelihood you may not have because you didn’t think they would stoop so low as to try to attack the part of the statement they said incorrectly (the must know they got it wrong when every other part is spot-on. either intentionally or if they truly aren’t sure they’d at least know they were making a substituion because they had to think of something on their own to fill the gap. YOU CAN’T ATTACK YOUR OWN SUBSTITUTION! lol. if it breaks you’ve proven that the part you put in is weak, not the argument itself) and furthermore you didn’t think the jury would be so dumb as to not see it. But as that analogy ended with a jury, it is very fitting because you see this in a courtroom all the time.

People can see fallacy but they tend to lack the ability to reconstruct the scenario without the misrepresentation of the opposing argument. so the fallic argument stands as a placeholder which we love in advertising because that placeholder-by-lack-of-challenge becomes permenent and now you ask for a Kleenex rather than a tissue. In that same way people like my parents don’t believe that my arguments that are anti government are plausible because the government got their ear first. and they know the government lied but that most of it was factual so you get this cross-belief that the government is lying on some level so you know better than to believe everything but since that lie is a placeholder story it becomes a scale of truth regardless. so since my ideas don’t match it at all sometimes the view is that the government may be lying but I’m spinning conspiracy theories. Worse yet, the government loves to sit in that area of mental no-mans land. they love that area of “classified” because it gives them a place to burry mistakes because they have had to try some ridiculous psychological experiments to figure out what they know now and honestly, it’s not the documents that might make them look like a bunch of loony scientists that would damage their integrity though I’m sure they don’t do any favors for it. tis really the ones that are so simplistic and silly but had to be done for the integrity of the data that are so comical that we wouldn’t be able to take our own government seriously. i digress, the straw man is taking a different version of an argument and putting it to fire. It’s modeled after something that actually does work in planning ahead. its how we figured out that every element has a boiling point except I don’t typically care about the in-between data until it matters. So I jump to the end and I think the fathers did the same. they tested their government models against a model of their current population and then against the same model, rounding up the worst attributes and rounding down the best ones. (e.g. crime rounds up, tax rev. rounds down) and kept out it until their system was independent of population size. THAT is how you plan shit. You think about the potential long-term. the short term benefits are obvious. they need no explanation. But see, the bulldogs in this world live on the short term goals because they have bigger dogs behind them (people who know their tactics and aren’t fooled by them and who have influence that can tear the bulldog out of their comfy seat on a whim, while authority loves to feel the power by asserting it these people feel their power by giving arbitrary deadlines and parameters simply to watch the the discomfort travel through the ranks as they all shift to conform). Bulldogs are also stupid to know the difference between short term goal and a benchmark. a short term goal is the end of a plan. a benchmark is a point of reflection in a longterm project and bulldogs think it’s time to order the keg. you get back to work the next day and they’re disappointed because you’re back to doing the same thing you have been doing for a while when they just partied to the notion that a stage was completed. they lose faith and give up on valuable stuff but now we’re getting into my own experiences with bosses more so than political problems. going back to the founding fathers they had the foresight to see this type of planning was a necessity. they approached it with a sense of duty to build something that lasts. For example I had mentioned that you can’t tax your nation into prosperity. we tried so hard to avoid that but we had some bulldogs in the whitehouse. (think LBJ and you can see it in the US economically. We are so imbalanced right now because the amount of money feeding into the military is not proportional to the amount of money being returned to society. We know something isn’t right. there is too big of gap where money is simply disappearing and the gov just keeps saying “it’s classified, but we need more”

Follow me down this path for a second. The government has lost it’s ability to look at the public and see anything really. at this point our relationship with the government can be characterized by that of a narcissistic relationship as it pertains to psychology. so what do you think would happen if suddenly we collectively said, “no f this. you’re telling us what we’re paying into or you’re not seeing a dime.” and come April not a single tax gets filed? do you think our government is going to see it’s own fault or come to any realization that hit has gone too far and crossed a line with it’s people? Do you trust that they still have the capacity to see that their priorities are completely out of order and that they will adjust them accordingly? This is typically the part in a contention where facebook people say something passive-aggressive or otherwise insulting like if you do think this then it has some reflection of your IQ. a statement made from a mind no more qualified to make that assessment much less count to the value of it. All I know is that I, myselse, have lost all faith that this would be the outcome despite believing that, from a psychological standpoint, it is the start of a healthy response and from a U/X and troubleshooting standpoint it’s the best way to treat a problem. Sometimes the result you’re getting isn’t a computer glitch its that you haven’t provided everything it needs (crime rises dramatically when finding work is more difficult and offers too little in comparison to working as an opportunistic contractor (will do anything for the right price) and when the fear of poverty and the affect it will have on you and maybe your family if you support one that is when the walls that house ones moral compass begin to Jerhico).

If we boycotted taxes nationally I’m not sure the government would reflect. I fully expect that it will become enraged at the defiance (really it should be impressed and probably in awe of the entire nation actually being united on something ironically, even more so that it would be against them). I think they would resort to doing it themselves. a programmer could and maybe already has written a function to systematically walk through the census and run the numbers to do the taxes for each individual on the list and likely add a service fee in such a ridiculous amount to teach us a lesson. but the other option is to vote to vote (not a repeat, watch) they loke that system because as you can see with Citizens United they can impose a law for a temporary purpose and barely say anything about it while using it like an all-acces key. by the time we catch it, the thing we would have told the government “hell no” on is long since over with and we’re just fighting to prevent future bullshit. so we have to vote to show the government that enough of the population has an opinion on the matter and that will eventually get the issuereviewed by the supreme court so we can then TELL THEM WE DON’T LIKE IT. which, correct me if I’m wrong but I kind of suspect that would be obviouse being that if everyone was cool with it WE WOULDN’T HAVE MADE A BIG DEAL ABOUT IT! See the government does see that we disapprove but it hides behind bearaucracy. IT SHOULD just simply say, “ok, forget the process to enter the issue into the supreme court, the peoples feeling on the matter is obvious so we’ll just address it now.”BUT IT WON’T because it circumvented us for a reason and they need us to continue to accept their propensity to drag things out for as long as it takes to make law obsolete or disperse the rights it gives into other litigation so it’s still there but fragmented. which is why you now need a lawer to tell you if you’ve done something wrong which is a little, “Pot/Kettle” if you ask me.

Point is, through little tactics that we don’t pay much attention to, the very things people underestimate that I emphasise like subliminal messaging, slogan fallacies given to rally us e.g. "If you got nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.” (I said I was innocent of what I’m accused of. i never said I wasn’t hiding something, asshole). its little things like that which are used to tweak our perspective. on their own they are almost totally benign but now they are just particles being added to cancer and at this point I’m quite certain we’re terminal. we can live a long time with cancer but we’re still going to hit the ground sooner than we should.

Do I feel lucky?

No, I mean yes, I mean luck is whore

I after a quote from a movie only a select few will recognize and even fewer will comprehend (take that hipsters) I posed a question so to reiterate:

Do you believe in luck?
What is, "luck?" Can you make it? Is it a force of it's own? Is it an entity? Or purely a
mental perception of a series of events going with or against the desires of an individual?
Everyone has their own application for the word.
What is yours?

I believe I have the answer as to the existence of luck, charm, good fortune, or whatever pseudonym it may take. Regretfully it's not the most satisfying but it makes perfect sense if you're willing to hear me out. I know anyone who opposes the side of the coin I've landed on would have a desire to quit reading and blow me off like any other nut job that disagrees with them. I can assure you, it's worth exploring because I didn't like where I wound up at first either.

I don't believe in luck. However, what I believe has no baring on the existence of a given entity or deity. But this is a rare case where, it absolutely could! As of this very moment luck absolutely does exist and you'll have to come to terms with that just like Athiests will have to accept that for the same reasoning God/god(s) exist. They exist because we built churches and casinos (not to be confused with the relationship churches share with poultry). I believe that if I was the last human alive luck would be absent which is a bit of a, "no-brainer" if you think about that statement for a split second.

"Sweet! Last person on earth what should I do? I know! No cover charge at the strip... club... Well this >blows!" - Realizing that "last man on earth" is not a guarantee the presence of females

Currently, there is a casino not far from me in any direction in which there is road. I am very confident that not one of them is empty at 4:22 AM this Sunday morning. This means that there are people investing money arbitrarily because they believe that in one of the many definitions and names luck could potentially take, it will eventually find time to dance with them. It is that belief, the very fact that someone believes in something so strongly that they are willing to act accord to it's very existence despite it being intangible.

Let's call it the, "Mime Effect." You know that box they are trapped in isn't real. You know that it is merely an impressive and disciplined choreography in which this person who appears to have vacated their rocker for quite some time, now dances around and bumps into things and barely saves them from impending disaster in such an convincing way that it appears that this imaginary environment is actually very real to them and when they look at you from across the make-shift stage that is this nested world of their own you can feel the betrayal inflicted by your own disbelief. They storm right over, moving things out of their way, stepping on the skateboard, picking themselves up only to kick the cat on the way over to you and they adjust their composure, clear their throat, toss the hairball into the fake plant, and invite you into this chaotic room within their household. Can you picture that? Great, because now I want you to rewind your imagination just a little bit to when our mime showed his second symptom of a fractured perception with a quick change of mood while they allowed you into their home. This is very important, ok? I need you to remember something in detail. Please, explain this to me. How did you enter the Mime's home? Was there a porch or was it an apartment? if it was a porch, was it flat or did it have decorative steps? if it was an apartment was sub-level, first floor, suite or penthouse? was it non-traditional living like perhaps an RV or a tent? If it was an RV, Hi grandma, grandpa, thanks for taking the time to read my blog! In the event it was a tent, thank you. Your mime performance has been excellent. If I've missed anyone, I'm curious, how did you come across this blog?

Right, I was going somewhere with that. Do you remember how you entered the enclosed living space? Don't tell me, I want to guess and I think you'll be surprised at my accuracy; are you ready? Lets see, judging by your approximate height, carry the 3, and divide by the average lateral speed of a swallow (Euro, for the record), Your method of entry was....

You walked through the door that was opened for you by our Mime.

Anti-climactic, you say? I'll tell you the same thing I tell everyone else who doesn't appreciate it. You should have seen it from my perspective! lol what I think we can take away from this is that it's always better to give than to receive... Ok I think it's out of my system, this is ridiculous, even for me!

Most of you will have imagined being greeted by a french clown dressed in a 1950's color scheme who paused at the door, straightened up a bow-tie, hair, and posture as well as the obligatory clearing of the throat. he then proceeds to cough violently (I personally envisioned this in such an exaggerated fashion that would be reminiscent of The Mask to the extent of bring a tear to the eye of Jim Cary himself) from which something one can only assume was a hairball is produced. After discarding it in something commonly sitting by the front door in American homes our Mime opens the door and allows you to enter. I believe that will have consistent imagery on average with minor adjustments for different living situations (for non traditional one's, "it wasn't a Mime with his own stage light, it was an officer with a flashlight. It wasn't a conspiracy, you quadruple parked the RV, Grandpa. Just pay the ticket!" and "I'm sorry for waking you so early in the afternoon but it was the only time I had to drop off the Mime costume. But slamming the tent flap on me was a bit excessive. Don't you think?" RV & Tent respectively).

The point is that in the beginning you understood that only the Mime was real and everything the Mime touched was imaginary (at least we hope, not ruling out hallucination. Dude lives in a tent). So you understood that in this moment you could reach out and touch this mime had you been there by you weren't which takes this a level further. In your head, your very own mind is the only place this scenario ever existed. Each person that participates in this exersize will have a different version proving that whatever objects separated you from the Mim were in your head. From the steps, or maybe the absence thereof, up to and including the door itself was all something you placed there. Go ahead, read back. I merely stated some actions one might take before walking through an entry way and that you were invited inside.

None of this was real and yet even in your mind, an environment in which you have God-like control over structure and physics, you STILL followed the course of action you would take in the event that the structure was real. A Mime, even a bad one, only has to believe in his act a little bit and behave according to the existence of various objects and as humans we are raised with the understanding that actions that started prior to those of our own generally have the right of way and it is rude to impede them. We also know that even when we believe a person to be incorrect in a given situation when an act of kindness or generosity or even acceptance is extended from said, "incorrect foundation," it would be considered an insult to reject their hospitality so short of being offensive to one's own beliefs one will indulge this Mime's dilusions if for no other reason to avoid conflict.

That is the entire case. By walking through the door you've illustrated that while believing in the absence of a house/apt/Bat Cave/etc you will still acknowledge it's temporary exisctence for the sake of someone else and not only that but you will physically respond to it. For not being real, you will go to some pretty interesting lengths to respect the boundaries of the object(s) in question and at that point it is still obviously not tangible. But can you honestly say that it isn't real? If you think so then one list thing to keep in mind. You are far from the only person who will face scenarios just like this. As state, other participants will have different environments. but within them most will make the same choice to pretend that a door separates them. If that holds true and can be a sample to reasonably represent everyone in modern society then on that scale when a large portion of the population (not even the majority) believes in something so intangible and so irrational as something like luck in it's many potential forms they will act on it. What they do may or may not affect the chances of a successful gamble. But you might change the way you roll the dice if they win and you might say, "See, that dumb dance you call the, "Lucky Shuffle" doesn't make a difference" either way, you give it attributes. And that is how something that is not real can be willed into existence in a split second.

So does luck exist? Yes, but only for as long as someone in the world believes it does. When something artificial and useless obstructs your path we generally call it litter so I would venture to say that because luck itself has no form or specific function it is nothing more than mental refuse that we interact with for the sake of others.

My opinion on luck isn't that we have a specific control of it or that there is a force acting as a periodic cheat code to bring us a brief moment of happieness in life. Honestly in my experience of life which at this point is no longer in small proportion (contrary to common miscalculation) there is absolutly nothing hcanding out free things with out an agenda of it's own. It works like this. You work. shortly therafter you will have the opportunity to enjoy the fruits of that work or you can continue to work and stash that away for a later time. When you delay your indulgences you don't just end up with a bigger party when it's time to open the floodgates of your vault. You build a foundation and that foundation is a network hub (intersection). If you take the short term gain you enjoy it but at the end you don't have anything to add to your foundation. but instead of throwing the weekly keger you choose to knock back a few while watching the game, you retain the fruits of your labor and it beacomes an extension to your foundation. You can build your foundation in any direction you please with no limits as to how many branches it can have. The longer the branches and the more that you build, the better position you'll be in. beause when many roads converge on a central point it's not just an intersection. it's called a city center. and that's what it looks like when someone walks through life without settling for short term fixes when better can happen for the patient. The thing is, opportunity is merely someone actively working toward a goal. the more people that join, the bigger the opportunity becomes. Opportunity hates resistance so it is in constant search of the path in which the least amount resides. When someone has build their foundation with hundreds of access points, it's not some random entity sprinkling pixy dust that makes these good things randomly happen around that person. They've just made connections and whether someone chooses the path of least resistence or the path of greatest achievement it is more likely that both paths will pass through that persons foundation than the chances of either of them missing it entirely. and that's not even mentioning the benefits of steering your opportunity through that foundation. others will be doing the same and if you've ever gone camping, RVing, or trucking you'll know the value of making connections at these busy intersections of people working towards independent goals. You always come across things others need and when the day comes when you do that is you "Lucky" day. It's the chance to be generous to the extent you can afford. Whether you do so will determine how lucky you are. Not like a karma thing. that would be a mistake. there's no governing body making sure things stay even. Trump is our president. Clearly that governing body has vacant seating if it exists. When someone in need is provided for people get curious as to how that happened. when people hear it was you and that you didn't take the opportunity to gouge the person in need with the whole, "supply & demand" routine. some will come around for a hnad out but you'll find the next time you're in need, you'll won't just have that one person willing to return the favor. In most cases you'll have his network. And when you make it out of a tough situation quickly that's when people start to claim you're a lucky person. But I'm beginning to believe Luck is just a term to use to achknowlege someone elses current achievement without having to admit that one's own methods are lacking in any capacity. In this light, more and more I believe that luck is really more of an insult than an attribute to be proud of.

Travel with me down this for a second. If luck implies that something was missing from the equation of learn+work=reward (i.e. you can make a half court shot, It doesn't mean you've ever played basketball, many know the game but the work hasn't been done to where that shot will be made with any consistency it can work in revers too). If either the education isn't there, or someone didn't put in the work that would usually be required to achieve a result but got it done because someone they aided in the past happened to be in the right place, people call that a lucky break. It implies that you did not deserve the result, does it not? But I don't believe it to be true. I'd say that by aiding that person in the past you did the without realizing it.and by doing so they made an investment. At that moment their investment matured. not luck.

That's my view on the existence of luck and what it all really means. Tip your waitress (unless she's monopedal)

If... Not now... When?

The Obligitory Floor Model

	'IFCASES'=> array('gender' => 'male', 'gender' => 'female', 'gender' => 'mom'),
if($data) {
    //what to do with the first array value
    //instructions for the data after the first array value
    //instructions for the end array value
    //error handling

The Breakdown

This is a framework or built-in function idea. If your counting an array this gives you more incremental control at the cost of manually calculating your own offset but that's partially why one might use this. hence the simplistic ways of saying "zero"

if($data=array(), $options=array()[, $increment) {
elseifaka notnow, as in there's more to this loop template. bootstrap's grid replaces `

GitHub – angelxaces


Seattle, WA

The thing is, I don't really want to write this right now. You typically create ...