this about sums up Corporate America. Add 25+ people, 2 committees, 2 office locations, and 14 government cars and that's how Government in America would handle the same situation and get same outcome.
Even though, I too believe this, and people have been preaching it for years, I am starting to question if it even matters.
It's just one facet of what's wrong with government control.
And since they print money willy nilly, and our country is supposedly in debt anyway, I don't see why anyone should care where they money in Social Security is coming from.
SSN is another conversation entirely - talking about people retiring after 20 years with ridiculous lifetime pay, then getting rehired as consultant at 2x the pay and a free car... this happens ALL THE TIME YOU'D BE SHOCKED... retired people making 2-6 times what they ever made working... NOT ALL.. but far too many.
At the employee level, you're told to document everything and keep records (following procedures, sorting and storing records in a certain way, etc.) so that you can be replaced easily.
At the C-suite level, you purposely don't do that. Everything is kept in your head or your private journal. If they sack you, all the information is lost unless they pay you as a consultant, in which case you drip feed it back to them!
no kidding - ever hear of the BART Janitor who made $328K a year.. he got to retire including that number in his calculation... making $150/YR now for life... retired as a janitor.. WTF.. this is why we can't have nice things - oh and he works full time at another city job now.. AND IT DOESNT' AFFECT HIS RETIRMENT!!
It's actually worse than that. They don't hate us and our country, they just don't care about either. I'd rather face an enemy intent on my destruction because it gets the ball rolling one way or the other. Indifference will just prolong the current situation until the bagholder looks down and finds nothing in his bag, then it all goes to shit in chaotic fashion.
Eh, no. Easily 60% of the top 100 market cap companies would usher in a regime far left of Biden, open the borders and eliminate representation tomorrow if they could.
But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.
I think that's a little bit unfair, in that it's not like you'll find anything that's much better. All the infringements that have been made are not made because of flaws in the Constitution so much as because of people arguing and misinterpreting it in bad faith. I worry that to make it more explicit would just create a different host of problems, too, in that the more explicit something becomes, the fewer situations it can cover (generally speaking).
So yes, the Constitution was "powerless," but only in the sense that it was not obeyed. It's not like you could solve that problem unless you could actually endow the paper itself with sentience, purpose, and the literal, physical power to enforce itself. It's easy to say that it's not fit to exist, but what's the better version?
In the long run, there is no such thing, and can be no such thing, as "limited government," because once someone is accepted by others as a rightful master, and believes himself to have the moral right to rule, there will be nothing and no one "above" him with the power to restrain him.
Yeah, regardless of whether or not you agree that Anarchism/Voluntarism is a sustainable destination, it's certainly the correct direction from where we are now.
I too would like to be a little closer to that as a direction, but it's not an END.
It basically will always face death if taken to an extreme because collectivists will use their numbers against you, even if you outnumber them in total they will be concentrated.
Like, imagine a million tiny nations vs a neo USSR. And the tiny nations have no taxes and thus no air force, and the USSR isn't trying to just enslave them, but to kill them all with gas attacks from the high stratosphere so they can colonize.
Based on all of human history. Our natural state was anarchy, and in every single case it has ended in a government of varying degrees of size and rigidity.
Tell me, if the quote about limited government always failing to a "rightful master" is true, then what about anarchy stops that from happening? A community organizes under a charismatic individual or body of such individuals, and it will grow. That is far more inevitable than the idea that the laws limiting government will always be violated and discarded.
Our natural state was the opposite of anarchy. "Rulers" by force and might have conquered throughout history, and that has rarely if ever changed.
Anarchy would put the power of legitimized violence into the hands of people, and disperse power among many, forming a decentralized collection of individuals and groups without dictator. This has never been accomplished, so there is no historical precedent for examination. What would follow from it is pure speculation. But my speculation is that balances of power could be maintained between many decentralized groups, in the same way that, on an open free market, many different firms compete peacefully for patronage.
Whether that balance could be maintained, and growth from various sides thus checked, is an open question. But it's worth pointing out that were it to topple, and a new dictator emerge, we would only be right here, where we're starting from -- under the bootheels of the State. The worst that could happen is where we are now (or where States have taken us in the past 100 years).
Lincoln did what he had to do to preserve the union. But he laid the groundwork for tyranny by dramatically increasing federal power. Maybe it was inevitable?
Frankly, the groundwork was laid far earlier than that when Jefferson didn't dismantle the Supreme Court once the Court essentially decided that it was superior to the other branches of Government with Marbury V Madison. The 14th amendment stripping states of autonomy was the framework for our long slide downhill that was built upon that foundation.
Therein lies the problem . The Founders knew the devious nature of humans and that is why the original intent of the Founders is key. They believed the best government was the one closest to the people . They believed in State's rights.
On the part of the North, the war was carried on, not to liberate the slaves, but by a government that had always perverted and violated the Constitution, to keep the slaves in bondage; and was still willing to do so, if the slaveholders could be thereby induced to stay in the Union.
The principle, on which the war was waged by the North, was simply this: That men may rightfully be compelled to submit to, and support, a government that they do not want; and that resistance, on their part, makes them traitors and criminals.
No principle, that is possible to be named, can be more self-evidently false than this; or more self-evidently fatal to all political freedom. Yet it triumphed in the field, and is now assumed to be established. If it be really established, the number of slaves, instead of having been diminished by the war, has been greatly increased; for a man, thus subjected to a government that he does not want, is a slave.
I would say the problem really started after Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company (1886) when a corporation would be considered a person giving them the same constitutional rights as you and me (1st and 14th ammendments in particular). In addition the gradual weakening of the interstate commerce clause since the early 20th century has allowed to federal government to become the bloated overpowered bureaucracy that we see today.
The distortion of the Commerce Clause has been a very real and distinct problem . It is the Federal income tax that has led to the bloated Federal government we have today . The Founders would not believe the people would EVER pass such an Amendment .
IMHO, it was when the court - reformed itself - under the threat of the court packing plan, and then the new deal legislation / regulation was approved by the court. But even the reformed court, several years latter, so the folly of the new deal price controls, and even that liberal court started stricking down some of the legislation, the sick chicken case, etc. And also the passage of the 17th amendment - direct election of the Senate - made the issues worse - and as an indirect results lead to the creation of the unfunded mandates from the feds (a massive power grab). Marbury was correctly decided.
1860 was a punch to the gut but I think what we are seeing these days is the size of government we had to create to win WW2 is now biting us in the ass.
The size of govt was necessary for 20th century global politics, something the founders couldn't account for at the time. We're still just tribes squabbling for bananas except now the grove is the entire earth and our weapons can insure mutual destruction. Whether we like it or not, our country is "king" and all eyes are upon us until we aren't king. We're far away from the fantasy where the US can just majorly downsize its govt and stop being the player in global politics. Worse than that, the global financial system has been made so artificial its essentially a giant ponzi scheme and each new generation of politics have to be bagholders and get worse at it than their predecessors.
So we can't go back... but going forward is an Orwellian nightmare. What's to be done? Embrace globalism? Or try and stay the course (which isn't tenable).
If history is our guiding star, we're likely at a point where the board needs to be flipped and cleared before something better can bloom. Whether that happens in 5 weeks, 5 years, or 50 years, it's hard to say. Take a glass half full approach, acquire as many resources as you can, learn about how to live without modernity. I mean look at Texas... Corpses are piling up after 36 hours of no electricity.
Just for Lols, this article in Quillette puts the quasi-libertarian spin (UBI + fake job fulfillment) on how to handle the future of Glubb's worldview. The comments at the bottom are gold.
In other words, our national histories are propaganda, not well balanced investigations.
I'm not sure that the entirety of western civilization (or any population for that matter) can handle the mental weight of "well balanced" anything. We are fallible creatures who strive to simplify our lives and every year we move into the future is creating a more intricate world that is favoring specialization at the expense of being "well rounded". With that, humanity is pushing away from personal responsibility and towards accepting their fate as "cattle" in the technocracy(whether they are aware of it or not). We may not have enough "table flippers" left in the gene pool to reset our course :/
Even "unoccupied" land is owned by someone, there's no frontier to satisfy our exploratory, expansionary urge. There's no challenge to travel, pretty much anyone can get more or less anywhere inhabited on the planet in less than 72 hours if they have a budget on the order of a middle class American's vacation.
That's why I think we need to take colonizing nearby objects in space seriously. It gives us an expansionary purpose to satisfy that genetic urge.
Look for similarities and differences throughout world history, seek to understand the different sets of systems, and go from there. You may find people that speak (write) openly on image boards. While there is considerable freedom of speech on these forums, they still have much less freedom of speech in practice than multiple image boards.
If you are sincere and honest, and genuinely care about things, you may find some extremely bitter truths. Be prepared to face such in multiple different ways.
Like who? Black people have been screwed over by race grifters and politicians alike. The Establishment's plan is divide and conquer - and you are acting like one of their own.
Furthermore, The Constitution didn't "fail" in 1860 - The South jumped the shark and left the North without any good options.
Blacks aren't the masters, they're the attack dogs to keep people focused on the racial issues instead of the class ones. They don't have positions in media or finance or even government to orchestrate anything. There is a group that does, though.
We have to PROVIDE data to the auditors. They should be the ones actually doing the auditing. This has been my experience as well. An audit is only as good as the data provided, and if you want to seem on the up and up, just provide what minimum you need to.
Companies need better mechanisms in place to handle such processes, and auditing firms need to actually hire people who are knowledgeable in what they're looking for instead of simply querying the company. But both of those things would actually require effort.
I used to create financial reports from Oracle. I once had an auditor ask me for the specifics of how the reports were created. It's an income statement, not real hard to figure out. Revenue goes on the revenue line. Expenses go on the expense line. Wasn't good enough, she wanted specifics. So I printed out 1500 pages of computer code. She didn't bother me any more after that.
Fuck ISO. It may have been well intentioned but at least half the rules seem to be in place so they can continue to sell iso compliance books and perform iso audits.
However, the current method of "no audits, shit I'll check to see if I did anything illegal nope i said I'm fine" is also bullshit. The challenge is to walk down the middle to allow both efficiency and accountability.
If no one can appeal to justice except to government, justice will be perverted in favor of the government, constitutions and supreme courts notwithstanding. Constitutions and supreme courts are state constitutions and agencies, and whatever limitations to state action they might contain or find is invariably decided by agents of the very institution under consideration.
How can someone like scott be so logically inconsistent? He's right about obvious things and completely retarded about most others. Lol.
Spez: downvotes from scott apologists. Typical. Hes a grifting cuck. He thinks Google is not a monopolistic evil.
this about sums up Corporate America. Add 25+ people, 2 committees, 2 office locations, and 14 government cars and that's how Government in America would handle the same situation and get same outcome.
oh and ridiculous retirement benefits that will bankrupt and destroy your kids future. - thanks government!
Even though, I too believe this, and people have been preaching it for years, I am starting to question if it even matters.
It's just one facet of what's wrong with government control.
And since they print money willy nilly, and our country is supposedly in debt anyway, I don't see why anyone should care where they money in Social Security is coming from.
SSN is another conversation entirely - talking about people retiring after 20 years with ridiculous lifetime pay, then getting rehired as consultant at 2x the pay and a free car... this happens ALL THE TIME YOU'D BE SHOCKED... retired people making 2-6 times what they ever made working... NOT ALL.. but far too many.
And what often happens is the leader gets in trouble, resigns, then becomes a consultant for the same company at 2x pay and a free car.
At the employee level, you're told to document everything and keep records (following procedures, sorting and storing records in a certain way, etc.) so that you can be replaced easily.
At the C-suite level, you purposely don't do that. Everything is kept in your head or your private journal. If they sack you, all the information is lost unless they pay you as a consultant, in which case you drip feed it back to them!
>people retiring after 20 years with ridiculous lifetime pay
How do I get in on this? : )
no kidding - ever hear of the BART Janitor who made $328K a year.. he got to retire including that number in his calculation... making $150/YR now for life... retired as a janitor.. WTF.. this is why we can't have nice things - oh and he works full time at another city job now.. AND IT DOESNT' AFFECT HIS RETIRMENT!!
Study the Weimar Republic in Germany and see where limitless money printing leads .
Corporate "america." They hate us and our country,
It's actually worse than that. They don't hate us and our country, they just don't care about either. I'd rather face an enemy intent on my destruction because it gets the ball rolling one way or the other. Indifference will just prolong the current situation until the bagholder looks down and finds nothing in his bag, then it all goes to shit in chaotic fashion.
Eh, no. Easily 60% of the top 100 market cap companies would usher in a regime far left of Biden, open the borders and eliminate representation tomorrow if they could.
Add a goon squad and you now understand how the CCP works.
Think the USA today and the FBI . We are very close to the CCP , they have their puppet in charge .
Don’t forget all the money laundering in the guise of consultants.
And 120k per ham planet Diversity consultant w Stacy Abrams calendar on shim's desk.
No. They don’t have to do anything at all except for telling the media to convince us that they actually did do something.
This sounds like the election
There is no fraud if you are not allowed to look and audit the election.
If you can't look at the signatures, the ballots, anything... You won't find any problems.
"There's no problem, so you can't look." Seems legitimate... if you're hiding something.
“We asked the people who would be publicly shamed and lose their jobs if there was any fraud, and they said there was no fraud.”
How does one agree 10x more than their capacity to agree?
Print it like our farce of a government or issue them like our farce of a banking system issues securities.
Fractional Reserve Agreement
I think that's a little bit unfair, in that it's not like you'll find anything that's much better. All the infringements that have been made are not made because of flaws in the Constitution so much as because of people arguing and misinterpreting it in bad faith. I worry that to make it more explicit would just create a different host of problems, too, in that the more explicit something becomes, the fewer situations it can cover (generally speaking).
So yes, the Constitution was "powerless," but only in the sense that it was not obeyed. It's not like you could solve that problem unless you could actually endow the paper itself with sentience, purpose, and the literal, physical power to enforce itself. It's easy to say that it's not fit to exist, but what's the better version?
Perhaps, and yet anarchy is unsustainable. It may just be a cycle we're stuck in.
Yeah, regardless of whether or not you agree that Anarchism/Voluntarism is a sustainable destination, it's certainly the correct direction from where we are now.
I too would like to be a little closer to that as a direction, but it's not an END.
It basically will always face death if taken to an extreme because collectivists will use their numbers against you, even if you outnumber them in total they will be concentrated.
Like, imagine a million tiny nations vs a neo USSR. And the tiny nations have no taxes and thus no air force, and the USSR isn't trying to just enslave them, but to kill them all with gas attacks from the high stratosphere so they can colonize.
Based on what?
"Markets for food are unsustainable" says the Agrimonopoly.
"Markets for housing are unsustainable" says the Zoning and Planning Commission.
"Markets for cars are unsustainable" says the sole auto producer in the USSR.
Need I go on....?
Based on all of human history. Our natural state was anarchy, and in every single case it has ended in a government of varying degrees of size and rigidity.
Tell me, if the quote about limited government always failing to a "rightful master" is true, then what about anarchy stops that from happening? A community organizes under a charismatic individual or body of such individuals, and it will grow. That is far more inevitable than the idea that the laws limiting government will always be violated and discarded.
Our natural state was the opposite of anarchy. "Rulers" by force and might have conquered throughout history, and that has rarely if ever changed.
Anarchy would put the power of legitimized violence into the hands of people, and disperse power among many, forming a decentralized collection of individuals and groups without dictator. This has never been accomplished, so there is no historical precedent for examination. What would follow from it is pure speculation. But my speculation is that balances of power could be maintained between many decentralized groups, in the same way that, on an open free market, many different firms compete peacefully for patronage.
Whether that balance could be maintained, and growth from various sides thus checked, is an open question. But it's worth pointing out that were it to topple, and a new dictator emerge, we would only be right here, where we're starting from -- under the bootheels of the State. The worst that could happen is where we are now (or where States have taken us in the past 100 years).
Lincoln did what he had to do to preserve the union. But he laid the groundwork for tyranny by dramatically increasing federal power. Maybe it was inevitable?
Frankly, the groundwork was laid far earlier than that when Jefferson didn't dismantle the Supreme Court once the Court essentially decided that it was superior to the other branches of Government with Marbury V Madison. The 14th amendment stripping states of autonomy was the framework for our long slide downhill that was built upon that foundation.
Therein lies the problem . The Founders knew the devious nature of humans and that is why the original intent of the Founders is key. They believed the best government was the one closest to the people . They believed in State's rights.
I would say the problem really started after Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company (1886) when a corporation would be considered a person giving them the same constitutional rights as you and me (1st and 14th ammendments in particular). In addition the gradual weakening of the interstate commerce clause since the early 20th century has allowed to federal government to become the bloated overpowered bureaucracy that we see today.
The distortion of the Commerce Clause has been a very real and distinct problem . It is the Federal income tax that has led to the bloated Federal government we have today . The Founders would not believe the people would EVER pass such an Amendment .
IMHO, it was when the court - reformed itself - under the threat of the court packing plan, and then the new deal legislation / regulation was approved by the court. But even the reformed court, several years latter, so the folly of the new deal price controls, and even that liberal court started stricking down some of the legislation, the sick chicken case, etc. And also the passage of the 17th amendment - direct election of the Senate - made the issues worse - and as an indirect results lead to the creation of the unfunded mandates from the feds (a massive power grab). Marbury was correctly decided.
1860 was a punch to the gut but I think what we are seeing these days is the size of government we had to create to win WW2 is now biting us in the ass.
The size of govt was necessary for 20th century global politics, something the founders couldn't account for at the time. We're still just tribes squabbling for bananas except now the grove is the entire earth and our weapons can insure mutual destruction. Whether we like it or not, our country is "king" and all eyes are upon us until we aren't king. We're far away from the fantasy where the US can just majorly downsize its govt and stop being the player in global politics. Worse than that, the global financial system has been made so artificial its essentially a giant ponzi scheme and each new generation of politics have to be bagholders and get worse at it than their predecessors.
So we can't go back... but going forward is an Orwellian nightmare. What's to be done? Embrace globalism? Or try and stay the course (which isn't tenable).
Spend the 1-2 hours it takes to read this today: http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf
If history is our guiding star, we're likely at a point where the board needs to be flipped and cleared before something better can bloom. Whether that happens in 5 weeks, 5 years, or 50 years, it's hard to say. Take a glass half full approach, acquire as many resources as you can, learn about how to live without modernity. I mean look at Texas... Corpses are piling up after 36 hours of no electricity.
Just for Lols, this article in Quillette puts the quasi-libertarian spin (UBI + fake job fulfillment) on how to handle the future of Glubb's worldview. The comments at the bottom are gold.
https://quillette.com/2020/09/30/pasha-glubb-and-avoiding-the-fate-of-empires/
ty ty, cheers
I will, thank you.
As I read this line -
I'm not sure that the entirety of western civilization (or any population for that matter) can handle the mental weight of "well balanced" anything. We are fallible creatures who strive to simplify our lives and every year we move into the future is creating a more intricate world that is favoring specialization at the expense of being "well rounded". With that, humanity is pushing away from personal responsibility and towards accepting their fate as "cattle" in the technocracy(whether they are aware of it or not). We may not have enough "table flippers" left in the gene pool to reset our course :/
We've run out of space.
Even "unoccupied" land is owned by someone, there's no frontier to satisfy our exploratory, expansionary urge. There's no challenge to travel, pretty much anyone can get more or less anywhere inhabited on the planet in less than 72 hours if they have a budget on the order of a middle class American's vacation.
That's why I think we need to take colonizing nearby objects in space seriously. It gives us an expansionary purpose to satisfy that genetic urge.
Look for similarities and differences throughout world history, seek to understand the different sets of systems, and go from there. You may find people that speak (write) openly on image boards. While there is considerable freedom of speech on these forums, they still have much less freedom of speech in practice than multiple image boards.
If you are sincere and honest, and genuinely care about things, you may find some extremely bitter truths. Be prepared to face such in multiple different ways.
Because life was better before 1860?
So you prefer black masters now? I never had a white hood, but after BLM trying to enslave me, might be a good idea to pick one up.
Like who? Black people have been screwed over by race grifters and politicians alike. The Establishment's plan is divide and conquer - and you are acting like one of their own.
Furthermore, The Constitution didn't "fail" in 1860 - The South jumped the shark and left the North without any good options.
Blacks aren't the masters, they're the attack dogs to keep people focused on the racial issues instead of the class ones. They don't have positions in media or finance or even government to orchestrate anything. There is a group that does, though.
Meanwhile my bosses successful business gets put under a microscope. Our government is no longer for the people, by the people.
If only our tech audits were so easy to deal with. I waste SO much time providing data for Audits. Ugh.
That's the point Adams is making here, isn't it?
We have to PROVIDE data to the auditors. They should be the ones actually doing the auditing. This has been my experience as well. An audit is only as good as the data provided, and if you want to seem on the up and up, just provide what minimum you need to.
Companies need better mechanisms in place to handle such processes, and auditing firms need to actually hire people who are knowledgeable in what they're looking for instead of simply querying the company. But both of those things would actually require effort.
If you cant see it it means everything is all good!
WHO in China
This
But the media will tell you its Russia and not China
We investigated ourselves and....well, all of you know the rest.
Obvious 2020 election reference lol
This can be tied to more than election fraud. The Iran nuclear deal is like this as well.
Fast and furious, Benghazi, waco, etc.
I used to create financial reports from Oracle. I once had an auditor ask me for the specifics of how the reports were created. It's an income statement, not real hard to figure out. Revenue goes on the revenue line. Expenses go on the expense line. Wasn't good enough, she wanted specifics. So I printed out 1500 pages of computer code. She didn't bother me any more after that.
Fuck ISO. It may have been well intentioned but at least half the rules seem to be in place so they can continue to sell iso compliance books and perform iso audits.
However, the current method of "no audits, shit I'll check to see if I did anything illegal nope i said I'm fine" is also bullshit. The challenge is to walk down the middle to allow both efficiency and accountability.
Is that laptop case he's carrying loaded with Extra Crispy?
That's like employee evaluations at my company as well- where you evaluate yourself. I always come out in great shape. Wonder why?
“We investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing whatsoever.”
-Democrats after the fraudulent 2020 election
Yes.
CEO of Dominion: "I debunked the Anterim County forensic audit of Dominion machines."
The few election "audits" weren't even this good
This is terrifyingly accurate in regard to a lot of infosec compliance.
You sure this isn't election audit reviews in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Georgia or Nevada? Cause it sure looks familiar.
Based Dilbert cartoon merchant!
Ooo a sticky! Thank you mods! :)
That's literally how the DoD/military audits go.
Scott Adams is a fence-sitting weasel.
How can someone like scott be so logically inconsistent? He's right about obvious things and completely retarded about most others. Lol. Spez: downvotes from scott apologists. Typical. Hes a grifting cuck. He thinks Google is not a monopolistic evil.