This Guy I Know

A guy I know has had hepc since 1972, never any symptoms after first six months. drank oplenty till 1980 when his kid was born - hard to drink much and get up four times a nite  and go to work. They didn't even know about c until about 85, which is why so many were infected from transfusions and the like. Very common amongst our cohort, the wild generation, whooo! He was actually diagnosed from donating blood after they started testing it. Did interferon when it became available around 2000, didn't take, still no symptoms. When the doctor said to quit, no problem because he was already bored w/chili, but I heard it's not so easy for some folks. Now they have a sure cure, but I'm skeptical, waiting to see some realtime results, do not trust the medical system at all. Diet and exercise if he ever develops any willpower. He actually talks to his liver, "hang on, buddy, we're in this together".

This other guy, Dave, was legendary. Sometimes drink beer all night, no sleep and go to work at metro, fucking ironman, but lost all his friends and daughter. A rough road. He had some kind of childhood disease that was supposed to take him out so he just didn't give a shit. If you opened his box, right now, he'd tell you he didn't have a problem. stupid juice, like I said. Without booze the Irish would probably control the world instead of YNW.

I had read early on that regular daily drinking was worse than binging for the liver, takes about three days to clear the fat that causes cirrhosis, so I'd always knock off for a while, which is why I'm still around, but we both know it's because of the blessed virgin, maybe not, maybe she just feels a little guilty for letting the kid run wild. He would have made a good rabbi or at least a good carpenter, give her a lot of grandchildren,  but NO, he had to go fucking with the Sanhedrin mafia and hang with the hippies and skanks, couldn't stand no water and god forbid his no good friends go without loaves and fishes for one afternoon. Husband no help, always saying it didn't come from his side of the family. What's a mother to do?

Nothing to It!

I was a big Grayson fan when he was going after the Fed/wall street. Then he was unelected. Then he was reelected and is doing some good work, but noticeably not in the area of finance. Hmmn - who was that other guy in NY, the attny general I believe that went after the banksters, had a  "girlfriend problem", now he's on the teevee, I don't watch too much, but I'm guessing he's not dealing with finance either. I guess there wasn't anything to it, but it's better than waking up with a horse head in your bed, hey Robin? and no bankers even went to trial (except some dot-head that was convicted of insider trading by the metadata on his cell phone, musta been a furrin terrist). Hummnahummna; I'm humming so much - I wish I was more flexible.

I'm starting to sound a little like that nut Ron Paul. I must be some kind of conspiracy theorist. Better stick to the important issues like the Mideast and the government shutdown; the ability to conjour trillions of fedbux and give it to your friends couldn't be anything but good if everyone gets health insurance and a free phone, amirite? better stick to the script unless you want to be called a nut and riduculed by New Republic and Senator McCain. These things tend to work themselves out, don't they? Don Quixote, call your office.

It Usually Begins with Moldbug

I’ve been meaning to write something simply outlining my limited understanding of NR in the short period since I discovered that moldbuggery had started to expand exponentially after UR began to sputter when he became a father. I had been quite startled to randomly discover an unexplained reference to the Cathedral and realize that it had actually escaped to the wild and had begun to grow and mutate and seemingly mingle DNA with WN and alt-right. I think the biological equivalent is called a chimera [Journal of Chimerical Theory - recall most mutations do not survive, but I don't think it's too early to say "It lives!"]

I’ve been quite happy swinging casually from link to link but have been looking for a more structured or formal collection of sources as the chrome bookmark system seems to be very rudimentary. I had come across this graphic representation of the antiversity previously, but typically lost the URL to the void, but was fortunate to blunder back to find the author is contemplating just such a structure. It is exciting to watch this develop and I hope that it gains sufficient strength before the townspeople (how I hate them) gather with the torches and pitchforks. Usually by the time I find out about something it’s already passed, but since it’s not really something new but more rediscovered, I’m pitching  something crypto-lovecraftian along the lines of “Arkham Antiversity Journal of Unicameral Theory and Applied Practice with Syllabus of Archaic and Obscure Political Knowledge”. Or if that’s too long, “The New Necronomichronical Review”.

No Good Deed

...so the young motorcyclist gets to heaven, and St. Peter says "Welcome son, you had a good life and your unfortunate departure has done much good for your brothers and sisters. Your liver was donated to a beloved rock star who could continue to entertain his fans. Your lungs went to a beautiful young girl who remains the delight of her family and will someday do great things. Your kidneys went to a nice granny lady, beloved of her large family and now able to enjoy life without painful and expensive dialysis. Your donations have done much good, and have balanced out your otherwise misspent life and qualified you spend eternity in the joyful presence of the Lord!"

"Far out, man! Who got my heart?"

(awkward silence)

send em a coupla bux awready

Antiwar.com debunks the lies as soon as they're uttered – that's our job. The War Party is doing its damnedest to drag us into yet another war in the Middle East – but Antiwar.com is right there, refuting their war propaganda 24/7. But we can't do it without your help. Please make your tax-deductible donation today.

From the Vicar of Wakefield

Oliver Goldsmith, Chap. XIX, pg. 197

"The defcription of a perfon difcontented with the prefent government, and apprehenfive of the lofs of our liberties."

"...Liberty, Sir, liberty is the Briton's boast, and by all my coal mines in Cornwall, I reverence its guardians [political publications]."
   "Then it is to be hoped," cried I, "you reverence the king."
   "Yes," returned my entertainer, "when he does what we would have him; but if he goes on as he has done of late, I'll never trouble myself more with his matters. I say nothing. I think only. I could have directed some things better. I don't think there has been a sufficient number of advisors; he should advise with every person willing to give him advice, and then we should have things done in another manner."
   "I wish," cried I, "that such intruding advisers were fixed in the pillory. It should be the duty of honest men to assist the weaker side of our constitution, that sacred power that has for some years been every day declining, and losing its due share of influence in the state. But these ignorants still continue the cry of liberty, and if they have any weight basely throw it into the subsiding scale." 
   "How," cried one of the ladies, "do I live to see one so base, so sordid, as to be an enemy of liberty, and a defender of tyrants? Liberty, that sacred gift of heaven, that glorious privilege of Britons!"
"Can it be possible," cried our entertainer, "that there should be any found at present advocates for slavery? Any who are meanly giving up the privileges of Britons? Can any, Sir, be so abject?"
   "No, sir," replied I, "I am for liberty, that attribute of Gods! Glorious liberty! that theme of modern declamation. I would have all men kings. I would be a king myself We have all naturally an equal right to the throne; we are all originally equal. This is my opinion, and was once the opinion of a set of honest men who were called Levellers. They tried to to erect themselves into a community, where all should be equally free. But, alas! it would never answer; for there were some among them stronger, and some more cunning than others, and these became masters of the rest; for as sure as your groom rides your horses, because he is a cunninger animal than they, so surely will the animal that is cunninger or stronger than he, sit upon his shoulders in turn. Since then it is entailed upon humanity to submit, and some are born to command, and others to obey, the question is, as there must be be tyrants, whether it is better to have them in the same house with us, or in the same village, or still farther off, in the metropolis. Now, Sir, for my own part, as I naturally hate the face of the tyrant, the farther off he is removed from me the better pleased am I. The generality of mankind also are of my way of thinking, and unanimously created one king, whose election at once diminishes the number of tyrants, and puts tyranny at the greatest distance from the greatest number of people.
   Now those who were tyrants themselves before the election of one tyrant, are naturally averse to a power raised over them, and whole weight must ever lean heaviest on the subordinate orders. It is in the interest of the great, therefore, to diminish kingly power as much as possible, because whatever they take from it is naturally restored to themselves; and all they have to do in a state is to undermine a single tyrant, by which they resume their primaeval authority. Now a state may be so constitutionally circumstanced, its laws may be so disposed, and its men of opulence so minded, as all to conspire to carry on this business of undermining monarchy. If the circumstances of the state be such, for instance, as to favor the accumulation of wealth, and make the opulent still more rich, this will encrease their strength and their ambition. But an accumulation of wealth must necessarily be the consequence in a state when more riches flow in from external commerce, than arise from internal industry; for external commerce can only be managed to advantage by the rich, and they have also at the same time all the emoluments arising from internal industry; so that the rich, in such a state, have two sources of wealth, whereas the poor have but one. Thus wealth in all commercial states is found to accumulate, and such have hitherto in time become aristocratical. Besides this, the very laws of a country may contribute to the accumulation of wealth; as when those natural ties that bind the rich and the poor together are broken, and it is ordained that the rich shall only marry among each other; or when the learned are held unqualified to serve their country as counsellors merely from a defect of opulence, and wealth is thus made the object of a wise man's ambition; by these means I say, and such means as these, riches will accumulate. The possessor of accumulated wealth, when furnished with the necessaries and pleasures of life, can employ the superfluity of fortune only in purchasing power. That is differently speaking, in making dependants, in purchasing the liberty of the needy or the venal, of men who are willing to bear the mortification of contiguous tyranny for bread. Thus each very opulent man generally gathers round him a circle of the poorest of the people; and the polity abounding in accumulate wealth, may be compared to a Cartesian system, each orb with a vortex of its own. Those, however, who are willing to move in a great man's vortex, are only such as must be slaves, the rabble of mankind, whose souls and whose education are adapted to servitude, and who know nothing of liberty except the name. But there must still be a large number of the people without the sphere of the opulent man's influence, namely, that order of men which subsists between the very rich and the very rabble; those men who are possest of too large fortunes to submit to the neighboring man in power, and yet are too poor to set up for tyranny themselves. In this middle order of mankind are generally to be found all the arts, wisdom, and virtues of society.  This order alone is known to be the true preserver of freedom, and may be called the People.
   Now it may happen that this middle order of mankind may lose all its influence in a state, and its voice be in a manner drowned in that of the rabble; for if the fortune sufficient for qualifying a person at present to give his voice in state affairs, be ten times less than was judged sufficient upon forming the constitution, it is evident that greater numbers of the rabble will be introduced into the political system, and they ever moving in the vortex of the great, will follow where greatness shall direct. In such a state, therefore, all that the middle order has left, is to preserve the prerogative and privileges of the one principal tyrant with the most sacred circumspection. For he divides the power of the rich, and calls off the great from falling with tenfold weight on the middle order placed beneath them. The middle order may be compared to a town of which the opulent are forming a siege, and which the tyrant is is hastening to relieve. While the besiegers are in dread of the external enemy, it is but natural to offer the townsmen the most specious terms; to flatter them with sounds, and amuse them with privileges: but if they once defeat the tyrant, the walls of the town will be but a small defence to its inhabitants. What they may expect, may be seen by turning our eyes to Holland, Genoa, or Venice, where the laws govern the poor, and the rich govern the law. I am then for, and would die for, monarchy, sacred monarchy; for if there be anything sacred amongst men, it must be the the anointed sovereign of his people, and every diminution of his power in war, or in peace, is an infringement upon the real liberties of the subject. The sounds of liberty, patriotism, and Britons, have already done much, it is to be hoped that the true sons of freedom will prevent their ever doing more. I have known many of those bold champions of liberty in my time, yet do I not remember one that was not in his heart and in his family a tyrant."

One Ring to Rule Them All

The bionic mosquito takes a very hard-assed approach to banking; Why Not a Free Market in Money?  He argues that all commerce, including banking can be self-regulating based on voluntary agreements "with the requisite condition that members within the society by-and-large respect the non-aggression principle." No regulation necessary. I'm in complete agreement, except I should throw in that it will only happen in the very unlikely event that the present masters of the universe allow it to be taken from their cold, dead hands. Hope in one hand...

I've been puzzled for quite a while about two features of modern banking that don't fit together in any theoretical framework;

first - savings rates have been declining, and until recently (households have been de-leveraging in response to the credit crises) and interest on deposits have been so low there is really no incentive to financial intermediation. Even with extremely low reserve requirements, I don't see how there can be so many small banks, since home loans, after the death of traditional S&L's are usually originated by specialized mortgage bankers and small and medium consumer loans are (I'm guessing here) mostly done on charge cards. So I gather that  retail banks are making their money on large consumer loans such as autos, and lines of credit to small businesses. This is understandable, but where I live in suburban Washington D.C. there seems to be a bank on every corner, most of which no one ever heard of five years ago. It seems to me that this model could only work without real competition, meaning that these banks are essentially franchises of the Fed, a cartel where risk and reward are controlled and averaged out. Anything like a free market would eliminate 90% or more. Scary to the bankers. Almost nobody likes risk if a guaranteed small return is sufficient.

Secondly, credit cards are essentially zero-reserve loans, each purchase is made with "thin air" money up to the individual's credit limit and backed by nothing more than the merchant's trust that VISA will pay. I suppose it's not considered inflationary because much of it is extinguished month to month, but the total amount has got to be huge. I imagine it's close to FRB levels before Permanent QE. [I really should do some research before I post this. I really should floss more often, too]. This does seem very "free market" to me, because there is a circle of anonymous trust between the customer, the vendor and the bank that simply didn't exist with traditional banknotes - checks. It is higher velocity even than cash because of added protection from vendor fraud. I think this is close to free banking except that I strongly suspect it is also cartelized at the top. There was Visa, MC, and American Express which wasn't really credit (payable on receipt) and I think on the way out. A thinly disguised "natural monopoly" due to very high barrier to entry; it would be almost impossible for a new competitor to bootstrap that level of trust, except by an enormous player. I guess will see when "they" decide to let Morgan or Citi do a Lehman in the next crisis and we all get our GS cards, probably RFI implants.   That is a little scary.