Random thoughts.... post yours!

Tom

An Old Friend
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Location
Gulf Coast
I also wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~***~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A + B = Tuesday
1 + 1 = Purple

There are a lot of people angry, frustrated, confused about reality because they don't understand it.
It causes people to expect something that will not happen and they act to try to make it happen.
This confuses it even more.

The first step is to try to understand the reality that surrounds you.
This requires looking at it with a clear understanding.
We are taught, all our lives, delusional concepts that attempt to rewrite reality to our own will but it doesn't work that way.

When reality rears its cold ugly head, it scares us or angers us and we start closing our minds to it.
As a defensive action, we despise the reality before us and work that much harder to change it to something we expect.
Problem is, reality doesn't care, it just is.

Most will heap delusions onto delusions trying to make reality bend to their will. It causes constant conflict in how we understand our lives.
Only by stripping away the delusions can we find contentment.

Before someone can change their reality they need to understand the reality that currently exists. If deluded about the current reality, any action plan will fail because the changes that are made will be changes to the delusion and not the reality. The reality will persist, thus, the action plan fails.

When action plans repeatedly fail, we start blaming things for the failure. In this case, money.
Sometimes reality can't be changed individually and sometimes it can't be change no matter what. Laying blame is merely an attempt to understand reality rooted in delusion.

Frankly, I doubt many people can understand the concepts I am referring to and it really doesn't matter to me. There are however, some people that understand what I'm writing and to them it makes a lot of sense.
They do matter to me because they are not prone to blaming or delusional thinking.

Having lived on both sides of the delusional mind-barrier I choose to embrace reality no matter how cold and dispassionate it is. To me, delusional thinking causes depressive thinking and I will no longer feed that monster at my expense.
I embrace reality and change what I can and accept everything else.
It gives me personal contentment.
 

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Location
Pennsylvania
So I'm checking my email this afternoon, waiting on an a particular email from GitHub, and seen a notice from Amazon that my order for some hanging LED 'rainfall' lights has shipped.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B074SJNFC1/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I... I don't remember ordering them. :eek: I remember seeing them last night while I was exploring options for solar powered LED light strings for mason jars but I sure don't remember clicking the '1 Click Buy' button and I sure as heck didn't go through the checkout process.

I remember now why I try not to surf the net when it's late & I'm tired.
 

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Location
Pennsylvania
BBC America is showing the letterbox version of Terminator 2: Judgment Day this weekend. Great movie, makes me want to watch T1 & T2 back-to-back.
 

screenersam

This is news, Vincenzo, NEWS!
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Location
Maryland
forest fires are a natural event. the forest must burn occasionally to clear out for new growth. Forest Service policy of put-all-fires-out is counterproductive. dead wood accumulates and makes things worse.
 

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Location
Pennsylvania
forest fires are a natural event. the forest must burn occasionally to clear out for new growth. Forest Service policy of put-all-fires-out is counterproductive. dead wood accumulates and makes things worse.
Unfortunately most of the major devastating fires the US has seen in recent years can all be tied back to some type of human related instantiation. Natural fires on their own have posed far less danger than those that were self-inflicted.
 

Tom

An Old Friend
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Location
Gulf Coast
Here, I have an idea on how to get a handle on illegal immigrants in any country that is part of the United Nations.

A Variable Fine

Here's how it could work...

Anytime a nation (any nation) has to catch and deport illegal immigrants, the immigrants parent nation is fined.
They are fined for all the costs related to removing that individual from their country. In addition, there is a fine assessed for each offense.

The fines would consist of the costs related to that individual including:
$ Costs to search out that individual.
$ Costs to apprehend that individual.
$ Costs to hold and deport that individual.
$ Lost tax revenue related to that individual.
$ Damages related to persons or property by the illegal immigrant.
$ Percentage of costs to prevent additional violations based on the number of violators reported during the assessment period.
$ Standard violation fee.

That means, all the costs that are currently being covered by the nation's INS enforcers, detainers and paper-pushers that would normally be submitted as costs involved to the federal budget.
All the damaged property, fences (or a wall), any lawsuits from deaths related to the apprehension, salaries of employees, job benefits for the employees and any moneys required to return the violator to their country of origin.

All costs are collected and assessed against the originating nation twice a year. With paper proof to back up the claim.

What I think would happen if the nation is hit in the pocket for violations of immigration laws is that those nations will start doing everything in their power to reduce or stop the violators.

Nations might initiate a "declaration of separation" that requires acceptance from the receiving nation. Every immigrant would be required to have proof of separation.

So, yes, Mexico might cover the costs to build a wall but it will be their wall, not ours. Same with any other country with illegal immigrant problems.

Perhaps the 'effective' solution is to hand off the problem to the nations that are producing illegal immigrants. Let them spend their money to prevent violations.
 

Tom

An Old Friend
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Location
Gulf Coast
If nations can regulate who comes in, why can't they regulate who goes out?
Start holding nations responsible for the illegal exodus of their people and you might see a reduction over-all.
Ya might be surprised how effective it is once it gets started.

Personally, I think everyone should be able to migrate to any place on Earth if they so choose.
 

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Location
Pennsylvania
All costs are collected and assessed against the originating nation twice a year. With paper proof to back up the claim.
There is no governing body that could actually enforce such a mechanism like that and most countries would ignore a "bill" that was sent to them.
 

Tom

An Old Friend
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Location
Gulf Coast
There is no governing body that could actually enforce such a mechanism like that and most countries would ignore a "bill" that was sent to them.
Doesn't the UN have a fine system already in place?
I dunno?
I'm thinking a ratified and approved mandate as UN policy?
Being a UN policy, the entire UN would receive a portion of the fine.
That means every 'other' country not named in the 'bill' would receive a percentage of the fine costs evaluated.

The focus would not be to 'make money' but as a deterrent.
Granted, every country has a certain number of illegal immigrants each quarter.
The deterrent comes into play when one country is fined repeatedly for a large number of violations.
It is expected that such a country, with a high number of violations quarter after quarter will take steps to reduce the number of illegally exiting citizens.

The issue isn't legally exiting citizens. The issue is reducing the number of citizens illegally fleeing the country.
This would inspire countries to step up their border security and take a hard look at the reasons why their citizens want to leave.
It would also significantly reduce the number of people illegally entering a country.
There would be no action against any citizen leaving thru legal means.
That means the 'focus' will be on those trying to break the law.

So, right now you have a country defending its boarders against illegals.
They foot the entire bill for the effort. That is money lost.
If the originating country also works to reduce that number of people leaving illegally, the costs are greatly reduced.
Less money spent.
Less lives in danger.
Less property damage.
Less tax revenue cheated.

The fines are the 'forced hand'.
If countries would do it on their own there would be no need for fines.
But, they don't.
Call it a fine or call it sanctions, whatever makes you feel better.
The end result is positive.
Positive for the country trying to defend itself and positive for the people of the country trying to prevent exodus.

I see it as "DUH, why aren't we already doing this?"
 

screenersam

This is news, Vincenzo, NEWS!
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Location
Maryland
da UN is irrelevant.
if they can't fix North Korea or stop the civil war in Yemen what good are they? a bunch of well-paid suits giving speeches to each other, many of them bashing the US.
we should pull out. we can do humanitarian ourselves.
 

Tom

An Old Friend
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Location
Gulf Coast
da UN is irrelevant.
if they can't fix North Korea or stop the civil war in Yemen what good are they? a bunch of well-paid suits giving speeches to each other, many of them bashing the US.
we should pull out. we can do humanitarian ourselves.
While I might agree that the UN is over-blown pompus fluff it could, with the right mindset be effective at maintaining world order, if nothing else as a communication forum.

The UN does impose sanctions on countries based on agreement.
These sanctions might be considered as a type of 'fine'.
Play our game or we will cut you off. Keep your word or you will lose allies.

Being as there really isn't any other world establishment that represents the majority of all the different countries, the UN is the only establishment that could have such authority to fairly police such an action.

Every country has a certain amount of illegal immigrants entering.
Every country has a certain amount of citizens exiting illegally.
Every country would pay quarterly penalties resulting from this illegal activity.
For most countries, it will even out but some countries have a higher than normal number of citizens exiting illegally. The data that would result from tracking such activity would expose the biggest offending countries to the rest of the world.
Then, the rest of the world could tell that country to clean up their act and treat its citizens better.
 

screenersam

This is news, Vincenzo, NEWS!
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Location
Maryland
everybody is willing to talk but no one wants to put their blood and treasure at risk except for self interest.
except for the fanatics, and they rarely make things better.
 
Top Bottom