Fw: THE FIVE PERCENT GOD

Alice and Miriam,

For sure I don't find any tangible support for the various forms of God as described in the many Holy Books.  Each is filled with hope and desire.  But there is no solid facts proving that one of these many Gods really exists. 

On the other hand, I have experienced some interesting phenomena.  Nothing within my experience explains them.  I am sure that there is an explanation, but it is currently out of my reach.  I also believe that our senses only provide us with a small window into all that is going on about us in this thing we call The Universe. 

Also, I am a Dreamer, with a capital D.  I love wandering off into the "What if" world. 

What if there really are Flying Saucers?  What if people have found a way to travel through Time?  What if there is a faster method of moving through space than at the speed of light?  What if Mary had a little Lamb?  Would that mean the the Ram is as horny as the shepherd? 

 

Carl Jarvis

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Miriam Vieni

To: 'Blind Democracy Discussion List'

Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 1:47 PM

Subject: RE: THE FIVE PERCENT GOD

Alice,

I wasn't talking about agnostics as a group, just about Carl. From what he
said, it sounded like he was quite sure that there is no God, but he just
didn't want to say that. I realize that not everyone is in that place.

Miriam

________________________________

From: blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org] On Behalf Of Alice Dampman
Humel
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 10:20 AM
To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
Subject: Re: THE FIVE PERCENT GOD


Miriam, 
I don't think that is the case.it's not that an agnostic does not have the
"courage of his convictions, " it is that his "conviction" is that it is
unknowable and impossible to prove   whether God exists or not. That is the
primary component of agnosticism as I see it. 
Alice

On Mar 27, 2013, at 1:37 PM, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:


If you're right, you're an atheist, but you don't have the courage
of your
convictions, just like most other people who call themselves
agnostics.

Miriam

________________________________

From: blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org] On Behalf Of Carl
Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 11:30 AM
To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
Subject: Re: THE FIVE PERCENT GOD


Roger,  please never leave this list.  I am absolutely enchanted by
your
explanations.  On the one hand, you cause me to think, an exercise
we should
all be doing daily, and on the other hand, as you march step by step
through
your logical explanations, I find myself grinning from ear to ear. 
You are about the most methodical thinker I've met in a long time. 
Nonetheless, I am going to continue to call myself an Agnostic.  At
least
until I stumble upon a better word.  I place no percentages on
whether God
exists in any form, or not.  I simply see no way of proving that
which
cannot be measured. 
As I've said before, I believe that God had to be invented to answer
unanswerable questions that troubled Man. 
If I'm right, then there is no room for a 5% or 50% possibility of
some sort
of God. 
Of course Believers everywhere will tell me that I'm wrong, that God
does
exist, and that He created Man.  They are 100% positive that they
are right.
But they have 0% proof. 
They would be better off trying to prove that the Easter Bunny
exists.  At
least they can show the numbers of colored eggs that mysteriously
appear
hidden on Easter Day.  Some might argue that the eggs were placed
there by
Mom and Dad, while others would say that a Rabbit came around during
the
night.  The young child can't prove either claim.  All they can see
are the
eggs tucked in open hiding.  And a big basket of tooth decay sitting
at the
end of their beds. 
When the children grow wiser, they figure out just what is going on.

But our Universe is so vast and time is so eternal that we may never
become
wise enough to figure it all out.  So until then, I say we can't
prove the
unprovable. 

Carl Jarvis(the Agnostic)


----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Loran Bailey <mailto:rogerbailey81@aol.com> 
To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
<mailto:blind-democracy@octothorp.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 7:50 AM
Subject: THE FIVE PERCENT GOD

I am just getting on my computer for the first time today and I have
not
yet checked my email. Since I have an off line life it will be some
time
before I do check it too, but I have been thinking about Bob's post
about estimating a five percent probability of a god and I feel
compelled to add to my response to him. First, Let's look at how an
estimate of      five percent probability is established. To
estimate a
five percent probability it is necessary to run at least twenty
trials.
Since we are talking about looking for an event that would be the
existence of a creator of the universe then each trial would consist
of
examining a universe and either detecting a god or not detecting
one. If
you looked at twenty universes and found nineteen of them without a
god
and one with a god then you could estimate that the probability of
finding a god for the next one was five percent. Twenty is the
minimum
though. If you examined a hundred universes and found five gods or
if
you examined a thousand universes and found fifty gods then your
estimate of five percent would be a more and more accurate estimate
and
your degree of confidence in that estimate would increase. In order
to
speak of a probability, though, you must have not examined the
universe
that you are estimating a five percent probability of a god for. I
suppose that is this universe. So why do you not examine this
universe
using the same techniques that you used for the other minimum of
twenty
universes and then you could establish a certainty of either a god
or no
god for this universe? Then, have you examined any universes at all?
The
traditional definition of the word universe is everything. That
would
leave you with only one universe to examine at all. It means that
you
only get one trial and you either find one or you don't find one and
so
you either establish a one hundred percent probability or you
establish
a zero probability if your method is unambiguous. If you do not have
an
unambiguous method for detecting a god and you find no evidence of a
god
then you are back at a probability of one in infinity and that
amounts
to zero. Now, there are some cutting edge physicists who propose the

existence of parallel universes. They are really only revising the
definition of the word universe. They posit the existence of
something
that they call the multiverse that contains all of the universes. In
the
way they use those words they are only calling everything the
multiverse
and the word universe is demoted to something less than everything.
This
still remains only a proposal though. It is based on the behavior of

certain subatomic particles and a mathematical model. They have not
actually detected or examined another universe. Have you found a way
to
examine the other universes in the multiverse? If you have I would
be
interested in learning about your technique and you will be looking
at a
Nobel prize. Then, if you have found a way to examine the various
universes in the multiverse, what technique do you use to detect a
god 
for these universes? That would be worthy of a nobel prize too. If,
on
the other hand, you have examined only the universe in which you
reside
then what technique do you use to establish a that five percent
probability and why does it not establish the existence of a god one
way
or another? Is it that it is unreliable and you must run a trial on
the
same universe many times? Does it show the existence of a god only
one
time out of twenty times you use it. I suppose that there are many
unreliable techniques around that might produce results like that in
a
number of fields, but it would be very useful to look closely at the

technique and see if there is a way to refine it to make it more
reliable. The real question is, how do you determine that five
percent
probability of a god? I will tell you what I suspect and if I am
wrong
then I would be very interested in knowing what your method really
is
and that could also be a basis for a nobel prize. I suspect that you
are
just pulling the five percent figure out of thin air. If that is the

case then the figure has no more meaning than the implied
probability of
fifty percent that most agnostics advocate with actually giving
figures.
If that is the case also, then I would expect that you will try to
justify your figure with arguments like, I just feel it or I just
think
it or it just seems that way to me. In other words, you would be
using
the very same arguments that the proponents of a hundred percent
probability use and it would be just as valid, that is, not valid at

all. Unless you can produce a god detector or at least some way that
a
god detector would work, that is, a falsifiable theory of god that
can
be tested, you are right back to making an assertion with no
supporting
evidence and it will be only one of the set of assertions that have
no
support and that set numbers a total of infinity. That is, the
assertion
of a five percent probability of the existence of a god would have
exactly the probability of being true as the assertion that there is
a
hundred percent probability of a god, one in infinity.

_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy



_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy




_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy

Fw: THE FIVE PERCENT GOD

Hi Miriam,

So, you've found he out.  Houdini Jarvis. 

But seriously, when I find a definition that fits, I'll wear it eagerly. 

Trouble is, I used to declare myself to be a Patriotic American.  That definition turned out to be nothing but fiction and deliberate lies by the Ruling Class to keep my People in submission. 

Then I was a Born Again Christian.  Despite all that my father had preached to me, I embraced God Almighty, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.  That defined me.  Until finally the fog and Bull Shit was washed from my eyes and I realized that Christianity, that All religions are merely another tool in the Master's tool box, just like Patriotism, put there to keep my People imprisoned. 

And so,

God, along with all religion, has been invented by Men for purposes of keeping their slaves in their place and giving them the Right to rule. 

But I can't define whatever it is that began this Universe, if indeed it ever had a beginning. 

I am no longer a Patriotic American.  I say that I am a Citizen of Planet Earth.  But I will not hold to that if something better comes along. 

I turned away from the National Federation of the Blind because Jernigan was playing God over his blind subjects.  I tried to work within the organization but was thrown out for my trouble.  Over the years I have defined myself as a Democrat, working hard within the Party as I had worked within the NFB, to about the same end.  I have been a Liberal, a Progressive and a Radical.  All words. 

At my heart I am simply a Free Spirit.  I can change my mind when new information comes along.  I do not have to apologize for that which I once believed to be the Truth.  While I lean toward Marx, and could well be at least a Socialist, I find that I don't really fit there, either. 

When I directed the Training Center, VRC's would bring a fat folder and place it in my hands saying that they wanted to refer this client to the Center.  "Better read that file.  You'll want to know some of the problems we're dealing with here", they would say. 

I would thank them and set a date for their client to enter our Program.  Then I'd lay the file to one side.  After their initial two week evaluation, where we would meet and get acquainted, I would then sit down and read the file.  It was usually pompous crap.  Words put down to show the importance of the VRC.  Not always.  We did have some human beings working within the Department, but many of our so called professionals were simply inflated hot air balloons.  If I'd read their opinions first, I would have been prejudiced against the client.  I would always be seeing that person through the fat folder. 

Just as we blind people are always seen through that Universal Blind Stereotype. 

Call me what you will, it cannot change the fact that I know who I am.  And I will never again be bound by the rules and pontifications of others.  I will listen, I will learn, as I have learned from you and Roger, and Sylvie, and Alice, and Bob, and Joe, and so many others.  I will alter my thinking, but it will always be mine to do. 

If to you that makes me an escape artist, so be it. 

 

Carl Houdini Jarvis, The Great!!!

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Miriam Vieni

To: 'Blind Democracy Discussion List'

Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 6:52 PM

Subject: RE: THE FIVE PERCENT GOD

Carl, the man who doesn't want to be pinned down or defined, the escape
artist.

Miriam

________________________________

From: blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 8:39 PM
To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
Subject: Re: THE FIVE PERCENT GOD


Alice and Miriam,
For sure I don't find any tangible support for the various forms of God as
described in the many Holy Books.  Each is filled with hope and desire.  But
there is no solid facts proving that one of these many Gods really exists. 
On the other hand, I have experienced some interesting phenomena.  Nothing
within my experience explains them.  I am sure that there is an explanation,
but it is currently out of my reach.  I also believe that our senses only
provide us with a small window into all that is going on about us in this
thing we call The Universe. 
Also, I am a Dreamer, with a capital D.  I love wandering off into the "What
if" world. 
What if there really are Flying Saucers?  What if people have found a way to
travel through Time?  What if there is a faster method of moving through
space than at the speed of light?  What if Mary had a little Lamb?  Would
that mean the the Ram is as horny as the shepherd? 
 
Carl Jarvis
 
 
----- Original Message -----

From: Miriam Vieni <mailto:miriamvieni@optonline.net> 
To: 'Blind Democracy Discussion List'
<mailto:blind-democracy@octothorp.org> 
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 1:47 PM
Subject: RE: THE FIVE PERCENT GOD

Alice,

I wasn't talking about agnostics as a group, just about Carl. From
what he
said, it sounded like he was quite sure that there is no God, but he
just
didn't want to say that. I realize that not everyone is in that
place.

Miriam

________________________________

From: blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org] On Behalf Of Alice
Dampman
Humel
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 10:20 AM
To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
Subject: Re: THE FIVE PERCENT GOD


Miriam, 
I don't think that is the case.it's not that an agnostic does not
have the
"courage of his convictions, " it is that his "conviction" is that
it is
unknowable and impossible to prove   whether God exists or not. That
is the
primary component of agnosticism as I see it. 
Alice

On Mar 27, 2013, at 1:37 PM, Miriam Vieni
<miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:


If you're right, you're an atheist, but you don't have the courage
of your
convictions, just like most other people who call themselves
agnostics.

Miriam

________________________________

From: blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org] On Behalf Of Carl
Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 11:30 AM
To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
Subject: Re: THE FIVE PERCENT GOD


Roger,  please never leave this list.  I am absolutely enchanted by
your
explanations.  On the one hand, you cause me to think, an exercise
we should
all be doing daily, and on the other hand, as you march step by step
through
your logical explanations, I find myself grinning from ear to ear. 
You are about the most methodical thinker I've met in a long time. 
Nonetheless, I am going to continue to call myself an Agnostic.  At
least
until I stumble upon a better word.  I place no percentages on
whether God
exists in any form, or not.  I simply see no way of proving that
which
cannot be measured. 
As I've said before, I believe that God had to be invented to answer
unanswerable questions that troubled Man. 
If I'm right, then there is no room for a 5% or 50% possibility of
some sort
of God. 
Of course Believers everywhere will tell me that I'm wrong, that God
does
exist, and that He created Man.  They are 100% positive that they
are right.
But they have 0% proof. 
They would be better off trying to prove that the Easter Bunny
exists.  At
least they can show the numbers of colored eggs that mysteriously
appear
hidden on Easter Day.  Some might argue that the eggs were placed
there by
Mom and Dad, while others would say that a Rabbit came around during
the
night.  The young child can't prove either claim.  All they can see
are the
eggs tucked in open hiding.  And a big basket of tooth decay sitting
at the
end of their beds. 
When the children grow wiser, they figure out just what is going on.

But our Universe is so vast and time is so eternal that we may never
become
wise enough to figure it all out.  So until then, I say we can't
prove the
unprovable. 

Carl Jarvis(the Agnostic)


----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Loran Bailey <mailto:rogerbailey81@aol.com> 
To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
<mailto:blind-democracy@octothorp.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 7:50 AM
Subject: THE FIVE PERCENT GOD

I am just getting on my computer for the first time today and I have
not
yet checked my email. Since I have an off line life it will be some
time
before I do check it too, but I have been thinking about Bob's post
about estimating a five percent probability of a god and I feel
compelled to add to my response to him. First, Let's look at how an
estimate of      five percent probability is established. To
estimate a
five percent probability it is necessary to run at least twenty
trials.
Since we are talking about looking for an event that would be the
existence of a creator of the universe then each trial would consist
of
examining a universe and either detecting a god or not detecting
one. If
you looked at twenty universes and found nineteen of them without a
god
and one with a god then you could estimate that the probability of
finding a god for the next one was five percent. Twenty is the
minimum
though. If you examined a hundred universes and found five gods or
if
you examined a thousand universes and found fifty gods then your
estimate of five percent would be a more and more accurate estimate
and
your degree of confidence in that estimate would increase. In order
to
speak of a probability, though, you must have not examined the
universe
that you are estimating a five percent probability of a god for. I
suppose that is this universe. So why do you not examine this
universe
using the same techniques that you used for the other minimum of
twenty
universes and then you could establish a certainty of either a god
or no
god for this universe? Then, have you examined any universes at all?
The
traditional definition of the word universe is everything. That
would
leave you with only one universe to examine at all. It means that
you
only get one trial and you either find one or you don't find one and
so
you either establish a one hundred percent probability or you
establish
a zero probability if your method is unambiguous. If you do not have
an
unambiguous method for detecting a god and you find no evidence of a
god
then you are back at a probability of one in infinity and that
amounts
to zero. Now, there are some cutting edge physicists who propose the

existence of parallel universes. They are really only revising the
definition of the word universe. They posit the existence of
something
that they call the multiverse that contains all of the universes. In
the
way they use those words they are only calling everything the
multiverse
and the word universe is demoted to something less than everything.
This
still remains only a proposal though. It is based on the behavior of

certain subatomic particles and a mathematical model. They have not
actually detected or examined another universe. Have you found a way
to
examine the other universes in the multiverse? If you have I would
be
interested in learning about your technique and you will be looking
at a
Nobel prize. Then, if you have found a way to examine the various
universes in the multiverse, what technique do you use to detect a
god 
for these universes? That would be worthy of a nobel prize too. If,
on
the other hand, you have examined only the universe in which you
reside
then what technique do you use to establish a that five percent
probability and why does it not establish the existence of a god one
way
or another? Is it that it is unreliable and you must run a trial on
the
same universe many times? Does it show the existence of a god only
one
time out of twenty times you use it. I suppose that there are many
unreliable techniques around that might produce results like that in
a
number of fields, but it would be very useful to look closely at the

technique and see if there is a way to refine it to make it more
reliable. The real question is, how do you determine that five
percent
probability of a god? I will tell you what I suspect and if I am
wrong
then I would be very interested in knowing what your method really
is
and that could also be a basis for a nobel prize. I suspect that you
are
just pulling the five percent figure out of thin air. If that is the

case then the figure has no more meaning than the implied
probability of
fifty percent that most agnostics advocate with actually giving
figures.
If that is the case also, then I would expect that you will try to
justify your figure with arguments like, I just feel it or I just
think
it or it just seems that way to me. In other words, you would be
using
the very same arguments that the proponents of a hundred percent
probability use and it would be just as valid, that is, not valid at

all. Unless you can produce a god detector or at least some way that
a
god detector would work, that is, a falsifiable theory of god that
can
be tested, you are right back to making an assertion with no
supporting
evidence and it will be only one of the set of assertions that have
no
support and that set numbers a total of infinity. That is, the
assertion
of a five percent probability of the existence of a god would have
exactly the probability of being true as the assertion that there is
a
hundred percent probability of a god, one in infinity.

_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy



_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy




_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy


_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy

There is still hope

    There is still hope. 

 

Yesterday Cathy and I chatted with a Third Grade Class at the Chimacum elementary school.  That's a small community near Port Townsend. 

The class is studying Helen Keller and Louis Braille, as part of their Disability Awareness class. 

What a refreshing experience!  The class consists of 24 8 year olds, a very charming and energetic teacher named Mary, and an older woman working as a teacher's aid. 

Bright, inquisitive, eager young minds.  Very polite and well mannered.  Cathy and I talked with them for a very few minutes, setting the tone, and then just let the questions and conversation take us where it would.  We brought just enough "gadgets" to demonstrate how blind people adapt their lack of sight to function in a world made for sight. 

Of course there were the usual questions that young people always ask, "How did you get blind?", "Do you see nothing but black?", "How do you know when it's morning?" 

But these children also got into questioning how it felt to be blind.  I had begun our conversation by asking, "Will the blind people in the room please clap your hands so I'll know where you are?" 

Of course I was the only one who clapped.  "This is how it is for most of us blind people," I told them.  "We are usually the only blind person in the room." 

A girl asked, "How does that make you feel?  Do you feel left out, being the only blind person in the room?" 

"I don't feel left out now," I told her, "But of course there are times when being blind does set me apart.  Think of how you'd feel if you were the only girl in a room full of boys." 

"Ugh!", she declared. 

"But mostly it would be okay, wouldn't it?" I suggested. 

"No way!" she said firmly. 

Alright, we had better move on. 

When the 45 minutes were over we had just begun.  But the children had to head for their computer class.  The teacher said they had volunteers waiting to work with the children in small groups. 

But they all insisted that we would agree to come back when they had finished their class on disabilities, and they would have more questions. 

And then we stood up to leave and a crowd of happy children all trouped up to give both of us big hugs. 

As we clambered back into our truck I said to Cathy, "There is our future.  And I think it's in good hands." 

 

Carl Jarvis

 

 

US Congress prepares new,trade sanctions against Iran

Subject: Re: US Congress prepares new,trade sanctions against Iran

Did you ever notice that God anoints the guy with the biggest bomb?

First of all, who declared the United States the world's Enforcer? 

Secondly, as Peace keepers, the US is doing about as good a job as they are doing at home with their War on Drugs, or War on Poverty. 

Thirdly, isn't it a fact that the ones most hurt by sanctions are the very poor, the elderly, the children and the disabled? 

Good going US, at least you are consistent, doing to others exactly what you do to your own. 

 

Carl Jarvis

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Roger Loran Bailey

To: Blind Democracy Discussion List

Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 5:28 PM

Subject: US Congress prepares new,trade sanctions against Iran

http://www.themilitant.com/2013/7710/771054.html
The Militant - March 18, 2013 -- US Congress prepares new trade
sanctions against Iran
The Militant (logo)

Vol. 77/No. 10 March 18, 2013


US Congress prepares new
trade sanctions against Iran

BY LOUIS MARTIN
In a display of bipartisan unity, Congress is preparing to further
expand U.S. sanctions against Iran to what would amount to "a commercial
trade embargo
if fully carried out," according to the New York Times.

For years, Washington has waged a campaign to force Tehran to abandon
its program of nuclear research, which the U.S. government and its
allies say is
geared toward making nuclear weapons. The Iranian government maintains
its program is for power generation and medical purposes.

Republican Rep. Ed Royce from California, who is chairman of the House
Foreign Affairs Committee, and Rep. Eliot Engel from New York, the
committee's ranking
Democrat, jointly introduced legislation Feb. 27 "intended to prevent
Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons ability," the Times reported.

The measure would expand the list of blacklisted Iranian companies to
all those under government management and potentially freeze Iran's
foreign bank
assets held in euros, one of its few remaining ways to repatriate
profits from foreign trade.

Two days later, Senators Lindsey Graham, a Republican, and Democrat
Roberto Menendez, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
introduced a
resolution stating, "The United States government should stand with
Israel and provide diplomatic, military and economic support" in the
event Tel Aviv
takes military action against Iran. President Barack Obama is expected
to visit Israel for the first time as president later this month.

At the same time, talks on Iran's nuclear program resumed Feb. 26-27
between Tehran and representatives of the U.N. Security Council—China,
France, Russia,
the U.K. and the U.S.—and Germany. Held in Almaty, Kazakhstan, Central
Asia, these were the first such talks since June last year.

"Threatening Iran is not going to work," Mohammad Khazaee, Iran's
ambassador to the U.N., told CNN March 3. "As soon as you say, 'We are
ready to talk
to you and work with you, but at the same time, we punish you and put
pressure on you and your people'—Iran cannot accept that."

Meanwhile, another set of sanctions adopted in July by Congress kicked
in Feb. 6, blocking Iran from direct access to revenue from oil sales to
nine countries.
Instead, it can only receive credit to purchase goods from those
countries, which include Iran's biggest oil customers, among them China,
India and Turkey.
The measures add to earlier sanctions that have increasingly forced Iran
into oil-for-goods barter deals with its trading partners.

According to a New York Times Feb. 26 report, the six government
representatives at the Almaty talks were planning to offer Iran an
easing of sanctions
on trade in precious metals in exchange for Tehran's agreement to stop
enrichment of uranium to 20 percent purity, shut down its Fordo
underground enrichment
facility, and ship abroad its stockpile of 20 percent enriched uranium
for conversion to nuclear fuel.

Sanctions on Iran's trade in gold and other precious metals were signed
into law by President Barack Obama at the beginning of January, aimed at
preventing
countries from trading these metals for Iranian oil and gas.

Tehran has insisted that before any agreement could be reached, all
sanctions be lifted and Iran's "right to enrich uranium" be recognized
as a signatory
of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Workers resist economic squeeze

Years of imperialist sanctions appear to have their intended effects,
which include not only damaging Iran's economy, but imposing hardship on
working
people there and feeding factional tensions among the country's rulers.

According to a Feb. 24 Financial Times article, Iran's national
currency, the rial, fell by about 60 percent last year under the
combined impact of U.S.
and European Union sanctions.

Inflation is officially at 28.7 percent and youth unemployment at 28.6
percent. In the last two weeks of January, prices of chicken, eggs and
rice have
increased 23 percent, 30 percent and 37 percent respectively.

Bosses in Iran are taking aim at working people, who in some cases are
fighting back.

For example, the Free Labor Union of Iran website and other dispatches
reported that the 1,200 workers at the Safa Pipe Rolling factory in
Saveh ended
a five-day strike Feb. 7 after the employer finally paid their September
wages. This was the second strike by these workers in two months over
outstanding
wages.

The Iranian parliament approved a plan Feb. 24 to subsidize basic food
staples like rice, vegetable oil and meat, the Financial Times reported.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's supporters in parliament voted against
the food subsidy plan, the Times said, claiming "there was no economic
crisis in
Iran." Politicians backing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who pressed for the
subsidies, have been blaming Iran's economic problems on Ahmadinejad's
policies.
Ahmadinejad's second and final term will end with elections in June.

Related articles:
Oppose imperialist squeeze on Iran!



Front page (for this issue)
|
Home
|
Text-version home



_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy

it's class based!

Subject: Re: it's class based!

So the solution here is a simple one.  Lower the standard of living and the average life expectancy will drop, thus reducing the need to increase funding for Medicare, as well as raising the eligibility age for social security.  And a spin-off benefit will be a reduction in expensive nursing and assisted living care. 

 

Carl Jarvis

----- Original Message -----

From: joe harcz Comcast

To: blind democracy List

Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 6:14 AM

Subject: it's class based!

Long life wealth go together, study says . Michael A. Fletcher. ST. JOHNS COUNTY, Fla. - This prosperous community is the picture of the good and ever

longer life - just what policymakers have in mind when they say that raising the eligibility age for Social Security and Medicare is a fair way to rein

in the nation's troublesome debt. The county's plentiful and well-tended golf courses teem with youthful-looking retirees. The same is true on the county's

41 miles of Atlantic Ocean beaches, abundant tennis courts and extensive network of biking and hiking trails. The healthy lifestyles pay off. Women here

can expect to live to be nearly 83, four years longer than they did just two decades earlier, according to research at the University of Washington. Male

life expectancy is more than 78 years, six years longer than two decades ago. But in neighboring Putnam County, life is neither as idyllic nor as long.

Incomes and housing values are about half what they are in St. Johns. And life expectancy in Putnam has barely budged since 1989, rising less than a year

for women to just over 78. Meanwhile, it has crept up by a year and a half for men, who can expect to live to be just over 71, seven years less than the

men living a few miles away in St. Johns. The widening gap in life expectancy between these two adjacent Florida counties reflects perhaps the starkest

outcome of the nation's growing economic inequality: Even as the nation's life expectancy has marched steadily upward, reaching 78.5 years in 2009, a growing

body of research shows that those gains are going mostly to those at the upper end of the income ladder. The tightening economic connection to longevity

has profound implications for the simmering debate about trimming the nation's entitlement programs. Citing rising life expectancy, influential voices

including the Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction commission, the Business Roundtable and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have argued that it makes sense

to raise the eligibility age for Social Security and Medicare. But raising the eligibility ages - currently 65 for Medicare and moving toward 67 for full

Social Security benefits - would mean fewer benefits for lower-income workers, who typically die younger than those who make more. People who are shorter-lived

tend to make less, which means that if you raise the retirement age, low-income populations would be subsidizing the lives of higher-income people," said

Maya Rockeymoore, president and chief executive of Global Policy Solutions, a public policy consultancy. Whenever I hear a policymaker say people are living

longer as a justification for raising the retirement age, I immediately think they don't understand the research or, worse, they are willfully ignoring

what the data say. A Social Security Administration study several years ago found that the life expectancy of male workers retiring at 65 had risen six

years in the top half of the income distribution but only 1.3 years in the bottom half over the previous three decades. In 1980, life expectancy at birth

was 2.8 years longer for the highest socioeconomic group defined in a research study than the lowest, according to a report by the Congressional Budget

Office. By 2000, the gap had grown to 4.5 years. Life expectancy has increased mainly among the privileged class," said Monique Morrissey, an economist

who focuses on retirement issues at the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal-leaning research organization. For many people, raising the retirement age

would amount to a significant benefit cut. Advocates of raising the retirement age say only a relative handful of older workers would be harmed and that

the vulnerable could be protected by enacting hardship exemptions. Meanwhile, they say, with a wave of baby boomers moving toward retirement and health-care

costs always on the rise, the retirement programs are sustainable only if people are willing to pay higher taxes or accept fewer benefits. Overall, life

expectancy has improved substantially since the first Social Security payments were issued in 1940. Then, a man who made it to 65 could expect to live

12.7 years, compared with 18.6 years in 2010. A woman who turned 65 in 2010 could expect to live 20.7 more years, compared with 14.7 in 1940. That trend

helped persuade lawmakers in 1983 to slowly move the age people could receive full Social Security benefits from 65 to 67, a change that will be complete

in 2027. Now, as the cost of providing old-age benefits has emerged as the key driver of the nation's long-term budget deficit, there is increasing pressure

to again raise the retirement age - this time for both Medicare and Social Security. But given the widening differences in life expectancy for people on

opposite ends of the income scale, "that would mean a benefit cut that falls heaviest on people who generally are most reliant on Social Security for their

retirement income. It is totally class-based," said Eric Kingson, a Syracuse University professor and co-chair of Social Security Works, a coalition opposed

to reducing old-age benefits. The gap in life expectancy has widened as the country's economic life has grown more bifurcated. The high-income Washington

region includes two counties with some of the nation's longest life expectancies. In Montgomery County, life expectancy was 81.4 years for men and 85 years

for women in 2009. In Fairfax County, it was slightly lower - 81.3 years for men and 84.1 years for women. In the District, where 18.7 percent of the population

lives in poverty, life expectancy was 72.6 years for men and 79.6 for women in 2009. Not only is life expectancy diverging by income level, but now some

demographic groups - particularly low-income white women - are losing ground. A study published last week in the journal Health Affairs said that in almost

half of the nation's counties, women younger than 75 are dying at rates higher than before. The counties where women's life expectancy is declining typically

are in the rural South and West, the report said. Putnam County shares many of those characteristics. Forests, picturesque lakes and the beautiful St.

Johns River, the longest in Florida, dot the area. But amid that rural splendor there are few good jobs and, officials said, little access to medical care.

Even people who have health insurance often struggle to make it to doctor appointments, complicating efforts to manage chronic diseases. I see a lot of

people with uncontrolled diabetes or who haven't had their high blood pressure treated in a year or more," said Terrence Soldo, medical director for St.

Vincent's Mobile Health, which runs regular medical clinics in Putnam. There are health-care deserts out here.. . . There is a lack of access because there

are not enough doctors around. County health rankings by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation show that there is one primary care physician for every 2,623

residents in the county. One county east in St. Johns, there are more than double the ratio of family doctors, one for every 1,067. The problem goes beyond

access. In St. Johns, residents are more likely to seek out information to bolster their health. Even when St. Johns residents do not search for health

information, medical professionals say they are at minimum more likely to follow doctors' orders. Being more affluent and educated, you are likely to have

better access to information and you are also more likely to want it," said Joe Gordy, chief executive of Flagler Hospital, which is in St. Johns County.

Jeff Feller, chief executive of WellFlorida Council, a state-designated regional health-care nonprofit organization, described Putnam as part of "the Southern

disease belt. With 38 percent of its children in poverty and just 31 percent of its population with even some college education, there is little wonder

why more than a fifth of Putnam residents are in poor or fair health, double the rate in St. Johns. Adults also smoke at nearly double the rate they do

in St. Johns, and they are far more likely to be obese and far less likely to be physically active, according to rankings developed by the Robert Wood

Johnson Foundation. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out," Feller said. You just have to look at the socioeconomic and demographic differences

- unemployment, education levels, income between the two counties - to understand what is going on. This is fueled by poor economics and a lack of access

to health insurance and health coverage. Those differences are compounded by the resource gap separating the counties. With a healthy tax base that is

recovering from the recession, St. Johns officials are in a better position than those in Putnam to address problems. When St. Johns officials learned

of a change in the infant mortality rate, they quickly joined forces with local nonprofit groups to get information out encouraging prenatal care. Cyndi

Stevenson, a member of the St. Johns County commission, said the county has formed similar partnerships to tackle a wide range of problems. The result

is a county ranked as one of the healthiest places in Florida. Putnam, meanwhile, is ranked near the bottom. She added that the county's relative wealth

helps make life not only better for its residents, but also longer. A good economy does a lot for a family," Stevenson said. fletcherm@washpost.com

 

---

_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy

Thinking of you on your 21st birthday

Subject: Thinking of you on your 21st birthday

 

Dear Josh,

 

Cathy and I send you our love and best wishes for good things to happen on this, your 21st birthday. 

Honest, we bought a card, addressed an envelope, put it on the mail table right there by the front door to take it to the post office and get the right postage on it, and then went off and forgot it.  Not you, we never forgot you.  I know that we didn't, because on two separate days as we headed down the road to work with clients, I suddenly sat up and said, "Did you bring Josh's birthday card?" 

 

"Me?" Cathy shot back, "You're in charge of the mail." 

End of conversation.  So I guess we blame old grandpa's failing mind...now what was I saying?...

So I know that you're not given to long, wordy messages, but when you have a few minutes we'd enjoy hearing your impressions of Germany and surrounding country...that which you can see from behind the fences.  I suppose at some point in time they will let you take leave off-base and you'll have a chance to do some sight seeing. 

I think you're the first one in our immediate family to trod upon the sacred land of the old Franks.  My Great, Great, Great Grandfather...maybe I missed one Great, anyway, he came from Germany.  His name was John Ludwig.  Born in 1735, he came to America at the ripe old age of 17, in 1752.  He became a sea captain during the Revolutionary War and later moved inland to Illinois.  My grandpa Ludwig was born there, near the Erie Canal, and then his family moved to Iowa where he grew up. 

In 1901 at the same age that you are today, Grandpa hopped a train and headed West.  He arrived in Seattle and bought a bicycle and peddled up the railroad right of way to the town of Snohomish, where his cousin lived.  He then went to Spokane where he became a Nurseryman for an orchard rancher.   

In late 1910 he met Blanche Alexander and courted the sox off her, marrying her in March of 1911.  My mother was their first born, coming along on Christmas Day, in 1911. 

Of course you know the rest.  Mother and dad had me, I married your grandma and one day we found your mother out in the potato patch. 

But to finish my story about Grandpa Ludwig. 

As I said, in 1901 he peddled up to Snohomish and visited his cousin and her husband.  In 1951, exactly 50 years later, Grandpa hopped a train and came over to Seattle.  We all piled into the old Hudson and drove to Snohomish.  Grandpa clambered out of the car and walked up to the door that he'd knocked on 50 years earlier.  The two of them had not seen one another in all those years.  He knocked, and a sweet looking old lady with pure white hair opened the door and shrieked, "Earl!"  That was Grandpa's name.  They knew one another instantly, and danced around on the porch, hugging and laughing while we all sat wondering if we'd been forgotten. 

The funny thing is, I remember watching Grandpa and his cousin hugging and jumping around on the porch, but I can't remember anything about the day, other than the drive to Snohomish.  It's like looking through a keyhole into a room and only seeing what is straight in front, even though you know there's so much more to see. 

Ah, but I am wandering.  The point of all of this ramble is to let you know that you are loved and thought of on this very important day. 

And think of it, you may be the first relative to set foot on German soil in over 260 years.  Hmm...wonder if it's changed much. 

We love you and wish you the best. 

 

Grandpa and Cathy

xoxoxoxo

 

***

 "We do not inherit the land from
our ancestors, we borrow it from our children."

care and feeding of the Empire

When wondering what the future holds for Americans, remember that the Empire must expand.  Empires, by their very nature, cannot stand still.  They either expand or contract and die.  And in either way, the Empire sucks up everything in sight in a desperate attempt to survive. 

Finally, we 98% are *Not part of the Empire.  We are its fodder.  Carl Jarvis

 

From today's LUV News:

 

THE AUSTERITY SCAM

 

Two stories out this morning show that the proposed sequester/austerity programs being discussed by President Obama and Congress are unnecessary and a scam. 

The first is a piece is about the Empire expanding its operations in the Pacific, identified as "rebalancing."  We appear to have unlimited resources for expansion of Empire, even as cutting social programs is being discussed to apply to the peasants. This is about the "defense" of the 1% at the expense of the 99%, as real defense is abandoned.

The second is a piece from Common Dreams showing that there is money aplenty hiding from the budget even as Obama and Boehner are telling us we are in dire straits, beginning, "At a time of record corporate profits, U.S. 'corporate tax dodgers' are parking more of their profits offshore, taking advantage of tax loopholes to shield billions from U.S. taxes."  Do we really need to make the poor and elderly suffer to protect this abomination?

---

 

 

***    

 "We do not inherit the land from
our ancestors, we borrow it from our children."