Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

[Satori]

Albuquerque, New Mexico, also requires a business to obtain a license to go out of business. Absurd and an aspect of collectivism.

The one thing all of these ridiculous so-called laws and ordinances have in common is this: they are a tax, whether called a fee, an assessment, a fine, or whatever. The goal is to increase revenue to the state.

[Fellow Aspirant]

Voice

Thanks for the clarification(s), written in a reasonable manner.

I was actually reacting to this statement of yours: "capitalism is incompatible with human flourishing."

This was in the report - not my words, but since you bring it up, yeah, I think it's too broad, too.

"And if someone is guarding prisoners or building a prison, they of course should get paid for their labor as well. No one should be forced to work for free, because that's the same as slave labor, and what socialism ends up being when the government finally goes broke and yet people are still clamoring that they have a "human right" to a doctor seeing them, etc. "

Speaking of taking a broad and general approach, here's one of them. Socialized medicine works quite well in many countries, my own (Canada) being one of them. Slavery? C'mon - get serious. The doctors get paid according to contracts worked out with the government. Negotiated contracts, like all unions. Some choose to leave for better pay in the States, but most of them return in a few years. They complain that their choices of treatment practices are too restricted by the insurance companies that call the shots (sometimes literally ) So, no system is perfect, but the American system of for profit treatment has a lot of problems with affordability for millions of Americans.

"We used to have a common morality and sense of local community to fall back on but in the post-modern age I don't think that exists so much anymore."

Yeah, a society needs a certain sense of shared vision and values, for sure. This, I think, is the reason that my country's healthcare, education and prison systems have been able to manage so far. We have a pretty well developed sense of fairness mixed with compassion and common sense. Our personal and national expectations are much more modest than those in the U.S., and I think we have a better sense that we really are "our brother's keeper".

So far, anyway. The inroads made by corporate and individual greed in the last few years threaten this.

Brian

[Fellow Aspirant]

Quote 12 Ridiculous Government Regulations That Are Almost Too Bizarre To Believe

#1 Private Investigator's License

The state of Texas now requires every new computer repair technician to obtain a private investigator's license. In order to receive a private investigator's license, an individual must either have a degree in criminal justice or must complete a three year apprenticeship with a licensed private investigator. If you are a computer repair technician that violates this law, or if you are a regular citizen that has a computer repaired by someone not in compliance with the law, you can be fined up to $4,000 and you can be put in jail for a year.

#2 Business Privilege License... For Bloggers

The city of Philadelphia now requires all bloggers to purchase a $300 business privilege license. The city even went after one poor woman who had earned only $11 from her blog over the past two years.

#3 Funeral Director License for Monks

The state of Louisiana says that monks must be fully licensed as funeral directors and actually convert their monasteries into licensed funeral homes before they will be allowed to sell their handmade wooden caskets.

#4 Teeth Brushing Regulation

In the state of Massachusetts, all children in daycare centers are mandated by state law to brush their teeth after lunch. In fact, the state even provides the fluoride toothpaste for the children.

#5 D.C. Tour Guide License

If you attempt to give a tour of our nation's capital without a license, you could be put in prison for 90 days.

#6 Raw Milk License

Federal agents recently raided an Amish farm at 5 A.M. in the morning because they were selling "unauthorized" raw milk.

#7 Pumpkin and Christmas Tree Vendor License

In Lake Elmo, Minnesota farmers can be fined $1,000 and put in jail for 90 days for selling pumpkins or Christmas trees that are grown outside city limits.

#8 Untangling Whale Restriction

A U.S. District Court judge slapped a $500 fine on Massachusetts fisherman Robert J. Eldridge for untangling a giant whale from his nets and setting it free. So what was his crime? Well, according to the court, Eldridge was supposed to call state authorities and wait for them do it.

#9 Interior Design License

In the state of Texas, it doesn't matter how much formal interior design education you have - only individuals with government licenses may refer to themselves as "interior designers" or use the term "interior design" to describe their work.

#10 Additional 1099s to File

Deeply hidden in the 2,409-page health reform bill passed by Congress was a new regulation that will require U.S. businesses to file millions more 1099s each year. In fact, it is estimated that the average small business will now have to file 200 additional 1099s every single year. Talk about a nightmare of red tape! But don't try to avoid this rule - it is being reported that the IRS has hired approximately 2,000 new auditors to audit as many of these 1099s as possible.

#11 License to Close a Business

The city of Milwaukee, Wisconsin makes it incredibly difficult to go out of business. In order to close down a business, Milwaukee requires you to purchase an expensive license, you must submit a huge pile of paperwork to the city regarding the inventory you wish to sell off, and you must pay a fee based on the length of your "going out of business sale" plus a two dollar charge for every $1,000 worth of inventory that you are attempting to sell off.

#12 Labeling Products with Calorie Counts

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is projecting that the food service industry will have to spend an additional 14 million hours every single year just to comply with new federal regulations that mandate that all vending machine operators and chain restaurants must label all products that they sell with a calorie count in a location visible to the consumer.

This isn't funny anymore

The following short video produced by the Institute for Justice examines some more examples of completely ridiculous regulations across the United States. The video is very funny, but please keep in mind that all of this red tape is absolutely killing many very real businesses....


Thanks! Very entertaining!

B.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by Fellow Aspirant (here)
Speaking of taking a broad and general approach, here's one of them. Socialized medicine works quite well in many countries, my own (Canada) being one of them.

You mean aside from it going bankrupt and constantly requiring greater funding? I don't consider that working "quite well." This is an economic issue that I assume you have never studied in any detail.

Aging populations, inflation, lack of competition, and other factors all combine to create ballooning costs, which is exactly what you have been seeing in the Canadian system and why your grandkids won't be able to benefit from it. It'll collapse before then. Another case of Baby Boomers creating a "we'll pay for it later" system that just ends up screwing their progeny, though FDR's generation in the states also did the same thing.

Slavery? C'mon - get serious.

I am serious. Think about it. Some people (maybe not you, I don't know) claim that healthcare is a "human right." Right? Healthcare is provided by doctors, nurses, etc. So saying "healthcare is a human right" is equivalent to saying "the labor of doctors, nurses, etc. is a human right," which is saying that everyone is entitled to the labor of another person. Do you see anything in this idea of "healthcare is a human right" about how much anyone is going to be paid? No, you don't, because socialists tend not to consider economic realities. That is the primary reason why socialism always fails. So how do you think it's going to go when the healthcare system runs out of money for the reasons I listed above, and yet under this philosophy of "human rights," doctors and nurses are still required to work anyway? Look to communist China for an example of how this plays out. People are often forced to work for wages they have no control over, and they can't easily get out of this situation. In China, people are even forced to move to completely different regions when there are shortages of doctors, since the "collective need" trumps the individual's freedom every time under this philosophy of government.

If you don't mind my asking, were you ever required to take an economics course of any kind? I ask because I've known people who get university degrees without ever being required to understand even the fundamentals of basic economic theory, and I find that remarkable. I suspect that many people in the US, Canada, and other western nations are allowed to graduate with degrees today while being totally ignorant of economic theory, and yet they are supposed to be "well-rounded," "educated" citizens who are expected to vote on economic policies. Economics needs to be a basic requirement just the same as history and fundamentals of math, language, etc.

The doctors get paid according to contracts worked out with the government. Negotiated contracts, like all unions. Some choose to leave for better pay in the States, but most of them return in a few years.

I wonder why doctors in the United States would be better paid? Perhaps because they aren't locked into government contracts. If this is still the case even after what Obamacare has done to our healthcare industry then that's pretty impressive.

They complain that their choices of treatment practices are too restricted by the insurance companies that call the shots (sometimes literally ) So, no system is perfect, but the American system of for profit treatment has a lot of problems with affordability for millions of Americans.

Because there is no moral accountability in insurance companies either, since "religion is the opiate of the masses" and has no value to society I suppose. Atheism is increasingly prevalent among the youth of today too. I'm no Bible-thumper myself but I do realize the practical necessity of public morality in any society. Confucianism served the same purpose in China, but the communists went after Confucianism too, for the same reasons.

Yeah, a society needs a certain sense of shared vision and values, for sure. This, I think, is the reason that my country's healthcare, education and prison systems have been able to manage so far. We have a pretty well developed sense of fairness mixed with compassion and common sense. Our personal and national expectations are much more modest than those in the U.S., and I think we have a better sense that we really are "our brother's keeper".

Pretty soon this will be incorporating Shariah Law and then we will see if there are any limits on this compassion. At least perhaps Canada will have public morality again as Shariah is slowly codified into law.

[Bruno]

A voice from the Mountains- why do you think Canada is going bankrupt over our healthcare system? While I am not saying we aren't in precarious financial situation, just not more so than any modern western nation. You seem to be of the opinion that socialism is a dirty word? I don't want to live in a communist state but I like living in a country that values universal health care. I think that any society that sees its self as a place of equality and opportunity should have a well funded health and education system that is easily accessed by all. If that makes me a communist in some people's eyes so be it.

[AutumnW]

Interesting thread. Thanks to fellow Canadian poster, Fellow Aspirant for vetting some of what would have otherwise passed as 'research.' And Bruno, thanks for your comment.

Btw, some of the most impartial medical research comes out of Sweden....another socialist hellhole There but for the grace of God, goes Canada! In our dreams!

I was thinking the other day what it must be like to be an American and it was kind of befuddling. Canadians have such a well developed sense of 'we' it feels almost genetic.

I feel sorry for Americans, quite honestly.

[AutumnW]

Posted by Bruno (here)
A voice from the Mountains- why do you think Canada is going bankrupt over our healthcare system? While I am not saying we aren't in precarious financial situation, just not more so than any modern western nation. You seem to be of the opinion that socialism is a dirty word? I don't want to live in a communist state but I like living in a country that values universal health care. I think that any society that sees its self as a place of equality and opportunity should have a well funded health and education system that is easily accessed by all. If that makes me a communist in some people's eyes so be it.

Canadian healthcare per individual is much cheaper than the U.S because it is universal, therefore streamlined. Our doctors are paid well. Our nurses make over 60.00 per hour. We have a bulge of boomers that require more care now. This is a demographic problem not a problem with the form of delivery.

Our medical system has many many problems currently. Those problems are best addressed collectively -- and I imagine they will be as our worst nightmare is to endure the nightmares Americans face when they are ill.

[we-R-one]

Hello this thread is not about Canadian healthcare, please take the discussion into a different thread. I've asked over and over again to please keep this thread on topic to no avail. I'm beginning to feel like the intention of some people is to purposefully disrupt.

Let's keep the topic as close as possible to the the title:
Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

[AutumnW]

I can see Agenda 21 working in say, Canada. We almost have this already with nearly all of our population clustered in a few large cities and the remainder wilderness, and some agriculture. Our lives are relatively pleasant, people with guns don't go berserko in malls or schools and we enjoy a fairly high standard of living. So, Agenda 21, you know... It might not be so bad to give it a try in the U.S. Meth addicts could hand the blighted rust belt and Midwest back to the buffalo and be sequestered in lovely treatment centers in mega cities where they would receive massage therapy while scientists worked on a vaccine for addiction.

[we-R-one]

Thought I'd point this out since the topic of this thread involves deregulation of Agenda 21 blueprint...in THE UNITED STATES not CANADA.

"Despite the calls for Trump to get rid of Pruitt, however, the conservative activists claimed the work he has done should ensure his position.

"Overall, Administrator Pruitt has finalized 22 deregulatory actions, saving American families and businesses more than $1 billion in costs. He is critical to President Trump’s efforts to streamline agency efforts in a way that assists American families and the economy," they wrote."

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...re-pruitt.html

[we-R-one]

Back-to-Basics Agenda

"Administrator Pruitt speaks to miners in Sycamore PA“What better way to kick off the Back-to-Basics Agenda than joining hard-working coal miners to celebrate the beginning of a new era for jobs in our country. The coal industry was nearly devastated by years of regulatory overreach, but with new direction from President Trump, we are turning things around for these miners and for many other hard-working Americans.”
-- Administrator Scott Pruitt
Administrator Pruitt's "Back-to-Basics Agenda" reflects his efforts to refocus EPA on its intended mission, return power to the states and create an environment where jobs can grow. The agenda focuses on the three E’s:

Environment: Protecting the environment
Economy: Sensible regulations that allow economic growth
Engagement: Engaging with state and local partners.

Administrator Pruitt kicked off his “Back to Basics Agenda” on April 13 at the Harvey Mine in Sycamore, Pennsylvania. He spoke with coal miners about the president’s recent Energy Independence Executive Order, which directs EPA and other federal agencies to review the Clean Power Plan and revise regulatory barriers that impede energy independence, including unnecessary burdens on coal miners and coal-fired electric utilities.

“We can and we will achieve clean air and clean water and we will also have strong economic growth and job creation at the same time.”
-- Administrator Scott Pruitt

Source: https://www.epa.gov/home/back-basics-agenda

A repeat of Trump's message I recently posted, so let's hope they stick with it.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I'm going to try to wrap this back around to Agenda 21 and the globalist agenda of collecting everyone into urban areas for the sake of the thread.

Here is a UN page on Agenda 21 for anyone who wants to read straight from the horse's mouth:

NATURAL RESOURCE ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Click here to go to these sections:

Agriculture
Atmosphere
Biodiversity
Desertification and Drought
Energy
Forests
Freshwater
Land Management
Mountains
Oceans and Coastal Areas
Toxic Chemicals
Waste and Hazardous Materials

https://www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natl.../usa/natur.htm


If you look at the section on agriculture, you will see this:

Decision-Making: Legislation and Regulations

The 1990 "Farm Bill", the US Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 USE 3101) defined sustainable agriculture as "an integrated system of plant and animal production practices having a site-specific application that will, over the long term, satisfy human food and fiber needs...
[...]
This programme compensates farmers for voluntarily limiting future development on their land through a "conservation easement." The programme enables landowners to sell development rights on their land to a government agency while retaining full ownership.

So what could be so bad about the government providing for our food needs? I would ask on the other hand, what's wrong with the traditional method of allowing the free market to determine how much farmers grow, what they grow, etc.? And why should taxpayer money be raised and spent on buying back land from private citizens for government "development"?

If you read through the UN's own page they are talking about the government becoming involved in many things that they previously had no business in, including buying back farmland from farmers. If the farmer already owns the land and grows crops on it then what benefit does the government obtain by purchasing that land? No one is expecting bureaucrats from the USDA to go down and farm it, are they? It boggles my mind to try to understand how the simple fact of the government owning something is supposed to confer some magical traits that allows greater advantage to be derived.

Does anybody remember how farms were collectivized in China during the communist revolution there, and people were forced to work on those farms to provide food for the rest of the country? That probably isn't what comes to most peoples' minds but that is exactly along the lines of what collectivization on this issues results in, and the only motive that makes any sense for government to get involved in private industry.

In Marxist/socialist/communist governments, they always seek to take control of private industries and turn over full control of them to government bureaucrats. It is a legal means of seizing property and power that would otherwise be a criminal act. They start with healthcare because it's easy to engage peoples' emotions when talking about ostensibly saving people who are sick and dying. But they never end with healthcare, and in this case the globalists are targeting land ownership.

Posted by Bruno (here)
A voice from the Mountains- why do you think Canada is going bankrupt over our healthcare system?

Not Canada going bankrupt, but the healthcare system specifically. I posted an article on the previous page talking about some of the problems the system is facing.

You seem to be of the opinion that socialism is a dirty word?

For me and many others who are economically literate on what socialism means, yes, it is indeed a dirty word. It used to be a much more dirty word before the current state of affairs we find ourselves in, when people were more educated on why communism fails, just as communism itself is a dirty word. Surely you understand that communism is just a more full implementation of the same Marxist ideas that underlie socialism. It's not a matter of wanting to be cruel to people. What ends up being cruel is believing in something that sounds nice but ends up being a nightmare.

The bottom line with either healthcare or Agenda 21 is that the government thinks they can do everything better than the private citizens, when history proves over and over again that this is not at all the case. Government is repeatedly corrupt and incompetent. Private citizens, even if motivated purely by profit, are much more competent and attentive to market needs and values, and competition among them benefits everyone. This applies to farmers as much as it does doctors, though their respective markets have differences.

I don't want to live in a communist state but I like living in a country that values universal health care.

If you read the literature from people like Saul Alinsky and the radicals he used to hang around, they thought of universal healthcare as a foot-in-the-door to more expansive Marxist policies, such as government interference in farmland as you see in Agenda 21. As with anything else, they take what is ultimately an illogical and indefensible theory of government and encapsulate it in the most emotional, heart-string-pulling package that they can, to make it easier for people to swallow. That's what healthcare is for. Then after the government has monopolized that industry, they'll go for others, because why not? As you read above, they want to buy back rights to farm land too, not to mention manufacturing industries and everything else they can get their hands on.

I think that any society that sees its self as a place of equality and opportunity should have a well funded health and education system that is easily accessed by all. If that makes me a communist in some people's eyes so be it.

Equality of opportunity or equality of results? Life isn't fair, and if you have freedom, then there will always be differences between what some people have versus what others have. There will never be a time, if you live in a free system, where everyone is equal in all ways. The problem with socialists is they often try to force everyone into an identical situation (except for those already wealthy, who are exempt of course) and in the process they become tyrannical and strip everyone's freedom away for the "collective good," etc.

Jordan Peterson talks about this subject at length and explains it much better than I could. The bottom line is that no one can ever make a promise that life will be fair to everyone from now on, unless they have utter control of everything in everyone's lives, and anyone with that motivation is not actually looking after your best interest to begin with. For me freedom will always be preferable to a government assurance of "fairness" or "equality."

Posted by AutumnW (here)
Canadian healthcare per individual is much cheaper than the U.S because it is universal, therefore streamlined.

You mean because it is paid for by the taxpayer through enormous tax rates.

Our medical system has many many problems currently. Those problems are best addressed collectively -- and I imagine they will be as our worst nightmare is to endure the nightmares Americans face when they are ill.

While you complain about having to take care of Americans who cross the border I doubt you raise any complaints about having to take care of the hundreds of plane- and boat-loads full of foreigners who permanently settle there and also mooch off of your tax money. For reasons alluded to above I would rather keep my freedom than have a government guarantee that they will take care of everything for me, whether that means promising to take care of my health, or promising to better manage farmland, or whatever else they are promising.

Again I have to return to this idea that somehow government involvement is going to magically make everything better. The government is made up of human beings no different than anyone else. How in the hell is turning over authority to them over lands and industries supposed to actually improve anything, really? Is it because people in government are supposed to be smarter than everyone else? When did it stop becoming preferable for communities to manage their own affairs without authoritarian interference? When did such heavy-handed interference become seem as the best option?

What it actually reminds me of is children who are eternally dependent upon a parent, in this case with the government being that parent. The arguments always seem to boil down to an obsession with people who are completely incapable of taking care of themselves, and are happy to not only vote away their own responsibilities but the responsibilities of their friends and neighbors to the government as well. And then the government is supposed to fix everything while we just sit back and watch, and consume. That seems to be the mentality that's going on and the only reason I can think of for people falling for it, is that they've forgotten that there are alternatives that don't sacrifice our freedom and ability to own private property.

[Bruno]

I certainly think that communism is a dirty word. Communism is a failed idea. That being said I don't believe having some socialist policies in a democratic capitalist society is a slippery slope to communism.

Regarding Jordan Peterson who is also a Canadian, I am a huge fan. Life is certainly unfair and is struggle for each and every one of us. Like Peterson I too believe that the best way to put your life in order no matter what your circumstance is to "clean your room". Personal responsibility is important. In fact it might be the most important lesson to learn while here struggling through life. However, Peterson also talks about our responsibilities to others and to society.
"We must each adopt as much responsibility as possible for individual life, society and the world. We must tell the truth and repair what is in disrepair. It is in this manner that we can and must reduce the suffering of the world." (From his book 12 rules for life)

Universal healthcare and education both help to reduce a great deal of unnecessary human suffering in my opinion. In Canada we have both and there is still plenty to struggle through but I think it gives more people an opportunity to help themselves.

Posted by Bruno (here)
A voice from the Mountains- why do you think Canada is going bankrupt over our healthcare system?

Not Canada going bankrupt, but the healthcare system specifically. I posted an article on the previous page talking about some of the problems the system is facing.

You seem to be of the opinion that socialism is a dirty word?

For me and many others who are economically literate on what socialism means, yes, it is indeed a dirty word. It used to be a much more dirty word before the current state of affairs we find ourselves in, when people were more educated on why communism fails, just as communism itself is a dirty word. Surely you understand that communism is just a more full implementation of the same Marxist ideas that underlie socialism. It's not a matter of wanting to be cruel to people. What ends up being cruel is believing in something that sounds nice but ends up being a nightmare.

The bottom line with either healthcare or Agenda 21 is that the government thinks they can do everything better than the private citizens, when history proves over and over again that this is not at all the case. Government is repeatedly corrupt and incompetent. Private citizens, even if motivated purely by profit, are much more competent and attentive to market needs and values, and competition among them benefits everyone. This applies to farmers as much as it does doctors, though their respective markets have differences.

I don't want to live in a communist state but I like living in a country that values universal health care.

If you read the literature from people like Saul Alinsky and the radicals he used to hang around, they thought of universal healthcare as a foot-in-the-door to more expansive Marxist policies, such as government interference in farmland as you see in Agenda 21. As with anything else, they take what is ultimately an illogical and indefensible theory of government and encapsulate it in the most emotional, heart-string-pulling package that they can, to make it easier for people to swallow. That's what healthcare is for. Then after the government has monopolized that industry, they'll go for others, because why not? As you read above, they want to buy back rights to farm land too, not to mention manufacturing industries and everything else they can get their hands on.

I think that any society that sees its self as a place of equality and opportunity should have a well funded health and education system that is easily accessed by all. If that makes me a communist in some people's eyes so be it.

Equality of opportunity or equality of results? Life isn't fair, and if you have freedom, then there will always be differences between what some people have versus what others have. There will never be a time, if you live in a free system, where everyone is equal in all ways. The problem with socialists is they often try to force everyone into an identical situation (except for those already wealthy, who are exempt of course) and in the process they become tyrannical and strip everyone's freedom away for the "collective good," etc.

Jordan Peterson talks about this subject at length and explains it much better than I could. The bottom line is that no one can ever make a promise that life will be fair to everyone from now on, unless they have utter control of everything in everyone's lives, and anyone with that motivation is not actually looking after your best interest to begin with. For me freedom will always be preferable to a government assurance of "fairness" or "equality."

[AutumnW]

The problem isn't with the agenda, it's with people seeing a natural process of urbanization as something to fear. It's already happening. People are already moving away from areas where they can't make a living to areas where they can. The reduction in population is a natural consequence of having less personal living space, like having to live in a condo they can afford rather than a house on an acre of land. High rises are more energy efficient as well.

It IS sad but unfortunately, it's also inevitable, agenda or not.

Bill Gates was referencing the fact that mothers whose children survive early childhood due to vaccines aren't as inclined to have the traditional ten offspring as a safeguard against high childhood mortality rates. It takes a few generations for this reality to kick in -- but it does, provided mothers have access to birth control and basic education. Gates is not advocating genocide. I imagine he wants to see the lives of women, in particular, improved dramatically.

It would be wise to approach this subject with less zeal and more clear headed reason.

[AutumnW]

Posted by Bruno (here)
I certainly think that communism is a dirty word. Communism is a failed idea. That being said I don't believe having some socialist policies in a democratic capitalist society is a slippery slope to communism.

Regarding Jordan Peterson who is also a Canadian, I am a huge fan. Life is certainly unfair and is struggle for each and every one of us. Like Peterson I too believe that the best way to put your life in order no matter what your circumstance is to "clean your room". Personal responsibility is important. In fact it might be the most important lesson to learn while here struggling through life. However, Peterson also talks about our responsibilities to others and to society.
"We must each adopt as much responsibility as possible for individual life, society and the world. We must tell the truth and repair what is in disrepair. It is in this manner that we can and must reduce the suffering of the world." (From his book 12 rules for life)

Universal healthcare and education both help to reduce a great deal of unnecessary human suffering in my opinion. In Canada we have both and there is still plenty to struggle through but I think it gives more people an opportunity to help themselves.

Posted by Bruno (here)
A voice from the Mountains- why do you think Canada is going bankrupt over our healthcare system?

Not Canada going bankrupt, but the healthcare system specifically. I posted an article on the previous page talking about some of the problems the system is facing.

You seem to be of the opinion that socialism is a dirty word?

For me and many others who are economically literate on what socialism means, yes, it is indeed a dirty word. It used to be a much more dirty word before the current state of affairs we find ourselves in, when people were more educated on why communism fails, just as communism itself is a dirty word. Surely you understand that communism is just a more full implementation of the same Marxist ideas that underlie socialism. It's not a matter of wanting to be cruel to people. What ends up being cruel is believing in something that sounds nice but ends up being a nightmare.

The bottom line with either healthcare or Agenda 21 is that the government thinks they can do everything better than the private citizens, when history proves over and over again that this is not at all the case. Government is repeatedly corrupt and incompetent. Private citizens, even if motivated purely by profit, are much more competent and attentive to market needs and values, and competition among them benefits everyone. This applies to farmers as much as it does doctors, though their respective markets have differences.

I don't want to live in a communist state but I like living in a country that values universal health care.

If you read the literature from people like Saul Alinsky and the radicals he used to hang around, they thought of universal healthcare as a foot-in-the-door to more expansive Marxist policies, such as government interference in farmland as you see in Agenda 21. As with anything else, they take what is ultimately an illogical and indefensible theory of government and encapsulate it in the most emotional, heart-string-pulling package that they can, to make it easier for people to swallow. That's what healthcare is for. Then after the government has monopolized that industry, they'll go for others, because why not? As you read above, they want to buy back rights to farm land too, not to mention manufacturing industries and everything else they can get their hands on.

I think that any society that sees its self as a place of equality and opportunity should have a well funded health and education system that is easily accessed by all. If that makes me a communist in some people's eyes so be it.

Equality of opportunity or equality of results? Life isn't fair, and if you have freedom, then there will always be differences between what some people have versus what others have. There will never be a time, if you live in a free system, where everyone is equal in all ways. The problem with socialists is they often try to force everyone into an identical situation (except for those already wealthy, who are exempt of course) and in the process they become tyrannical and strip everyone's freedom away for the "collective good," etc.

Jordan Peterson talks about this subject at length and explains it much better than I could. The bottom line is that no one can ever make a promise that life will be fair to everyone from now on, unless they have utter control of everything in everyone's lives, and anyone with that motivation is not actually looking after your best interest to begin with. For me freedom will always be preferable to a government assurance of "fairness" or "equality."

Voice from the Mountains,

What do you think makes the biggest impact, your telling Canadians, like Bruno and I what you read somewhere, often from an ivory tower academic, or our actual lived experience.

We are happy to be living in a country where people can go about their daily lives without fear of financial ruin, due to a terrible health care system and without fear they may be victims of a spree shooter.

You have a system that doesn't work and largely because the elite, looking after their own interests, can always scare you half to death with horror stories about 'socialism'. The real enemy in the U.S is unbridled self interest manifest in croney Capitalism, extreme corruption and out of control and unnecessary military spending.

[turiya]

Its getting a little confusing to follow, as in determining who is saying what... So, before going any further, I think Bruno's post needs to be corrected... as follows....

Posted by Bruno (here)
I certainly think that communism is a dirty word. Communism is a failed idea. That being said I don't believe having some socialist policies in a democratic capitalist society is a slippery slope to communism.

Regarding Jordan Peterson who is also a Canadian, I am a huge fan. Life is certainly unfair and is struggle for each and every one of us. Like Peterson I too believe that the best way to put your life in order no matter what your circumstance is to "clean your room". Personal responsibility is important. In fact it might be the most important lesson to learn while here struggling through life. However, Peterson also talks about our responsibilities to others and to society.
"We must each adopt as much responsibility as possible for individual life, society and the world. We must tell the truth and repair what is in disrepair. It is in this manner that we can and must reduce the suffering of the world." (From his book 12 rules for life)

Universal healthcare and education both help to reduce a great deal of unnecessary human suffering in my opinion. In Canada we have both and there is still plenty to struggle through but I think it gives more people an opportunity to help themselves.

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)

Posted by Bruno (here)
A voice from the Mountains- why do you think Canada is going bankrupt over our healthcare system?

Not Canada going bankrupt, but the healthcare system specifically. I posted an article on the previous page talking about some of the problems the system is facing.

Posted by Bruno (here)
You seem to be of the opinion that socialism is a dirty word?

For me and many others who are economically literate on what socialism means, yes, it is indeed a dirty word. It used to be a much more dirty word before the current state of affairs we find ourselves in, when people were more educated on why communism fails, just as communism itself is a dirty word. Surely you understand that communism is just a more full implementation of the same Marxist ideas that underlie socialism. It's not a matter of wanting to be cruel to people. What ends up being cruel is believing in something that sounds nice but ends up being a nightmare.

The bottom line with either healthcare or Agenda 21 is that the government thinks they can do everything better than the private citizens, when history proves over and over again that this is not at all the case. Government is repeatedly corrupt and incompetent. Private citizens, even if motivated purely by profit, are much more competent and attentive to market needs and values, and competition among them benefits everyone. This applies to farmers as much as it does doctors, though their respective markets have differences.

Posted by Bruno (here)
I don't want to live in a communist state but I like living in a country that values universal health care.

If you read the literature from people like Saul Alinsky and the radicals he used to hang around, they thought of universal healthcare as a foot-in-the-door to more expansive Marxist policies, such as government interference in farmland as you see in Agenda 21. As with anything else, they take what is ultimately an illogical and indefensible theory of government and encapsulate it in the most emotional, heart-string-pulling package that they can, to make it easier for people to swallow. That's what healthcare is for. Then after the government has monopolized that industry, they'll go for others, because why not? As you read above, they want to buy back rights to farm land too, not to mention manufacturing industries and everything else they can get their hands on.

Posted by Bruno (here)
I think that any society that sees its self as a place of equality and opportunity should have a well funded health and education system that is easily accessed by all. If that makes me a communist in some people's eyes so be it.

Equality of opportunity or equality of results? Life isn't fair, and if you have freedom, then there will always be differences between what some people have versus what others have. There will never be a time, if you live in a free system, where everyone is equal in all ways. The problem with socialists is they often try to force everyone into an identical situation (except for those already wealthy, who are exempt of course) and in the process they become tyrannical and strip everyone's freedom away for the "collective good," etc.

Jordan Peterson talks about this subject at length and explains it much better than I could. The bottom line is that no one can ever make a promise that life will be fair to everyone from now on, unless they have utter control of everything in everyone's lives, and anyone with that motivation is not actually looking after your best interest to begin with. For me freedom will always be preferable to a government assurance of "fairness" or "equality."

To me, the big difference between the two ideologies - socialism vs a capitalist democratic Republic - is: what has the higher precedence? ...In a socialist government, the responsibility to others has a greater precedence over personal responsibility. For a capitalist democratic Republic, its diametrically reversed.

The significance is this: If one has the proper priorities well established, taking care of oneself needs to have the higher precedence. Only then, can one even consider taking care of others.

Bruno you initially said it correctly. But it seems by adding the word 'however' into your statement it shows that the [Jordan Peterson?] point was not quite understood.

And to bring it back around to Trump. This is what he is trying to correct. The American system over a long stretch of time, with bringing in the (socialist) welfare state through several past presidents, this has caused the American system to stand on its head. Trump is making the move to put America back on its feet again. That is part of his Making America Great Again - MAGA!

Just my 2cents worth.
________Late Add_______

Thought my post was in line with the thread topic.... as Agenda 21, at least in my view, is driven by an undercurrent that the Earth, herself, is as weak as a kitten & is unable to take care of herself... this is the same kind of thinking that drives the communist / socialistic policies that the individual peoples cannot take care of themselves... That is why the State (the U.N. in this case) ultimately has assumed its NWO caretaking role.

Just was making an attempt to bring the recent & seemingly off-topic discussion back to the theme of this thread.

Apologies. Didn't mean to cause a problem...
cheers...

[we-R-one]

What part of 'off topic' is not being understood here? And that's why there's confusion because this thread is purposefully being derailed by conversations going away from the original content of the thread. It feels like I'm dealing with kids in kindergarten. Is it just too hard for you to start another thread?



Per Avalon forum rules:

2. ‘TROLLING’

An internet ‘troll’ (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll) is someone who posts controversial, irrelevant, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as our forum, with the intention or agenda of provoking (‘hooking’) other users into an emotional response — or to generally disrupt normal, healthy, on-topic discussion. Members who seem to be trolling risk losing their membership and posting rights.

2. PERSONAL CONVERSATIONS

Personal conversations should be conducted privately. Do always remember that your posts are visible to thousands of people who may not find private jokes or topics beneficial (or even understandable!). Do please try to keep posts on topic at all times

[Bill Ryan]

Hello, Everyone:

We’ve taken the rare step of closing this thread (and also the Qanon and the Trump is not the Answer threads) for a day.

That’s three threads that have generated quite a lot of strong opinion. (That’s usually a good thing, by the way. )

This is to mandate what might be called a cooling-off period. We’ve received a number of reports, not just recently, and the common factors in some members’ disquiet is what is perceived (at least by some) as violations of the guidelines.

Now. Kindly listen up. It's all quite a tangle, and the lines can never be drawn clearly enough to create an automatic judgment about what's okay and what's not. One person sees a troll, and another person sees someone with a strong counter-opinion. It's always HOW things are presented that's the criterion.

We have to allow (and even encourage) strong counter-opinions on the forum. Debate and discussion is how we all learn. If we're all preaching to the converted all the time, what's the value? It all becomes a giant echo-chamber.

And just as one person sees a troll, and another person sees someone with a strong counter-opinion, one person sees an insult and is offended or riled, and another will see nothing like that at all. There's no way a concise set of guidelines can sift and sort all that.

The same goes with what’s on topic. One person will suspect a deliberate attempt to derail the thread; while another may see a lateral-thinking cross-linking to a related topic. (The on/off topic thing is interesting. Other threads can veer wildly off-topic, but no-one cares; that’s because emotions haven’t already been raised by the hot topic of the thread’s central theme.)

In some cases, an off-topic post is clearly made. It may not be a deliberate attempt to divert. People can read complex arguments and be stimulated to share or inform about all kinds of things. But the principal at play here is always to RETURN to the main topic, and for everyone to support that.

And finally on that, a thread on a certain strongly-felt topic is very likely to attract and stimulate counterpoints. That’s fine. Again, that's how we learn. And again, it’s HOW those counterpoints are posed that’s the issue.

If those reading this can sit with a moderator's hat on for just a moment, you may see that all far from easy to manage. It's like a business or civil meeting full of very passionate people who are not agreeing. The key, one more time, is how that passion is expressed.

Please consider this. Here are the predigested bulletpoints:

• This thread will re-open in 24 hours.
• This is NOT censorship.
• We are not publicly admonishing anyone here.
• We encourage diversity of opinion, and spirited information-backed debate.
• KEY to this is that the debate should be appropriate and courteous. There are ways of disagreeing strongly while holding others in respect.

Many thanks to all. There are MANY MANY MANY other interesting threads here to keep anyone on Planet Earth amused, informed, educated and engaged for a day!

If this step doesn’t seem to have any effect, certain members can be blocked from posting on a particular thread (i.e. for them it’s read-only), if the mods feel that’s warranted. There are also a number of other steps we can take.

What we DO want is for people to learn. Avalon is far more than a simple message-exchange vehicle, like Facebook or Twitter. It’s a library, or even a university. (Read and absorb every thread we have here, and you’ll know more than any human alive. )

I’ll close by referencing one of the seven key recommendations showcased by Stephen Covey in his excellent book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. His 5th 'habit' is:

• Seek First to Understand, Then to Be Understood.

This blog post, all about that, is WELL worth reading if you’re wondering what to do next.

• https://huffingtonpost.com/joanne-la...b_5609892.html

[Bill Ryan]

Folks, the thread is now open again.

As Richard Dolan says at the close of every one of his radio shows: — be kind to each other.

[we-R-one]

Now that it appears Trump has dismantled portions of the infrastructure of AGENDA 21, the focus will be on reform and revision as already mentioned. This recent news release fits the bill and demonstrates Trump adhering to his campaign promise of providing his constituents with more transparency. As part of the reforming process, EPA administrator Scott Pruitt has announced a much needed rule that's making the 'deep state' media go crazy with the 'sky is falling' articles. You'll see why once you read, as it will highlight in your mind how the whole global warming farce came into fruition due to lack of transparency...not to mention it will make you think of how many other 'science' related causes this lack of transparency from the past, aided in promoting the globalist agenda.



EPA Administrator Pruitt Proposes Rule To Strengthen Science Used In EPA Regulations

04/24/2018
Contact Information:
EPA Press Office (press@epa.gov)

WASHINGTON (April 24, 2018) – Today, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt signed a proposed rule to strengthen the science used in regulations issued by EPA. The rule will ensure that the regulatory science underlying Agency actions is fully transparent, and that underlying scientific information is publicly available in a manner sufficient for independent validation.

“The era of secret science at EPA is coming to an end,” said EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. “The ability to test, authenticate, and reproduce scientific findings is vital for the integrity of rulemaking process. Americans deserve to assess the legitimacy of the science underpinning EPA decisions that may impact their lives.”

This proposed rule is in line with the scientific community’s moves toward increased data sharing to address the “replication crisis”—a growing recognition that a significant proportion of published research may not be reproducible. The proposal is consistent with data access requirements for major scientific journals like Science, Nature, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences as well as recommendations from the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Science for Policy Project and the Administrative Conference of the United States’ Science in the Administrative Process Project.

The proposed rule builds upon President Trump’s executive orders on regulatory reform and energy independence:

Executive Order 13777, issued in March 2017, provides that regulatory reform efforts shall attempt to identify “those regulations that rely in whole or in part on data, information, or methods that are not publicly available or that are insufficiently transparent to meet the standard of reproducibility.”

Executive Order 13783, also issued in March 2017, provides that “It is the policy of the United States that necessary and appropriate environmental regulations comply with the law, are of greater benefit than cost, when permissible, achieve environmental improvements for the American people, and are developed through transparent processes that employ the best available peer-reviewed science and economics.”

Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX): “Administrator Pruitt’s announcement ensures that data will be secret no more. For too long, the EPA has issued rules and regulations based on data that has been withheld from the American people. It’s likely that in the past, the data did not justify all regulations. Today, Administrator Pruitt rightfully is changing business as usual and putting a stop to hidden agendas.”

Senator Mike Rounds (R-SD): “Sound, reliable science is vital to helping us make important policy decisions that impact the health of American families and their livelihoods. Inserting new levels of transparency in the EPA rulemaking process will help make the agency more accountable to the American people and help everyone understand the impact of EPA’s decisions. Today’s directive is a significant step toward making sure these decisions are not made behind closed doors with information accessible only to those writing the regulations, but rather in the full view of those who will be affected.”

Dr. Edward J. Calabrese, Professor, Environmental Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts: “The proposal represents a major scientific step forward by recognizing the widespread occurrence of non-linear dose responses in toxicology and epidemiology for chemicals and radiation and the need to incorporate such data in the risk assessment process.”

Dr. Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, President, Cox Associates; Member, National Academy of Engineering; and Editor-in-Chief of the Journal Risk Analysis: “I believe that transparency and independent reproducibility of analyses and conclusions are bedrock principles of sound science. Some commentators have expressed concerns that making the data behind policy conclusions and recommendations accessible and transparent might threaten the privacy of individuals. But this concern can be fully met by applying current privacy-protection techniques for data analysis. These techniques have been developed and used successfully for years at the Census Bureau and elsewhere. Thus, we can have the scientific benefits of accessible data while protecting individual privacy.”

Dr. Jason Scott Johnston, Director, Olin Law and Economics Program, University of Virginia School of Law: “EPA’s proposed rule, Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science, is badly needed “Best practice among peer-edited scientific journals is to require that data and statistical routines used in published papers be posted online and/or made publicly available. To apply the same standards to research that EPA says justify regulations affecting billions of dollars in economic activity and millions of human lives is essential for those regulations to truly be scientifically based.”

Bruno Pigott, Commissioner of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM): “IDEM supports transparency in rulemaking. Good, sound science leads to better regulations.”

Dr. George Wolff, Principal Scientist, Air Improvement Resource, Inc., and former Chairman of EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (1992 – 1996): “In the development of regulations based on environmental studies, numerous subjective assumptions and choices must be made regarding the selection of data and models that have a profound impact on the strength of any statistical associations and even whether the associations are positive or negative. The appropriateness of the assumptions and choices are not adequately evaluated in the standard peer review process. That is why it is essential that the data and models be placed in the public domain for a more rigorous evaluation by qualified experts. The proposed regulation, Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science, will provide an opportunity for such evaluations.”

Source: https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa...pa-regulations