Minutus

Yes, you describe a government that values the life of the people.
Capitalism, as a concept and practice does not. It is a system that
only values money and power and history has shown that. Any
social service programs have been hard fought for by the people.
And even when getting some gains, corporate interests spend a
great deal of time and money trying to destroy those gains. These
are people who think and believe they are better than the “masses”
who should have no rights to anything except servitude to the wealthy.
t
From: Ellen Madono
Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2013 6:59 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Pipe dreams

Hi,
What I notice here is Japan is basic service are not as affected by political winds. The Japanese have a parlimentary system modeled after Germany. Their bureaucracy is stogy, unimaginative etc. But basic services such as medical checkups, "socialized " medicine type issues like child care, elder care, birthing etc. are not racy. They do not require the trappings of market economy medicine. They require sound and long term bureaucratic organnization. Not the sexy stuff of political rhetoric unless you believe that political control of birth can sustain a political party. These issues are essential to the mechanical upkeep of our organic needs as humans. These basics should to be separated from political movement. Career bureacrats should be making these long term plans not politicians. This is not the American way, but in the long run, I think the results are more reasonable.
Best,
Ellen

This is perhaps something of a quibble, but I don't think "capitalism" is where the blame should really go. There are goodly numbers of both corporations and individuals who *are* managing to be both capitalist (private ownership of the means of wealth -- I *think* that is the definition?) but also ethical and compassionate.

I do believe it's important to ascribe "blame" correctly, and in this instance I believe the "blame" goes not to the economic system so much as to their dreadful mis-use, due to inadequate restraints on -- and excessive amounts of -- qualities such as greed, short-sightedness, selfishness -- and in other cases, a simple failure to accurately understand the situation, and some cause-and-effect relationships. (E.g. I am thinking of a friend who just recently was "explaining" to me about how happy homeless people are, and the beggars in India. She said this with reference to one *particular* homeless beggar we were watching limp past us, and he did not look happy at all, to me. She insisted that he looked very happy to her. Puzzling...)
Anyway, my point being -- political systems are just tools. Any tool can be used well or badly, depending on the nature and training and intentions of the people using it. Let's repair ourselves and each other first, and then, I believe, the political structures will be reformed along the way.

Well sad,
rene
REPLY TO: only
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

Nah, Roger, I think you have it backwards. The drug companies ARE the government. THEY decide who to fund into power (n USA anyway).
No it is not. It is the drug companies who do that. (Also the food companies - Monsanto, Hills petfood etc). They do it by holding the government ransom. The FDA supports the drug companies against anything that works better because they have been told by drug companies that if drug companies are not supported by the FDA, then there will not be research dollars from drug companies for cancer research, etc.
Since those in power got there courtesy of drug company funding, it's a great set-up.

Drug and food companies also set the laws about vaccines and medical practice that excludes alternatives to toxic-medicine. 8 Companies spent many billions to study how to get rid of competition from alternative health, and came up with a plan to do so. They chose to rewrite (at least veterinary) medical practice law to exclude the competition (their word for it) - then lobbied it into place a state at a time. No government did that - they just were lapdogs of the drug/food companies, with their huge lobbying funds, and with no thought, bought the "best for the public good, to vaccinate" story, and all the other stories, hook line and sinker.

It's the law of greed that holds sway.
The people have lost control by GIVING the drug/food companies the right to pay for the government they want with promotional dollars. THAT is the wrong system we have, and it leads to Government By Greatest Greed.

"Campaign funds" is a euphemism for drug company hi-jacking.

Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: only
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

I will agree that any system can be corrupted as it always devolves down to the core values of the people
operating the system.
However, Capitalism, by definition has no humanistic value structure within its very nature. The fact is that
many people over the years have tried to impose humanistic values on this system and it has never worked
long term. European countries and Japan, as Ellen has described, have recognized a core govt responsibility
to the public at large. These countries implemented social programs to keep the country stable and the masses
controlled. Education has been created for mass social manipulation for the needs of the corporation. That
is not theory, but factual history. However, the current explosion of globalized control is forcing even the EU
nations to impose ‘austerity’ measures on the people. It is all a ruse in order to trash the economic base of
the people. The wealthy in the US have had the best 2 yrs for their profit but the economy of the public has
been getting forced to lower and lower levels. The housing crisis was a direct assault on the primary source
of wealth for the majority of people in this country—home ownership. Historically home ownership has
been the one means for creating and transferring wealth to children. We still live in a system based on
landed aristocracy. Destruction of unions by corporate interests has created another attack on economic
saftey for all people as what happens with the unions affects labor across the board.
That Capitalism has managed to survive and create a comfortable middle class. Under major pressure it
provided social safety net programs of the most minimal sort, just enough of a carrot to keep the poor from
revolting. However, the middle class is not that important any more under globalization. Rates of profit
are the core goal of capitalism, not the wellfare of the public. The rest is all smoke and mirrors.
Remember even that icon of Capitalism, Adam Smith, wrote that it could only work in a nation with strict
controls placed on it. Without those controls Capitalism buys the govt and becomes fascism. Reference
Mussolini’s definition. We now call it corporatism today to emotionally distance the public from that
sinister concept of fascism. We have pretty much arrived as the state of corporate no holds barred.
Think of how Bush annointed Big Pharms with a ‘held harmless’ status for all vaccines. The number of
vaccines have exploded since then. Vaccines became the biggest economic frontier for that industry and
the public would be their enforced consumers.
If one wants to understand what is really happening, it is critical to look at the tendencies developing
economically and politically. Looking at a few exceptions, a few hold outs if you will, is not the overarching
reality that is being imposed. It is never the individual politician but the institutionalization of values and
how they get codified in rules, regulations, processes, etc. Look at the Bradley Manning trial. The govt
had no case of consequence and they failed to prove anything meaninful. The judge then actually changed
the charges so she could rule against Manning. That is what Capitalism will do to protect its interests.
That is what we were taught, at least in the US, is what fascism does, but not democracy. How would you
interpret this trial in light of this discussion?
t
t
From: Shannon Nelson
Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2013 8:05 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Pipe dreams

This is perhaps something of a quibble, but I don't think "capitalism" is where the blame should really go. There are goodly numbers of both corporations and individuals who *are* managing to be both capitalist (private ownership of the means of wealth -- I *think* that is the definition?) but also ethical and compassionate.
I do believe it's important to ascribe "blame" correctly, and in this instance I believe the "blame" goes not to the economic system so much as to their dreadful mis-use, due to inadequate restraints on -- and excessive amounts of -- qualities such as greed, short-sightedness, selfishness -- and in other cases, a simple failure to accurately understand the situation, and some cause-and-effect relationships. (E.g. I am thinking of a friend who just recently was "explaining" to me about how happy homeless people are, and the beggars in India. She said this with reference to one *particular* homeless beggar we were watching limp past us, and he did not look happy at all, to me. She insisted that he looked very happy to her. Puzzling...)

Anyway, my point being -- political systems are just tools. Any tool can be used well or badly, depending on the nature and training and intentions of the people using it. Let's repair ourselves and each other first, and then, I believe, the political structures will be reformed along the way.

Totally agree Irene.
It is a cognitive dissonance that prevents people from seeing what is actually happening.
Even with all the lies and conspiratorial decision-making behind closed doors betw govt and
industry, the public still gets enough information that the tendencies can be seen and
understood. But due to co-dependency, intentionally created to keep people subservient,
and an entrenched belief system that says we have a democracy and that our system is
not sinister, people refuse to see what is before their eyes.
t
From: Irene de Villiers
Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2013 8:41 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Pipe dreams
Nah, Roger, I think you have it backwards. The drug companies ARE the government. THEY decide who to fund into power (n USA anyway).
No it is not. It is the drug companies who do that. (Also the food companies - Monsanto, Hills petfood etc). They do it by holding the government ransom. The FDA supports the drug companies against anything that works better because they have been told by drug companies that if drug companies are not supported by the FDA, then there will not be research dollars from drug companies for cancer research, etc.
Since those in power got there courtesy of drug company funding, it's a great set-up.

Drug and food companies also set the laws about vaccines and medical practice that excludes alternatives to toxic-medicine. 8 Companies spent many billions to study how to get rid of competition from alternative health, and came up with a plan to do so. They chose to rewrite (at least veterinary) medical practice law to exclude the competition (their word for it) - then lobbied it into place a state at a time. No government did that - they just were lapdogs of the drug/food companies, with their huge lobbying funds, and with no thought, bought the "best for the public good, to vaccinate" story, and all the other stories, hook line and sinker.

It's the law of greed that holds sway.
The people have lost control by GIVING the drug/food companies the right to pay for the government they want with promotional dollars. THAT is the wrong system we have, and it leads to Government By Greatest Greed.

"Campaign funds" is a euphemism for drug company hi-jacking.

Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: only
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

I agree with T, I think it does belong there.
Capitalism is about Capital - money - and whatever makes the most of it.
The problem with that is that everyone is expected to pull their own weight whether they are sick or well, whether they were unlucky and fell under a bus, or lucky and won the lottery. There is no provision for humanity and compassion or a fair shake for the FACT that we are NOT all equal - and some social responsibilty and sharing is needed. Capitalism is too much a greed system, and lacks any built in system of sharing or compassion.

That's not to say everything needs socializing - or at least a socialized option as a basic right - just those things which need to be socially *responsibly* handled - and that includes health care access - and I do mean health care, not toxic medicine, (though if people want it they can have it as well I suppose, till they learn what works better).

As I See it:
Practise of Medicine = dangerous application of poisons to suppress disease symptoms temporarily.
Practise of Homeopathy = gentle nudges to the system to go back to work looking after itself.

Seems a no-brainer choice.
There are some, but it would need to be universal to be workable for an entire society.
There is too much of this thinking, and that's why we need the socializing of basics like medicine.
(The I/i is broken on this keyboard..)

Two women waiting in the dr's office recently were chatting about how the people getting Medicaid should be put to work to pay their way. They have NO clue what it is like to get any life-sustaining basic help from medicaid.
WHen I objected with a few facts they told me "Oh well you are different, you are in a wheelchair".
I gave up - clearly they have no clue. Being in a wheelchair will not get you a penny of Medicaid. But they see a wheelchair as a horror story and some other dastardly illness during which the victim can actually stand or walk, as automatically a lazy lout who should be at work. My friend's son in law has just had his back fused in another area - 4th op in a year, due to a smashed back from being forced to lift much too heavy bombs all day in the military. He was a full time pediatric nurse before military duty. It's taken three years to get ANY treatment from VA - but he walks - painfully - between ops.
I do not think that is valid.
Political systems need to be managed by the population - not by big pharma/food
Otherwise they are tools of big pharma/food and not tools of the people.
It's not about being handled well or badly, it's about WHO is handling it well or badly.

Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: only
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

I don't think that I have it backwards. Governments came first. They have the teeth. Big Pharma can merely ask or bribe government to do some coercion. The people with the guns do the coercion.

I like the Chinese policy of executing those government officials who accept bribes. But if there weren't excessive regulations then there wouldn't be government officials to bride in the first place.

Roger
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: furryboots@icehouse.net
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 05:41:17 -0700
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Pipe dreams
Nah, Roger, I think you have it backwards. The drug companies ARE the government. THEY decide who to fund into power (n USA anyway).
No it is not. It is the drug companies who do that. (Also the food companies - Monsanto, Hills petfood etc). They do it by holding the government ransom. The FDA supports the drug companies against anything that works better because they have been told by drug companies that if drug companies are not supported by the FDA, then there will not be research dollars from drug companies for cancer research, etc.
Since those in power got there courtesy of drug company funding, it's a great set-up.

Drug and food companies also set the laws about vaccines and medical practice that excludes alternatives to toxic-medicine. 8 Companies spent many billions to study how to get rid of competition from alternative health, and came up with a plan to do so. They chose to rewrite (at least veterinary) medical practice law to exclude the competition (their word for it) - then lobbied it into place a state at a time. No government did that - they just were lapdogs of the drug/food companies, with their huge lobbying funds, and with no thought, bought the "best for the public good, to vaccinate" story, and all the other stories, hook line and sinker.

It's the law of greed that holds sway.
The people have lost control by GIVING the drug/food companies the right to pay for the government they want with promotional dollars. THAT is the wrong system we have, and it leads to Government By Greatest Greed.

"Campaign funds" is a euphemism for drug company hi-jacking.

Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: > only
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."