The idea has often been thrown around, but does the research suggest it is worthwhile? Although largely anecdotal, my research suggests that what some consider to be drug use could be actually a case of breaking equal opportunity employment. In other words, to deny food stamps or supplemental income because of suspected drug use is really more a form of racism against poor people than a responsible thing to do. Natural plants that are considered drugs have proven to be medicinal in battling infections. They have origins in indigenous cultures. Unless the job is incredibly dangerous in some way, it is reasonable to assume they would perform the job duties. There is evidence that dangerous tasks could be done as well, but just to be on the safe side it can’t hurt to ask they not do it during the dangerous job. It varies depending on the length of time they have been using the plants for medication, just like other medications. People don’t always know how they will react to medications at first. It all should come down to how responsible the individual is, not how responsible they are stereotyped to be because of the medicinal pathways they choose to take.
As far as supporting the economy, supplemental income could support it in a way. Ideally, it would not require tax increases or spending cuts in other areas to “pay for it.” I still have found no evidence that the government needs to make a profit and run like a business. It is based on some kind of delusional belief that people have to be manipulated into working, possibly, or trying to make it appear more legitimate? It definitely isn’t necessary. Therefore, the “debt” isn’t really a thing. They aren’t obligated to pay the Federal Reserve, which is part of the government, back for money they lent them. They are literally lending money to themselves and then owing it to themselves? It’s unecessary it seems.
Without having to “pay for it,” this would be exactly like my idea to give money to everyone as a stimulus.
Even if it did have to be paid for, would it support the economy as a whole? The answer is no. Quality of life would improve for some, and it would be for people in extreme need. It could decrease it for others, though. It could even cause more homeless people in the worst case scenario. Depending on the amount that was given, it might still not be enough for many homeless to have a home. At the same time, the amount that was taken from others would put more strain on them decreasing employment and their spending which supports the incomes and livelihoods of other people. If this caused the incomes to be too low to afford housing, then the supplemental income might still not allow them to afford housing because it could be over the maximum amount you can earn, so many wouldn’t even get the supplement.. Also, it could be too little to make the difference otherwise.
It seems pretty worthwhile, to help the poor, obviously. It is always worthwhile. The fact remains, though, that until the money in circulation increases enough, it will have to be spread thinly. This means lower quality of life, more stress, and more struggle for many.
Research also suggests it is worthwhile to be optimistic and to believe that everything is going perfectly and any problems are resolving themselves.
Friday, August 31, 2018
Tuesday, August 28, 2018
Improving Quality of Employment and Decreasing Unemployment
I noticed that with the tax cuts that were implemented, the unemployment rate in America dropped under 4% in 2018 according to the bureau of labor statistics for a period of time. It oscillates. That is awesome. I would estimate that if they increased the money in circulation even more, then it would drop even lower. Also, though, the quality of employment would rise with better wages and better work safety and well being, by increasing the money in circulation even more. If you refer to my previous essay on Unemployment, then you can see statistical evidence that supports this.
I would say the best thing to do would be to give $10 trillion dollars to all citizens split equally as an economic stimulus that didn’t need to be paid back. It could be done over time.
I have heard that taxes in Ireland are 11%. If we matched that on the federal level, how much extra money would go into circulation? Would it be close to $10 trillion?
I would say the best thing to do would be to give $10 trillion dollars to all citizens split equally as an economic stimulus that didn’t need to be paid back. It could be done over time.
I have heard that taxes in Ireland are 11%. If we matched that on the federal level, how much extra money would go into circulation? Would it be close to $10 trillion?
Monday, August 27, 2018
Gatorade and Bananas
Brief anecdotal research is pointing to a relationship between easing muscle tension and soreness with bananas and Gatorade. The relationship could exist due to the sugar in these things or the potassium, or both. It could be the potassium. Bananas seemed to make the greatest change. Bananas have four times as much potassium as a cup of Gatorade.
Because there is potassium in a lot of things, though, it would be interesting if the actual active ingredient was sugar, with naturally occurring fructose being beneficial. Further research could test sugar’s effect in various forms from fruits and regular sugar. It would make sense because of the breakdown of sugar in metabolic processes.
Because there is potassium in a lot of things, though, it would be interesting if the actual active ingredient was sugar, with naturally occurring fructose being beneficial. Further research could test sugar’s effect in various forms from fruits and regular sugar. It would make sense because of the breakdown of sugar in metabolic processes.
Wednesday, August 22, 2018
Visiting Gravity Again
I'm going to try to revisit this gravity dilemma again, first visited in 2013, and first observed and thought of by me in 2011.
So, basically, the idea is that gravity doesn't seem to have a very clear cause. They seem to indicate that mass plays a role. The bigger the mass, the more gravitational pull it has. However, objects seem to fall at the same rate, even though one is much heavier than the other. This could be because of the enormous size of Earth compared to a tennis ball versus a bowling ball. However, it doesn't make a lot of sense, otherwise. It seems that differences in mass would make a difference on the gravitational pull.
Also, hydrogen and helium float, even though lithium doesn't float. The atomic mass of lithium is barely more than helium. It is still less than oxygen, nitrogen, and elements in the atmosphere. If displacement of molecules were the reason why hydrogen and helium floated, then why doesn't lithium float? If displacement is not the reason, then why does helium and hydrogen float?
Interestingly, gravity seems to act on all objects, whether or not they are metal. This makes it less likely that gravity is due to polarity. However, it is interesting to note that metals tend to be more heavy. I wonder, if the enormous magnetic field could be responsible for gravity.
There is such a thing as molecules having polarity, even if they are not made of metal. Perhaps all molecules have polarity, and gravity is really due to polarity and magnetism. Scientists adamantly deny this to be the truth.
Let's think for a moment about the idea that it were polarity. What about the idea that all atoms are balanced with positive and negative charges? What if the movement of the electrons actually changed direction with the direction of the gravitational pull? If all of this were true, why would helium and hydrogen float, still? It doesn't make sense, unless lithium didn't float because it were a metal, and metals were heavier due to their increased ability to be affected by magnetism. If you look, every single element before Nitrogen is a metal except Carbon. If that were the reason, displacement could explain why they float, but Carbon is not a metal.
What is the deal with carbon, then? Why does it not float? It is considerably lighter. Could it be some kind of thing that is more magnetic than helium but less than other metals? Why are there so many contradictions here? Will we find the answers? To be continued.
If you’re thinking it’s polarity, then let me direct you to a previous essay. It points out that the masses and speeds of the planets are all out of proportion to the momentum they would need to have centrifugal force. Are they wrong about the masses and speeds?
Jupiter is 20 times the size of Mars, but Mars is smaller than Earth. The masses indicated by NASA show Jupiter having a 316 times greater mass than Earth and Mars having a mass 82 times smaller than Earth. However, Mars’ velocity is slower than Earth, and Jupiter’s velocity is slower than Mars.
If gravity did actually act equally on all masses, then why isn’t the change in the distance from the sun directly proportional to the change in velocity? Are they wrong about those figures?
But wait, what if gravity is exponentially decreasing with distance? That would make sense. It does seem kind of exponential the proportions of distance to the sun versus velocity of the planets.
However, why would helium and hydrogen float then, if gravity acted equally on all masses?
What the f$&@?
So, basically, the idea is that gravity doesn't seem to have a very clear cause. They seem to indicate that mass plays a role. The bigger the mass, the more gravitational pull it has. However, objects seem to fall at the same rate, even though one is much heavier than the other. This could be because of the enormous size of Earth compared to a tennis ball versus a bowling ball. However, it doesn't make a lot of sense, otherwise. It seems that differences in mass would make a difference on the gravitational pull.
Also, hydrogen and helium float, even though lithium doesn't float. The atomic mass of lithium is barely more than helium. It is still less than oxygen, nitrogen, and elements in the atmosphere. If displacement of molecules were the reason why hydrogen and helium floated, then why doesn't lithium float? If displacement is not the reason, then why does helium and hydrogen float?
Interestingly, gravity seems to act on all objects, whether or not they are metal. This makes it less likely that gravity is due to polarity. However, it is interesting to note that metals tend to be more heavy. I wonder, if the enormous magnetic field could be responsible for gravity.
There is such a thing as molecules having polarity, even if they are not made of metal. Perhaps all molecules have polarity, and gravity is really due to polarity and magnetism. Scientists adamantly deny this to be the truth.
Let's think for a moment about the idea that it were polarity. What about the idea that all atoms are balanced with positive and negative charges? What if the movement of the electrons actually changed direction with the direction of the gravitational pull? If all of this were true, why would helium and hydrogen float, still? It doesn't make sense, unless lithium didn't float because it were a metal, and metals were heavier due to their increased ability to be affected by magnetism. If you look, every single element before Nitrogen is a metal except Carbon. If that were the reason, displacement could explain why they float, but Carbon is not a metal.
What is the deal with carbon, then? Why does it not float? It is considerably lighter. Could it be some kind of thing that is more magnetic than helium but less than other metals? Why are there so many contradictions here? Will we find the answers? To be continued.
If you’re thinking it’s polarity, then let me direct you to a previous essay. It points out that the masses and speeds of the planets are all out of proportion to the momentum they would need to have centrifugal force. Are they wrong about the masses and speeds?
Jupiter is 20 times the size of Mars, but Mars is smaller than Earth. The masses indicated by NASA show Jupiter having a 316 times greater mass than Earth and Mars having a mass 82 times smaller than Earth. However, Mars’ velocity is slower than Earth, and Jupiter’s velocity is slower than Mars.
If gravity did actually act equally on all masses, then why isn’t the change in the distance from the sun directly proportional to the change in velocity? Are they wrong about those figures?
But wait, what if gravity is exponentially decreasing with distance? That would make sense. It does seem kind of exponential the proportions of distance to the sun versus velocity of the planets.
However, why would helium and hydrogen float then, if gravity acted equally on all masses?
What the f$&@?
Monday, August 20, 2018
A Good Idea for the US Job Market
One of the beautiful things about the US job market is that it is a free economy. However, this freedom also had made it somewhat more complex to find the right job. Communist regimes often have been able to simply provide someone with a home and a job on the spot, quickly and easily, regardless of the negative aspects people dislike of those style of markets. Our free economy deserves the same. Every person deserves to have a home and a job.
To make the process easier, I think it would be worthwhile to have a universal job application for every job candidate. All of the hiring employers already register with the government. They should have a single website that is used for all hiring purposes, one application with a resume, and take away the whole cover letter system requirement. Any kind of special hiring methods or questions can just be asked at the first interview. That way people don’t waste time when there is no chance of being hired.. They could connect this website to a “hiring center,” that connects directly to real jobs.
The categories for this website could include “high need” hiring for labor shortages, “high need and will train,” “non high need,” and “non high need will train.”
Overall, the application process has to be as easy as possible, but in addition this will connect people to employers that are hard to find or that they didn’t know existed.
By using just one application, job applicants never have to fill out multiple applications and search for employers ever again. They will all be on this one website. It could be a requirement that they are posted here, if they were going to post it somewhere.
Moderators could filter out all scams. People could relocate for jobs that are needed in other areas of the country more easily, because they would know for certain if the job was there or not before going.
Ideally, it could reach the point where everyone could walk into a hiring center and get a job or start training immediately, without even having to apply to multiple places, if they just describe the type of work they want. Their standard of living should be covered while they train, by the government if the employer can’t afford it.
Of course, this is just a suggestion, but I think the previous paragraph would bring relief to a lot of employers and employees.
To make the process easier, I think it would be worthwhile to have a universal job application for every job candidate. All of the hiring employers already register with the government. They should have a single website that is used for all hiring purposes, one application with a resume, and take away the whole cover letter system requirement. Any kind of special hiring methods or questions can just be asked at the first interview. That way people don’t waste time when there is no chance of being hired.. They could connect this website to a “hiring center,” that connects directly to real jobs.
The categories for this website could include “high need” hiring for labor shortages, “high need and will train,” “non high need,” and “non high need will train.”
Overall, the application process has to be as easy as possible, but in addition this will connect people to employers that are hard to find or that they didn’t know existed.
By using just one application, job applicants never have to fill out multiple applications and search for employers ever again. They will all be on this one website. It could be a requirement that they are posted here, if they were going to post it somewhere.
Moderators could filter out all scams. People could relocate for jobs that are needed in other areas of the country more easily, because they would know for certain if the job was there or not before going.
Ideally, it could reach the point where everyone could walk into a hiring center and get a job or start training immediately, without even having to apply to multiple places, if they just describe the type of work they want. Their standard of living should be covered while they train, by the government if the employer can’t afford it.
Of course, this is just a suggestion, but I think the previous paragraph would bring relief to a lot of employers and employees.
Thursday, August 2, 2018
Revisiting Economic Theory
To fully understand how to produce a healthy economy, you have to understand every aspect of it. That is why I want to examine several areas of the economy now.
1. The stock market and business debt
- One interesting part about the stock market and business debt is how it can cause a lot more money to be in circulation than normally would be. Theoretically, this could boost the economy.
2. Government debt
- Again, this could boost the economy through increased money in circulation.
3. Consumer debt
- Again, this could boost the economy through increased money in circulation.
4. Housing Prices
- These are a major factor, because everyone has to pay for housing. Theoretically, if any prices were raised in relation to housing, even just for the cost of heaters and air conditioning, then it could cause inflation in all other areas of the economy as well. What is more interesting is how a cycle could develop involving increasing prices and increasing cost of housing.
5. Worker Welfare
- There is a lot of evidence connecting this to economic welfare. When the economy is struggling, their welfare actually decreases with it.
6. A system of lending
- Most countries currently are depending on systems of lending to provide enough money in circulation to support the population. This means that most countries are depending on debt inflated amounts of cash flow, more cash than is actually in circulation. Meanwhile, more in circulation would still cause everyone to have an amount super conducive to living at a higher quality of life.
7. Need for money in areas that aren’t market oriented
- When was the last time you went to the store and bought a pack of restoring the health of local underwater ecosystems, and a gallon of planting trees to reduce global warming? It is pretty rare. The system relies on non profit groups to do many things. Although successful, many people often find they cannot do things they wanted to benefit society, due to lack of financial resources.
8. Confusion and false beliefs
- There can be much confusion and false beliefs due to the failure to solve problems of homelessness for people in need.
9. Required payments
- Car insurance, taxes and estimated taxes, property taxes, health insurance, home insurance... all of these increase the required cost of living, which can be a cyclical cause of inflation just like the cost of housing. When people find that they can’t afford these things, they find no options to help them.
9.5 Quality of Life
- Although all of the debt can help boost the economy, it can be a burden to quality of life in addition to many things mentioned above. All of this can even lead to people who cannot pay for a normal life.
10. Summary
- It is clear that we need to have more money in circulation, or everyone could be more poor than the Great Depression era people, simply because of the increase in population. There is a limit on the amount that can be lent. Everyone needs to be given that money, as they increase it, to alleviate poverty and prevent false beliefs and confusion. It is no longer possible to support oneself from a minimum wage job, even though it is possible and easy in Australia. Why? It is simply the population.
11. The Good News
- Any problem with the economy in this area is actually quite gradual. Business debt and government debt can play a huge role in helping to alleviate the stress of it. Consumer debt can as well. However, confusion, false beliefs, and any problems can easily be avoided with a small change.
1. The stock market and business debt
- One interesting part about the stock market and business debt is how it can cause a lot more money to be in circulation than normally would be. Theoretically, this could boost the economy.
2. Government debt
- Again, this could boost the economy through increased money in circulation.
3. Consumer debt
- Again, this could boost the economy through increased money in circulation.
4. Housing Prices
- These are a major factor, because everyone has to pay for housing. Theoretically, if any prices were raised in relation to housing, even just for the cost of heaters and air conditioning, then it could cause inflation in all other areas of the economy as well. What is more interesting is how a cycle could develop involving increasing prices and increasing cost of housing.
5. Worker Welfare
- There is a lot of evidence connecting this to economic welfare. When the economy is struggling, their welfare actually decreases with it.
6. A system of lending
- Most countries currently are depending on systems of lending to provide enough money in circulation to support the population. This means that most countries are depending on debt inflated amounts of cash flow, more cash than is actually in circulation. Meanwhile, more in circulation would still cause everyone to have an amount super conducive to living at a higher quality of life.
7. Need for money in areas that aren’t market oriented
- When was the last time you went to the store and bought a pack of restoring the health of local underwater ecosystems, and a gallon of planting trees to reduce global warming? It is pretty rare. The system relies on non profit groups to do many things. Although successful, many people often find they cannot do things they wanted to benefit society, due to lack of financial resources.
8. Confusion and false beliefs
- There can be much confusion and false beliefs due to the failure to solve problems of homelessness for people in need.
9. Required payments
- Car insurance, taxes and estimated taxes, property taxes, health insurance, home insurance... all of these increase the required cost of living, which can be a cyclical cause of inflation just like the cost of housing. When people find that they can’t afford these things, they find no options to help them.
9.5 Quality of Life
- Although all of the debt can help boost the economy, it can be a burden to quality of life in addition to many things mentioned above. All of this can even lead to people who cannot pay for a normal life.
10. Summary
- It is clear that we need to have more money in circulation, or everyone could be more poor than the Great Depression era people, simply because of the increase in population. There is a limit on the amount that can be lent. Everyone needs to be given that money, as they increase it, to alleviate poverty and prevent false beliefs and confusion. It is no longer possible to support oneself from a minimum wage job, even though it is possible and easy in Australia. Why? It is simply the population.
11. The Good News
- Any problem with the economy in this area is actually quite gradual. Business debt and government debt can play a huge role in helping to alleviate the stress of it. Consumer debt can as well. However, confusion, false beliefs, and any problems can easily be avoided with a small change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)