Comments by "Charles Brightman" (@charlesbrightman4237) on "Newsmax"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Consider also, the US Fed has a target of 2% inflation every year. But that is also 2% on top of all the 2%'s that came before it, which turns out to be a lot of inflation over time.
Now first, if people's wages, benefits and even saving's account interest do not keep up with the true cost of inflation, they fall behind in buying power, and zero income is still zero income. But with economic inflation people would have a higher economic mountain to climb. They eventually could become economic slaves to the larger economy. And slavery was supposed to be done away with at least here in the USA. It seems it has been replaced by a system of 'economic slavery'.
Second, space travel, the ONLY thing that might save any species from this Earth, has gotten more expensive just in my lifetime. What is space travel going to cost in the next 100, 1000, 1 million years from now? Economic inflation just might be a contributing factor to the demise of all life from this planet Earth. And we did it to ourselves. Or more correctly the US Fed did it to us all, including themselves.
Instead of talk like doing away with the penny, they should actually be trying to bring back and maintain the value of the penny. And then have a target of 0% inflation annually. Otherwise, we all eventually die one day from something and go extinct, which is probably going to occur anyway, but without economic inflation, we would have a better chance of surviving. With economic inflation, less so.
What good is life if there is no entity left to live it? What good is money if there are no entities left to spend it?
Survive beyond this Earth, solar system and galaxy, OR die and go extinct. Those are the choices, (if we even actually have a choice). Currently, no exceptions.
* Everybody needs to become active in changing the US Fed's economic inflation policy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The comments made in this video, about the Supreme Court Justices actually following the Constitution, well, consider this:
Consider also: While the US Constitution has ages to hold certain public offices, and the age to vote, and clearly says that basically all American citizens have the privileges or immunities thereof (14 Amendment), are basically ALL laws throughout America that America utilizes to protect and punish children, unconstitutional? No where in the Constitution is mental capacity a requirement to be considered an American citizen nor that might limit an American citizen's privileges or immunities.
Now, I am not advocating that America does away with all the laws that help protect children, but aren't all those laws that America utilizes to protect and punish children unconstitutional?
* So, do we truly want to follow the US Constitution to the actual letter or don't we?
1
-
1
-
1
-
Honestly and sincerely answer the enclosed questions in this copy and paste from my files:
Consider the following: (Whether human, AI, or other species):
We appear to be individuals in a larger society of individuals. Whether it is an individual human in a larger society of humans, or an individual AI in a larger society of AI's, or an individual in a larger society of all species in existence throughout all of existence.
What is 'best' for an individual, may or may not be what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals. And conversely, what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals, may or may not be what is 'best' for the individual.
But, if a decision had to be made concerning a certain topic, of who's 'best' should take precedent over the other's 'best', who's 'best' should take precedent? If for an individual, which individual? All individuals? If for a larger society of individuals, which larger society of individuals? A certain group? A certain nation? A certain species? All species in existence throughout all of existence?
And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? Should I decide how you should exist? Should you decide in how I should exist? Should others decide how we both should exist? Should we decide how others should exist? And who even decides in how to decide? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
And whatever is decided and by whom, there might be entities who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist, which could be a source of animosity, which could lead to further violence and death.
This whole natural tension between the individual and the larger society of individuals, who decides, and by what authority they and they alone get to decide, is the cause of much strife, suffering and death in this world.
But still, while we consciously exist, how should we, individually and as a larger society of individuals, exist while we do exist? How should we help take care of the young, old, ill and needy, if even at all? How would we want to receive help should we be individually young, old, ill and/or needy, if even at all? How should those be treated who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist? How should we treat others if we are being forced to exist how we do not want to exist? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? And where does the money and resources come from to do what we would like to do for how we would like to exist while we do exist?
It's all basically about who is in control, so as to make the decisions, for who's benefit. With all the consequences and ramifications, seen and unseen, of all of our collective choices.
Then we all will still die in the end one day from something, we all will still forget everything we ever knew and experienced, and we all will still be forgotten one day in future eternity as if we never ever existed at all in the first place, regardless of how we all existed while we existed. An entity truly exists throughout all of future eternity, or they don't. It appears we don't in actual reality, and as such, all of life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Death is freedom from life and eternal death awaits us all. Or so the current analysis would indicate.
Individually and as a society of Individuals: For every moment that passes, one less moment being alive AND one moment closer to being not alive.
* Added note: Current Analysis: Long Term: (Very Short Version):
All life on and from this Earth is eventually going to die and go extinct. No exceptions at this time. This Earth and all on it are all just a waste of spacetime in this universe.
(And note also, those who cannot, or choose not to, face the above apparent reality, often delude themselves with fairy tales of alternatives).
1
-
1
-
@paulrevere5197 QUESTIONS:
Okay, it's claimed that a sub-set of humanity, in only a certain time in human history, out of all the other humans in existence on this Earth throughout time, as well as all the other species on this Earth throughout time, as well as any other life that might exist in this galaxy, as well as all the life in other galaxies, is the only chosen people of God. Really? They truly believe this? Ego centric much?
* God did not make man in God's image, man made God in man's image.
Additionally:
a. Modern science claims energy cannot be created nor destroyed, hence energy is eternally existent.
b. An absolute somethingness cannot come from an absolute nothingness, so an absolute somethingness always existed, most probably being energy itself.
c. Universe ALWAYS existed in some form and NEVER had a beginning, No Creator Needed.
'a' is true, is it not? 'b' is true, is it not? If 'a' and 'b' are true, then no creator is needed in 'c'.
* Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning.
1
-
1
-
Answer the enclosed questions from this copy and paste from my files:
Consider the following: (Whether human, AI, or other species):
We appear to be individuals in a larger society of individuals. Whether it is an individual human in a larger society of humans, or an individual AI in a larger society of AI's, or an individual in a larger society of all species in existence throughout all of existence.
What is 'best' for an individual, may or may not be what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals. And conversely, what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals, may or may not be what is 'best' for the individual.
But, if a decision had to be made concerning a certain topic, of who's 'best' should take precedent over the other's 'best', who's 'best' should take precedent? If for an individual, which individual? All individuals? If for a larger society of individuals, which larger society of individuals? A certain group? A certain nation? A certain species? All species in existence throughout all of existence?
And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? Should I decide how you should exist? Should you decide in how I should exist? Should others decide how we both should exist? Should we decide how others should exist? And who even decides in how to decide? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
And whatever is decided and by whom, there might be entities who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist, which could be a source of animosity, which could lead to further violence and death.
This whole natural tension between the individual and the larger society of individuals, who decides, and by what authority they and they alone get to decide, is the cause of much strife, suffering and death in this world.
But still, while we consciously exist, how should we, individually and as a larger society of individuals, exist while we do exist? How should we help take care of the young, old, ill and needy, if even at all? How would we want to receive help should we be individually young, old, ill and/or needy, if even at all? How should those be treated who are being forced to exist how they do not want to exist? How should we treat others if we are being forced to exist how we do not want to exist? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide? And where does the money and resources come from to do what we would like to do for how we would like to exist while we do exist?
It's all basically about who is in control, so as to make the decisions, for who's benefit. With all the consequences and ramifications, seen and unseen, of all of our collective choices.
Then we all will still die in the end one day from something, we all will still forget everything we ever knew and experienced, and we all will still be forgotten one day in future eternity as if we never ever existed at all in the first place, regardless of how we all existed while we existed. An entity truly exists throughout all of future eternity, or they don't. It appears we don't in actual reality, and as such, all of life itself is all ultimately meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Death is freedom from life and eternal death awaits us all. Or so the current analysis would indicate.
Eternal Death 'IS' Eternal Peace. (OSICA)
(And note, those who cannot, or choose not to, face the above apparent reality, often delude themselves with fairy tales of alternatives).
1