Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › What book are you reading right now?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What book are you reading right now? - Page 193

post #2881 of 3825

 

 

Put in a few chapters, pretty good so far. Although the large number of complicated South/Central American place and deity names is more than I can comprehend in a single caffeine-fueled sitting. You can read the first chapter free on the obverse website.

 

http://obversebooks.co.uk/product/against-nature/

post #2882 of 3825

 

 

Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do


 

 
McWilliams marshals a vast army of anecdotes, quotes, statistics and assertions to argue that America would be a lot better off if we stopped using the force of law to save each other from drugs, alcohol, gambling, pornography, suicide and sex in its more exotic flavors.

- New York Times

 
Peter McWilliams has come up with a "reinvention" of government that would bring us closer to the ideals of the Founding Fathers, increase our personal liberties and save an impressive amount of money in the process.

—USA TODAY

 
There's a huge difference between crime and sin - and the government has no business making the former out of the latter. At least, not in America.

—New York Newsday

 
It might inspire a song if I can match your mix of humor and seriousness. Brilliant!

Sting

 
The forces arrayed against McWilliams are many and powerful, from the legions of the religious right to the political establishment. McWilliams' book brims with facts delivered with a gentle sense of humor and spiced with pithy quotations from sources as diverse asThomas Jefferson and Joni Mitchell.

—Cleveland Plain Dealer

 
Here is a controversial book that contains so much logical thought, it is destined to be roundly ignored by policy makers.

—Gannett News Service

 

 

CONTENTS

Front

AUTHOR'S NOTES

PART I

THE BASIC PREMISE

An Overview

What Are Consensual Crimes?

Separation of Society and State

Personal Morality Versus Governmental Morality

Relationship
post #2883 of 3825

 

 

"Going Clear: Hollywood, & The Prison Of Belief" - Lawrence Wright

post #2884 of 3825
"America Alone" by Mark Steyn

I just downloaded the Kindle copy yesterday and so far a very interesting examination of demographics and the suicide of western civilization.

Well written in an engaging style with excellent historical and literary references.
post #2885 of 3825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr4Bob View Post

"America Alone" by Mark Steyn

I just downloaded the Kindle copy yesterday and so far a very interesting examination of demographics and the suicide of western civilization.

Well written in an engaging style with excellent historical and literary references.

Fear sells well  .

 

Read the reviews on A-Zon for balance and counterpoint(s) : http://www.amazon.com/America-Alone-The-World-Know/product-reviews/1596985275/ref=cm_cr_dp_qt_hist_one?ie=UTF8&filterBy=addOneStar&showViewpoints=0

post #2886 of 3825

YOU CAN'T AFFORD
THE LUXURY
OF A NEGATIVE THOUGHT

                                            A Book for People with Any Life-Threatening Illness 

 

 

 

 

 


TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

post #2887 of 3825

Covers a wide range of topics. "Weather Forecasting" has improved exponentially with the rich data and the processing speed of computers.  Baseball, likewise, is data rich and predictable.  Earthquakes have too many variables to predict easily day to day, but over time one can predict the probability of earthquakes over lengths of time ex. decades.  The stock market, politics, poker and  economics are all covered.

More relevant to the current news the likely hood of terrorism is covered. Predicting human behavior given enough data and time is calculable.  

Great read and authored by a serious political pollster. 

post #2888 of 3825

Re reading actually. This should be required reading in every high school.

 

LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01

post #2889 of 3825

post #2890 of 3825

Esquire Magizine

 

 

APR 
2013

The Great Mulligan

( Mulligan : Courtesy  "Do Over" in a gentlemans game of golf )

at 9:15am

 

 

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ11gGZl3vhROT2pA1CehthSNXgHraBf2jd2w6etUU9ppLQeSEaTQ

Read more: The Great Mulligan -

Esquire http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/the-great-mulligan-042413#ixzz2RQZDZVIM


Edited by Hi-Finthen - 4/24/13 at 4:53pm
post #2891 of 3825

Poetry of,  LIAM HUGHES

I Was Warned

I feel like I've been robbed with a fountain pen
I was warned about these kind of men
It was said some time ago but it still applies
I was warned about these kind of lies
It rings true in my ear as listen to the song
I was warned about this kind of wrong

Well as soon as I am back standing on my feet
I was warned about this kind of deceit
You pull the wool away from my tired sight
I was warned about this kind of plight
To reveal the problems you've given me to face
I was warned about this kind of disgrace

Well done you've managed to bring me to the floor
I was warned about this kind of war
Do you not understand these are difficult times 
I was warned about these kind of crimes
There is no way that I am able to defend
I was warned about these kind of men 

Liam Hughes
post #2892 of 3825

PBS Drops Another Bombshell: Wall Street Is Gobbling Up Two-Thirds of Your 401(k)

By Pam Martens: April 25, 2013 

Frontline Chart Showing Impact of 401(k) Fees Over 50 Years of Saving for Retirement

If you work for 50 years and receive the typical long-term return of 7 percent on your 401(k) plan and your fees are 2 percent, almost two-thirds of your account will go to Wall Street. This was the bombshell dropped byFrontline’s Martin Smith in this Tuesday evening’s  PBS program, The Retirement Gamble. 

This is not so much a gamble as a certainty: under a 2 percent 401(k) fee structure, almost two-thirds of your working life will go toward paying obscene compensation to Wall Street; a little over one-third will benefit your family – and that’s before paying taxes on withdrawals to Uncle Sam. 

To put it another way – you work for Wall Street. You are their slave, their lackey and as long as their toadies dominate in Congress, nothing is going to change on the legislative front to stop the looting. Wall Street seized millions of homes through illegal foreclosures and stripped the equity from the owners. They got away with it. Some Wall Street firms further enriched themselves making bets that the housing market would collapse, using their inside knowledge of the bogus loans they had made. They got away with that also. Now Wall Street is busy asset stripping the retirement plans of the working class in America while President Obama proposes to cut Social Security benefits through a discredited calculation called Chained CPI – conveniently causing people to save more in their 401(k) plans to make up for the potential loss. But the more you save, the more Wall Street asset strips. 

The Retirement Gamble was written by the outstanding team of Martin Smith and Marcela Gaviria, who exposed in January that when it came to Wall Street, the U.S. Justice Department had “no investigations going on. There were no subpoenas, no document reviews, no wiretaps.” The head of the criminal division of the Justice Department, Lanny Breuer, announced he was stepping down one day after that program aired. He returned to Covington & Burling, the corporate law firm representing Wall Street firms. 

The revelation of the two-thirds wealth transfer machinery was delivered by none other than John Bogle, the legendary founder of The Vanguard Group, a low-load mutual fund firm, who served as its Chairman and CEO from 1974 to 1996. Bogle is no slouch. He’s one of the most highly respected men in finance and graduated magna cum laude from Princeton University with a degree in Economics. 

This is the relevant portion of the transcript from the program: 

Bogle: Costs are a crucial part of the equation. It doesn’t take a genius to know that the bigger the profit of the management company, the smaller the profit that investors get. The money managers always want more, and that’s natural enough in most businesses, but it’s not right for this business. 

Smith: Bogle gave me an example. Assume you’re invested in a fund that is earning a gross annual return of 7 percent. They charge you a 2 percent annual fee. Over 50 years, the difference between your net of 5 percent — the red line — and what you would have made without fees — the green line — is staggering. Bogle says you’ve lost almost two thirds of what you would have had. 

Bogle: What happens in the fund business is the magic of compound returns is overwhelmed by the tyranny of compounding costs. It’s a mathematical fact. There’s no getting around it. The fact that we don’t look at it— too bad for us. 

Smith: What I have a hard time understanding is that 2 percent fee that I might pay to an actively managed mutual fund is going to really have a great impact on my future retirement savings. 

Bogle: Well, you have to rely on somebody to get out a compound interest table and look at the impact over an investment lifetime. Do you really want to invest in a system where you put up 100 percent of the capital, you the mutual fund shareholder, you take 100 percent of the risk and you get 30 percent of the return? 

Smith takes Bogle’s advice and pulls up a compounding calculator on his laptop. On air, he shows the viewer the results: 

Smith: Take an account with a $100,000 balance and reduce it by 2 percent a year. At the end of 50 years, that 2 percent annual charge would subtract $63,000 from your account, a loss of 63 percent, leaving you with just a little over $36,000. 

There’s another way to prove the point. Pull up a compounding calculator on line. Take an account with a $100,000 balance and compound it at 7 percent for 50 years. That gives you a return of $ 3,278,041.36. Now change the calculation to a 5 percent return (reduced by the 2 percent annual fee) for the same $100,000 over the same 50 years. That delivers a return of $1,211,938.32. That’s a difference of  $2,066,103.04 – the same 63 percent reduction in value that Smith’s example showed. 

Presently, 70 percent of Americans who have any kind of retirement plan at their place of employment have a 401(k) plan. Not everyone is paying 2 percent fees. Some are paying more and others are paying less – sometimes much less if using passively managed index funds. But, historically, Wall Street has preyed on the least informed and the least educated, which tends to be the poor and middle class. 

Consider the testimony of Gail Kubiniec, a former Assistant Manager at CitiFinancial, a unit of mega Wall Street firm Citigroup, to the Federal Trade Commission in 2001 concerning the premise on which she loaded on extra charges to loans: 

“I and other employees would often determine how much insurance could be sold to a borrower based on the borrower’s occupation, race, age, and education level. If someone appeared uneducated, inarticulate, was a minority, or was particularly old or young, I would try to include all the coverages CitiFinancial offered. The more gullible the consumer appeared, the more coverages I would try to include in the loan…” 

The Retirement Gamble can be viewed in its entirety here.

post #2893 of 3825

Might there be a tourrorist somewhere, maybe under a neighbors bed, even ...

 

 

Witches, Communists, and 
Terrorists Evaluating the Risks and 
Tallying the Costs
 
By John Mueller and Mark G. Stewart
 
The risk from terrorism, like 
that from witches and domestic Communists in the past, 
has been massively exaggerated, but 
it has only very rarely been explained 
or even examined by those who are 
appalled at the security system those 
exaggerations have spawned.
In contrast, as with the hunts for 
witches and Communists, the chief 
challenge to the domestic counter terrorism system in the United States 
is at what might be called the “periphery.”
 
Thus, concerns are raised about 
prosecutorial misconduct, the potential entrapment or misidentification 
of suspects, and the legality of the 
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention 
facility. These are entirely legitimate 
concerns, of course, but ones likely to 
be ineffective in front of judges anxious to set deterring sentences and juries composed of frightened citizens.
No defense of civil liberties is 
likely to be terribly effective as long 
as people believe the threat from terrorism is massive, even existential. 
 
To undo, or even modify, the security system that has burgeoned in 
the United States during the last ten 
years, those who oppose it must attack not simply the consequences of 
the system, but also the premise that 
furnishes its essential engine.
 
“Threats” of the Past
Between about 1480 and 1680, hundreds of thousands of people, the 
vast majority of them women, were 
executed in Europe, mostly by being 
burned at the stake. This took place 
after they had confessed, generally 
(but not always) under torture, to 
such crimes as eating babies, flying on broomsticks, and copulating 
with devils. Notes historian Hugh 
Trevor-Roper (in The european
WiTch-craze of The SixTeenTh and
SevenTeenTh cenTurieS (1969)), one 
square in a German town “looked 
like a little forest, so crowded were 
the stakes,” and during an eight-year 
reign one prince-bishop “burnt 900 
persons, including his own nephew, 
nineteen Catholic priests, and children of seven who were said to have 
had intercourse with demons.”
 
During this long period, a few 
people tried to debunk the process—
and some were tortured and executed 
themselves because of such heresy. 
But their attacks on it were ineffectual because they went after the consequences of the system, not its premise: 
that witches exist and that they are a 
key element in an ongoing battle on 
earth between God and the Devil. 
 
Let us flash forward. In his fascinating 2000 book Communazis, Alexander 
Stephan describes the U.S. government’s surveillance of a group of émigré 
writers during and after World War 
II. None was found to pose much of a 
subversive threat,and the surveillance 
never led to real persecution—indeed, 
few of the writers noticed they were 
being watched. Instead, what impresses 
Stephan is the essential absurdity of the 
situation, as huge numbers of government employees intercepted and catalogued communications, meticulously 
recorded comings and goings, and 
sifted enterprisingly through trash bins, 
exhibiting a “combination of high efficiency with grotesque overkill”—and 
all, of course, “at taxpayers’ expense.”
 
At the time, critics of this process, like those for the witch craze, 
focused almost entirely on the potential for civil liberties violations. 
But no one, it seems, attacked the 
premise of the system—that Communists were everywhere and posed 
a severe threat. More specifically, at 
no point during the Cold War does 
it appear that anyone said in public 
“many domestic Communists adhere 
to a foreign ideology that ultimately 
has as its goal the destruction of 
capitalism and democracy and by 
violence if necessary; however, they 
do not present much of a danger, are 
actually quite a pathetic bunch, and 
couldn’t subvert their way out of a 
wet paper bag. Why are we expending so much time, effort, and treasure over this issue?”
 
In fact, despite huge anxieties 
about it at the time, there seem to 
have been few, if any, instances in 
which domestic Communists engaged 
in anything that could be considered 
espionage after the Second World 
War. Moreover, at no time did any 
domestic Communist ever commit 
anything that could be considered 
violence in support of the cause.
Nonetheless, the fear of domestic 
Communism and the consequent 
costly anti-Communist surveillance 
system persisted for decades.
 
Thus, 
in 1972, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in full perpetual motion mode opened 65,000 new files as 
part of its costly quest to ferret out 
Communists in the United States. 
The pursuit died out only when international Communism collapsed 
at the end of the Cold War.
Terrorist Risks Assessed
Something comparable has now happened..
 
post #2894 of 3825

Terrorism was an easy sell. They took an intelligence failure and built a bureaucracy around it. You are now stuck with homeland security which is slowly bankrupting the country one day at a time, when all that was needed was audit and resource allocation to existing agencies.

 

Compared to terrorism attacks in France, and England among other nations over the years, acts on US Soil pale by comparison.

 

You have more to fear from school children getting access to firearms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-Finthen View Post

Might there be a tourrorist somewhere, maybe under a neighbors bed, even ...

 

 

Witches, Communists, and 
Terrorists Evaluating the Risks and 
Tallying the Costs
 
By John Mueller and Mark G. Stewart
 
The risk from terrorism, like 
that from witches and domestic Communists in the past, 
has been massively exaggerated, but 
it has only very rarely been explained 
or even examined by those who are 
appalled at the security system those 
exaggerations have spawned.
In contrast, as with the hunts for 
witches and Communists, the chief 
challenge to the domestic counter terrorism system in the United States 
is at what might be called the “periphery.”
 
Thus, concerns are raised about 
prosecutorial misconduct, the potential entrapment or misidentification 
of suspects, and the legality of the 
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention 
facility. These are entirely legitimate 
concerns, of course, but ones likely to 
be ineffective in front of judges anxious to set deterring sentences and juries composed of frightened citizens.
No defense of civil liberties is 
likely to be terribly effective as long 
as people believe the threat from terrorism is massive, even existential. 
 
To undo, or even modify, the security system that has burgeoned in 
the United States during the last ten 
years, those who oppose it must attack not simply the consequences of 
the system, but also the premise that 
furnishes its essential engine.
 
“Threats” of the Past
Between about 1480 and 1680, hundreds of thousands of people, the 
vast majority of them women, were 
executed in Europe, mostly by being 
burned at the stake. This took place 
after they had confessed, generally 
(but not always) under torture, to 
such crimes as eating babies, flying on broomsticks, and copulating 
with devils. Notes historian Hugh 
Trevor-Roper (in The european
WiTch-craze of The SixTeenTh and
SevenTeenTh cenTurieS (1969)), one 
square in a German town “looked 
like a little forest, so crowded were 
the stakes,” and during an eight-year 
reign one prince-bishop “burnt 900 
persons, including his own nephew, 
nineteen Catholic priests, and children of seven who were said to have 
had intercourse with demons.”
 
During this long period, a few 
people tried to debunk the process—
and some were tortured and executed 
themselves because of such heresy. 
But their attacks on it were ineffectual because they went after the consequences of the system, not its premise: 
that witches exist and that they are a 
key element in an ongoing battle on 
earth between God and the Devil. 
 
Let us flash forward. In his fascinating 2000 book Communazis, Alexander 
Stephan describes the U.S. government’s surveillance of a group of émigré 
writers during and after World War 
II. None was found to pose much of a 
subversive threat,and the surveillance 
never led to real persecution—indeed, 
few of the writers noticed they were 
being watched. Instead, what impresses 
Stephan is the essential absurdity of the 
situation, as huge numbers of government employees intercepted and catalogued communications, meticulously 
recorded comings and goings, and 
sifted enterprisingly through trash bins, 
exhibiting a “combination of high efficiency with grotesque overkill”—and 
all, of course, “at taxpayers’ expense.”
 
At the time, critics of this process, like those for the witch craze, 
focused almost entirely on the potential for civil liberties violations. 
But no one, it seems, attacked the 
premise of the system—that Communists were everywhere and posed 
a severe threat. More specifically, at 
no point during the Cold War does 
it appear that anyone said in public 
“many domestic Communists adhere 
to a foreign ideology that ultimately 
has as its goal the destruction of 
capitalism and democracy and by 
violence if necessary; however, they 
do not present much of a danger, are 
actually quite a pathetic bunch, and 
couldn’t subvert their way out of a 
wet paper bag. Why are we expending so much time, effort, and treasure over this issue?”
 
In fact, despite huge anxieties 
about it at the time, there seem to 
have been few, if any, instances in 
which domestic Communists engaged 
in anything that could be considered 
espionage after the Second World 
War. Moreover, at no time did any 
domestic Communist ever commit 
anything that could be considered 
violence in support of the cause.
Nonetheless, the fear of domestic 
Communism and the consequent 
costly anti-Communist surveillance 
system persisted for decades.
 
Thus, 
in 1972, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in full perpetual motion mode opened 65,000 new files as 
part of its costly quest to ferret out 
Communists in the United States. 
The pursuit died out only when international Communism collapsed 
at the end of the Cold War.
Terrorist Risks Assessed
Something comparable has now happened..
 
post #2895 of 3825

Stoics+3.jpg

 

For the fifth time.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › What book are you reading right now?