Occupy Wall Street

The ‘Occupy’ movement is intriguing.  The idea of social and economic equality is a continuation of equality movements that have spanned over the past 150 years.  I’m not writing this to argue and protest against The Man and corporate America playing a role into the toilet flush of the world economy.  Instead I want to discuss this movement in terms of this supposed ‘change’ that so many believe or have been talking about with the approaching magical date in 2012.

I’ve written about 2012 before, both debunking and informational posts on the many beliefs, facts, and theories behind it.  To say the least, I’m intrigued, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say I’m a hard core believer – especially when you get all into the alien and sci-fi aspect of it.  If I was to ‘believe’, then I would say my beliefs stem more from the theories of discovery and enlightenment of the Human race that are clearly around us all today.  The ‘Occupy’ movement, Human Genome Project and the advancements in the understanding of our genetics, the exponential advancement of our technology, and the unexplained occurrences: Massive animal deaths (as mapped on Google Maps), increase in major natural disasters (According to the EM-DAT, the total natural disasters reported each year has been steadily increasing in recent decades, from 78 in 1970 to 348 in 2004.), etc.

As far as the ‘Occupy’ movement, the huge global participation is directly attributed to today’s internet and technology.  The internet, in some respects, is the collective subconscious of this planet.  Never before has information been so easily distributed and readily consumed.  One could argue the increase of natural disasters is also a result of internet and technology – 1. We can now live in places never before habitable. 2. News of every natural disaster reaches millions.  So, it’s no surprise how the ‘Occupy’ phenomena has spread so quickly to 1500 cities worldwide.

Is the world finally becoming enlightened and demanding a global change?  Social and economic equality makes sense, but how can that be achieved?  Can the ‘Occupy’ movement really force global change?  All great questions that have yet to be answered. The timing is impeccable though with 2012 right around the corner when mentions from ancient civilizations, modern day spiritualists, and even scientists all theorize one similar concept: Change is upon us.

Think back to when you were born.  How different are things nowadays?  Well now look back 100 years ago.  It’s crazy to think about how much has changed.  Even crazier to think about how much things will change in the next 100 years.

They say that technological advancement is exponential.  Well with that in mind, looking at these changes in the past 100 years, it’s crazy to even imagine what we will see the rest of our lives!!

The year is 1910.
One hundred years ago.
What a difference a century makes!

Here are some of the U.S. statistics for the Year 1910:

The average life expectancy in the U.S. was 47

Only 14 percent of the homes in the U.S. had a bathtub.

Only 8 percent of the homes had a telephone.

A three-minute call from Denver to New York City cost eleven dollars.

There were only 8,000 cars in the U.S., and only 144 miles of paved roads.

The maximum speed limit in most cities was 10 mph.

Alabama , Mississippi, Iowa, and Tennessee were each more heavily populated than California.

With a mere 1.4 million people, California was only the 21st most populous state in the Union.

The tallest structure in the world was the Eiffel Tower!

The average wage in the U.S. was 22 cents per hour.

The average U .S. worker made between $200 and $400 per year ..

A competent accountant could expect to earn $2000 per year,

a dentist $2,500 per year,

a veterinarian between $1,500 and $4,000 per year, and

a mechanical engineer about $5,000 per year.

More than 95 percent of all births in the U.S. took place at home ..

Ninety percent of all U.S. doctors had no college education.

Instead, they attended so-called medical schools, many of which were condemned in the press and by the government as “substandard.”

Sugar cost four cents a pound.

Eggs were fourteen cents a dozen.

Coffee was fifteen cents a pound.

Most women only washed their hair once a month, and used borax or egg yolks for shampoo.

Canada passed a law that prohibited poor people from entering into their country for any reason.

Five leading causes of death in the U.S. were:
1. Pneumonia and influenza
2. Tuberculosis
3. Diarrhea
4. Heart disease
5. Stroke

The American flag had 45 stars.

Arizona, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Hawaii, and Alaska hadn’t been admitted to the Union yet.

The population of Las Vegas, Nevada, was only 30!!!

Crossword puzzles , canned beer, and ice tea hadn’t been invented yet.

There was no Mother’s Day or Father’s Day.

Two out of every 10 U.S. adults couldn’t read or write.

Only 6 percent of all Americans had graduated from high school.

Marijuana, heroin, and morphine were all available over the counter at the local corner drugstores.
Back then pharmacist said, “Heroin clears the complexion, gives buoyancy to the mind, regulates the stomach and bowels, and is, in fact, a perfect guardian of health.” (Shocking!)

Eighteen percent of households in the U.S. had at least one full-time servant or domestic help.

There were about 230 reported murders in the entire U.S.

There are many questions I have wondered whether I’d see the answer to in my lifetime:

Will there be an African-American President in my lifetime?  Check.

Will there be universal health care for Americans in my lifetime?  Check.

Will there be flying cars in my lifetime? Depends on how you define a car, Virgin Galactic and Icon Aircraft may have arguments that this is a “Check” too, but I am still waiting for the flying Delorean.

Will Marijuana be legalized in my lifetime?  This seems to be on it’s way.

On this day, Thursday, March 25, 2010, it was announced that California has certified, officially named the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010, for November’s ballot Wednesday after backers turned in signatures from hundreds of thousands of voters.  This would make California the first state to legalize marijuana since the 1930s.

Now obviously just because it’s on the ballet, does not mean it will pass, though many speculate there is an enormous amount of support for this.  The reasons for support are not because California is home to an abnormally large population of stoners.  Instead, the support stems more from the economic crisis going on in the grand state of California and many feel the legalization AND taxation of marijuana may be the solution to the crisis.

If it’s approved, adults 21 and older would be permitted to possess up to an ounce of marijuana; anyone could grow up to 25 square feet of plants per residence; and local governments would be asked to craft rules on distributing and taxing marijuana. The Secretary of State’s Office said it would take effect the day after Election Day (Do I see a new Hallmark Holiday in the works?)

The interesting fact that will come into play when/if the initiative is passed, is how the federal government will respond.  Though the state will have legalized it, the federal government will not have. While the Obama administration last year promised to turn a blind eye to sick people, even though medical marijuana also conflicts with federal law, it may not be willing to do the same when it comes to street-corner dealers and people who just want to get high.

No official word has come from DC yet.  Yet Salwa Ibrahim, spokeswoman for the pro-legalization campaign led by cannabis activist Richard Lee of Oakland seems to think not much will be done.  “The federal government is going to allow the state of California to move forward with this.  We’re not worried about it.”

It’ll be interesting to see how this all plays out!

A lot of people are very opinionated about the subject of Michael Vick due to the fact that dogs (For the record:  I’m  a huge dog fan and have own and loved many) are involved in the situation.  For the first part of my rant, I’m going to strip away moral debate on this topic.  I mean, it’s very clear that what he did is wrong.  He should and did get punished for his actions.  The moral debate lies more on whether he should be let back into the NFL.  I’ll touch on that in a bit.

The Business Debate – A “Good” or “Bad” Move for the NFL

The verdict is in, everyone knows it:  Vick has clearance to play in the 2009-2010 NFL season.  Of course the NFL and the Eagles are going to catch a ton of scrutiny for this decision, posing the question, “Is this a good move for the NFL and the Eagles?”

From a business standpoint, letting Vick play is a great decision for the NFL and the Eagles.  Why?  Well I, for one, am very interested in seeing him on the playing field.  In his previous seasons, Vick was one of the most electrifying and exciting players to watch on the field.  Being from Detroit, I was reminded of the glorious days (glorious in terms of the Lions’ history of horrible teams) of Barry Sanders.  As a young lad, I was excited to go to the Thanksgiving Day games (we went every year) no matter what the record of the Lions was because Barry was always so amazing to watch…even if a loss was the end result.

Now, even if someone is not a Detroit fan (most likely 95% of the NFL fans out there!!), I would imagine that there are thousands, if not millions, of the NFL fans out there that agree with me on Vick’s “excitability.”  This means that Vick’s return to the field, after years in jail, will probably attract a number of eyes that normally wouldn’t watch the Eagles.  Also factor in that “Michael Vick” has become a household name that people trash over their family dinner regularly, you now have the non-NFL fans that will undoubtedly watch just because they are interested in the drama (think about how many people gawk at a car wreck).  This most definitely means that the ratings on the games in which Vick takes the field will most likely be quite high…which means more advertising dollars.

The same applies for the tickets sold for the games in which Vick plays.  Teams, such as the Lions, that have had horrible consecutive seasons will most likely see a spike in tickets sales for the game(s) that Vick is taking the field.  This equates to $$$$ to the NFL – Plain and simple.

Additionally, as the saying goes, “No PR is bad PR.”  Even though the whole world may hate Michael Vick, his presence on the field will attract the eyes of people who may not have ever watched a football game.  This equates to higher ratings which in turn…I already explained the scenario above.  The only question left to ask from a PR standpoint is, “Will Michael Vick’s presence on the field cause people to not watch NFL games or advertisers to not run ads on his games?”  I’m sure that there will be a very small percentage of people that might answer a questionnaire stating this is the reason they don’t watch NFL games.  But let’s be honest people, if you are an NFL fan, no matter how disgusted with Michael Vick, and maybe even the NFL and Eagles for putting him on the field, you’re still going to watch your team play on Sundays.  There maybe a few conservative advertisers that might drop out, but I think it’s safe to assume most will stay on, especially because the ratings will be higher.

Analyze this data, the only conclusion to come to is:  A phenomenal move on the part of the NFL and Eagles to better their business.

The Business Debate – Ethics and Practices

The second business topic deals more with the moral issues in this case.  As much as businesses and entrepreneurs would like to base decisions purely on the financial result, our society has evolved in such a way that business ethics are a very important part of the decision making process (Although I say very important, when it comes down to it, let’s not forget the point of a business is to make money).

The professional sports industry plays a very large role in the lives of our youth society.  Pro players are role models – no ifs, ands, or buts about it.  Being so, the entities, such as the NFL, that control the industry must take this into account when making decisions such as this case.  Although they are in it to make money, if they were completely irresponsible and allowed rapists, killers, and drug users (known to the public at least!!) to play professional sports, they would undoubtedly be taken to the town square and stoned.

Is it ethical for the NFL and Eagles to put Vick on the field?  Probably not.  If you look at other  careers, such as a lawyer, a felony conviction would get any lawyer’s license to practice revoked.  Granted, an NFL player is not defending criminals or representing accident victims in a court of law, but with the whole “role model” influence such a powerful medium to the youth across the country, one could argue that it’s of very similar significance.

In the end, as I mentioned above, the decision isn’t really going to take away from the NFL audience.  Weigh all these factors together, and I would have made the same decision.

Play on Michael Vick.

Stevia. Most people probably haven’t heard of it. Stevia is a genus of about 240 species of herbs and shrubs in the sunflower family (Asteraceae), native to subtropical and tropical South America and Central America. The species Stevia rebaudiana, commonly known as sweetleaf, sweet leaf, sugarleaf, or simply stevia, is widely grown for its sweet leaves. As a sweetener and sugar substitute, stevia’s taste has a slower onset and longer duration than that of sugar, although some of its extracts may have a bitter or licorice-like aftertaste at high concentrations.

With its extracts having up to 300 times the sweetness of sugar, stevia has garnered attention with the rise in demand for low-carbohydrate, low-sugar food alternatives. Medical research has also shown possible benefits of stevia in treating obesity and high blood pressure. Because stevia has a negligible effect on blood glucose, it is attractive as a natural sweetener to people on carbohydrate-controlled diets. However, health and political controversies have limited stevia’s availability in many countries; for example, the United States banned it in the early 1990s unless labeled as a supplement.

The question to ask is: Why it was banned unless labeled as a supplement by the US FDA? Is it because it’s potentially harmful to humans? In reality, stevia is natural and non-toxic. Compared to nutra-sweet or Splenda which are both derived through a chemical process, it’s actually much healthier for you.

In 1991, when the FDA labeled the plant as an “unsafe additive,” it restricted the import of stevia. This brought on much controversy that brought up questions of whether the FDA acted on results from empirical data that stevia was “inadequate to demonstrate its safety,” or if it was pressure from lobbyists in the artificial sweetener industry. Most likely we all have our opinions on that!

Well guess what…last year the FDA lifted the restriction and stevia can now be used as an additive. Wow, just when you thought our government did not act in the best interest of the people they TOTALLY redeem themselves…or NOT.

The real reason the restriction was lifted is not because they find that it’s in the best interest of public health. Forget that there is this all-natural product that grows from the ground that could be used as a sugar substitute rather than using nasty chemicals that we are finding cause an array of symptoms. Instead, what really pushed them to make the change…COCA COLA. That’s right folks. The beverage giant pushed and the government tipped over.

At least the soda giants took a turn for the better **applause**:

In December 2008, the FDA gave a “no objection” approval for GRAS status to Truvia (developed by Cargill and The Coca-Cola Company) and PureVia (developed by PepsiCo and the Whole Earth Sweetener Company, a subsidiary of Merisant), both of which are wholly-derived from the Stevia plant.

This headline isn’t a joke.  A state representative for Texas actually proposed during House testimony on voter identification legislation, “Rather than everyone here having to learn Chinese — I understand it’s a rather difficult language — do you think that it would behoove you and your citizens [Chinese] to adopt a name that we could deal with more readily here?”  As a person of ethnic heritage, although I have assimilated to the American culture, it’s completely appalling that she could make such an ignorant statement.  Last names have been what carries on a family’s tradition for thousands of years now.  There have been numerous times in the past that have been documented as prejudiced movements where immigrants have been forced to change their name when entering the U.S.  Did Betty Brown fail her history class?  Is she this ignorant?

It’s so disheartening to the movement for equality amongst all who live, work, and are the very lifeline to our struggling economy.  The South already has issues to deal with in escaping the stereotype for being racist.  It’s ignorant comments like these by public officials that reopen the wound making it easy for people to scorn at.  When approached by the Organization of Chinese Americans, Brown replied, “Can’t you see that this is something that would make it a lot easier for you and the people who are poll workers if you could adopt a name just for identification purposes that’s easier for Americans to deal with?”  She refused calls out by people to apologize for her statements.

What’s next?  Mexicans changing their names so it’s easier for American to deal with?  Japanese?  Russians?  The list goes on.  This is a country that prides itself on being a big melting pot.  We are proud of the different cultures that are represented…probably more than any country in the world.  It’s just a shame that ignorant people like Betty Brown can make one stupid statement and tarnish the “American Way.”  I just hope she comes to her senses and realized the stupidity in her statement and apologizes for it.

I find these types of “conspiracy theory” videos interesting, but before I jump on the bandwagon with a theory and start preaching to the world, I always do a little research to see if there is any validity in what the message is.  In this case, I was astonished.

If history has taught us anything, it’s that large empires only manipulate and persecute the majority population (often times the poor) for the better of the small, but powerful, wealthy sector of society.  Mankind has evolved…right?  We showed our evolution of these principles when we stopped Hitler…didn’t we?  In a way, yes.  But I also see that the world domination conspirators might have evolved in their methods as well.  It’s no longer possible to take over the world by force without nuclear destruction of the planet.  What about a strategic takeover through an idea of world unity through governments, currencies, and controlled media.  If ever a way to take over the world in this day and age, this would be the method.  Does this sound improbable?  Here’s some conspiracy vocab to think about: RFID Chips, 9/11 conspiracy – did we do it to ourselves to create this so-called war on terror?, global economic crisis – interest rates lowered, credit easier to get – all decision our government made…which has led to this recession, war on Iraq – Iraq happens to be in a very strategic location for military attacks on Iraq and Syria, U.S. supplying Georgia with weapons and training in support again Russia – all of these question raised by very public actions taken by our government.

The U.S. Government may be the best PR agency in the world.  With our standards of democracy, they cannot control the media like China or similar factions do.  Our government had to evolve with the times and become a PR expert that can covey a controlled message across our media to influence the public.  Here’s a great example:  We not only condone, but we emphatically support this so-called “war on terror” as we invade countries in search of terrorists.  Our own constitutional rights are compromised with our own support due to this message of “it’s a national security issue”.  There are families voluntarily implanting RFID chips in their children which now place them forever under the surveillance of satellites in response to fears brought on by these so-called terrorist threats.  All of this accomplished primarily through the media communication this message of terrorist threats and national security issues.

The New World Order as explained by Wiki, refers to a new period of history evidencing a dramatic change in world political thought and the balance of power. However, in conspiracy theory, the term “New World Order” (the capital letters are distinguishing) refers to the advent of a cryptocratic or totalitarian world government.  Is this happening now?  Let’s look at some examples of some current government movements and decide for yourself.

RFID Chips – Reference: http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/301006_id_cards_2008.html

Last year there was quite the controversy surrounding our very own U.S. government pushing these “revolutionary” ID cards.  These ID cards would carry RFID chips that would carry every bit of information on each one of us as an individual that our government has on file – Social Security, credit history, legal history, etc.  These were supposed to be implemented May of last year…obviously the American people had a different feeling about that happening.  Oh, yeah and these chips…traceable anywhere in the world by satellites.

The North American Union – Reference: http://www.google.com/search?q=north+american+union&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t

The North American Union (NAU) is a theoretical regional union of Canada, Mexico, and the United States similar in structure to the European Union, sometimes including a common currency called the Amero. The idea of regional integration has been discussed, proposed, ^[1], or debated amongst former government officials with business leaders in academic and scholarly circles for many decades,^[2] but nothing approaching the integration suggested by a “North American Union” has ever been seriously considered by leaders of the three nations, and government officials from the nations say there are no plans to create such a union.^[3] The formation of a North American Union has also been the subject of various conspiracy theories.^[4][5][6][7] It is said to be a conspiracy theory, yet there have been several reports over the past couple years, like http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=49877, stating that George Bush was actively pursing agreements with Mexican and Canadian officials to make this union happen.

Iraq – Reference: http://www.accuracy.org/newsrelease.php?articleId=1246

We all know about the war on Iraq.  And I think many of us have our concerns with the motives (**cough** OIL **cough**) behind our invasion of that country.  Not to say that Saddam wasn’t a tyrant and deserved to be removed, but we must question the “big picture” that the Bush administration had in mind.  Did he really feel compelled to invade Iraq just to liberate the Iraqui people?  When you take into account countries like Iran and Syria that are conveniently located nearby, questions of strategies to use Iraq as a strategic military base against those countries make a lot of sense for oil domination…which in turn may be world domination.

U.S. and Israel help Georgia fight Russia – Reference:http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-57569

Why did we care?  Russia is a long time “enemy” yes.  But when you look more into it, look at the location of that area.  Yet another strategic military location the U.S. could use in it’s efforts to take over the oil-rich Middle East.  And if Russia controlled that area, most likely they wouldn’t be so quick to allow our military to occupy it.

Is this all paranoia?  It seems a lot of people are picking up on these trends.  Yet the overall public awareness does not seem to follow suit.  Is our media and entertainment industry yet another point in the plot for global domination – One World?  Hulu’s commercial jokes about a plot to take over the world by turning brains to mush by feeding it meaningless “entertainment”.  Perhaps that message is not too far off.

We’re social. Follow Us!

Although I’m a United States citizen, it’s stories like these that cast a shadow of doubt about our government agencies falling to the pressures of corporations.  First of all, let me state that I do not condone people pirating software, technology, music, or film/tv programming.  With that said, there has to be a line drawn that clearly states the limit in which a government can intervene in this war. 

Yes I agree corporate entities have a right to protect their assets, but we as humans have a right to our privacy.  Although the internet is a forum that allows file sharing to happen easily, doesn’t mean you can exploit it’s users.  That’d be like the secret service busting me for handing my friend the latest Chili Pepper’s CD to upload to his/her music library.  It’s just not right.

Sweden, who apparently hosts 8% of the global peer-to-peer file sharing traffic (Popular BitTorrent sharing site, The Pirate Bay, is based in Sweden), passed a new law, which is based on the European Union’s Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED),  allowing copyright holders to obtain a court order forcing ISPs to provide the IP addresses identifying which computers have been sharing copyrighted material.

That’s right, you share a file using a BitTorrent site, and you could be found.  Now, for us Americans, I don’t think there’s that much of an immediate threat.  But if this becomes a trend, we could be looking at similar legislation being brought to our House and Senate for approval.  We don’t get to vote on it people…we get to watch our elected officials decide for us.

I’m torn.  In one way, I see and understand the point of the law, but there’s a part of me that has a hard time swallowing the notion that my privacy may not be protected.  I’m curious as to what people have to say…you give a “thumbs up” or “thumbs down” on this law??

We’re social. Follow Us!

As you can imagine, the security of our new President, Barack Obama, is a major operation:  Secret Service agents, snipers, remote radios, satellite images.  This country has shown how we’ve evolved in electing our first African-American president.  But we all know that prejudices still exist and insane people obsessed with some message walk amongst us all throughout the word.  Reasons that prove the safety of President Obama should definitely be a concern.  Security of our President has always been tight no matter who it is, but reports are coming in that Barack has taken his security and style high-tech.

According to some reports,Obama wore a suit made by a clothier specializing in bullet-resistant clothing during the inauguration ceremonies.

While no one from the U.S. Secret Service have yet to mention any details about the garment’s structure, some are speculating it may have come from the line by Colombian designer Miguel Caballero.

With rising levels of dangerous conflicts in Colombia and other parts of Latin America, the need for a type of clothing that not only can protect it’s owner, but also looks good too.  Caballero,  is well known for his super tough but flexible and business appropriate clothing, such as the $7,500 polo shirt that can stop a shot from a 9-mm revolver.

According to Caballero, many of his garments offer more than three levels of ballistic protection and they are about seven times more flexible than the Kevlar vests that are usually worn. Designers that use Kevlar tie together dense strands of the material (500 to 1,500 filaments per strand of yarn, according to Slate), which is then weaved into the clothing.

It’s absolutely amazing to me that fashion has a solution for these high profile individuals (be it presidents or drug lords) that can protect them from bullets…in style!!

In addition, President Obama has one of the safest Presidential limo ever built, calling it, Cadillac One (or simply, “The Beast”), whose toughness rivals a tank and seals off like a bank vault in the event of a potential attack.

We’re social. Follow Us!

Larry Flynt and sidekick Joe Francis

Larry Flynt and sidekick Joe FrancisThere’s few things that get better with age.  Of course we all know fine wine is one of them.  But one of the rare others is the mind of Larry Flynt.  At the ripened age of 67, Larry Flynt may have pulled his most brilliant marketing/pr stunt yet.

In a mockery of our current economic status, Larry speaks out on the growing trend of multi-million dollar companies whining to the U.S. Government to bail them out in their so called “crisis”.  “The take here is that everyone and their mother want to be bailed out from the banks to the big three,” said Owen Moogan, spokesman for Larry Flynt. “The porn industry has been hurt by the downturn like everyone else and they are going to ask for the $5 billion. Is it the most serious thing in the world? Is it going to make the lives of Americans better if it happens? It is not for them to determine.”

Almost as comical as this request, “Girls Gone Wild” creator, Joe Francis, decided to jump on the bandwagon as Larry’s kid sidekick joining in the request to the government and making this statement:  “The US government should actively support the adult industry’s survival and growth, just as it feels the need to support any other industry cherished by the American people.”

“We should be delivering [the request] by the end of today to our congressmen and [Secretary of the Treasury Henry] Paulson asking for this $5 billion dollar bailout,” he told CNN Wednesday.”

Now let’s be honest…we all know the porn industry, even with a reported decrease in sales, still has the web keeping the industry going strong (perhaps the affiliate marketers are suffering more).  Even Larry and his sidekick conceded the industry is in no financial danger.  The genius behind this political statement is “calling out” these corporations and financial institutions for whining like babies when times are a little tough.

IT’S NOT THE TAXPAYERS DUTY TO BAIL THEM OUT!

I’ll leave you another quote from Larry to close out this rant:

“People are too depressed to be sexually active,” Flynt said in the statement. “This is very unhealthy as a nation. Americans can do without cars and such but they cannot do without sex.”

“With all this economic misery and people losing all that money, sex is the farthest thing from their mind. It’s time for congress to rejuvenate the sexual appetite of America. The only way they can do this is by supporting the adult industry and doing it quickly.”

So far, there has been no congressional reaction to the request.

We’re social. Follow Us!