Confirm Your Bias

I want to share with you an exercise in (cognitive) bias:

1) If you throw a piece of paper away, do you put it in the paper recycling bin? If that piece of paper e.g. tissue paper is soiled, do you then put it in the garbage? It’s still paper right, so why not put soiled tissue paper in the paper recycling bin?



2) Did you know that Pluto is no longer a planet? It was reclassified as a 'dwarf-planet'. But a dwarf-planet is still a planet right? Pluto was discovered in 1930, we have been calling it a planet for almost 100 years, but now the ‘experts’ say it is not a planet, but a ‘plutoid’ or dwarf planet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto



3) Is Carbon Dioxide a pollutant? This one is important because it makes the difference between millions of dollars in taxes, or not. And YES — they will be coming out of your paycheck not the politicians’.

Can they tax the air we breathe?

Well if you redefine CO2 as a pollutant — they can and do.
CO2 has been around for a long time, and the last thousand years or more of human history, CO2 was NOT called a pollutant. For the last 10 or more years the definition has been wavering. Now however, with new motivation and a new agenda, Washington and Obama have definitively re-defined CO2 as a pollutant; regardless if manmade or naturally occurring.

Now the point of the questions above is not to prove any facts. You will not prove one single fact with them, but magically, what the 3 questions above really do — is reveal your biases.

Beware! Trying this on your family will result in heated debates, be ready!
If you are really feeling good about this try these two:

Syrian ‘Rebels’:
1) Really? When the US fights them in Iraq, they are called 'Insurgents' and it is not a revolution but an 'insurgency' or downright terror campaign.
2) There was no insurgency until the SAudis and Qataris started funding the 'rebels'.

CO2:
1) There was no reason to re-define CO2 until a certain agenda came along and some politicians needed the new definition to enable their tax scams.
2) Why re-define now?

In the cases above, you will see that the timing is more than dubious, it is actually incriminating.

In every political case, the timing is crucially important.

Some people will say you are being a pedantic-semantic fool for harping on your definitions, the people who say that however, are the ones who end up in 're-education camps' later, 'for their own good' ... of course.

The start of any project must be the definitions, make sure you get them right or you will pay dearly later on when it’s much too late, and never miss a chance to confront someone who is using semantics to rip you off.

Social Security - Democrats' Rip-Off!

This is a perfect example of the "Generation Effect"!
From Facebook:



History Lesson on Your Social Security Card
Just in case some of you young whippersnappers (and some older ones) didn't know this.
It's easy to check out, if you don't believe it. Be sure and show it to your family
and friends. They need a little history lesson on what's what and it doesn't matter
whether you are Democrat or Republican. Facts are Facts.

Social Security

Cards up until the 1980s expressly stated the number and
Card were not to be used for identification purposes. Since nearly everyone in the
United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the
message, NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION was removed.

An old Social Security card with the "NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION"message.
Our Social Security

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1) That participation in the Program would be
completely voluntary,

No longer Voluntary

2) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
incomes into the Program,

Now 7.65%
On the first $90,000.

3) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,

No longer tax deductible

4) That the money the participants put in went to the
Independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
General Operating Fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,

Under Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and spent.

5) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed
as income.

Under Clinton & Gore
up to 85% of your Social Security can be taxed.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put
away -- you may be interested in the following:

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
Independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the
General Fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratically
controlled House and Senate.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party with Al Gore casting the
'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the U.S.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

Q: Which Political Party decided to start
giving annuity payments to immigrants?

(AND MY FAVORITE):

A: That's right!

Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!

------------ -- ------------ --------- ----- ------------ --------- ---------

Then, after violating the original contract (FICA),
the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans
want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!
If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of
awareness will be planted and maybe changes will
evolve.

The Generation Effect

The generation effect is the apparent drifting of the definition of “Normal” due to the reference bias of each new generation.

“It has always been this way”.
In other words - the set of values that you are born with become prime reference for the rest of your life.

Example:
In the early 1980’s in California, waitresses did not have to pay taxes on their tips.
In the mid 80’s a new law was passed and from there on waitresses had to include their tips in their income taxes.
This was not “normal” for anyone of that generation.
However, the next generation grows up with this new criteria and accepts it as the norm.
“It is normal to pay taxes on your tips” becomes the new status quo.

This has a debilitating effect over time.
Applied to our present government - it (among other things) ENABLES politicians to keep gradually raising taxes indefinitely.

Sometimes known as “salami tactic” - to gradually take something away -one slice of salami at a time - until there is nothing left. If the “slices” are kept small, the current generation does not notice and is more likely to accept the loss.

A similar analogy is the “Frog in boiling water”:
If you toss a frog into a pot of boiling water – he will immediately jump out of it.
However, if you put the frog in a pot of cold water, and slowly heat it up to the boiling point – he will stay in the pot until he dies.

If we take a look at our social security system you can see how our present day politicians are exploiting the generation effect to effectively apply the salami tactic to our taxes.

Because our politicians constantly devalue our dollar with dubious tax schemes and an even more dubious “Federal Reserve” the buying power of the dollar decreases over time. 

If that isn’t bad enough – we now add one more negative dynamic on top:The present method to pay off debt , is to borrow money from the Chinese.So to pay off last year’s debt, our politicians borrow more money and INCUR MORE DEBT.DEBT ON TOP OF DEBT = MORE DEBT in an ever increasing spiral upwards.The net effect of this is that the next generation has to pay the last generation’s debt.The politicians therefore “project” what they need for next fiscal year – which is more new taxpayers to pay for the last round of delirious borrowing.In simpler terms – they are paying off one credit card with another.The very sad thing about this is:They are ENSLAVING future generations that aren’t even born yet to the debt machine known as our fiscal policy!

In order to counter this, more and more NEW taxpayers are needed. So in effect, the next generation has to pay for the previous generation, because the previous generation’s money has devalued over time.
This need for a perpetually growing pool of new taxpayers is what the politicians call “growth” and it is nothing more than a pyramid scam over time.

If time is the horizontal axis, the pyramid lays on its side as in diagram below:

Any system based on “growth” is a pyramid scam.
Growth in a politician’s mouth is nothing but newspeak for Pyramid Scam.

This is what’s happening in present day America.
Taxes are constantly being raised, and new taxes and fees are constantly being made.
This, all to combat the devaluation of our money due to:

• inflation
• politicians misuse of taxes
• misappropriation of funds
• The Federal Reserve
• And many more

The real criminal part about this is the absolute failure of our politicians and so called "leaders" to address this FAILURE.

Raising taxes is indicative of a broken system.

When politicians obey the laws of nature (like a gold standard for our money) and practice sound fiscal policies (just google Ron Paul) there is absolutely no reason we cannot beat or entirely control inflation and the resulting devaluation of our currency.

The best analogy for this is the “Flat Tire Syndrome”.

A bicycle has a flat tire, you can:

1. pump more air into it
2. fix the hole

1. If the hole is small enough, just pumping it up will work for a short amount of time - but after a while the tire is flat again.
2. If you fix the hole - problem solved.

What we are doing is 1. constantly pumping more air into a tire with a hole in it - “System Defect”.

Instead of fixing the hole - we are constantly asking for more air - from the taxpayer. And then more air, and even more air on top of the air as the hole gets larger and larger (due to inflation etc.).
This method is ignorance of the defect, and can only work temporarily for a short time.

And that is exactly the problem - Refusing to fix the problem:
TOTAL DENIAL OF REALITY

Ice Cream

THE BEST EXPLANATION I HAVE SEEN ON WHY OBAMA WON THE ELECTION

From a teacher in the Nashville area

"We are worried about 'the cow' when it is all about the 'IceCream.'

The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third grade this year..... The presidential election was heating up and some of the children showed an interest. I decided we would have an election for a class president. We would choose our nominees. They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote. To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other class members. We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students should have.

We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot. The class had done a great job in their selections. Both candidates were good kids.

I thought Jamie might have an advantage because he got lots of parental support. I had never seen Olivia's mother. The day arrived when they were to make their speeches.

Jamie went first. He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better place. He ended by promising to do his very best. Everyone applauded and he sat down.

Now it was Olivia's turn to speak. Her speech was concise. She said, "If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream." She sat down.

The class went wild. "Yes! Yes! We want ice cream..."

She surely would say more. She did not have to.

A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the icecream?

She wasn't sure. Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it? She didn't know. The class really didn't care. All they were thinking about was the ice cream.

Jamie was forgotten. Olivia won by a landslide.

Every time Barack Obama opened his mouth he offered icecream and 52 percent of the people reacted like nine year olds. They want ice cream.

The other 48 percent know they are going to have to feed the cow and clean up the mess."

This is the ice cream Obama promised us!

 

Remember, the government cannot give anything to anyone --
until they first take STEAL it away from someone else.

Gray Davis

This jerk tripled the car registration fees in California until the people finally had enough and kicked him out of office!
When was the last time that you saw a politician kicked out by angry citizens with a grass roots signature collecting campaign!!!!!?

Viva Democracy!!!

Little Rat-Bastard socialist Faggot