More money for medical research

"Money won't buy happiness, but it will pay the salaries of a large research staff to study the problem” Bill Vaughn


WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama has announced $5 billion in government grant money to help pay for research into cures for cancer and other diseases.

I have written before about the federal money spent on medical research and how it would be more effective if a prize for a cure was offered instead.

Now President Obama will ask for another $5 billion of government money be spent on medical research. This after more than $30 billion has been spent on research for a cancer cure.

Do you believe republican researchers will get as much money for research as will democrat researchers? Don't!

The Orteig Prize offered $25 thousand in 1919 for anyone to fly across the Atlantic non stop. Charles Lindbergh won that prize in 1927. How long do you think it would have taken someone if the government spent money on research to find out how to accomplish the mission, and how much money would have been spent on the research?

John Harrison (24 March 1693 – 24 March 1776) was a self-educated English clockmaker. He invented the marine chronometer, a long-sought and critically-needed key piece in solving the problem of accurately establishing the East-West position, or longitude, of a ship at sea, thus revolutionising and extending the possibility of safe long distance sea travel in the Age of Sail. The problem was considered so intractable that the British Parliament offered a prize of £20,000 (comparable to £2.77 million / €3.52 million / $4.56 million in modern currency) for the solution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harrison

The Harrison prize encouraged innovation to find a way to keep time at sea and measure longitude. This helped seafarers keep better track of their positions and avoid running aground. Think how long it would have taken to find a mariner clock if the government had funded research. And how much would it have cost the British government in research funds?

Researchers survive by doing research. If a cure is found there will be no need for research. It makes sense that the researchers are not in a hurry to find something that will put them out of business.

Humans all look out for their self interests first.

Charles Tolleson

Women on submarines

The U.S. Navy is considering lifting the ban on women serving with men on board submarines. I think this will bring problems that are created by nature.

A better solution would be to train women to operate a submarine and staff the whole crew with females. The same should be done for crews aboard other navy vessels.

If women want to be equal and share the responsibility for defense then surely there are plenty of women willing to perform these missions to protect their country. After all, it is a country that treats women as if they are more valuable than they really are. We do not need any more baby factories. Humans are not an endangered species.

Instead we need women who can produce in science and technology, and defend the country, though the country hardly needs defending. No one is stupid enough to invade the United States.

I suspect the desire to integrate the genders aboard U.S. submarines is a political action designed to get more females votes for the democrats. It has little to do with reason and plenty to do with power. Whenever men and women work together the power goes to the woman. She can censor the speech and behavior of her male co workers. I can imagine the power a woman must feel if she is the only woman on board a submarine crew. Most of the men may desire her. Each man will be chivalrous and try to protect her, vying for her favors.

The male crew members will have desire, the curse mother nature put on them, but, they must control the curse or face military discipline.

Charles Tolleson

"All I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power.”
Ashleigh Brilliant

The Demonic Male

"The Demonic Male", 1997, by Dale Peterson and Richard Wrangham indicates human males and chimpanzees are the only violent animals. The Bonobos however were a non violent type of chimpanzee. The authors study showed that humans and their cousins, chimpanzees, were the only animals that killed their own kind.

The authors give reasons that have long been suspected; food and women. Males have a biological need to procreate and sow their seeds. Food scarcity and the drive to survive will make animals fight. The desire to mate is so strong, humans and chimpanzee males will rape females.

This behavior, violence for food, is strange for humans, considering human animals can produce more food than they need.

Why does this behavior not happen in other animals? It does. They fight and protect their territory, food, and off spring. The males of other animals do not rape the females. The males could kill more of their own kind but they usually don't have the opportunity because battles end, as the defeated runs away, before death. You cannot run away from a stealth missile.

As long as human males have a need for females there will always be the State, and the military, espousing sophistry to justify the innate violence of males.

The Bible, Numbers, Chapter 31, verses 1 through 18 tells of the violence and horrors, just to collect women, virgin women.

Numbers 31:7 And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.

Numbers 31:9 And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods.

Numbers 31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

Numbers 31:18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

The best way to curtail the violence of the demonic male is to abort each male fetus for the next 25 years. The goal is to make the world's males/female ratio population to be many more females for each male, This will go a long way towards eliminating war. In India and China, more female than male fetuses are aborted. There are millions more males than females in these countries. This only means trouble ahead.

It is time for the so called "civilized" man to find a better solution to the curse mother nature placed on him. Hopefully, bio engineering will change humans' innate propensity for violence.

Charles Tolleson, Bonobo

Medicare, what is seen and what is unseen

My neighbor is an emergency room physician. He works for a company that has about 20 doctors that contract to hospitals. He gets a monthly salary and works a regular day time job.

The other day, a Monday, as he arrived home from work, I asked him how his day went, thinking a week day, daytime shift, would be quiet. He shrugged in dismay and said, "I saw twenty patients, seventeen were over 80"

He said many of these patients were brought to the emergency room after a call to 911.

In 1965 Medicare was enacted. It was a glorious day for the humanitarians. They saw goodness and praised themselves for being so much better than other people. They did not see the bad consequences of their grandiose policies. Frederic Bastiat wrote about the unseen consequences of government policies.

What the Utopian delusionalists failed to see was the results of the birth control pill just a few years before, in 1960, which cause the birth rate to decline, causing many people to grow old, childless, and living alone.

The Utopians failed to see the growth of the State with the use of 911 that would make it normal for old people living alone to call 911 for the most minor problems and be transported to the emergency room. The more calls the State mob received, the larger their budget would be for the following year.

Nor did the Utopians foresee the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Roe vs Wade, which made abortions easier, again, reducing the number of young people who would support Medicare.

The Utopians also failed to see the advances in medical technology, such as open heart surgery and laparoscopy surgery, that would prolong the lives of old people. Knee and hip replacements were not available in 1965. Many seniors have these surgeries, and cataract surgery, all paid for by Medicare. When the Medicare act was passed the humanitarians had no idea how much their programs would cost. The doctors and hospitals are the big beneficiary. They have plenty of customers, paid for by a third party. Costs of these procedures are never negotiated between doctor and patient.

So now one unseen consequence of another government policy, Medicare, is that too many people are using the health care industry more than is necessary because they don't have to pay for the service. Fewer young people are available to pay for the excesses in Medicare. The Utopians failed to see the percentage of old people in the population would increase.

The problem with government policies is they cannot adapt to changing conditions like a free market can adapt. Government policies might work better in a zero changing society, but no such society exists.

The unseen consequences of Medicare that was enacted in 1965 have created a problem for the U.S. Government. The costs are skyrocketing. The program cannot be sustained in its current form. The government hopes to solve the problem with the universal health care bill. This bill will simply make people pay more for what they are now getting for free in the emergency hospital rooms.

If the government really wants to reduce health care costs they should make it permissible for people to practice medicine without a license and for someone to open a hospital without government approval.

If the government prohibited medical insurance for all except cancer, accidental injuries, or major organic disease, with larger co payments, the cost of medical care would plummet,

Charles Tolleson

Nancy Pelosi is concerned about violence

Recently Nancy Pelosi had this to say at a news conference on Capitol Hill:

"I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw - I saw this myself in the late 70's in San Francisco, this kind of - of rhetoric was very frightening and it gave - it created a climate in which we - violence took place. And so I wish that we would all, again, curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made, understanding that - that some of the people - the ears it is falling on are not as balanced as the person making the statement might assume."

Nancy Pelosi is concerned about violence, yet she promotes violence. The government she helps manage is involved in force and violence minute by minute. Her government thugs are arresting and assaulting citizens for the smallest infraction, infractions she helped make illegal, such as smoking pot. It's my body Ms. Pelosi, so stop using violence on me! Are you a sadist?

And there is the violence of two wars sponsored by Ms Pelosi. She has the power in congress to cut off the funding for these illegal wars. How many innocent women and children have been killed in the Middle East by Ms. Pelosi's love of violence? How many dead and injured American military personnel are there because of the violent prone Nancy Pelosi? Are you a sadist Ms Pelosi?

And what did you know about the torture of innocent people at Gitmo, Ms Pelosi? Are you really concerned about violence? I don't think so. I think you just want to silence dissent. Power corrupts, and it has corrupted you. Or did power just allow your dormant corruption to blossom?

"He who controls others may be powerful, but he who has mastered himself is mightier still” Lao Tzu

Charles Tolleson

Delinquent homeowner association dues

The recent downturn in the economy has seen some homeowner associations whose members are delinquent with their association's membership dues.

Many years ago there was no such thing as condos. Homeowner associations were for a few country clubs.

My homeowners association has 72 condos in 12 buildings. Each building has one water heater for all six units in that building. There are no water meters. Our heat is electric. Each unit has an electric meter.

One of the members in my association of 72 members is delinquent in her dues. Our dues are $553 per month. This includes $113 per month for earthquake insurance, hot and cold water, sewage, exterior lights, professional property manager, landscaping, clubhouse, pool, jacquise, and sauna.

When I bought my condo I did not realize the pitfalls of having so much "communal" living involved in our dues.

The current member that is delinquent owes several thousand dollars in back dues. It is suspected she is behind in her mortgage payments and will file for bankruptcy. The association has a lien on her property for the past dues. Our manager says we will be lucky to get half of what we are owed if the property is sold.

I resent having to pay her dues. I don't know her. I did not make any decisions about her finances. Maybe she took out a second mortgage she could not afford. Maybe she spent too much on expensive wine and travels, like Thomas Jefferson, who died broke.

One could say I should not be alarmed. After all, my share of the delinquent dues is only $10 per month. However, she is not the only person I help support. I am forced, at the point of a gun, to pay taxes to support others. There are hundreds of other people who get food, shelter, health care, and education, all at my expense. It adds up.

It's only one person out of 72 that is delinquent. What if it increases to 3, or 10, or 20! If one can get away without producing and live at the expense of others, one will eventually do so.

This community sharing reminds me of Garrett Hardin's, "The Tragedy of the Commons" where each person looks out for their self interest, even though they will do harm to the common property. Hardin later said he should have titled his essay, The Tragedy of Unregulated Commons. Hardin should have known from history that most common property was regulated by the tribal chiefs, priests, and warrior class. Even regulated common property fails because of the same reasons, human self interest. My homeowner association is regulated. That does not keep some members from abusing the commons.

The person who is delinquent in her dues will only lower the value of our property. But she doesn't care since equity in her condo is probably negative. This is the tragedy of all communes. It was the tragedy of the Pilgrims who almost starved because the production of food was a community effort. They survived only after they started reaping what each individual planted and managed.

History is filled with examples of human behavior that proves people will look out for themselves. They will survive by producing or taking from others. Those are the only two ways. When one practices a government of taking, that society will not prosper.

"Socialism is workable only in heaven where it isn't needed, and in hell where they've got it.” Cecil Palmer

Charles Tolleson

Sex during a recession

Fredrick's of Hollywood just announced an increase in sales, in a down economy! Avon Products also saw an increase in sales during the past 6 months, though still lower than a year ago.

I believe this shows how women invest and place value on what they can offer a man. Men have lost more jobs than women, but not their desire for women. Men work in construction while women work in health, education, and services. The former has lost jobs while the latter has increased jobs.

Women invest in lingerie and cosmetics. Women know that a small investment can reap high returns. Men have desires for women that are so strong a man will work dangerous jobs to make a week's salary that they will spend on a woman in an hour.

In this economic slowdown, I wonder how many women have turned to the oldest profession in the world to supplant their income. From an economic point of view, an increase in the supply of prostitutes should reduce the cost men pay for sex. The free market works to set values of products and services with the amount of capital available.

Charles Tolleson

Health Care, Politics and Comprise

"It is incredible how as soon as a people become subject, it promptly falls into such complete forgetfulness of its freedom that it can hardly be roused to the point of regaining it, obeying so easily and willingly that one is led to say that this people has not so much lost its liberty as won its enslavement." Etienne de la Boetie

The art of politics is negotiate and compromise.

Those who wanted Universal Health Care to accommodate certain groups, and to help eliminate the unsustainable growth of the Medicare/Medicaid problems, presented a grandiose, four different plans, with confusion and pie in the sky expectations.

All politicians know the way to get a law passed is to ask for too much, then compromise and settle for less. This way the opposition can claim victory, and the law is enacted, which will be modified in the next session of congress.

The debate is about how much the government should be involved in a service between a doctor, patient and insurance company. The debate should not be about how much the government should be involved, but should be about if the government should be involved at all! If the government is involved a little, it has the power to be involved a lot. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that gives the Federal Government the right to require citizens to buy a product or service.

The advocates for Universal Health Care will get a law passed soon. Then both sides will claim a victory. The losers will be the consumers and liberty.

Charles Tolleson

U.S. bans Chinese tires

President Obama imposed a heavy tariff on tires imported from China. This is at the request of the United Steel Workers who make tires in the U.S. President Obama is trying to appease his supporters, and attempting to keep the unemployment rate from rising.

Tires will now cost millions of consumers more money just to keep some high paid American factory workers employed.

China will retaliate and cause some loss of jobs in the production sector of the U.S.

Nothing will prohibit other countries from making cheaper tires for U.S. consumption.

The United Steel Workers union say they cannot compete against the cheap labor in China. They say the workers in China do not have rights and are slave laborers.

So what does the United Steel Workers propose to do? They propose to put those poor Chinese workers out of work. Out of work and with no unemployment insurance like the United Steel Workers have. Nor do the poor Chinese workers have Medicaid, and food stamps, and public housing, benefits available to an unemployed USW.

The American laborers are often lamenting the greed of American corporate executives. I see greed in the proposal of the United Steel Workers. The selfish United Steel Workers want to stick it to the American consumer and the poor Chinese workers. Greed affects the poor as well as the rich. Only the self actualized can avoid greed.

Bilbo Baggins

Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Human Needs

Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of human needs has been studied and talked about since he first published his theory in 1943.

It is most interesting to see what is missing from Maslow's list of human needs. What is missing from the list are liberty and freedom.

I wonder why Maslow omitted these needs. Did he even consider liberty and freedom as human needs? Could he have been so apolitical to overlook something we promote and admire about our tribe? We talk an awful lot about how great our tribe is because we have freedoms. We even go to war to defend our freedoms, and go to war with the goal of promoting freedoms in other countries. If freedom is so important, why does Maslow fail to mention freedom as a human need?

I tend to believe Maslow may be right. I don't think freedom is as important as we make it out to be. I think we talk a lot about freedom just to make us feel strong and independent, when in fact we are more than willing to be dependent on others.

Eleven year old Jaycee Dugard was kidnapped from South Lake Tahoe in 1991. Her kidnapper raped her and forced her to live 18 years in Antioch, Calif. Dugard was 28, with two children, when she was freed in 2009. She had plenty of opportunities to escape, but chose not to. Her needs were being met. Freedom was not more important.

Throughout human history liberty and freedom was not part of human needs. Humans were dependent and subservient to the king, pope, or some idol. Their allegiance was to the safety and survival of the tribe, not the individual.

I think humans are afraid of freedom because it is a great measuring device of the individual. Freedom requires responsibility for choices and actions. With total freedom one may be exposed as a failure, or a success. There is no equality in freedom. In a completely free society many people would be ranked in a lower status. This ranking makes one feel threatened. The individual's safety, one of the highest needs of a human, is at risk. A low ranking person is less likely to find a mate, which is also one of the highest human needs.

People could theoretically have all of their needs satisfied if they were in a well run government coed prison, their cell a nice condo with a view.

Many people are willing to give up their freedoms for a promise that their other needs will be met. Freedom and liberty is not on their list of needs.

I doubt very much that the early American colonists would have gone to war with England if King George had promised them free food, shelter, health care, and education. Political liberty and the Declaration of Independence would not have mattered to them because the King would have provided them with their needs.

Charles Tolleson, Mr Needy

President Obama asks his critics of health care

President Obama said about those who criticize his health care plans, "I've got a question for all of those folks. What are you going to do? What's your answer? What's your solution? And you know what? They don't have one. … Their answer is to do nothing, and we know what that future looks like."

The president is practicing the magician's art of deflection. The president is assuming that the government should do something about health care when there is nothing in the constitution that authorizes the government to do so. The general welfare clause does not apply because government run health care is not promoting the general welfare of the states, but is creating a nation of dependents, which harms the general welfare of the states.

If however your critics come up with another, plan you will adopt it and claim it as your own, and create a legacy that you brought Universal Health Care to the United States.

What to do about health care? Mr. President, get the government out of the health industry. Allow people to become doctors and nurses without a license. Allow people to build hospitals without government permission. We know that creating more supply than demand will reduce the cost of a product or service. Stop requiring hospitals to treat everyone. Allow people to grow their own opium for pain relief.

Medicare is another failed government program that you are trying to save. It has increased the cost of health care. It encourages office visits for so many obese people who could cure their own symptoms by dieting. It spends billions on keeping dying and terminally ill old people alive a few more weeks. The government cannot afford the Medicare program. Eliminate Medicare and the cost of health care will drop drastically.

Of course my suggestions will fall on deaf ears. That's because people have a desire to tell others what to do. Their desire to help others is a desire to rule others. Too many people use the democratic process to impose their will on others, to tell them how to live, by using the force of law. No law should be used except to protect life and property.

I believe we need a constitutional amendment that allows members of congress to be selected the same way we select jurors, and for one or two year terms. I believe this because people who seek office under the current system are seeking self actualization, and rarely succeed.

The current elected politicians ruling the country are never fulfilled. As Abraham Maslow said, only about two percent of people ever feel self actualized. Politicians are always striving for self actualization and seldom succeed, thus they will continue to try and win our love and respect by any kind of sophistry and non constitutional law.

Mr. President, relax. You will feel self actualized quicker.

Charles Tolleson

President Obama's Speech to School Students

"Give me a child and I'll shape him into anything." B.F. Skinner

President Obama's speech to the nation's school students has been posted at the White House site.

I think the president's speech is a good one for high school students, but is not appropriate for elementary students.

Most of the 2.7 million government school teachers support President Obama so any classroom discussion about his speech will be slanted in favor of the president, and will have an affect on the 2012 election. (Update 9/26/2009. A teacher in New Jersey was teaching her 8 year old students to sing the praises of President Obama. Indoctrinating children is nothing new for churches and states.)

I also think the president is looking for votes in the 2012 election. Millions of current high school students will be eligible voters in 2012 and will remember the president's speech to "them". More young people who vote will vote for him than will vote for his challenger. The President's speech is a smart political move.

As always, those who control the origins of the message can control the masses. The president is controlling the message in order to get more followers. He reminds me of some of the Southern Baptists preachers I used to hear when I was a kid. Spellbinding orations to say the least. The followers always returned, Sunday after Sunday.

"I’ve talked a lot about your government’s responsibility for setting high standards, supporting teachers and principals, and turning around schools that aren’t working where students aren’t getting the opportunities they deserve."

No Mr. President, it is not the responsibility of the government employees to set high standards for the rest of us.

"And that’s what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself."

That's very good advice Mr. President. Now if only your government policies backed up that rhetoric. Why don't you really hold people to being responsible for themselves instead of being responsible for someone else?

"And this isn’t just important for your own life and your own future. What you make of your education will decide nothing less than the future of this country. What you’re learning in school today will determine whether we as a nation can meet our greatest challenges in the future."

Now there you go again Mr. President. This is Country worship. The new god is the State. As when you stand in front of eight, that's right, eight U.S. flags, not one, but eight icons of the State to worship. You desire the worship of the State because you are its high priest.

You are telling young people to work hard for their country. What you mean, they should work hard and grow the economy so the government employees can continue to live well as they confiscate a share of the workers' productivity.

"My father left my family when I was two years old, and I was raised by a single mother who struggled at times to pay the bills and wasn’t always able to give us things the other kids had."

Mr. President. Give your dead father a break! Stop bashing him in public just to satisfy your own anger at him, while praising your mother to get the female votes.

Of the three children you reference who overcame hardships, two thirds were females. Still pandering to the female vote Mr. President?

"Young people like Jazmin Perez, from Roma, Texas. Jazmin didn’t speak English when she first started school. Hardly anyone in her hometown went to college, and neither of her parents had gone either. But she worked hard, earned good grades, got a scholarship to Brown University, and is now in graduate school, studying public health, on her way to being Dr. Jazmin Perez.

I’m thinking about Andoni Schultz, from Los Altos, California, who’s fought brain cancer since he was three. He’s endured all sorts of treatments and surgeries, one of which affected his memory, so it took him much longer – hundreds of extra hours – to do his schoolwork. But he never fell behind, and he’s headed to college this fall.

And then there’s Shantell Steve, from my hometown of Chicago, Illinois. Even when bouncing from foster home to foster home in the toughest neighborhoods, she managed to get a job at a local health center; start a program to keep young people out of gangs; and she’s on track to graduate high school with honors and go on to college."

And the usual request for God to bless America.

"Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America."

Why stop with America Mr. President? Why not ask him to bless the whole world?

Charles Tolleson

Marriage, by Herbert Spencer, 1845

Earlier I wrote about not marrying a woman who I lived with for many years. I did not want a legal document, marriage license, to hold us together. I did not want the State to be a third party to our relationship.

I thought if we cared about each other we would stay together. I told her, and her mother, early in our relationship that I did not want to be married. I would take the relationship one day at a time. When either party was ready to end the relationship they were free to do so. No legal document should be required to keep us together. As a libertarian I don't believe one person should own another, in any form. Nor do I think any persons should require the permission and approval of the State to form a voluntary relationship.

I just read a letter written on marriage, by Herbert Spencer, in 1845, that says something similar. Since Spencer's letter, divorce has become
acceptable. Living together without marriage should also be acceptable.

Charles Tolleson

http://praxeology.net/HS-LM.htm

1. You agree I believe with Emerson that the true sentiment of love between man and woman arises from each serving as the representative of the other's ideal. From this position I think we may deduce the corollary that the first condition to happiness in the married state is continuance of that representation of the ideal; and hence the conduct of each towards the other should always be so regulated as to give no offence to ideality. And on this ground I conceive that instead of there being, as is commonly the case, a greater familiarity and carelessness with regard to appearances between husband and wife, there ought to be a greater delicacy than between any other parties.

2. There should be a thorough recognition on both sides of the equality of
rights, and no amount of power should ever be claimed by the one party
greater than that claimed by the other. The present relationship existing
between husband and wife, where one claims a command over the actions of the other, is nothing more than a remnant of the old leaven of slavery. It is necessarily destructive of refined love; for how can a man continue to
regard as his type of the ideal a being whom he has, by denying an equality of privilege with himself, degraded to something below himself? To me the exercise of command on the part of the husband seems utterly repugnant to genuine love, and I feel sure that a man of generous feeling has too much sympathy with the dignity of his wife to think of dictating to her, and that no woman of truly noble mind will submit to be dictated to.

3. The last important condition I hold to be the forgetting, to as great an extent as possible, the existence of a legal bond, and the continual
dependence upon the natural bond of affection. I do not conceive the most
perfect happiness attainable while the legal bond continues; for as we can
never rid ourselves of the consciousness of it, it must always influence our conduct. But the next best thing to destroying it is to banish it from our minds, and let husband and wife strive to act towards each other as they would were there no such tie.

If men were wise they would see that the affection that God has implanted in us is amply sufficient, when not weakened by artificial aid, to ensure
permanence of union; and if they would have more faith in this all would go well. To tie together by human law what God has tied together by passion, is about as wise as it would be to chain the moon to the earth lest the natural attraction existing between them should not be sufficient to prevent them flying asunder.