#also it does us no benefit to diminish that there are still breakthrough successes which are manifestly trans woman centric

[glitchlight]

well thats fun.

[experiencingmyjoy]

Walking Within Wisdom #14 September 2, 2019

“Money does nothing, PEOPLE do EVERYTHING!” ~Michael Tellinger, Ubuntu Contributionism

Last week I walked a total of 32.96 miles and swam 7,500 meters (a slow week for me) AND BOY did I learn a TON!!! Overall I think this walking thing is working ;-)

So although I was not walking during this wisdom presentation yesterday, this subject and work is NEVER far from my mind… Instead of Walking Within Wisdom I may have to re-title this particular segment DRIVING LONG DISTANCES WITHIN WISDOM as it took me two and a half hours (I would have driven further btw) to get from Denver to Pueblo (Colorado) to listen to my dear friend Rebecca Gretz present about “Ubuntu Contributionism: A New (NON)Economic Paradigm”

Some of you may know that I have been spending a good deal of time in Walsenburg Colorado. My work there is based on the ideas/values of Ubuntu and contributionism and last year we purchased an 1898 School House (pictured here), started growing food, chickens and started collaborating with the community to lay the groundwork for this new paradigm.

If I haven’t talked your ear off about this work and would like to know a bit more please see this short video that talks about the movementhttp://bit.ly/onesmalltown

There have been ups and MANY downs in the past year and despite all of that we are still working on it!

Although we tried to record Rebecca’s presentation, sadly it didn't work out that way. So I am going to do my best to recap Rebecca’s wisdom with some of her slides and images...

Rebecca started off with a question:

Are you happy with the way the world is now?

There was all sorts of feedback from the audience, for the most part, the answer was a resounding no…

Rebecca went on to describe…

IMAGINE… •a world without the need for money. •a world where you do what you love to do everyday. •a world in which everyone uses their natural talents and acquired skills for the benefit of all in the community. •a world where there are no boundaries to progress in any area including energy, healthcare, science and the arts. •a world without strife, famine, war, and disease. That is UBUNTU CONTRIBUTIONISM!

The next question… Why imagine a world without MONEY?

WELL…

•Money is an artificial framework-an intermediary that comes between people and the resources they need to survive •Money, or the lack thereof, causes stress, depression, anxiety and sickness for individuals and families. •Money is used to destroy the environment and deplete planet resources •Money is used as a tool to enslave the masses. •Jobs, often, do not match the talents and interests of the people •The need for money puts a barrier between people’s desire to pursue their passions and the means for survival (i.e. starving artist) •The need for money interferes with people’s access to resources to achieve their goals (i.e. business, education, healthcare, charities, research)

These ideas are far from new, new age or just coming from crazy people like me. Buckminster Fuller was talking about these ideas 50 years ago, in 1970 Fuller said,

“We should do away with the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living. It is a fact today that one in ten thousand of us can make a technological breakthrough capable of supporting all the rest. The youth of today are absolutely right in recognizing this nonsense of earning a living. We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery because, according to Malthusian Darwinian theory he must justify his right to exist. So we have inspectors of inspectors and people making instruments for inspectors to inspect inspectors. The true business of people should be to go back to school and think about whatever it was they were thinking about before somebody came along and told them they had to earn a living.” R. Buckminster Fuller

So you probably want to know, what is UBUNTU? Ubuntu is a word from South Africa meaning: I am who I am because of who we ALL are. Basically the most collaborative word on the planet...

A person with Ubuntu is open and available to others, affirming of others, does not feel threatened that others are able and good. They have self-assurance that comes from knowing that they belong to a greater whole. They are diminished when others are humiliated or diminished, or when others are tortured or oppressed.

Rebecca then showed this image of beautiful children in a circle and told the story of an Anthropologist in Africa...

An anthropologist proposed a game to the kids in an African tribe. He put a basket full of fruit near a tree and told the kids that who ever got there first won the sweet fruits. When he told them to run they all took each others hands and ran together, then sat together enjoying their treats. When he asked them why they had run like that as one could have had all the fruits for himself they said: “UBUNTU, how can one of us be happy if all the other ones are sad?”

THIS IS THE WORLD I CHOOSE TO LIVE IN…

SO what is Ubuntu contributionism you may ask???

IT IS:

•A blueprint for a new social structure envisioned by Michael Tellinger. •It is an actual “plan of action” that outlines the steps necessary to achieve abundance for all.

Michael (and we all) ask that you keep an open mind .... These concepts are foreign to most of us who have been raised in a capitalistic, oligarchic society...

In his blueprint Michael even outlined a five point mantra

1. No money 2. No barter 3. No trade 4. No value attached 5. Everyone contributes their natural talents and acquired skills for the greater benefit of everyone in the community

So you may wonder why no barter and trade… Barter and trade continues the system that something has more (or less) value than something else and thus just replacing money with things. This also goes for using a different form of currency like bitcoin.

I also want to insert here, please don’t misunderstand, we are not all Pollyanna (well maybe I am) we understand we will need to continue to need money, barter and trade as a bridge as we are literally building the wings of the plane just before we take off… These ideas and movement takes time.

Rebecca Gretz went on to talk about Ubuntu basics, some of the work we have (and haven’t yet) been doing in Walsenburg. What kinds of talents and skills we are looking for in this first phase and:

We want to invite all inventors, healers, scientists, artists, food growers, etc, to our community–without funding limitations or need for profit, they will come up with new cures, technologies, etc. Other cities and towns will want to establish this for themselves when they see how successful our community is. It will be a domino effect that changes the world…

She then concluded with a quote from the former Former National Coordinator for Ubuntu USA

“We can no longer wait for the systems that enslave us to save us.We are the ones we’ve been waiting for, and the time is now.” ~Starr MacKinnon, PhD,

OF COURSE there was much much more here, my Ubuntu brothers added to the wonderful conversation and I even talked about how I got involved. I would be happy to talk to anyone who would like to know more AND

If you would like to learn more:

Read the book Ubuntu Contributionism by Michael Tellinger Go to our friend Michael E. V. Knight channel moneydoesnothing.com Look at any of the Ubuntu Facebook pages likehttps://www.facebook.com/UbuntuPlanetUSA/

[machetelanding]

For more than a decade, despite the increase in domestic population, the number of movie admissions sold has stalled. For some time that fact was papered over. Premium pricing through gimmicks such as 3D and IMAX were at least able to increase annual box office revenues (a bit). Nevertheless, the movie business is no longer a growth business, and 2017 is beginning to look like the year when the industry will have to finally come to terms with that.

Globalism was supposed to save Hollywood. The exact opposite ended up being the case. The worldwide audience became the tiger held by the tail; for the global village is one that demands shockingly expensive spectacle, which means huge investments, all-in gambles, that cannot begin to see a profit until $600 to $700 million in tickets are sold.

Worse still, leftwing filmmakers were counting on these oh-so sophisticated internationales to make political diatribes profitable, to appreciate their cinematic calls for multiculturalism, moral equivalence, anti-Americanism, and statism. Whoops! Turns out the rest of the world is even more addicted to mindless escapism than us rubes.

And so, over the last ten years Hollywood slowly painted itself into a corner, where at the expense of everything else, only $250 million franchises, low-budget horror, animated films, and raunchy R-rated comedies can make any money. But today about half those franchises are flaming out and R-rated comedies are in a coma.

Oh, there will always be movies. But let's face it, other than the pretentious, wankfest indies America's foo foo critics pretend to like and the thrilling exceptions that used to be the rule — Dunkirk, Baby Driver — going to the movies anymore is like going to Six Flags; an expensive ride on the latest CGI rollercoaster, something that is no longer about affirming the soul or a relaxing good time. Instead of coming together to explore our shared human condition, we buckle in to overload the senses.

Anyway, let's look at all the suicidal mistakes made by the film industry…

1. The Death of the Movie Star

The men who made Hollywood — the Selznicks, Warners, Mayers, Cohns, Goldwyns, Thalbergs, Zanucks, Schencks, Zukors, Laskys and Laemmles — quickly figured out that the movie star was the key to the world. Not just to box office success, but the key to shaping our culture, fashion, politics, Americanism, and even our humanity.

And so it was until the 1990s. Believe it or not, we used to go and see Eddie Murphy movies, Sylvester Stallone movies, and Goldie Hawn movies. We liked Harrison Ford and trusted his choices. We loved Chevy Chase and trusted his choices. This reality was good for everyone because you didn’t need $250 million in computer effects to put butts in seats. All you needed was Bruce Willis or Steven Seagal or Sigourney Weaver. All you needed was John Candy trying to get it right or Kathleen Turner merely showing up.

Fearing their $20 million salaries and growing power, Hollywood killed the movie star. But without the face on the poster selling tickets, all that's left to sell is the narcotic of CONCEPT, which must get bigger and bigger and more expensive in order to feed the fix.

2. Partisan Politics

Movies have always been political, have always had something to say. But it used to be that for every leftwing High Noon you had a response in the form of Rio Bravo. And look at what this healthy competition created — two masterpieces, both of which are political as opposed to partisan or divisive.

Today, movies and actors go out of their way to create ill-will through insulting and divisive commentary that attacks more than half the country. Sure, in their time, John Garfield, Humphrey Bogart, Charlie Chaplin, Katherine Hepburn and many others were leftwingers who advocated for their respective causes. But they had class. They never insulted or demeaned those who disagreed with them. Creative giants, leftists such as John Huston, Orson Welles and Elia Kazan, managed to have their say without throwing poop.

And that is all the difference in the world.

Insulting your own customers is not only bad business, it cannot begin to make up for a deficit of talent.

3. The Death of Censorship

Just because I believe that certain things should be legal — porn, getting drunk, loveless sex, homosexuality — that does not mean I believe those things are healthy for our society. Quite the contrary. I side with freedom because the messy and oftentimes tragic results of freedom are almost always preferable to the result of government control (see: Obamacare).

The same goes for censorship. I'm not for any form of movie censorship, but that doesn't mean I'm unaware of how lifting censorship, removing all barriers, has greatly diminished the art form of the motion picture.

There are exceptions (DePalma, Scorsese) where excess can be in and of itself art, but for the most part the depth, creative energy and artistic breakthroughs required to find another way through subtext are almost always preferable to text.

Had Alfred Hitchcock been allowed to get his full freak on, does anyone believe Psycho, Rear Window, North by Northwest, Vertigo, Strangers On a Train, Notorious, Rebecca, or Rope — all violent films stewing in sexual, and sometimes homosexual subtext, would be anywhere near the classics they are today?

Almost always, limits benefit art. There are no limits today and creative laziness is the result. For this reason, movies are not even sexy anymore.

4. The Leftwing Sycophants Who Cover the Movie Business

Whether it is Deadline, The Hollywood Reporter or Variety, whether it is pretty much every critic you read at Rotten Tomatoes, the people whose job it is to cover the movie business are almost all leftwing Social Justice Warriors, all sycophants who refuse to challenge the status quo or speak truth to power.

Yes, there are people on the political right like myself who sometimes cover these things, but we are all on the outside looking in. The publications within the bubble, however, are all bubbled themselves, and all about protecting the bubble. The only time they raise a fuss is when Hollywood is not leftwing enough — We need more homosexual movies! We need more trans movies! We need more women and minorities! We need more Stephen Colberts! Trump is icky!

A perfect example was published over the weekend when two new movies released on more than 3,000 screens tanked. The franchise wannabe Dark Tower failed to clear $20 million; the oh-so topical and critically-lauded Detroit lit itself on fire with $7 million.

But how did Deadline spin these dual duds…

For the second weekend in a row, Sony figured out a way to work around the Rotten Tomatoes system to get a lackluster title to open. Last weekend, it was the Emoji Movie, which posted an OK $24.5M in second. This weekend, it’s their Media Rights Capital co-production The Dark Tower, which is taking No. 1 with a modest take estimated at $19.5M. …

Call it what you will, but it’s distribution’s job to open a movie. In the case of Sony, they held back reviews as late as they could for Dark Tower and Emoji Movie and got them started so they could last the rest of the month. Again, not a wondrous result with Dark Tower, but here it sits in first place.

It gets worse…

Kathryn Bigelow’s Detroit from Annapurna, despite having the best reviews and audiences scores out of this weekend’s wide entries – respectively with an 88% certified fresh and A- CinemaScore – didn’t find that love spill over into its opening weekend, which looks to settle at $7.25M. Not a fantastic start for a movie which cost between $35M-$40M. …

Once moviegoers leave Detroit, they’re amazed. The trick for Annapurna is to keep word-of-mouth alive[.] … We hear the original 20 runs of Detroit held quite well.

For the sake of context, let's look at this very same Deadline writer's analysis of a movie that opened in January of 2016. Both Detroit and 13 Hours are topical, controversial, and political. Both are modestly-budgeted ($40 million for Detroit; $50 million for 13 Hours), but that is where the similarities end.

13 Hours, Michael Bay's Benghazi story, is aimed at conservative Middle America. Detroit is aimed at the Black Lives Matter crowd.

13 Hours opened cold in only 2,389 theaters. After a limited run to boost publicity and word of mouth, Detroit opened in a whopping 3,007 theaters.

Over at Rotten Tomatoes, critics buried 13 Hours with a miserable 50% rating. Critics lauded Detroit with a 88% fresh rating. Nevertheless…

13 Hours opened to much, much better $16.5 million 3-day when compared to Detroit's miserable $7.3 million 3-day opening.

And yet…

This weekend Paramount launched Michael Bay’s 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi, drawing more noise from the CIA, Republicans and Democrats than moviegoers with a middling 4-day opening of $19M.

But despite audiences embracing the Michael Bay film with an A CinemaScore, bureaucrats have had a heyday kicking 13 Hours around like a political football. And it’s never good when partisan factions get their hands around a movie. Such squabbling is one of the chief factors seen in 13 Hours coming in under its $20M-$23M four-day projection.

This sort of partisan spin and wishcasting from those who should be telling cold truths is part of what's destroying a cowardly and out of touch film business desperate for any kind of affirmation that encourages them to never change.

5. The Death of the Women's Movie

After the studio system gasped its last in the mid-60s, the leftists of New Hollywood took over, and while they had an incredibly creative 10-year run, these oh-so progressive leftists also killed the women's picture.

In the hands of leftist Hollywood, in the hands of a Hollywood where more women and feminists are in charge than ever before, how freakin' pathetic is it that a Wonder Woman is a revelation, a cultural epoch, a record scratch in Hollywood history.

Sorry, but no it's not.

When patriotic right-wingers ran Hollywood, when those stodgy, old and backwards "sexist" conservatives were in charge, up on that big screen, women enjoyed real equality. They were goddesses — tough and beautiful, independent and accessible, whip-smart and classy, in charge and selfless, sexy and decent.

The list is endless… Garbo, Davis, Crawford, Grable, Stanwyck, Simmons, Kerr, Hayworth, Lamar, Hepburn, Rogers, Colbert, Bergman, Bacall, de Havilland, Fontaine, Hayward, Taylor, Dietrich, Loren, Lombard, Garland, Loy, O'Hara, Pickford, Harlow, Day, Monroe, Kelly, Gardner, Leigh, Swanson, Holliday, Grahame, Reynolds, Neal, Saint, Caron, Wyman, Wood, Tierney, Darnell, Goddard, Grier and Arthur.

What do we have today? An aging and increasingly unappealing Meryl Streep and a whole host of cookie cutter babes (many of whom look like 14-year-old boys) all-too eager to degrade themselves, to act like sexist men. Hollywood uses these girls for nothing less than chum, and every year wonders why they can't find even five decent choices to fill the Best Actress category.

Oh, yeah, you've really come a long way, baby.

6. A Bubble That Has Lost Touch With the Audience and Now Makes Crap

The movie industry has lost complete touch with its audience. Gone are the talent scouts looking to build a farm club by spreading out across the country in search of The Next Big Thing. Instead it is an incestuous bubble that only reproduces within the family, within the rarified zip codes of Manhattan and Los Angeles.

7. The Death of Comedy

What in the world happened to the family comedy? The romantic comedy? The high school comedy? The ethnic comedy? The guy comedy? The snobs vs. slobs comedy? The stick-it-to-the-man comedy?

I'm no prude. I love The Hangover and American Pie. But every comedy today is man-boys and their body fluids, gross-out and heartless.

I don’t want to walk out of a theater feeling like I need a shower. And judging by the endless string of R-rated flops, we are all tired of this soul-killing garbage.

8. The New Production Code Is Much More Stifling Than The Old One

The old Production Code that guided the movie business throughout much of the golden era was more about how content like sex, violence and human sexuality was presented. In other words, these topics were not placed off limits. Hitchcock was allowed to make clear that Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint did it, he just couldn’t show them doing it; Hitchcock could make clear Martin Landau and James Mason were homosexual lovers, he just couldn’t show it.

Today's Production Code is an unspoken one. Nevertheless, it is much more fascist and creatively stifling than its predecessor because you cannot work around political correctness, you cannot turn text into subtext when certain subjects are placed completely off limits. For instance, unless you are black, you are no longer allowed to tell certain stories. A movie that told the truth about transsexuals being mentally ill could not be made today. Certain special interest groups cannot be satirized today. Conservatism cannot be portrayed as having any good ideas today. Every Western must apologize to the Indians. The list is endless and grows by the day. Just look at this stupid controversy surrounding HBO's Confederacy.

You can argue that anyone can make any movie they want. Sure. And that was true back in the studio era. But within the system, within the mainstream, you risk the same thing you did in 1955 — being blacklisted, shunned, and personally destroyed.

9. An Expensive Bad Time

With insanely high ticket and concession prices, movies are no longer accessible to millions of Americans. Like major league baseball, the theater experience is not only expensive but becoming more and more elitist, with high-priced luxury theaters becoming their own form of skyboxes.

For those of us who do gamble a hard-earned $80 for family night, we are forced to deal with the stress of theaters that do not police the talkers and texters; we are forced to gamble all that cash on an industry with a 15% success rate when it comes to producing a satisfying product.

Pathetic.

[dharmawire]

41/42. Decrease in Resources and no Increase. As the population grown did resources grow accordingly cohesively predicatively no they shrunk versus population metrics. They receded and perhaps we never have yet reached the point of having a uniform cohesive resilient infrastructure and economical tissue not for part of the planet but for all of it.

Hanso has to match its growth to its resources and plan them for taking a stake into the long term sustainable development of the planet for now and for the future.

43. Breakthrough in resources has happened in many shapes and forms but have they been cohesively directed to achieve this very aim of having not 3 or 4 worlds but one world where you can expect to find a normative best practices approach to infrastructure services and equipment. That is the breakthrough in resources. 

44. Coming to meet in resources is a positive development. Coming to meet of stake owners and the parties interested into these resources and doing so regionally. CTGC’s for Commodities Trading Groups & Corporations are meant to address that.

We consider resources from a regional perspective at Hanso. The true road ahead lies in developing existing resources and creating new ones. And so we will decline our areas of growth following the same lines as most multinationals do as regional markets. In fact just as in the Copenhagen Framework.

Framework I, MENA Framework II, AFRICA Framework III, Latin America Framework IV, Asia Framework V, Rest of the World Framework VI, Nature Conservation

How can Nature Conservation be a market, we want to buy into several different large nature reserves and exploit them sustainably. Crosswater Ecologdes is a good example of that. We set it as a corporation.

45. No Gathering in Resources needs to change already we have the economical ensembles perspectives. Resources are those of a region, a well balanced global economy is one where each region benefits from its resources. Also resources cannot go in one direction alone, globalization entails a flow of resources. And the capacity to produce them. The future lies in a free flow of resources between economical ensembles.

At Hanso resources have owners and stake holders. They can fructify within and outside the group. It is also that flow of goods and services and resources and people are an important resource that makes Hanso a global corporation.

We are setting up Milta as a professional office keeping services provider.

Milta can grow rapidly because of the fragmentation of that market. We want to offer better wages a better work environment including transportation and also international mobility.

Again the aim is to form a very large and global corporation so 3M employees in the future is an aim of Milta. And possibly ten times more. 

46. Ascending in resources ascending to the point where resources are globally cohesive and distributed. Because we must understand that a globalized economy is not based on haves and haves not. To the contrary a globalized economy is one where each has a part to play. Where each is a contributor enabled by efficient global infrastructure and information technologies. An economy that functions differently is not decentralized and thus not truly global and far below its potential. And it is going to stay that way unless we make development more even.

We are acquiring Accent a Moroccan phone and tablet maker and setting it to become a fully integrated chip maker and manufacturer of a broad line of electronics ranging from phones to computing and home electronics including hi fi sound and smart tv's.

47. Confining in resources resources that are confined are unexpressed and inefficient and lead only to more confining. In this segregated thinking of interests being confined to a place in particular or to a region of the world and that these interests conflict with other interests lies an archaic vision of a world that exists only on paper. 

The reality being that people everywhere seek the same thing peace and prosperity which can only be achieved by everyone and for everyone. In our investment on the future there are the generations of the future which will find it natural to live on 3 time zones and travel the world seeking opportunity. The economy is in creating those opportunities and not in creating barriers.

What are resources that are not confined it is when multinationals are equally present and productive in the diverse regions of the world. And when these regions and their parts are empowered to do and to achieve in a whole range of domains.

When you can find a normative economical tissue that is part national part regional and part international and a level of service in health and education that is good excellent even. We need look no further then Cuba to ascertain that is doable and within reach with the means to back it.

48. The Well in resources is good to have the well in resources if we realize that the planet is plentiful of resources, even rare earth minerals can be found in the sea, oil reserves are still abundant and will deplete less rapidly as electric vehicles pick up, and that it is not resources but means that are the problem. With more means resources will fructify. You do need to water that seed for a while before it give you a plant. That is the aim of the Copenhagen Framework.

The Well of human resources as well and talent is plentifully found as well it has to be empowered by means and organization, the means to do more and the organization to achieve. And so to strengthen this global venture further we are establishing 304 as an NGO. 304 for the number of indicators found in SDG. The scope of 304 is to support SDG's and by extension the partnership that Copenhagen Framework constitutes. It does so with all the tools available for an NGO including monitoring.

49. No Revolution in resources there has been a technological revolution with the internet bringing us closer together we are nearing 5G and hydrogen engines but has there been a revolution in resources, have we matured to the realization that they are greatly disparate across the globe and that imbalance hampers the whole diminishes the global economy and is a growing source of concerns. The answer is that the realization of this grave state of affairs falls short at addressing it for good.

What does no revolution in resources mean for Hanso and its Copenhagen Framework partners. One thing only the huge opportunities to create them. For profit and globally. From energy to farming and health.

The revolution in resources to make this planet better connected more articulate in its infrastructures and more decentralized in its ability to produce. Economy stems from diversity and reciprocity.

50. The Cauldron in resources is a blessing. The planet has been putting its contribution and will continue doing so, the question is to do it in a sustainable manner. Ecological sustainability is one of the goals of SDG's. Preserving the planet for future generations, recycling what we have already taken from its soil. Growing resources with farming and pisciculture. Furthering its human potential through health and education. 

We are scratching the surface of a planet where life is actually good through a sustainable for profit globalization of the existing economical and services tissue. And global infrastructures of which production more capable and decentralized.

51. Arousing Thunder is not found in resources, but the situation is not still, as much as we do not have arousing thunder in resources and we mean by that a powerful force for change as much as we have ascertained that we have Ascending in resources. And so things are bound to change so that resources are like the arousing thunder that illuminates the heaven of possibilities and that is an active force in what we are trying to achieve. Indeed it all revolves around a better exploitation of existing resources and creating new ones.

52. Bound in resources, bound in development and in opportunities. Bound in resources is not favorable neither is keeping still in resources. But if there has been one success it is this growing globalization that is bringing us together and has been for a very long time. Advances in telecommunications and computing strengthened logistics like never before. No the real problem and we stated that over and over again is means. The means to unbound resources so that they become universally accessible and articulate. Lean, efficient. The means to strengthen organizations so that they become highly effective and capable.

53. No Gradual Progress in resource, which explain while we are here. To remedy the fact that resources grew so unequally that maybe two thirds of the world lack them.

54. The Young Bride in resources or Clinging. Clinging to a model of paupercy of resources whereas the planet is rich in resources. People are a resource the planet is rich of its people. And all around us there are resources the sun is a resource so is the moon. Both produce massive amounts of energy here. Mars could one day become a resource for minerals and terraforming.

Far into the future there might be other worlds similar to ours that we can explore they too are a resource. In the nearer future we might one day be able to tap into the gas giants of our solar system to produce liquid fuels. Their sheer sizes make them a massive quantity of fuel supply. For now and the future.

Have we considered how much money and resources it takes to turn people living in poverty into active contributors of the economy. And how much does it generate for the global economy. Anything else is blindsided economics.

55. No Abundance in resources, no abundance and no gradual progress for lack of means. And organization. Means and organization to deliver on these means have been the constant drawbacks making it almost impossible to achieve the rest. The very aim of the Copenhagen Framework is to re-mediate to that through organization entrepreneurship and funding rounds.

56. No Wanderer in resources, commodities for example are traded in a handful of well know commodities markets. And so there is no transparency and the market ends up fixing the price of the commodity. Which is a bias because you cannot produce commodities by clicking on a button. No this is not how it is done and it explains why many countries rich in resources live in poverty. 

Commodities ought to be traded by the markets that produce them in local and regional and even international exchanges regrouping commodities producers. CTGC’s are meant to address that they regroup the producers and the traders as well as the final clients. We need more commodities and stock markets so that we have the Wanderer in resources.

More flows of goods and of people in both ways not just in one way supported by opportunity and opportunity can be created everywhere.

57. Penetrating Wind or Calculations found in resources. It says that we are getting somewhere we must first quantify and project to plan. How do we re-mediate to a lack of resources somewhere or address a specific task. It all revolves around logistics and means. Quantification and calculations are at the essence of the Copenhagen Framework and indeed of everything Hanso does. Things need to be meaningful to have a return on investment and to be lasting in time.

58. The Lake in resources is a blessing forward, the lake nurtures the lake furthers. The lake of interconnected agile resources able to face contingencies and create opportunity. Through more capabilities more infrastructure and efficient enabled organizations sustained by means. To address global questions we need this lake in resources in data in models and in understanding. Can we fix a situation completely if we understand it, if we understand the causes. That is the Lake of resources that we need to arrive at that are deployed agile and interconnected able and resilient.

Hexagram 59 Dispersing 5. Resources yes Hexagram 60 Articulating, Limitation 5. Resources yes Hexagram 61 Inner Truth, Returning 5. Resources yes

Dispersing Articulating and Inner Truth in resource. And Limitation. Dispersing and Articulating in resources to reach Inner Truth in resources. Our aim and achieving it out of limitation or quantification.

Dispersing resources investing building creating logistics and developing unexpressed potential. Dispersing resources is akin to dispersing wealth and through that wealth comes a more consequent wealth. The net result of a globally more empowered economy where each has a part to play.

Articulating these resources in a meaningful way so that there is an even tissue of resources to sustain activity and the economy and so that there is no waste. Articulating farms factories ports and airports rail sea and air logistics and research centers as well as universities and medical centers.

Inner Truth in resources is the emanation of this empowering of the parts and thus of the whole. As each part becomes more capable and able to sustain itself lastingly through activity and by being a useful meaningful component of the global economy. If you ask me about the state of globalization now I would say that two thirds of it are missing out of the absence or opportunities and waste. Wasting here what is needed there and not reaching forward to create opportunity. 

62. No Preponderance of the Small in resources the vast unexpressed potential of the planet, its human potential and its resources and the resources of space that will materialize someday. Great are these resources in minerals both mined and in the ground, there is surely more oil to discover, recycling and renewable energies have gained strength and speed. Still more is needed we are far behind expressing the potential of this planet for all which ought to be our aim. That and preserving it for future generations. At Hanso and everywhere.

63/64 After Completion and Before Completion. No After Completion in resources resources sustain activity resources make the world go round resources are an ongoing daily manifestation of globalization in how they move around. And no Before Completion in resources either as a matter of fact we are still far behind completion and most of that global infrastructure built in the 70's is now obsolete. So there infrastructures are the highways of resources.

[great-gramps]

Will Water Replace the Industrial Revolution?

More than 20 years ago I learned about and built an HHO (“Brown’s Gas”) kit to try on my (old) Saturn. It worked for me the first time, yielding a 10% increase in gas mileage. But after two more tanks full the mileage gradually returned to normal. Since I lacked the ability to understand the problem, I abandoned the effort.

In the time since then the so-called “green” energy movement has made great effort to get our attention in the race to replace fossil fuels, clean the air and make life easier for us all. But while we were arguing over global warming and climate change, it seems that we overlooked the central issue–conserving vital resources. Instead, the scammers and ad-men have blocked meaningful progress. They have enlarged their own carbon footprint in the course of petending  to offer solutions and the air and water quality has diminished. How is that working out for you?

 WIND

If you have taken an interest in wind power you are certainly aware that there are several prablems with those huge wind turbines. They are extremely expensive to make, they take a lot of space and you can find a lot of dead birds under them. Oh yes, and they need wind to work. So windmills try to solve one problem and create new ones.

 SUN

Solar power needs sunlight, so it’s useless half the time. But recently it has been getting some favorable attention. Some people have had success with solor powered homes, either reducing or eliminating their electric bill. A precious few have even been able to sell electricity back to the grid.

While it is still very expensive, the price of solar panels has been reduced substantially, with the help of government subsidies. Subsidies don’t seem to make a dent in the market for most people who could benefit from an affordable commercial product. But cost is not the only reason solar panels are not made in the United States. The manufacturing process is very toxic, which tends to defeat the mantra of the “save the planet” environmentalists. Again, solar seems to solve one problem and create others.

WATER

Water consists of two elements, hydrogen and oxygen. Oxygen exists freely in the air we breathe. Hydrogen must be separated from the oxygen by a process known as electrolysis. Yes, it is the same process used to permanently remove unwanted hair, but used in a different way. Hydrogen gas, produced via electrolysis, is referred to as HHO, just a positional change of the water molecules we know as H2O.

Initially, in the “Brown’s Gas” version, the process was to release the hydrogen gas into a mix of water and baking soda (or some other catylist). Once you separate water into its components, the two elements together as gas can explode violently. Hydrogen gas alone, will not burn. A electric spark just sparks weakly. Add just a little oxygen–less that 1%– to the hydrogen gas and it can become lethal. The hydrogen bomb is one example of the power of hydrogen gas. Brown’s gas was dangerous, and more than once has caused serious injury to those who made a mistake.

Critics point out that it takes more electricity to separate the hydrogen and oxygen gas from its safe water environment than the HHO gas provides in return. Energy, after all, cannot be created nor destroyed.

Recently I began thinking about the hydrogen idea again. I decided to see what, if anything, has changed with HHO technology since I first considered its potential. As it turns out, from the time of “Brown’s gas” and its use by pilots in WWII until today, water has become a viable commercial product for the energy market. More precisely, hydrogen gas is now commercially viable.

While HHO gas will explode violently when a spark is introduced, liquid H2O is so safe that it puts out a fire.To fuel a car, hydrogen is stored in another compound just as safe as water until it is needed. Then it is carefully introduced to the air (oxygen) and sparked. The tiny explosion in your carborator that results is similar to the one that is caused by gasoline, and accomplishes the same purpose, to turn your wheels. After each tiny explosion, the remaining hydrogen gas quickly bonds with oxygen in the air and exits the car. If you hold a cup under the tailpipe you can drink the exhaust. It is pure water.

How well this works determines the efficiency of the vehicle. It also seems to determine the number of critics that arise. Today India and Japan make, use and sell water cars. Today claims are also made (and disputed or denied) by oil companies, auto makers, governments and other conglomerates. California is promoting cars powered by Hydrogen Fuel Cells.

Hydrogen Fuel cells find favor among the oil industry because they typically refuel at a gas station. Gas stations are already plentiful everywhere in the country to serve fossil fuel customers. (Fossil refers to the fuel, not the customers.) Such stations are good for the economy because the oil industry would resist any product that would omit oil.

There are already cars, buses and trucks using this technology, and plans for air travel are on the way to completion. Companies that embrace them will thrive. Others will fade out as the new technology takes over. The reason inventors are turning their attention to cars that need no fossil fuel is simple: Such cars produce no greenhouse gas, no air polution, no global warming. This social upheaval will be green tech on steroids.  

Protestors may be the first to lose their “jobs.” Does that sound good to you?

SYNERGY

Synergy is the answer; and a very interesting and promising one. Sun, wind and water are abundant sources of energy, but finding a way to extract the energy they deliver has been a pipe dream for many people for many years. Now there is a breakthrough. Actually, the practical breakthrough has existed for many years. The water car is just one commercially viable answer to the energy and environmental problem.

ISSUES

As always, nothing good happens without creating critics. There are some reasons why the critics reject hydrogen technology and the synergy that makes it commercially viable. Consider a few common reactions.

First there is fear. Millions of people already fear hydrogen. The same fear surfaced in 1900 when the fake news of the day warned us of exploding cars that run on gasoline. May I remind you, however, that today’s hydrogen technology is much safer than either nuclear or gasoline energy. We have made nuclear energy safe too, and even though cars do explode now and then, we still drive them and think nothing of the consequences unless we see an accident on the highway. Eventually we will co-exist with the new safe technology in the same way we accept fossil fuel today.

The second issue is one you can experience daily. It will grow and fester in the future when people are losing their jobs because the new technology is replacing the old industrial jobs and the old industrial employers will fail to train workers in the new jobs. If solar and wind reduce or replace your current source of electricity, electric companies will lose employees all the way from the planning rooms to the linemen. And what good is it to have free electricity for your home and car, but you have no job, no money to buy food?

I used to work for a nuclear power company that now claims to supply electricity for about one-third of the US population, produced from coal, oil, and uranium, across several states. Such giants will still exist, still serve customers, and many people will still have jobs with them as the world shifts from industrial to what I choose to call “neo-nuclear.” I choose that term because words like “green,” “climate change” and “global warming” are even more dangerous to society than hydrogen or uranium or oil. Neo-nuclear refers to a safe synergy of conservation, protection of the environment that rises above the divisive polarity that surfaces in all discussions about our planet’s precious shared resources.

Would you like some good news? Battery makers and distributors will probably still be in business. The world will still run on electricity.

Water used as fuel is already a reality. We will someday embrace the new environment as we now embrace the automobile and airplane. But prepare yourselves to deal with the future in ways similar to those you see now.

Make no mistake, the death throes of the old industrial society will turn violent as unions and once-loyal employees become disheartened by layoffs, rising unemployment, low wages and probably long soup lines. Perhaps the most tragic example today is found on the internet, the videos from oil-rich and socialist Venezuela, where mothers search through trash to find half-eaten sandwiches to feed their starving toddlers.

Here’s the irony. Just watch it happen. It would be funny if it were not so tragic. My sense of the neo-nuclear future is that we will all switch sides! In the United States liberals traditionally have embraced wind and solar to deal with climate change and reduce gasses that they believe threaten our very breath. When the “green” neo-nuclear energy happens and they have no work, no food, and see little or no hope, will they still look favorably on such projects being funded by our government?

On the other side of the same coin, conservative, fiercely independent, entrepreneurs will become rich by their inventions, providing new jobs and empowering the people again. Individual initiative will cause the change by creating those efficient, no emission vehicles and power plants, without fossil fuel, using recycled resources that last indefinitely, while media and protesters still reject their right to be wealthy. Thus will the new elite social strata be built on the backs of age-old misunderstandings. And it will even provide new “jobs” for protesters.

Yes, fear mongers will tell us how dangerous hydrogen is, how it will kill our fish, deplete the air we breathe and threaten our precious water resource. They will concentrate on the jobs lost, the stock market crash (it will happen), and blame hydrogen for the world anarchy that they create for themselves. And they will continue to self-destruct, like wounded animals chewing their limbs off to escape the traps that hold them hostage.

The level of criticism we face often help us judge whether a project is a good thing or not. If it gets a lot of criticism, it probably is a vital asset. Valuable projects and valuable assets tend to suffer from a lack of attention. Looking for a job?

WELCOME TO THE FUTURE

In New Jersey there is a home–a large home, in fact–that is completely self-sustaining. Summer or winter, the owner not only has no electric bill, he actually sells his excess electricity back to the grid.There is a link below to a two-hour video tour that explains how his home works. There is also a good look at a unit of independence that you, too, can achieve.

The private residence uses at least 36 solar panels on the roof. These provide electricity to charge some industrial-size batteries. The batteries, in turn, provide the power to split water into hydrogen gas and oxygen gas. Hydrogen gas is stored is huge commercial propane tanks–a dozen or so. The oxygen is released for us to breathe. Hydrogen gas feeds electricity to the property. Synergy makes less worth more. No energy is destroyed, none created. But hydrogen, once released from water, is nearly the most efficient energy source we know. Here’s a clue: A Hydrogen Fuel Cell car runs over 700 miles per charge, and the storage tank is smaller than the gasoline tank you now have installed. And the hydrogen house in New Jersey has its own fuel station. Over the summer enough electricity is produced to carry the four-month winter in New Jersey, and sell some to the power grid.

Be sure to check out the “joule box” shown at the end. It uses all the same technology in smaller containers. The smallest version is 60Kw hours of power, enough for your home except for high draw utilities like air conditioner and clothes dryer. It uses four solar panels, one small windmill, some batteries, storage tanks, and some other goodies. When the batteries are fully charged, the system automatically kicks over to the electrolysis function, which splits hydrogen off and stores it in two small tanks. Everything is self-contained in one unit.

The joule box is a unit that is commercially available. 60Kw is enough to power an average home except for air conditioner and clothes dryer. There is a 100Kw available for private dwellings. Commercial sizes can be used up to 1Tw, enough to power a large city.

If you are have been unaware of the current social upheaval, then the following links may help acquaint you with its potential. These videos offer an opportunity to experience what some visionaries around the world are doing to introduce us to this new age. They expose concrete and positive commercial possibilities by bringing all the “green” technologies together in a synergy that promises to become as important as the Industrial Revolution was in 1800. In the process of watching them I hope you will find a happy place to set as your goal. Perhaps you will understand, as I do, that we really are our brothers’ keepers.

Whatever you take away from this information I urge you to share your comments here: gramps74@mail.com

If I find comments without profanity or other offensive language, with your permission I will gladly include it in one or more future blogs.

comments about the concepts of free energy and the cost.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0dhwlhTs9M

This Greek citizen lives off the grid using HHO system(s) exclusively at his home. Good explanation with history and demonstration of errors to avoid. In Greek with English subtitles. No unique ID (like Q: and A:) for videographer and inventor. It’s long and a bit hard to follow both words and action, but worth the effort; and it can be watched more than once.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk1shxXjlg8

This one claims to avoid using fossil fuels, but it admits that the utility rates will climb, and your cost could go up. DUH...? In my mind it ranks right up there with the recent claim by the “Flat Earth Society” that they have group meetings all around the globe.

https://www.globalgreenenergyllc.com/  

The rest of the videos I share with you now are the ones I commend to you for serious consideration. Just be aware that not everything you see on the Internet is factual information.

The hydrogen house, competely self-sustaining. To build it required adequate funding, government subsidy (true!) and the use of current technology to connect sustainable independent home and car. Take the tour(s) here:

http://hydrogenhouseproject.org/

 This is another mind-blower. It was a prizewinner created by three high school seniors. These girls are not from the United States, but they represent our competition. Enjoy the presentation of  “The Blue Battery”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULtGWCalIYg

The best part about the following link is the list of ways you can help bring about this neo-nuclear paradise with the least amount of grumble and sorrow.

https://peswiki.com/tools:get-involved-with-exotic-free-energy

 ‘Nuff said. Time to check it out. Who’s with me?

 Ken Anderson

-stops:13U�y��

[medicalmarijuana-news]

The Nuts and Bolts of Getting into the Business of Cannabis

When thinking about the cannabis industry, most people don’t immediately consider the financial side of it.

The reality is that the legal marijuana business—medical and recreational—is a major industry in the United States, estimated at over $7.1 billion in total revenue for 2016. The ArcView Group, an investment firm with roots in the cannabis industry, estimates that gross sales could easily jump to over $10 billion annually within the next year. That is an almost unprecedented level of growth in any industry, to say nothing of the fact that “new industries” are harder to come by for those who want to get in on the ground floor. As a solid and reputable growth area, it’s still in its infancy, but cannabis has the potential to be an industry worth pursuing for budding entrepreneurs.

Investing in Cannabis Is Recession Proof

When times are hard, people still want certain things in life, certain little luxuries or privileges. As a result, the cannabis industry, like the liquor business, is relatively recession proof. And as the use of cannabis has become more socially acceptable, particularly in the area of medical marijuana, where the sanction of the medical profession allays the fears that some might have of the business, the demand has been growing steadily. It’s still an industry in its infancy, relatively speaking, which means that there is also tremendous opportunity for those who want to take risks in a new industry.

Now that I have been in the industry for a while, I am glad I took the risk; as our products have been very well received, we are able to impact the lives of our consumers, we are able to bring a number of innovations to market and the business continues to grow on a daily basis.

Financing and Building a Cannabis Business: Risk vs. Reward

The social acceptability of marijuana, particularly relative to other drugs and substances, has created a unique situation in that the demand is very high, but the future of the industry is yet still uncertain.

Not having reached the acceptability level of substances such as alcohol means that the cannabis industry is riskier and might end up, through government controls or other interventions, looking quite a bit different in a few years time than it does today. This possible volatility makes some investors weary. They want to know that their investment is solid and putting money into infrastructure and a business with a fairly high overhead, it’s clear that the business of growing marijuana does not come with many guarantees. That said, the risk invites opportunities that are unparalleled in any other industry, and the entrepreneurs willing to take on those risks will have a tremendous ground floor opportunity.

For example, we have found great success in leveraging best practices and scientific breakthroughs from other industries to elevate the quality of our product, such as our Modified Atmosphere packaging which allows us to preserve our products’ freshness and deliver a consistent experience. Over time, we hope that our dedication to quality, preservation and organic growing methods will push the industry as a whole to raise their standards.

Raising standards and elevating the industry can only serve to improve the acceptability of growing and selling cannabis, as a business; the result of which will be greatly diminished risk for all.

Determining Expansion Plans in a New Market

While the growth and sale of a substance is not a new business model (think tobacco), cannabis, through it’s use as a medical intervention, is on a different level from pure pleasure and recreational values. This creates different market opportunities for the entrepreneur who is looking for future growth. Ultimately, like so many products, there will eventually be a mass market production quality of cannabis and a “craft market.” The value differential will be enormous but the markets for each are also very different, so there is a place for both in the industry.

At Honest Marijuana, we value quality above all else. As a result, we plan to remain a craft grower as we believe this is necessary to consistently provide the highest quality user experience. We also believe this will allow us to innovate faster than other growers.

Like most any industry, as it grows, the focus will turn to getting the customer’s attention and keeping it. A large element of that will be ensuring consistent, quality products are available. It’s the natural evolution of any product-based business model.

The Politics of Weed

While the future of the political climate is uncertain, I am confident that cannabis will continue to gain acceptance throughout the country. It is difficult to deny the medicinal benefits of the plant, the increasingly growing demand for the plant and the financial benefit to cities and states.

The bottom line is, as always, money.

States that understand the financial value of making marijuana mainstream—and taxable—will see their revenues blossom. Taking cannabis out of the hands of the criminal element will also eliminate a lot of the uncertainty that surrounds the industry still and will save millions of dollars spent prosecuting individuals for the use of this relatively benign substance. The medical benefits are legion, and with Baby Boomers getting older, the quality of life issue when dealing with pain is relevant and important.

Advice for Someone Getting into the Business of Cannabis?

It is an amazing time to enter the cannabis industry as it is still young and will evolve over the coming years. As a result, there is plenty of opportunity to build a business, innovate and truly create something new.

The key is to look beyond the basic grower model and into the various areas of development of cannabis-related businesses that are still relatively untapped—legal dispensaries and retail establishments, edible or infused products, services related to security and consulting, hemp products (as an offshoot). I

t’s not the gold rush in the early days, where all a company had to do was stake their claim and watch the green-gold roll in. The evolution of the industry means that entrepreneurs need to think beyond the basics.

Serge Chistov is the financial partner for Honest Marijuana Company, which utilizes all-natural cultivation methods to produce only the finest organic and eco-conscious cannabis products and preserves the marijuana in its purest form via earth-friendly, reusable tin cans that are brand new to the pot industry. The company is set to launch the first-of its-kind Honest Blunt hemp leaf cannabis cigar this year. http://ift.tt/2dRZAfi

from Medical Marijuana News http://ift.tt/2ihGIrX via https://www.potbox.com/