Bad News Bottoms

[snorkels4]

i worked for the government

army reserve 8 years

VA 1 year

 

what a mess

they see nothing out of line and thats the future so learn to go along to get along

there wont be a revolution

theyll put xanax in the municipal water before they let that happen

totally different psychy

 

what a mess

my dog has become my master

[DrStool]

Pretty decent selloff in the futures.

[Charmin]

Recession? No, It's a D-process, and It Will Be Long

Chief Investment Officer, Bridgewater Associates

 

Dalio: "Last year, 2008, was the year of price declines; 2009 and 2010 will be the years of bankruptcies and restructurings. Loans will be written down and assets will be sold. It will be a very difficult time.

 

Dalio: What the Federal Reserve has done and what the Treasury has done, by and large, is to take an existing debt and say they will own it or lend against it. But they haven't said they are going to write down the debt and cut debt payments each month. There has been little in the way of debt relief yet. Very, very few actual mortgages have been restructured. Very little corporate debt has been restructured." http://online.barrons.com/article_print/SB...WR&page=sp#

[vasu]

I just don't see the idea that selfishness is inborn is empirically supportable. That just doesn't seem right to me. Doesn't mean you're wrong, just that I am incredulous. I believe that humans are born with free will to decide or not whether to be selfish. I see my little grandchildren, and how loving and giving they are, and I just don't believe for a second that selfishness is an inborn trait of human beings. I see young human beings more inclined to give love than to be self aggrandizing. It is only later, and in certain circumstances, that truly selfish behavior emerges.

 

In fact, I know a whole class of human beings whose only desire is to care for others. Their devotion is selflessness in its purest form. They are called mothers.

my addition to what Doc wrote. When one done exploring enough of the world and about oneself, giving out gives more peace and pleasure than feeding to oneself. Its a kind of extending life beyond ones existence and makes life immortal. Bodily needs and ego(desire to express oneself) are the ones that drag us to the behaviour that we normally do.

[shorty]

Pretty decent selloff in the futures.

well, after all, it is a bear market

and we are in a Depression

sucker rallies like we had Friday are for sucking in suckers

[shorty]

Human communication is a very strange thing. It is so difficult that it is no wonder that people misunderstand each other. What is a wonder is that they ever DO understand each other. When we speak or write words or phrases, we are trying to bring into expression all the experiences and concepts that we associate with those words or phrases. When someone answers us, they also try to do this. Even "table" or "chair" could have many different meanings based on experiences and associations, let alone highly abstract concepts like "government", "capitalism", "selfishness", and"altruism."

 

Language is like culture-- and like the almost infinite number of subcultures of various regions, cities, towns, and families. The same word of phrase can easily mean something different in different regions, families, schools, gangs etc., as each group has certain understandings based on experiences from the recent or distant past in their group and their understanding of the meaning of those experiences for the wider world. And those experiences can be radically different from the experiences of other groups. Look at Israelis and Palestinians as one of the most extreme examples. Or probably any 2 people from different continents whose histories have little overlap, trying to describe to describe to each other what is valuable or meaningful in life. Or even maybe gardeners and prize fighters.

 

So never be surprised if you are misunderstood. Or if you misunderstand another. One of the most common experiences in the human race, even for the well-intentioned, even for those trying their darndest to be clear. Like fish asked to describe water if they have never experienced air, to describe it to birds who are not water birds, we're each caught in our own experience, and there are things we can do to bridge the gap, but those things have their limitations.

"Mr. Hope has to be careful not to become Dr. Doom," said Frank Luntz, a political consultant and author of the book "Words That Work: It's Not What You Say, It's What People Hear."

 

"Everything he says is parsed; everything he says is searched for deep meaning. When he goes to 'DefCon 5' on the economy and says that we're on the brink of catastrophe, it's absolutely insane."

 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said last month that our economy "is dark, darker, darkest."

 

Rep. David R. Obey of Wisconsin said, "This economy is in mortal danger of absolute collapse."

 

And Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri said of the economic-stimulus bill, "If we don't pass this thing, it's Armageddon."

[shorty]

I'm a happy-go-lucky durn optermistic fellar compared them folks.

 

they puttin' Shorty ta shame!

 

lemme see if I can one-up 'em

 

it gonna be bad

real bad

really really bad

badder 'n bad bad bad bad

[shorty]

S&P common stock futures 855.75 down a dirty dozen

 

just a lil' healthy profit-taking

 

bullish

 

all good

 

everyone hold

 

(until I can sell all mine first and put it in gold -- shhhhhhh!)

[2faas]

all that intellectual inquiry and Pretzel concludes that men are all essentially selfish by nature. Shows how useful the texts can be without a real practice. They are dangerous and labrythine and lead to a tangle of despair. Meditation is a great place to start, suspend beta-mind and remain silent. True nature is there,we swim in it but often don't see it. The real problem is not really selfishness. Selfishness is a byproduct of beleiving that one is separate from the world and therein proceeds tremendous fear and discomfort. What if one realized experentially that you are not separate,not apart,not opposed to, that in fact you are that,subject is object,I am Thou? A great koan to begin and end all practice or sadhna.

 

 

There is what there is, without being called 'this thing' or 'that thing'. There is no 'Thing?.

We are all connected.

The light in me honors the light in you.

Namaste

 

 

Hit a pivot at 869 (es) right at the end on Friday (actually 4 times in the last 30 mins) 852 and then 845 look like decent support. Looking for one last run to 905 or so before the move exhausts. we'll see.

[Pretzel Logic]

my addition to what Doc wrote. When one done exploring enough of the world and about oneself, giving out gives more peace and pleasure than feeding to oneself. Its a kind of extending life beyond ones existence and makes life immortal. Bodily needs and ego(desire to express oneself) are the ones that drag us to the behaviour that we normally do.

 

Ugh. You guys are all missing my point.

 

My point is not that "it's good to be selfish."

 

My point is not "every last human is incapable of selfless acts."

 

There are two hurdles with what I'm trying to convey. One is the negative cultural connotations associated with the word "selfish." The other is the fact that these ideas have been difficult to convey for thousands of years. I'll try to address both here, as briefly as I can. Wish me luck.

 

 

Many of us are striving to lead lives of selflessness; many of us are striving to put aside our egos. But most of us fail. There is a reason that the ego is compared to the serpent in the story of Adam and Eve. The ego is crafty and cunning, and just when we believe we are past our selves, we find that we are still being motivated by ego-driven goals, like recognition and praise... in other words, the ego has coiled around our intentions and gotten underneath our motivations -- like a wily serpent, secretly undermining us.

 

Lao Tzu wrote, "Higher virtue is not ingratiating, that is why it has virtue. Lower virtue does not forget about reward, that is why it is virtueless." Very very few humans can forget about reward. How many people will do a good deed if they go completely unrecognized for it? Do these people exist? Sure they do -- but they are in the very small minority. And even some of those are still doing it for the reward of feeling good. Is that self-gratifying "feel good" motivation not, in the end, selfish? We give to receive, even if we're receiving only from ourselves.

 

Most people do not question themselves deeply enough to get at the root motive of those "feel good" feelings. They don't acknowledge those feelings as selfishness. Is it a bad selfishness? No, not really -- it's highly constructive. But the word "selfish" has a bad connotation, so they refuse to acknowledge it in those terms. But it is what it is.

 

There is a reason Jesus said, "Straight is the gate, and narrow is the way, and few shall there be that enter unto it." The key word is "few." Note he didn't say, "Roughly 50% of the population." It is incredibly difficult to find that path -- it is not something most people come close to finding. It is not something most even consider, because they are too busy looking in the wrong places.

 

Confucius said, "The superior man does not change publicly from what he was privately." How many people can truly claim that? That their deeds in private are as pure as the face they show others?

 

 

So my points are: much of what passes as altruism has a self-gratifying root (i.e.- selfish, but you have to suspend your judgment of the term "selfish" -- refer back to Capitall's deconstructionism post); and that, when it comes to true selflessness, most people aren't there yet. Even most of the people who consider themselves enlightened aren't really there yet. One thing I've learned in my studies is that the truly enlightened are incredibly humble, and more than anything, they grasp how much they don't know. If someone brags about being enlightened, it's a sure-fire thing that they aren't.

 

We should all strive to realize the best in our selves, and to encourage the best in humanity. But that isn't accomplished effectively by ignoring the realities of human nature -- it is accomplished by accepting those realities and working to be a positive influence within that reality.

 

So, I hope I've cleared up the seeming confusion about my position and maybe gave some food for thought. I don't wish to become known as the resident board cynic, because I'm anything but. I also hope I didn't mangle any of the above quotes too badly, since I'm quoting from memory.

[alceringa]

PrtzlLogic-

 

The only thing that matters to society is what people DO, not what they think or how they feel.

 

Only what they DO.

[Pretzel Logic]

PrtzlLogic-

 

The only thing that matters to society is what people DO, not what they think or how they feel.

 

Only what they DO.

 

I don't disagree that action is what matters to society. Part of the discussion, however, regarded motivation and human nature.

 

I would argue that while people can learn the "rules" and conform to what society wants them to "do," every action we take in this life, from picking up a pen to educating our children, begins as an idea. Therefore, true right action can only flow from right thinking and correct ideas. So what we think does matter, and does impact society in the long run.

 

Beyond that, I made a mistake using the word "selfish" -- too much baggage with that word.

[Frogs Into Princes]

Prtzl, I want to say that most of what you have said here makes sense to me. However, these two lines seem to contradict each other:

 

Once we accept that all humans and (by extension) all human systems are flawed, we can try to create the best system possible within that understanding.

 

I don't wish to become known as the resident board cynic, because I'm anything but.

 

It seems to me that coming from "people are flawed" would be the very definition of cynical. The opposite of cynical would be coming from "people are perfect just the way they are and if ever I pick up a flaw in someone, I know that it's entirely contained in my interpretation of them."

[Frogs Into Princes]

The reason why selflessness is virtually non-existent is it can only happen by accident. If you aspire to become selfless, you would only do so out of purely selfish reasons.

 

The conversation would be "it looks good to be someone who appears selfless, so I'll do that."

 

It can't possibly work.

 

It would be like deciding that all the experts in your field are wrong and only making everything worse. Then you figure out that the reason they are wrong is because they are coming from "there's something wrong here that needs to be fixed" and it's the fixing of that non-existent problem that keeps it in existence. Then you decide that what you need to do is write a book about how coming from "there's something wrong here" can never make a real difference, so that you can prove to all the experts just how wrong their approach is.

 

That's exactly the position I find myself in. Three months ago I got an idea for a book that will change the world. In the book, I want to show that coming from "nothing's wrong" is the only way to make a difference. I believe I can do that. My problem is that the whole idea for the book came out reading other people's books and making them all wrong. If I try to write a book inside of that view, it couldn't possibly make a difference.

 

An advice or coaching would be appreciated.

[whacked]

I OWE YOU, an apology? Puh-leeze. You just misquoted me again. Where did I say that ANYONE should be made whole? Writing down their mortgage does not and should not make them whole. It does not restore their equity that's gone. You've misrepresented my words twice now.

Then I humbly apologize. Maybe I wasn't reading clearly. It happens sometimes, you can't read without spinning. So I'm sorry if I misunderstood. I can be a pain in the butt sometimes.