I have no issues with people closing their accounts, in fact, I commend them.
But they should have been organized in their movement and done it quietly and peaceably.

The protesters yelling and picketing is where they went wrong. They need to realize that it is a place of business and there are other business customers. When they form and create the ruckus they did, they need to be refused service at that time.

I don't think the bank was having people arrested for closing accounts, just for causing a disturbance. They might close their doors if there was a line up out the door and down the streets with the sole purpose of closing accounts though. Those that close their accounts win, while those that wait until those measures are taken will lose out.

The bank can only operate while using your money. if all money is withdrawn or if it is withdrawn too quickly, the bank is in danger of having investments collapse and those with money still locked within the system will see the value of their money depleted and valueless.

In order to stop this from happening, the bank would be obligated to close it's doors to protect not only their investments, but other people's money.

It can only take massive amounts of people withdrawing their money to open the banks eyes. They will respond. They can't stop you from withdrawing but they will stall the process of closing the account.

Sorry to bust your bubble, but infinite growth is simply not possible, nor is it desirable. For economic growth you need demographic growth (just look at how EU keeps sucking in immigrants to counterbalance the non-renewing fertility rate... it's definitely not out of kindness of heart). More people = more mouths to feed, but also exchanging cultivated land for inhabited land. Moreover, even if we manage to have 100% renewable power, much of the material we use (metals, gases, etc) are of a finite nature and rapidly depleting. Recycling is great, but can never be 100% effective, and even if it could, there are elements (think helium) that once they're gone they're gone, basta.

In the long run, we can only have a sustainable society if the growth imperative is scratched out of our mentality.

>> ^artician:

>> ^hpqp:
As long as our society is built around the imperative of growth (economic, demographic), we will continue to irretrievably destroy ourselves. The equation is simple: infinite possibility for growth - finite resources = self-destruction.

The thing is, renewable resources = infinite resources. I really believe infinite possibility for growth can be sustained, but what we have here is irresponsible growth. It's not growth as much as a viral consumption.
I think the next step is to start getting some names. Company names, shareholder names, CEO names. Find the people responsible for making these decisions, and education or kill them. Wait... what?
Anyway, this will never stop unless you confront individuals directly. It's very rare that indirect opposition (pacifist movements, ghandi/king jr. civil rights) works. So rare that I've given up on it for such dire circumstances.
Dear America: still feeling all that white guilt from the complete genocide of several hundred thousand indigenous natives on the norther continent? Well it's still happening right now. Now's your chance to make up for it.

Systems of government essentially reflect the consciousness of the populace. In other words, government won't change until people wake up. We are self-centered consumers. Our government promotes and feeds that mindset. It blinds us to everything.

The power and money grab by the top 1% can be seen simply as greed, but also as a realization that resources on this planet are dwindling fast, and those who control those resources are reinforcing their positions. With the emergence of a world market (cheap overseas labor) and automation, the large labor pools formerly encouraged in this country through a variety of means, are now irrelevant.

@shagen454: the government controls the force.

@mikus auralius: laws are written by lobbyists. the vast majority of them are corporate. this is not a democracy. it has the illusion of democracy. but that's it.

i think the question is whether change will occur because of an emergence of rationality, or whether it will follow the incredible suffering we are setting in motion through mass extinction and rapid depletion of the ecosphere.

the battle is in the mind.

Keep the name but change the color to green? Or whatever color wins in the poll?


>> ^Lann:

I say keep the diamond and just call it a white sapphire.
I don't like gold so, I just like to pretend my star is made of the alloy Tumbaga and is depletion gilded.

>> ^Lann:

I say keep the diamond and just call it a white sapphire.
I don't like gold so, I just like to pretend my star is made of the alloy Tumbaga and is depletion gilded.


It's actually a slice of starfruit.

I say keep the diamond and just call it a white sapphire.

I don't like gold so, I just like to pretend my star is made of the alloy Tumbaga and is depletion gilded.

There have been no long term studies about effects on cars yet. None at all. Some did it a few years, but thats simply not enough. Here in Germany manufacturers actually didnt release proper lists which cars work with it and which wont until right after E10 was introduced, and even now they are changing those lists regularly. Sure, in other countries they have been running that stuff your years and years, but those countries also have no studies about it. As long as there is such a srisk (and we all know ethanol attacks aluminum and some plastics, that are in fuel pumps and fuel lines and injectors, etc, there is no way to tell how safe it is. Because the manufacturer only care about sales. If engines break sooner, thats just ok, especially since it was forced by the government, so "they are not to blame".

Its detrimental because it drives up the price of food. Have you checked the course of it lately? Also gasline becomes even more expensive because of it, to make people buy it. Very well visible when Germany added E10. From one day to another the prices jumped by 8 cent. Rich dont care about such increases in cost. But poor are hurt a lot by it.
Just look at Indonesia and the palm oil desaster. Many people are actually starving because farmers stopped producing food and instead make palm oil now. And even that palm oil isnt meant for the domestic market, its going straight to foreign countries. In South America the rain forrest is burned down every day to make place for bio fuel plantages. You should Google about soy, corn and Monsanto while were at it. Theres a good documentary about that too, that will open your eyes.

We dont even know how much oil we have left or exactly how it was created. I dont know the English word for it, but theres the "Erdölkonstante" that shows that since people found oil they always thought it will be depleted in a few years and those years are nowadays actually at the highest point ever and has been at this for several decades without decreasing. As long as we still have enough, there is no need to raise prices and develop stuff that hurts people and cars. Yes, the raise is artificial. To get the rich even richer.
There has not been "oil peak" yet, instead oil production is still increasing a lot, and many countries could raise it by a lot more if they wanted to. But they dont want to because the prices would fall drastically.

Bio fuels are a desaster for humanity. They hurt so many people, its not funny anymore. Also they are not better than gasoline for the environment. All taken together, they are actually much worse. To call bio fuels good for our planet is a farce, and if you really believe that its good and even an alternative to consider, youre just a sock puppet for the corrupt rich. Sorry.

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^NetRunner:
This is proof that free markets fix everything, especially education.

What do you think free markets are, just curious? I mean, in your own words what comes to mind when you hear "free market"? I tend to think of people interacting freely without coercion. But you may conjure images of the Kochs and multinational monopolies.
I see an innocuous system where people have the freedom to trade and create trade systems that best suit their needs. You seem to conflate free markets to the current US market. That's not a free market, it's the result of a false market created that forces the people to trade using one currency and one central bank system (as opposed to competing market forces), and where the legislators create a restrictive market that grants subsidies and welfare to the rich (Corporations) and robs from the middle and lower class (depletes opportunity, thus depletes employment).
But I'm sure you disagree.


What comes to mind when I see "free market" in most contexts is "here we go again, someone's trying to conflate markets with freedom".

To give a more rigorous definition, I'll go ahead and crib Wikipedia's: "A free market is a market in which economic intervention and regulation by the state is limited to tax collection, and enforcement of private ownership and contracts."

I think where we differ is our assessment of free markets, not their definition.

My assessment is that free markets can't be created, and if somehow one was created it wouldn't be stable (i.e. they'd stop being "free" quickly), and even if they could be created and stabilized, wouldn't constitute a just society.

>> ^NetRunner:

This is proof that free markets fix everything, especially education.


What do you think free markets are, just curious? I mean, in your own words what comes to mind when you hear "free market"? I tend to think of people interacting freely without coercion. But you may conjure images of the Kochs and multinational monopolies.

I see an innocuous system where people have the freedom to trade and create trade systems that best suit their needs. You seem to conflate free markets to the current US market. That's not a free market, it's the result of a false market created that forces the people to trade using one currency and one central bank system (as opposed to competing market forces), and where the legislators create a restrictive market that grants subsidies and welfare to the rich (Corporations) and robs from the middle and lower class (depletes opportunity, thus depletes employment).

But I'm sure you disagree.

@oritteropo -- thanks. my cynicism meter just depleted one unit.

Grew up in the mountains of New Jersey, and this lady gets it half-right. Yeah, the bears are usually more scared of you than you might think... but notice this video is taped in autumn. That bear would have reacted a lot differently in the spring, when it wakes up from hibernation and is literally starving. Now imagine this woman trying to get between a starving bear and its acorns....

Bears get shot a lot in NJ (I'm referring here to out of season), but usually it is in the spring. Some are so hungry they will eat just about anything including your pets who happen to be tied up outside. One broke into our neighbor's house while the guy was cooking dinner to get at the steak that was being grilled. The thing literally knocked down the back door to get in. Once it was inside it ransacked the place. Eventually the cops came and had to kill it.

Another situation you want to watch out for is cubs... if there are cubs around and you startle the mama bear, it's a really bad situation. She's not going to bluff charge--she's going to maul you until you are either dead or have the sense enough to stop moving and play dead so that she thinks you're not a threat anymore.

Yeah, it sucks that New Jersey is rapidly depleting its woodlands and the bears have no place to go. Yeah, it sucks that some jerks shoot the bears just because they are a "nuisance" and tip over the garbage cans occasionally. I get the point this lady is trying to make with this video, but she's just advocating reckless behavior that in the wrong circumstances is likely to get someone seriously injured or killed.

@Mazex

Well, where your claim about brainwashed people falls apart is that if Jesus was made up (which no reputed historian would claim), or His resurrection wasn't true, his disciples certainly wouldn't have martyred themselves for that lie. Being direct witnesses of the fact, you can't claim they were brainwashed. So yeah.

I posted the historical reliability of the bible because it shows its not just cooked up, as you tried to claim. It's highly intricate, and I dare say it would be actually be more miraculous for holding up so reliably if it wasnt true. 100 percent historical accuracy is pretty compelling, I think..it indicates that these are honest eye witness accounts we're dealing with.

Here are some interesting science facts that the bible fortold thousands of years before science knew anything about it..pretty good for made up isnt it?

The earth free-floats in space (Job 26:7), affected only by gravity. While other sources declared the earth sat on the back of an elephant or turtle, or was held up by Atlas, the Bible alone states what we now know to be true – “He hangs the earth on nothing.”

Creation is made of particles, indiscernible to our eyes (Hebrews 11:3). Not until the 19th century was it discovered that all visible matter consists of invisible elements.

Oceans contain springs (Job 38:16). The ocean is very deep. Almost all the ocean floor is in total darkness and the pressure there is enormous. It would have been impossible for Job to have explored the "springs of the sea." Until recently, it was thought that oceans were fed only by rivers and rain. Yet in the 1970s, with the help of deep diving research submarines that were constructed to withstand 6,000 pounds-per-square-inch pressure, oceanographers discovered springs on the ocean floors!

There are mountains on the bottom of the ocean floor (Jonah 2:5-6). Only in the last century have we discovered that there are towering mountains and deep trenches in the depths of the sea

Blood is the source of life and health (Leviticus 17:11; 14). Up until 120 years ago, sick people were “bled” and many died as a result (e.g. George Washington). Today we know that healthy blood is necessary to bring life-giving nutrients to every cell in the body. God declared that “the life of the flesh is in the blood” long before science understood its function.

Noble behavior understood (John 15:13; Romans 5:7-8). The Bible and history reveal that countless people have endangered or even sacrificed their lives for another. This reality is completely at odds with Darwin’s theory of the survival of the fittest.

The first three verses of Genesis accurately express all known aspects of the creation (Genesis 1:1-3). Science expresses the universe in terms of: time, space, matter, and energy. In Genesis chapter one we read: “In the beginning (time) God created the heavens (space) and the earth (matter)…Then God said, “Let there be light (energy).” No other creation account agrees with the observable evidence.

The universe had a beginning (Genesis 1:1; Hebrews 1:10-12). Starting with the studies of Albert Einstein in the early 1900s and continuing today, science has confirmed the biblical view that the universe had a beginning. When the Bible was written most people believed the universe was eternal. Science has proven them wrong, but the Bible correct.

Light can be divided (Job 38:24). Sir Isaac Newton studied light and discovered that white light is made of seven colors, which can be “parted” and then recombined. Science confirmed this four centuries ago – God declared this four millennia ago!

Ocean currents anticipated (Psalm 8:8). Three thousand years ago the Bible described the “paths of the seas.” In the 19th century Matthew Maury – the father of oceanography – after reading Psalm 8, researched and discovered ocean currents that follow specific paths through the seas! Utilizing Maury’s data, marine navigators have since reduced by many days the time required to traverse the seas.

Incalculable number of stars (Jeremiah 33:22). At a time when less than 5,000 stars were visible to the human eye, God stated that the stars of heaven were innumerable. Not until the 17th century did Galileo glimpse the immensity of our universe with his new telescope. Today, astronomers estimate that there are ten thousand billion trillion stars – that’s a 1 followed by 25 zeros! Yet, as the Bible states, scientists admit this number may be woefully inadequate.

The number of stars, though vast, are finite (Isaiah 40:26). Although man is unable to calculate the exact number of stars, we now know their number is finite. Of course God knew this all along – “He counts the number of the stars; He calls them all by name” (Psalm 147:4). What an awesome God!

The fact that God once flooded the earth (the Noahic Flood) would be denied (2 Peter 3:5-6). There is a mass of fossil evidence to prove this fact, yet it is flatly ignored by most of the scientific world because it was God’s judgment on man’s wickedness.

The continents were created as one large land mass (Genesis 1:9-10). Many geologists agree there is strong evidence that the earth was originally one super continent – just as the Bible said way back in Genesis.

Life begins at fertilization (Jeremiah 1:5). God declares that He knew us before we were born. The biblical penalty for murdering an unborn child was death (Exodus 21:22-23). Today, it is an irrefutable biological fact that the fertilized egg is truly an entire human being. Nothing will be added to the first cell except nutrition and oxygen.

God has created all mankind from one blood (Acts 17:26; Genesis 5). Today researchers have discovered that we have all descended from one gene pool. For example, a 1995 study of a section of Y chromosomes from 38 men from different ethnic groups around the world was consistent with the biblical teaching that we all come from one man (Adam)

Origin of the major language groups explained (Genesis 11). After the rebellion at Babel, God scattered the people by confounding the one language into many languages. Evolution teaches that we all evolved from a common ancestor, yet offers no mechanism to explain the origin of the thousands of diverse languages in existence today.

Origin of the different “races” explained (Genesis 11). As Noah’s descendants migrated around the world after Babel, each language group developed distinct features based on environment and genetic variation. Those with a genetic makeup suitable to their new environment survived to reproduce. Over time, certain traits (such as dark skin color for those closer to the equator) dominated. Genesis alone offers a reasonable answer to the origin of the races and languages.

Air has weight (Job 28:25). It was once thought that air was weightless. Yet 4,000 years ago Job declared that God established “a weight for the wind.” In recent years, meteorologists have calculated that the average thunderstorm holds thousands of tons of rain. To carry this load, air must have mass.

Medical quarantine instituted (Leviticus 13:45-46; Numbers 5:1-4). Long before man understood the principles of quarantine, God commanded the Israelites to isolate those with a contagious disease until cured.

Circumcision on the eighth day is ideal (Genesis 17:12; Leviticus 12:3; Luke 1:59). Medical science has discovered that the blood clotting chemical prothrombin peaks in a newborn on the eighth day. This is therefore the safest day to circumcise a baby. How did Moses know?!

Our ancestors were not primitive (Genesis 4:20-22; Job 8:8-10; 12:12). Archeologists have discovered that our ancestors mined, had metallurgical factories, created air-conditioned buildings, designed musical instruments, studied the stars, and much more. This evidence directly contradicts the theory of evolution, but agrees completely with God’s Word.

A seed must die to produce new life (1 Corinthians 15:36-38). Jesus said, “unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it produces much grain.” (John 12:24). In this verse is remarkable confirmation of two of the fundamental concepts in biology: 1) Cells arise only from existing cells. 2) A grain must die to produce more grain. The fallen seed is surrounded by supporting cells from the old body. These supporting cells “give their lives” to provide nourishment to the inner kernel. Once planted, this inner kernel germinates resulting in much grain

Olive oil and wine useful on wounds (Luke 10:34). Jesus told of a Samaritan man, who when he came upon a wounded traveler, he bandaged him – pouring upon his wounds olive oil and wine. Today we know that wine contains ethyl alcohol and traces of methyl alcohol. Both are good disinfectants. Olive oil is also a good disinfectant, as well as a skin moisturizer, protector, and soothing lotion. This is common knowledge to us today. However, did you know that during the Middle Ages and right up till the early 20th century, millions died because they did not know to treat and protect open wounds?

The Pleiades and Orion star clusters described (Job 38:31). The Pleiades star cluster is gravitationally bound, while the Orion star cluster is loose and disintegrating because the gravity of the cluster is not enough to bind the group together. 4,000 years ago God asked Job, "Can you bind the cluster of the Pleiades, or loose the belt of Orion?" Yet, it is only recently that we realized that the Pleiades is gravitationally bound, but Orion's stars are flying apart.

Soil conservation (Leviticus 23:22). Not only was the land to lay fallow every seventh year, but God also instructed farmers to leave the gleanings when reaping their fields, and not to reap the corners (sides) of their fields. This served several purposes: 1) Vital soil minerals would be maintained. 2) The hedge row would limit wind erosion. 3) The poor could eat the gleanings. Today, approximately four billion metric tons of soil are lost from U.S. crop lands each year. Much of this soil depletion could be avoided if God’s commands were followed.

Animals do not have a conscience (Psalm 32:9). A parrot can be taught to swear and blaspheme, yet never feel conviction. Many animals steal, but they do not experience guilt. If man evolved from animals, where did our conscience come from? The Bible explains that man alone was created as a moral being in God’s image.

I'd want Beret Guy covering me under fire. Great Big Depleted Uranium Ones there.

Misfire Dude probably got anal probed by his rifle in the barracks afterward though.

>> ^srd:

For those of us that haven't played starcraft 2 yet, what just happened?


Excellent question. I haven't played the sequel either, but I did play the original. Here's my take: The Terran player debo uses a single Banshee (the flying/cloaking attack helicopter thing) to bypass any frontal defenses of the Protoss player in order to directly attack the player's drones in the back of the player's main base. Consider these drones to be the army's worker bees, collecting resources (crystal and vespene gas) in order to fuel the player's war economy. A direct hit on those drones cripples the Protoss player's economy by slowing/stopping resource income and forces the player to react. Worse yet, whatever attack units the Protoss player has already built in the early game are powerless against the Banshee because the Banshee can cloak and avoid detection.

Thus, not only is the Protoss player collecting income at a slower rate than the other players, but the Protoss player is now also forced to spend additional money to rebuild drones and to build Observer units that can reveal the cloaked Banshee which would allow the already-built Protoss attack units (who are lingering by the resources in the back of the base) to open fire. The Banshee continues to harass those units while Observers are built.

Meanwhile, debo's masterstroke is to send conventional infantry units through the front door of the base while the Protoss units are amassed in the back trying to locate and remove the harassing Banshee. This is a tactical win in terms of superior positioning, where the general infantry are guaranteed to do significant damage on the base's main buildings before being possibly defeated by the returning Protoss units, but also a strategic/macro/'long-view' gaming accomplishment by having forced the Protoss player to deplete his slowed economy on non-fighting Observer units due to a single Banshee, which opened the economical and physical door for the conventional frontal attack that the player is ill-equipped to handle.

TL;DR SEVEN KILLS, N*GGA, EIGHT KILLS, N*GGA

Believe it or not, I was there a few days after this happened. Pretty freaky stuff. The part of the story that they don't mention in this segment is that the outdated, poorly maintained Iraqi tanks where from the 1970's and half the size of the ultra-modern American tanks (using Depleted Uranium rounds). Not to mention that the Iraqi troops where already "shell shocked", half starved, highly demotivated (probably not even in the tanks), and for the most part, just waiting to surrender. I'm sure that American tank crews were "shocked" to find them and did perform well, it's just it was in no way an even match.