Free Food before Free Medicare

I can't remember if I wrote an article on this or not, but I'm going to now, tell me if you've heard this before.

I'm so completely pro free food for everyone, and here's why.

Important Definitions:
"Free food" --not processed food, a better term would be free produce allotments. Fruit, Vegetables, Milk and Grains (not flour, just grains).
"consumption" --I don't mean $ amounts per say, but some sort of veggie credit system that doesn't equate to dollars. Something like 279lbs of fruit per year, or 146lbs of grain, or 428 lbs of vegetables per person.
"Paid for by the government" -- The tax money should be given to the food distributors who sold it to the end user and traced back to valid transactions with food producers/aggregates. Therefore, if they buy 500 corn at $.1/head from farmer dan last month and 1000 corn at $.2/head from farmer jill, they sell 1200 to this food program and can apply 1k to the 1000 they bought from jill and 200 to that they bought from dan. --the difference they make could cover their distribution expenses and they could still sell the other produce at normal price for profit.
"revolving monthly system" -- The alotment doesn't carry over to the next month, you either use it or lose it.

I think people should be given free produce allotments based on a national average for the previous year of consumption.

Even if it was 50% of annual consumption, and it was given to EVERYONE, I think that would be perfectly fine, not affect the economy negatively, not discriminate, and not encourage people to stop working and would probably resolve the American hunger dilemma and improve national health.

Do away with food stamps.

It would work on a revolving monthly system, so they couldn't carry it over.

Why I think it would work
They couldn't spend this money on fast food or other goods.
They couldn't spend it on boxed/processed foods.
They could not easily trade it, because everyone they could trade with easily, already has it.
Produce eventually goes old so they can't horde it.
Starving children can use it.
It would encourage people to eat healthier.
The money goes back through the economy chain, meaning more farmers have an incentive to produce food providing jobs. The distributor gets a job as well.
This isn't a huge impact on the economy--we would be taking a product that litterally everyone uses and give it to them for free--unlike health insurance which is the right but not the obligation to collect on a claim under specific circumstances that will likely never happen. Produce is consumed daily by everyone unless they only eat out.
People who don't normally go to the grocer would do so and might find other things to buy with the money they saved by buying produce.

What Humanity Gave Up

I think I know how to explain this now!

I call it, "What Humanity Gave Up." And the point of this thing is that humanity gave it up but did not need to give it up. When people talk about greed being the root of all evil or money being at the root of all evil, this is really what they are talking about. So let me explain this to you and then I'll conclude and hopefully it all still makes sense:

Originally, mankind possessed the land, they grew crops, hunted, built homes and lived pretty simply. 

Then, factions formed--or perhaps in the process of discovery, they formed--either way it doesn't matter, factions formed. People started to get greedy and envious and other people hit on hard times and they all did the same thing: they attacked those people who were outside of their faction. 

Again, their motivations were: They wanted more than they had. --Everyone could fall into that category, whether because they had 0, nothing, and wanted enough to meet their needs, or because they wanted more so that they could live the life of luxury--they merely wanted more. Then, they used force to get what they wanted: more.

 To protect themselves, these farmers and hunters had to develop weapons and defenses. Some people had to devote more of their time training than farming in order to be at sufficient skill to protect those who were farming and hunting and building. 

In boiled down terms: because someone wanted to fight, someone else had to defend. Attackers and defenders were formed, and some did both: attack and defend. 

But those defenders, the original humans, the ones who truly had a grasp on what it meant to be human--they gave up the life of farming and hunting and building and existing, just because someone else forced them to--some other human who was greedy and out of line and rogue and evil. 

Conclusion:

The thing that humanity gave up was freedom. True freedom. 

We could have been an idealistic society where everyone is given a parcel of land and told: make do with what you have. And some people who were given worse land than others could have just accepted their fate and struggled through life and died, possibly a short life. 

This type of society could still buy and sell, it could be capitalistic so long as there was no force--only free will to give and take according to their own conscious. 

But, the reason that this society is idealistic is because at some point, someone gets greedy, someone says "my capitalism is superior" and they make deals that are unfavorable and "forceful" in many regards (blackmail, for example, or deceptive, pressure tactics, etc).

We gave up true freedom a long time ago when we decided to protect ourselves from others who would steal from us.

These days, American society is tipping towards an even stranger philosophy. The belief was instilled early on in the founding of the US goverment that people were obligated to take care of the poor--specifically that they were obligated to EDUCATE those who can't afford education so that everyone would be given an equal ability to vote. Previous to that point, to receive an education, you had to work for it, you had to save and then pay for your education. Today, we have politicians seriously promoting free college education--paid for by the wealthy, just as it was in the past. And let's be honest, the arument does not need to be stretched much to fall in life with the original intent of the founding fathers: to make sure peopel were smart enough that they could make an educated vote--even with a high school education they can't make an educated vote, so what difference would a cheap college education make? 

This argument for public schooling extended to today where we offer free assistance to the poor via food stamps, housing vouchers, baby formula, etc etc--because if they aren't in good health, how could they focus enough mental capacity to make an educated vote?

We can argue many different ways that socialism is merely the act of taking from the haves and giving to the have-nots for no other reason than to give the have-nots a better chance at living. This, in theory, could be a good system, but it relies heavily on force: Big brother takes from those who have and forces it to be handed out to the have nots. 

Both Capitalism (deceitfully robbing the poor by "capitalizing" on limited resources) and Socialism (forcing those with means to give to those without means) are doomed systems. 

The reason they are doomed systems is because of greed and more importantly FORCE. 

Wherever there is force, there is no freedom. If you do things out of force, you do not have freedom. 

If you pay taxes of any kind because you are threatened with jail time or confiscation--then you are being forced and it is no different than when the bad guys came to the farmers and demanded food from them. This is force. If you are drafted against your will--this is force.

Half of humanity gave up freedom when it forced the other half of humanity. Until we can find a remedy for this, there will be no freedom.

I have a warped sense of Friendship

This article was prompted by a conversation I had with Courtney, but I'm going to stray from using the traditional dialectic format.

I was attempting to tell her how difficult it is to have fans and stalkers and how my personality is the type that wants to be nice to everyone and have no enemies. I told her that I have tried two methods to deter these people from bothering me: 1) Telling them off in some form; 2) ignoring them. I think both responses fall under Competition/Aggression vs Avoidance, but I don't need to take this article in that direction.
At one point in our conversation, I made a realization about all of these people. A few of them actually:

First, I realized that I have an agenda with each of them, and that agenda is that I want to be friends with them.

Second--and this is where it gets complicated--I think they all want to assimilate me.
I think they want me to share an emotional bond with them as strong as the emotional attachment that they have with me. And somehow, (if you've read my other articles) that we'll experience the exact same things and be completely on the same page and unified. They want me to be on the same level that they are and when they are giving, they want me to be giving, then when they are passionate, they want me to be passionate, or playful or angry. They want me to be so firmly connected to them that I'm a continuation of them as a person, and that's no good. It's not good for me. It's unrealistic.

This theory explains a lot... my previous ex's were attached to me because I really was emotionally tight in that way with them, but then they fell apart when I strayed because I am my own person.
Every date I've been on in the last two years has gone the same way: if I wasn't emotionally mimicking them, they wouldn't be interested, but if I matched their emotions and parroted back to them, they would want to come back for more. All of my "fans" or stalkers or whatever you want to call them seem to be holding out for hope that one day I'll suddenly become just like them and emotionally connect to them and never let them go, but to me that's a little nauseating.

I like people for being themselves and being respectful of me. I like to connect emotionally with people, but I don't expect it and don't hold out for it, and don't pine for it. I want to share experiences with people, but I want them to form their own opinions and emotions of those experiences-- let me repeat: I do not want them to mimic my emotional responses to experiences that we share. I want them to form their own emotions and opinions. --I don't know what I have said in the past; it's been a while since I re-read what I have written, but connecting on that level is not the raison d'etre.

The raison d'etre for any relationship is to share the same moment of time, both feel positive emotions regarding it, and then both communicate about what they are feeling.
It is watching a moonrise together and person A sharing a story about how their father used to take them star gazing and how it felt so peaceful and safe, and person B sharing their emotions about how they are so glad to be around person A and how they make them happy.
--Notice: Both people shared different things in this hyp-examp. One was emotionally nostalgic, building neural pathways between the association of person B and their father. Person B was feeling emotionally grateful, happy and content that person A was in their life.

I would love to be EITHER A or B.

That's where I think I have a warped sense of friendship.
I don't care about WHAT emotions are expressed as long as they are positive.
I also don't care what the experience is, so long as it can be talked about positively and communicated positively.

Those seem to be the ideal ingredients: positive emotions, and communication. Though, the communication is more of a catalyst. The positive emotions are necessary for sure, but sometimes you don't need to communicate to trigger the reaction.
At least... this is what I've found anyway.

Follow-up to where has all the money gone?

There were 2 points I wanted to make in the original article--just before I got sidetracked about confirming my original argument about needing $12.40 to be sufficiently independent and on your own.

The first point I wanted to make was that somehow people survive by being sub-average. My original article was based around averages and medians. But sadly, people aren't average, and they are resourceful when their life is at stake. They find ways to cut corners, they make "sacrifices"--or rather, they make decisions about what their priorities are and they pay those bills first. They jump on opportunities that come their way and they manipulate people into giving them those opportunities.

Many people get ahead by pairing off with others. They pay lesser rent because they're splitting it between 3 or 4 roommates. They eat dinner with mommy and daddy so that they don't have to pay for meals. They get discounts on everything and big ticket items they get grandpa and grandma to buy for them.
On the surface, these people look as though they are independent and on their own, but they aren't completely independent--their lifestyle hinges on someone else. They wouldn't be able to afford their nice car if they didnt' live at home. They wouldn't be able to afford to live in a nice neighborhood if their parents weren't paying some of their rent. They wouldn't be able to go on vacations if someone didn't give it to them as a gift. Discounts, deals, and charity are what hold these people together.


Second point.

Way way way too many people spend their money on drugs and marijuana. They come up with pet names for the hobby and justify it in their mind like: I need this because it helps my anxiety and I don't have to pay for expensive pills instead. Or, I wouldn't be able to make it through the week if I didn't know there was something to look forward to on the weekend.
At the end of it all, they don't get too far ahead in life because they're busy living in the here and now--and not even a real here and now but instead a fantasy they dreamed up in their head while they were doing rec. drugs. I have never known anyone who lives on their own and smokes marijuana, maybe my network isn't big enough, but they always rely on someone else to pay part of the rent so that they can spend their money on weed.


In some, people are so full of shit.
They may, in many ways, appear to have their life together, yet they aren't quite there. The reason is, that to get there, they have to choose that lifestyle. They have to choose to work 40+ hours per week and drain themselves completely to be paid more than 15/hr. At that point, they are so tired or stressed out and they are barely getting by they just veg in front of a TV screen or computer or theater. They don't have the energy to do anything with their life.

This is how the world works these days, unfortunately. You have to make a decision in life to choose the lifestyle you want to live and say to hell with the money. The only people making a lot of money are hustling others and getting rich off the backs of people who slave away for them.
You pick a lifestyle, you live it, whether that means drugs or making money, or living privately on your own, or travelling, and you devote all of your resources to that thing. You sacrifice for that thing. You suck up to people. You may lose your own self respect or you may be put in uncomfortable situations with other people or otherwise, but it is the life you choose and you have to take a lot of 'bad' along with it.

Where have all the moneys gone? Long time passing?

I wrote a post on here a long time ago that attempted to justify and explain the costs of living in weber county, Ut.


--I don't think the numbers have changed. I think I'm still pretty accurate in my conclusions to that piece, but there are a few line items that I think have changed over the years (I wrote it in 2013).

Medical insurance, for example, has changed a little bit since then, but if anything it has only dropped $100/mo or $1,200 per year in an ideal situation. Mostly, people get by by having their employer pay part of their insurance, which equates to instead of $350/mo of insurance premiums they pay closer to $80/mo which is outside the realm of what I was using those scenarios for anyway. --If you didn't cut your budget, pinch and save, and take advantage of every little thing out there, then you would need around $12.00/hr wages to be single and live on your own. If you had other expenses, like medical bills or college tuition or otherwise, then you would need more money or more penny pinching.

I don't think wages have changed any over the last 3 years in weber county. They've stagnated. People survive by advancing their career, or super penny pinching.

I felt like doing another one of these posts only with salt lake county, where wages are higher, but expenses are way higher, but I think my experience and ethos as a home owner, renter, and landlord in the county gives me credibility to say: Wages are higher, but expenses are much must higher.

I chose weber county as my study area originally because I knew it was cheaper to live there than in other places, but still provided a reasonable life comparable to other places in the U.S.--plenty of things to do, shopping centers, and opportunities because it is a metro area. But I also know that in weber county there are a lot more opportunities to get ahead than in SLC. You can reasonably pinch pennies without suffering a loss.


Well, I'm getting off track here because the summary of my post has taken up the majority of this article.  I'll have to do a follow-up later. ******************************************

A history of my dating experiences in utah directed for non-mormons

I've been dating for 11 years straight, had many many girlfriends, been engaged 3 times, dated a lot more than that.--I think all of that qualifies me to say I'm an expert at dating, unlike those who get married and take a break for a few years.

Ok, enough crap.

Dating in Utah is a little different from any other state, though it might be comparable to dating in certain "christian" cities across the U.S. but let me tell you, if you aren't Mormon here (or christian, there) it's a very weird place to be.


For starters, Utah isn't even 51% Mormon, but the culture effects everything. Girls are taught that they should get married and have kids. When they get older, they make a conscious decision to either go with what they were taught and try to get married and have kids; or they rebel against the notion and say they don't want to get married or they don't want to have kids. --I've been around the block and 95% of people fall into one of these categories. The alternative is to really think hard about the decision and choose to either not have kids out of some other reason such as health reasons or the reality that they wouldn't make a good mother or that it would interfere with a career--or vise versa, to have kids for multiple reasons unrelated to what they were taught in life.--That's only about 5% of people. I'm not generalizing, this is true. Talk to someone long enough and you'll decide that they have no real reason for not wanting kids, or wanting kids just because they were told to.

This concept of marriage and children plays into the Utah dating pool differently than it does elsewhere in the world. Elsewhere, girls want to have a boyfriend for the sake of saying they have a boyfriend, but here they want to have a boyfriend for the sake of getting married.
Sadly, the ones who dont' want marriage or children either refuse to date or they only want a boyfriend to have "a little fun," get free things, and be taken care of.

Furthermore, there is a lot of fantasy that plays into the Utah dating world. Girls think some form of Disney prince is going to sweep them off their feet, and the young boys who catch onto this act the part--if only temporarily, because you can only act for so long. --and This is seriously twisted. There is an expectation that you be something that you are not to impress a girl who is only using you for a meal ticket or a marriage license or a father for their children. And unfortunately, after everything is said and done, they don't exactly care that you aren't being yourself.

Remember when I said how people like pain?--I guess I didn't write a post about it, but I've been saying it for over a year now and will have to write an article on it. These girls get married have a kid and then when things calm down enough they look at their husband and realize he's not the knight in Disney shining armor that they thought he was, because at that point he is tired of acting or he slips up a few times. Naturally, the marriage falls apart.

Next, there are a lot of divorced single moms in Utah. In other states there are a lot of teenage moms who didn't ever get married, and those are different, and yes we have those here too. These single moms obsess over their children. Their children are their life; if only because that's what the culture here expects. You rarely hear about people here giving up their child for adoption, or the mother letting the father take primary custody like you might in other states. But the real weird thing about these single moms is that they still troll the dating world, and they still act the same way that they did for their first husband: they want a prince charming or someone who will act for them.
It seems like a good follow-up recipe for disaster.

Being a Greek Atheist, I'm classified with the Satanists--Hell, I adhere to a few of their principles. Meaning, I think about everything I believe and I be the person I think I am and want to be. And therein lies a problem with the dating world: No matter how much I make the feel important or feel wanted, it doesn't matter because I'm not who they want--I'm not a Disney prince charming. I don't want to get married, but I do want kids.
Quid Pro Quo, I chase after less than 5% of the Utah population: the ones who don't want marriage, but want more than just a little fun and possibly want to have kids. Probably it's 1 in 1:1,000,000 that would be comfortable with my personality and lifestyle, and there aren't even 3 million people in Utah.

Post

I've been a little hung up with other projects to focus on this blog and writing out my thoughts. In fact, I don't even have internet at my house right now, I've resigned to using hot spots and my parent's internet for the time being. I could say something about that, but all in all I think it's a good thing--prevents me from being lazy for the time being and actually adds another layer of protection to my PC.

A list of things I'm doing;

Organic Farming on 1 Acre
Finding creative ways to sell my produce
Vlogging for my farm
Flipping a house that I'm living in
Moving into that house
Writing a Book
Enjoying summer -- Kayaking, tubing, swimming, driving, wanting to go camping but not camping, luberjacking taking care of properties.

Ya, I'd say I'm pretty busy.

I've been living on my parent's couch for a few weeks up until 2 days ago.


But I haven't stopped thinking or exploring. I'd love to write those new insights out but I just don't have the time at the right time! I've cracked the secret to motivational speeches and seen a few interesting natrual-world competitive actions that can be applied to the real world. I've discovered several social media PR tricks and hashed the role of the president in the next 4 years. I've had good humorous jokes with people and on pepole who were too unaware to understand. I've coped.
Life goes on and I love it right now. What is there to complain abouit?