Why Conspiracy theories are always wrong.

Conspiracy theorists make a lot of rather simple mistakes.

Here are a set list of the mistakes common to almost all conspiracy theories

1. They fail to take into account that in a free country, their are always intelligent, ethical people in government, the press, and most importantly the political party out of power.  They have huge motivations to expose the conspiracy.  And by intelligent, I mean more so than the conspiracy theorist.
2. They fail to take into account that conspiracies break down over time.  The longer the claimed conspiracy, the more likely someone will have discovered it and proven it to the public.   
3. They fail to understand that the more people in on the conspiracy, the more likely it will get exposed.
4. Bosses usually have motivations to expose conspiracies done by their subordinates, but hiding one from your boss is MUCH harder than it is to hide it from random people not in the organization.
5. They fail to realize that the conspirators know all of facts 1-4.

Lets start with some basic facts.  Few people will meet more than 100,000 in their entire lifetime.  One of those 100,000 people will be smarter than all the rest.

But the USA has over 300,000,000 people.  That means the smartest person you know, most likely has about 3,000 people smarter than them, in this country alone.   Quiet a few of them go into politics and some go into the press.

I guarantee you that there are people working for the government and for the press that are smarter than EVERYONE you have ever met.   That means if you can figure it out, they did before you did, and they probably predicted that you would.

Conspiracies break down over time.  First your opponent figures it out, and then they tell the world and the world believes them, because they get real, solid evidence (not bad video, not clearly faked documents, etc.)

In World War II there were several conspiracies.  The NAZI's tried to hide the fact that they were murdering Jews.  Hitler came into power on January 30, 1933, and the Soviets first started hearing about the Holocaust in June, 1941.   Eight years is all it took.   Yes, that's how long you can keep a major secret.   Note the Nazis were winning in June 1941.  The US did not enter World War II until Japan bombed Pearl Harbor in December of 1941, up until December of 1941, the Germans were crushing the Russians.  (source).    Multiple first person accounts were received describing exactly what happened

Similarly, the US began the Manhattan Project was first conceived in 1939.   The Soviets learned about it by December of 1944, eight months before the US drops the first A Bomb on Hiroshima.   They ended up with actual plans for the weapons, before the weapons were used.  Five years  is the max you can keep such a secret.

So, during wartime - when you can find patriots willing to die for their country by simply walking up to random people on the street corner - two of the most powerful countries in the world could not keep a secret for even a decade.

I absolutely assure you, that NO important secret that requires many people can be kept quiet for more than 20 years.  It will get out - and with solid irrefutable evidence.

So lets talk about bosses.  They have the ability to ask questions and fire the conspirators even without proof.  So if your boss (president, head of the IRS, whoever) doesn't know, you have to be so far above suspicion that there is ZERO chance that someone who is not your boss will suspect you.  That means the President of the USA must be in on any government conspiracy.  But he changes party.  Which means eventually he will not join it and expose it.  Then hold you up as the villain, blaming the entire other political party.

Lets talk about a non-government conspiracy.  Say for example Mrs. Obama decided that for some godforsaken reason, she wants her son to be President of the USA, even if failure means he gets thrown in prison for the rest of his life.   Keep in mind that being the son of an American, the ONLY benefit he gets is the right to be President - he would have been able to immigrate anyway and become a governor - just like Arnold Schwarnnegger.

At the very least, his mother must have been in on it.   Let's assume she also easily convinces Obamas father to be in on the secret (or maybe he wasn't present and she just tells him this.  So 42 years before I wrote this post, she falsely publishes a birth announcement in two Hawaii newspapers.  At some point, she also finds a way to add that info this Obama's father's immigration file.

She also gets one of her deer friends to confirm her lie.  She does all of this without telling Obama (why risk it?)   She then pays someone else to forge a fake short form birth certificate  (birthers claim this was a forgery).

But that isn't enough for her.  She must think so far ahead that she sees the birth certificate will be challenged.  So she pays off someone in the Hawaii's Health department to put in a real record of his birth in the records.   Then the Hawai Director of Health will confirm it as being real.

Somehow, this conspiracy genius, who has managed to get an old friend to lie about his birth, paid for a forged berth certificate, and also paid off the Hawaii government to get a real one, then FORGETS TO DESTROY THE FAKE BIRTH CERTIFICATE.   After all, if she has the real one, she doesn't need the forged one.

That is the minimum number of people.   It requires one friend, one criminal, and one member of the government to assist Mrs. Obama in the conspiracy.  And they all keep their mouths shut for decades.

All of this also requires that she gives birth alone, without anyone noticing it, Otherwise she has to hunt down the real birth certificate and destroy.

Also, there has to be some stupid reason preventing her from actually giving birth in the US.  It's not that hard to do it - illegal immigrants sneak into the USA every year to do it.  Not to mention wealthy Chinese people.

All for the minimal gain of having a black baby have the right to TRY to be president - back in the 60's when most black men have problem trying to vote.  She has no real motive to commit these major crimes.  The idea of her doing it is incredibly stupid.

OK, let's try this again - now, Obama himself decided to do it.  He has no motive until he becomes a senator.  Then, at that point, he finds that his mother, for no known reason happens to have given him a birth announcement in two newspaper that make it look like he is an American.  WHAT A LUCKY BREAK!  So Obama himself, a Senator who could easily and legally become Governor of a major state, decides to do the following:

1. First find someone to forge a birth certificate
2. Find an old teacher/family friend and convince them to lie about his birth.  
3. Pay someone to break into old immigration files and change his father's record to say Obama is an American born citizen
4. When the truth still comes out, he has to pay someone to alter the Hawaii records.  Let's assume this is the same guy for #1 and #3
5. He also has to hunt down and destroy any real birth record, not to mention pay off the doctor that delivered him..

As opposed to accepting a position as Hilary Clinton's Secretary of State, or some other similar position.

All of this has to be done by someone he trusts enough to commit multiple major felonies in his name. To be President of the USA, instead of the Secretary of State?  Worse, to be the first BLACK president of the USA?   The first one elected has to commit crimes to do it?  No way.   NO freaking way.   He would get caught, go to jail, and put back civil rights for decades.  No reasonable person that cares about this country would do it, and no one that doesn't care about this country would risk it.

Why not?  Because the person he pays to commit all these crimes will betray him..   In the first minute. Because the guy paid to do the crimes is either doing it for money or for political reasons.  If he is doing it for money, someone else (Trump) will offer more money.  If he is doing it for political reasons, the second he realizes Obama is willing to lie like that means he no longer believes in Obama - and betrays him.

The cost of the rime is all born by other people and it is physically IMPOSSIBLE for Obama to pay other people enough money to do the crime.

More importantly, he risks not just his career, but the future of the Democratic Party.   Hell, it makes more sense for a false-flag GOP non-citizen candidate to run for the Democratic primary than a real one.  

But it all comes down to risk vs reward.   For any small reward, usually the risk is worth it.  But the larger rewards always have risks that exceed them.   For a small reward, you can depend on anonymity, but not for the big ones.  You can easily still someone's wallet, but don't even think about breaking into the Federal Gold Reserve.  Why?  Because the security on your wallet would cost more than the wallet, but security for the Federal Reserve costs far less than it holds.

More importantly, Senators are smart enough to know that being the President's right hand man is almost as powerful.   Obama would have seen all the risks involved in this incredibly STUPID plan and instantly seen that being the President's Chief of Staff us far better,

But most importantly - all of this is done by the FIRST serious Black candidate for President.  No.   That title is too big for someone to try this stupid plan to get it.  The second black president, maybe.  But not the first.

And I assure the GOP would pay far more to uncover the issue than the DNC paid to cover it up.   Look at what they did in Benghazi when there was no cover-up.

Same thing for pretty much every other conspiracy theory.  People hiding aliens?  Not enough motive to do it.  Poisoning our water with fluoride?  Not enough reward for the risk.

President Bush causing 9/11?  Bullshit.   To much risk of impeachment for the relatively minor benefit.

Compare this with real scandals - the Fast and Furious gun running, the IRS scandal.  All of those are caused by INCOMPETENCE, with incompetent attempts to cover it up.

Never underestimate incompetence - and never think that your so called conspirators aren't just as incompetent.  

No, you CAN do these kinds of things in non-'free' countries.  China has no free press to investigate, nor any 'loyal opposition' party to complain and demand justice.  So who knows what goes on there.

But in the USA?  Not possible.  The Democrats or the Republicans would squeal on each other in an instant.

Why I believe the Banks, not Fannie Mae killed Housing.

Every once in while, I come across a news story that is so offensive, so evil, it makes me want to SCREAM!

 This is one such story.

It makes it clear and obvious why the banks are responsible for the housing issues, not Fannie Mae, or anyone else related to the government.

In Orlando Florida, a man had some issues paying off his mortgage.  So he wisely and prudently applied for and received a 'modification' of his loan.   Wells Fargo is, in my opinion, generally one of the better banks - note they actually did the modification. Wells Fargo agreed to accept a lower rate - commensurate with current rates - over a longer time.  He was told if he made four payments on time, then the lower rate would be made permanent.

Then his situation improved.

So, being a good citizen and a financially prudent man, he started putting a little extra into his monthly mortgage bill.  He also started paying it early.

Whereupon the bank foreclosed on him.

You see, the loan modification is a legal document.  His, like many others, expressly forbid people to pay extra money or pay early.  This in and of itself is within reason.  Banks lose money when you do this, and if interest rates have dropped even further they can't loan out your extra payments at the same rate you were originally paying.  So when they agree to give you a break, it is totally reasonable for them to say 'hey, no early/extra payments" with this special deal.

But a reasonable bank, would not have foreclosed.  I am sure that Wells Fargo foreclosed for some combination of the following:

• Bureaucratic nightmare that tries to force irregular reality into perfectly shaped holes
• Being a greedy, profit grubbing, house thief was too great a temptation
• Literalists too stupid to think inside the box, let alone outside the box

But the bank did not have to foreclose.   What a reasonable corporation would have done is the following:

1. Accept the check, but not cash it until the actual day the money is due.
2. Mail him back a check for the over-payment(s)
3. Along with a letter explaining that legally he can't pay more than the prescribed amount nor early, under the current contract
4. Thank him for the effort and congratulate him on being a good customer
5. Politely include a request to set up an automatic electronic transfer so as to prevent future problems

That is what a good business does, as opposed to what Wells Fargo did.

As I said earlier, Wells Fargo is one of the better banks.  They have not had the issues that Bank of America has.  So the fact that even Wells Fargo screwed up this badly is a fairly clear sign that the entire industry has major problems.

Most banks are bureaucratic nightmares, too focused on squeezing the last penny, who try to follow set rules, rather than think up new ideas, real customer service, or even good business.

Republicans Abandoning Capitalism

Tesla is an innovative small business.  They are creating electrical cars, something the big automakers repeatedly claimed was unprofitable and not worth their time.

Part of how they do it is by not paying dealers.  They sell direct to the customer.  You want a Tesla, you email/call them - or go to a Tesla owned show room.. No need to go through a middleman.

The problem is a whole bunch of car dealers don't like this.   They are afraid for their jobs.

Now a normal capable person, when faced with this dilemma, proceeds to up their level of service and advertise.  They sell cars from multiple companies and go out of their way to help you compare products and make the right decision.

If you offer a service that people find valuable, they will willing come in and buy direct from you, as opposed to online.

It is how Barnes and Nobles continues to operate despite Amazon.  They offer things that Amazon can't offer - among other things, instant free service for their e-reader, free WiFi for their e-reader, instant service (as opposed to waiting a week).


But the dealers in North Carolina are NOT reasonable. They don't want to offer things at a reasonable price, they want to overcharge you for what they offer.

In order to do that, they need exclusive licenses from the car manufacturers.  Which they have from most manufacturers.

But not Tesla.  Tesla won't play their game.

So the dealers in North Carolina talked to their state congressmen.  They bribed, oh, excuse me, contributed to campaign finances, of the Republicans running the state house.  Whereupon, those same Republicans have passed a law banning direct car sales to consumers, claiming it is 'unfair'.

It's not the only Republican controlled state to do so- Texas won't let Tesla owned 'showrooms' offer test drives, sell the vehicles directly - or even quote a price.  Tesla is already suing the state of Texas over this law - and attempting to have it overturned by the Texas State Senate.

Why exactly it is unfair for car companies to directly sell to consumers, while it is not unfair for Apple, Amazon, and a hundred other internet based businesses is not clear.
 
All I know is that the GOP in North Carolina has sold their principles out.

They are attempting to kill a new technology company that can someday save the American Car Industry, all to keep alive a dying business model.

No, the GOP has a whole is not abandoning Capitalism.  But no one is calling these state level Republicans "RINO'S"

Because the GOP as a whole considers capitalism to be a secondary issue, less important than getting themselves elected.

Yes the Boston Bombers were Terorist.

In a previous post, I asked Are The Boston Bombers Terrorists.   The answer is yes.  Not because they bombed, but because they wrote a note and confessed to the government that they were doing it as retaliation against the US government, not because of hatred for the American People.


Once again, terrorism is not the use of bombs, or taking prisoners which others called "Hostages".

It is the:

1. use of violence 
2. against non-combatants 
3. for political purposes.   

 This note confirms the political requirement, making it terrorism.  Without it, we just had a criminal.

Not that it matters, he is still going to be tried and convicted by a civilian court, because that is a right everyone in America gets.  (Unless Martial Law gets declared).

The IRS scandal - T-Party/Patriots tax audits

The IRS illegally concentrated on conservative groups trying to declare themselves as tax free groups.  They looked for groups with the words "Tea Party", and "Patriots" in their name, as well as for any group that objected to government' taxation. They did so at low level management and below.  High level managers were apparently kept in the dark about this program.

They claim it was not for partisan reasons., but instead was because they had these new political organizations popping up, and they wanted a way to find those that objected to taxes and therefore should have their taxes double checked to make sure they were obeying the law that they themselves objected to.   

Perhaps the IRS is lying and it was really done for partisan reasons.   I don't know.

But you should in fact consider the following.

Under US federal law, followed by the IRS law, all political action groups HAVE TO PAY TAXES.  There is NO legal way for political organization to avoid paying taxes.  

What certain groups do is get around this by claiming they are social welfare groups.  For example, you could claim to be teaching people about guns, rather than a gun lobbying group.

So before you get all upset about the IRS targeting conservative political groups, the real problem is that they didn't target liberal political groups.

If you have ANY stated political claims, you should get extra IRS scrutiny when trying to claim you are a social welfare group as opposed to a political group.


The problem is not the auditing, but the apparent partisanship.   They could and should have done everything they actually did - and also target with the words "Occupy" in their names and with stated goals of overturning our banking system.

If they had done that, this entire fiasco would never have happened.  We would have said "Look, they went after both conservative and liberal groups, equally, it wasn't partisan."

Why didn't they do it?

The IRS was too politically naive to understand how it would look. They were too stupid to realize they were only going after conservative groups.  They were honestly trying to go after tax cheats by looking at people that said they objected to taxes.

Their main problem was that they did not think about appearances, not that they had evil goals.  In fact, if they actually were evil, all they had to do to cover their tracks was add the word "Occupy" to their memo about Tea-Party/Patriot, do a couple of half-hearted investigations of a few liberals groups as cover, and they would have been safe from the charges currently being bandied about.

Or better yet, actually do a full investigation of the Occupy groups along with the T-Party groups and they would not only be without sin, but wearing the white hats in reality.

This is a scandal.   But just a tiny one.  Whether it was done intentionally or accidentally, it was done by incompetent people.

I am not afraid of incompetent people.  Over time, they will always be discovered and fail.

Compare this with the Bush partisan hiring scandal in the Justice Department.  The DOJ scandal was done by much more competent people.  Worse, they took steps to cover their tail - but in the end were caught.   Eventually some admitted that they were hiring and firing people based on political reasons.  They refused to hire/promote liberals and intentionally fired people because they were liberals.    You can read the official report (investigate and written up by a Republican) here.

But I digress. The DOJ is not the IRS.  It's not as if the IRS targeted liberal groups under George Bush.

Oh wait, they did:  They targeted liberal churches for being political, while at the same time ignoring conservative churches for doing practically the same thing.  Not to mention targeting the NAACP


This is a scandal, but a minor one, that has happened before and will happen again.  The people involved should be yelled at and reminded that appearances matter.

In addition, any settlements, fines, and/or punishments given out to those groups should be double-checked and reversed if they were found to be more severe than warranted.  As for reparations for legal fees and efforts, I think the free publicity for anti-government groups should be considered sufficient compensation.  Any organization worth their tin foil hats should be able to come out far ahead from this event.

It is not surprising that the GOP is trying to turn this relatively minor scandal into a big thing.  Particularly as the conservatives groups were already upset about taxes (which is why of course the IRS targeted them in the first place).


Did the IRS screw up?

Yes.

It is a bid deal?

No. 

Printable Guns

The age of the printable gun has arrived.   For now, printable guns aren't that big a deal.

The machines to print them are still relatively expensive (over a grand), and therefore uncommon.

But that will change, their price is coming down.   While we have some time, within 5-10 years, that time may run out.

So let's assume a thriving community of millions rep-rap devices easily and cheaply available for less than $500.


Right now the Government is trying to block the downloading.  I don't think that's a good idea.

So, there are the following issues:

1. First amendment (on top of the 2nd)
2. The infeasibility of blocking the information because it is now also available in servers outside of the USA
3. The fact that the new plastic guns often look like toys.  (Resulting in cops shooting kids with actual toys because they thought they were printed guns)

Now let's talk about possible real solutions to prevent widespread possession of downloaded guns by criminals, depressed people, the mentally unstable and children.

Note that last category.  Children, even  pre-teens , will be perfectally capable of building a gun in this situation.  While you may want adults to be able to print one out, as well as your own possible kids, what about others?

Very few people will be willing to let EVERY SINGLE kid in junior high school have access to a gun printing device.

Especially as they may leave them around for their younger kids to play with.





So here are some reasonable legal solutions to this coming problem.

1. Make it a new federal offense to print, paint or even posses a real working gun that is not painted/printed in a dark color.  Sorry, we need to protect the kids, you give up certain colors to be used solely by children.   This would be an add-on offense, counting as a separate felony for making it and for possessing it.  Similarly, they should continue to, by law, require a metal implant to aid metal detectors.  Printing, selling, or even possessing one without  such an insert would be an add-on felony., 10 years, no parole.   Why?  Because you do this only to hide a crime.
2. Pass a law that states while you can legally download gun plans, the government has the legal right to track your IP address, and doing so is considered sufficient evidence for a federal warrant if that IP address is associated with anyone that is on the government's "can not legally buy a gun".  (Note, it's already legal for the government to track your IP address, this just makes it clear that a warrant is justified.)
3. When such a blueprint is downloaded, the government has the right to send a message to the IP address daily for 3 weeks notifying the IP address that a gun has been downloaded.  This is to let parents know that their children may have done so. 
4. Any commercial business that lets customers rent their 3D printers should legally be required to prevent people from printing guns without first undergoing a background check.  
5. If you print a gun and then sell it, you need a license - even for a single gun.  Otherwise people could claim they only sold 1, when in fact they sold 1,0000.   This rule would only apply to selling printed guns, not to selling regular guns.

Note that this won't stop terrorists from printing guns and bring them onto aircraft.  Expect that to happen relatively soon.   We will need better weapon detection devices - I say devices that can smell gunpowder.

Warren's Idea to tie student loans to banking rates

Right now we give large banks a HUGE deal on interest rates.

The idea is to make it cheap for them to loan out money, so that they will do so.  Supposedly, the lower interest rates will trickle down to the people the banks loan out money.


Senator Elizabeth Warren (Senator from Massachusetts, driving force behind Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, oversaw TARP) wants to give students the same rate.

As per this article,  we  currently loan the money to the banks at 0.75%, while charging students almost  7.00%.   These loans are short duration loans to cover liquidity issues.   I.E.  give the bank $100 million to loan mortgage while they wait a couple of days to package them up and sell them to the Fannie Mae.

The banks get loans for hundreds of billions of dollars. (as per this report mentioned a peak of $150 billion 12 years ago, directly after the September 11th attack).


Student loans however exceed that number by quote a bit.  They are currently somewhere between $600 billion and $1 trillion. (Article about why it is so hard to tell)


Some people object to Warren's idea because of the cost.  Note that if the cost is so horrible, why do we give the banks the sweet heart deal?

Isn't the point of the Discount Window rate to encourage banks to loan money out?  Then why don't you want to encourage banks to loan money to students?


The quiet truth is we need to charge the banks more and the students less.

A solid rate of about 4% - higher than the