The following video contains significant female nudity. I am shocked! Shocked, I tell you! Clearly, this video is completely beneath the high standards heretofore established for this blog.
But . . . on the other hand . . . it is pretty funny.
Soooo . . . I’ve been compelled to weigh the “inappropriateness” of this video against its humor and I’ve come down in favor of funny.
I’ve suspected that the name “ALFRED N ADASK” signified an entity other than me (“Alfred Adask”) for over 15 years. I still can’t prove that suspicion, but I’ve seen nothing to disprove it—and I’ve been looking persistently.
I know that “Alfred Adask” (“Adask”) is a proper name that signifies a man who is endowed by his Creator with certain unalienable Rights (as per the “Declaration of Independence”). I presume that “ALFRED N ADASK” (“ADASK”) signifies a fictional entity that can have no such God-given, unalienable Rights. Thus, whenever “ADASK” is on trial, it has no significant rights and can usually be found guilty by the gov-co with minimum effort.
I received an email today that wasn’t quite clear but seemed to inquire about the unstated presumptions on which the courts (and the cops) rely. I replied as follows:
I have no idea how this is even possible.
The physicality required to play the piano should be beyond a 4-year old’s capacity. Playing like this should hurt his fingers.
The intellectual requirements should be beyond a 4-year old’s capacity. And where the heck can a 4-year old find the passion to play like this? Hasn’t he ever been seduced by TV?
I can’t imagine how any parent can teach this much to a child of this age. Did they force him to learn? Of course not. But if they didn’t force him, how did they teach him to love the piano so intensely?
Apparently, one or both of his parents are pianists and the child simply loved and therefore wanted emulate his parents’ talent from a very early age.
But, even so, this video is very hard for me to understand. This kid is a minor miracle.
video 00:03:54 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omuYi2Vhgjo
The Daily Reckoning Australia reports that,
“SOMETHING is brewing. We don’t know what it is, but it feels ominous. . . . we know the financial system is broken and that the market should collapse. We know you can’t solve a debt problem by increasing debt.
“Jim Rickards reckons the most likely outcome of all this is chaos. . . . When a system of international finance comes to an end, it normally goes through a chaotic period before another system emerges.
“What will that new system be? Rickards puts a number of options forward. All involve something taking over from the US Dollar as the world’s reserve currency.
“The problem with the US Dollar is that it fulfills the dual role of domestic currency and international reserve asset. This gives rise to the ‘Triffin Dilemma’, named after the economist Robert Triffin. The dilemma is that the objectives of managing a domestic currency run contrary to the objectives of an international reserve asset.”
I.e., a currency can serve only one “master”. The US dollar can serve only the people of the USA or only the people of the world. If the dollar serves one, it must slight the other.
Here’s a 2 hour and 15 minute movie entitled “Urban Danger”. The film describes what might happen in the event of an serious economic depression. I think it’s worth your time. It includes a lengthy description of a very intelligent senior citizen’s cabin in the woods. The description is fascinating, even charming to see this elderly man and his wife living in a small but very efficient home.
There are other more expensive cabins, and even a small a farm.
One of the movie’s fundamental themes is that in a worst case scenario, it’ll be extremely dangerous to be left living in a major city. The basic recommendation appears to be: get the heck out of the big city, and find a rural home where you can raise your own food, become energy independent, and hunker down.