Creation of a non sustainable business model 08 27 2013
When someone creates a non sustainable business model (it will fail) and it becomes insured by the United States Government (meaning taxpayer) through their persuasion, does not all the assets and personal wealth of those involved in that business model really belong to the United States Taxpayer? Do I have to give you the One, Two, Three's of it more clearly?
And can the failure or repeated failure, however well guised, of such a business model be considered all the evidence that will ever be needed to prove that it was and is a non sustainable business model?
In other words, once the taxpayer had to foot the bill for you, it should have been over?
How many nonsustainable business models are there? Make a list with reasons why!
And what happens when people are allowed to create a non sustainable business model? Can I ask the question, "Is it those who can not sustain themselves that create a non sustainable business model?" And if we allow the assets and value of our national assets to be depleted by that type of person, again, what kind of world has been created?
It is really the creation of a well guised Ponzi Scheme!
And are some investment banking offerings really well guised Ponzi Schemes doomed to failure! Absolutely!!!! So in that case if we can't blame the Investment Bankers who do we blame? When the taxpayer ends up footing the bill he also is burdened with unnecessary guilt? Right? He ends up paying and knows it wasn't his mistake and yet he could have voiced his opposition to such an idea from the highest mountain in the world and it would not have done anything to prevent it! It can be said the taxpayer is forced to take a spoonful of medicine that was created by a child who impressed society by mixing chemicals known to be detrimental to human health and administering them to human beings? Can we ever really apply the term Nobel prize winning chemist to anyone? Of course not! Why not? Because a Nobel prize winning chemist would take a megaphone up to the highest mountain and expose common chemicals known to cause sickness! There really hasn't been any Ralph Nader of chemistry. Why not? In order to become educated in chemistry one has to become indoctrinated into the concept of acceptable human casualties in the concept of the business model. The student who stood up and said, "Something should be done about that," would have been weeded out of the class (don't ask me how I know.) Those that rise to the top of the Profession only do so because they are complacent with the concept. So here we have a profession where the only way to get to the top is to not truly be concerned with human health. Someone else be the one to attach a label to that one this time!
At some point someone could add up the unrecognized future liability of every one of these industries and come to the accurate conclusion, "You never earned one American Abraham Lincoln red cent!"
Is the oil industry one such industry too? They have never paid the bill for the environmental contamination they created already!!! And you have to think of the Chemistry industry as being a vein of the oil industry too! Because most of the environmental contamination comes from products synthesized from oil in some way, shape or form! Ask yourself what the concept of chemistry mandated to be based on solar energy (electricity) would mean?
At some point we are going to have to develop floating solar energy powered filtration devices, much like you see water based trampolines that float, they are about 20 feet in diameter placed in our lakes. They would have a pump powered by photovoltaic cells mounted on the platform that would pump the lake water and run it through a filter! The filter would be replaceable. Indeed once the filter became full a switch could trigger an onboard cell phone to make the call to come and replace it, ideally ahead of time!
Copyright 2013 Thomas Paul Murphy
Originally published on 08 27 2013 at: www.themilwaukeeandwisconsinews.blogspot.com
When someone creates a non sustainable business model (it will fail) and it becomes insured by the United States Government (meaning taxpayer) through their persuasion, does not all the assets and personal wealth of those involved in that business model really belong to the United States Taxpayer? Do I have to give you the One, Two, Three's of it more clearly?
And can the failure or repeated failure, however well guised, of such a business model be considered all the evidence that will ever be needed to prove that it was and is a non sustainable business model?
In other words, once the taxpayer had to foot the bill for you, it should have been over?
How many nonsustainable business models are there? Make a list with reasons why!
And what happens when people are allowed to create a non sustainable business model? Can I ask the question, "Is it those who can not sustain themselves that create a non sustainable business model?" And if we allow the assets and value of our national assets to be depleted by that type of person, again, what kind of world has been created?
It is really the creation of a well guised Ponzi Scheme!
And are some investment banking offerings really well guised Ponzi Schemes doomed to failure! Absolutely!!!! So in that case if we can't blame the Investment Bankers who do we blame? When the taxpayer ends up footing the bill he also is burdened with unnecessary guilt? Right? He ends up paying and knows it wasn't his mistake and yet he could have voiced his opposition to such an idea from the highest mountain in the world and it would not have done anything to prevent it! It can be said the taxpayer is forced to take a spoonful of medicine that was created by a child who impressed society by mixing chemicals known to be detrimental to human health and administering them to human beings? Can we ever really apply the term Nobel prize winning chemist to anyone? Of course not! Why not? Because a Nobel prize winning chemist would take a megaphone up to the highest mountain and expose common chemicals known to cause sickness! There really hasn't been any Ralph Nader of chemistry. Why not? In order to become educated in chemistry one has to become indoctrinated into the concept of acceptable human casualties in the concept of the business model. The student who stood up and said, "Something should be done about that," would have been weeded out of the class (don't ask me how I know.) Those that rise to the top of the Profession only do so because they are complacent with the concept. So here we have a profession where the only way to get to the top is to not truly be concerned with human health. Someone else be the one to attach a label to that one this time!
At some point someone could add up the unrecognized future liability of every one of these industries and come to the accurate conclusion, "You never earned one American Abraham Lincoln red cent!"
Is the oil industry one such industry too? They have never paid the bill for the environmental contamination they created already!!! And you have to think of the Chemistry industry as being a vein of the oil industry too! Because most of the environmental contamination comes from products synthesized from oil in some way, shape or form! Ask yourself what the concept of chemistry mandated to be based on solar energy (electricity) would mean?
At some point we are going to have to develop floating solar energy powered filtration devices, much like you see water based trampolines that float, they are about 20 feet in diameter placed in our lakes. They would have a pump powered by photovoltaic cells mounted on the platform that would pump the lake water and run it through a filter! The filter would be replaceable. Indeed once the filter became full a switch could trigger an onboard cell phone to make the call to come and replace it, ideally ahead of time!
Copyright 2013 Thomas Paul Murphy
Originally published on 08 27 2013 at: www.themilwaukeeandwisconsinews.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment