Hufschmid's main page
Audio page

Eric Hufschmid, 7 Dec 2008

What should we do about our economic problems?

The three automobile executives below are trying to frighten us into believing that America will shrivel up and die if they are forced to deal with their financial problems by themselves.

The CENs (Chief Executive Neaderthals) begging Congress for money.
(l. to r.) Richard Wagoner, GM, Robert Nardelli, Chrysler, and Alan Mulally, Ford
By the way, I have a new page of Neanderthals here
My recommendation is to ignore their idiotic threats and face the fact that every nation is primitive and needs to be redesigned.

We should let our nations continue to deteriorate, and continue finding people who will help us free the human race from the crime networks, the incompetent leadership, and the corruption.

We have the intelligence and talent to improve our situation, so why keep things as they are right now? Let's make our lives better!

Hufschmid-7Dec2008.mp3   18 mb,  1 hour
To download, click your right mouse button and select Save Target As
A transcript is below, click here to jump to it.
We have unlimited opportunities

The majority of people promote the attitude that we're helpless to stop corruption and improve the world, but this attitude is not based on evidence. I think most people claim that we're helpless because they simply don't want to make an attempt to improve the world. They would rather play like children. Or, perhaps a more accurate description of these people is that they would rather titillate their emotions for sex, babies, food, material items, and status.

However, we have incredible opportunities. We can design an economy in a variety of ways, and we can create different types of transportation systems, and we can design cities in thousands of different ways. And every product can be improved upon... without exception!

Example: water heaters

I've been amazed at how many simple changes can be made to products to improve them. Most businesses overlook or ignore simple improvements simply because their primary concern is attracting customers. For example, consider the water heaters in America.
The common water heaters in America have a tube running up the center.

Hot air from the natural gas flames travel up that tube and heat the water.

However, when the burner is off, air flows up the tube, which cools the water, thereby wasting energy.

About 20 years ago I added a lid to my water heater.

When the burner is on, the hot air pushes the lid up, allowing the exhaust to escape.

When the burner turns off, the lid closes, trapping the hot air.

I assumed that I would save an insignificant amount of energy, but I was surprised to discover that the water became extremely hot because the lid was trapping the heat from the pilot light. I had to turn the thermostat off.

Since I live alone, the pilot light is capable of providing almost all of the hot water I need, so most of the time my thermostat is off. I turn the thermostat on only when I need extra hot water, or when someone is staying over at my house.

Do other nations have the same idiotic design for water heaters?

Don't worry about the automobile companies

America will continue to produce automobiles even if the management is forced to deal with their financial problems on their own. Besides, even if the American automobile companies vanished forever, why should we care? We can purchase Japanese and German automobiles.

I think our best option is to put some time and effort into developing better cities and alternative transportation systems. Below is an illustration of a transportation system that I fantasized about a few decades ago.

The cars travel along narrow, flat tracks. Grass can grow between the tracks. The cars get electricity from a narrow rod that penetrates a hollow track. The cars steer themselves by watching the position of the rod. The intersections don't have moving parts. There are only two choices at every intersection; namely, the car follows either the left wall of the hollow rail, or the right wall.

If we computerized the entire system, then nobody would have to drive the cars. We would only specify our destination. The cars would move along the tracks like components on an assembly line.

We're not helpless!

The reason I mention my fantasy transportation system is to encourage you to think about what we could be doing and to help you to realize that we have a lot of options.

None of us can do much of anything by ourselves, but if we can find enough people who can work together for the benefit of society, then we can develop better cities, a better economic system, a better transportation system, and better water heaters.

Don't let the majority of people get you discouraged. They won't help us improve the world, but they won't stop us, either. Think of them as talking monkeys of no importance. We don't need them. We can improve the world by ourselves.

So, spread the information and encourage people. Inspire people. Give them hope. Counteract the miserable, fearful, and depressing hysteria that is pouring from so many other people.

Every building in our city could be beautiful

The most attractive areas of our cities are usually the retail areas because businesses are competing to attract the attention of consumers. Churches are often very attractive, also.
The most disgusting sections of our city are usually the industrial areas.

We don't have to live like this, however. We have the talent and resources to make every building, sidewalk, and factory into a beautiful work of art.

Factories could even have stained-glass windows, just like churches.

We could - and should - enjoy going to work. We should enjoy our city, and our lives. We shouldn't suffer miserable conditions in order to boost corporate profits.

Even cubicles can be designed to be attractive. The human mind has the talent to create attractive offices and factories; we just have to find the desire.

We could also surround businesses and factories with gardens and walkways. We could make our city so nice that we enjoy going to work and spending time in the city.

The only thing that is stopping us from turning this earth into a paradise are the people who don't care about their city, and who only care about money, babies, sex, drugs, or fame.

But if you encourage people to look at the information on my website and discuss the issues I bring up, we will eventually find enough people to transform this planet. Burn some of my audio files, videos, and documents onto a CD-ROM and give it to people.

We shouldn't care about profit

A business is a "success" in our current economic system if they can make a profit, but we should change the system so that we pass judgment on whether a business is contributing something of value to life. Some examples are the Opie and Anthony show, Howard Stern, and MTV. Have you seen some of what they do?

And have you noticed the "toilet humor" in even the supposedly serious news reports? Look at this headline:
"Space Station residents to drink recycled urine"

Update January 12, 2008
Daryl Smith removed the warning at the top of his page that I am Jewish. If you're curious, I have a screen image of that portion of his website. Click here to view the image.

Do you need a free CAD program?

If you need a CAD program, or basic image editing, you can use the CAD program that I developed, MillWrite. I used MillWrite to create the above drawings, and some of the drawings in my book and video about 9/11. After I make the drawings with MillWrite, I use commercial image editing software to add the fancy coloring. You can download it and get more information here:

Christopher Bollyn meets Giulietto Chiesa

Nobody has seen any of the Bollyns since they disappeared on June 11, 2007, and now he shows up with Giulietto Chiesa.
How do you interpret this?

Plus I finally received an e-mail message from Bollyn!

I have more here.


A transcript of the audio

Sunday, Dec 7, 2008

As of today, the executives of the American automobile companies are still trying to frighten us into believing that the nation will suffer tremendous economic problems if we don't give them an enormous amount of financial assistance.

The importance of this issue should not be overlooked. Every business has to deal with problems, such as a decrease in sales, or an increase in expenses, or employees who quit or who can't perform properly at their job. Running a business is like flying an airplane or driving a car. The management has to constantly watch what's happening and make adjustments.

The management of the automobile companies should have been analyzing their sales, expenses, competition, and other issues, and they should have been having regular discussions about what to do to keep their business in good financial shape.

When they noticed that their sales were decreasing, or that their expenses were increasing, they should have reacted by compensating for it. But obviously they didn't compensate, and that allowed their financial problems to get worse. Now they're claiming to be on the verge of bankruptcy, and they want us to feel sorry for them.

It's important to understand that these problems are self-inflicted. And it's even more important to understand that if the government helps incompetent businessmen overcome self-inflicted problems, we hurt our nation by allowing incompetent people to remain in control of our businesses.

If the management of the car companies is truly as incompetent as they appear to be, we should tell the companies to find replacements immediately and start dealing with their problems.

Of course, to be fair, it's difficult for businesses to properly deal with financial problems. One reason is that it's not easy for businesses to get rid of employees, and it's especially difficult to get rid of management.

Our economic system was designed for a primitive farming community in which there were only a few small businesses. As I've already described in other audio files and documents, our economic system isn't well-suited for our modern era. Our system wasn't even designed to deal with changes in technology.

From the point of view of a consumer, improvements in technology are exciting, but from an economic point of view, technology creates problems that have to be dealt with. Some businesses and some employees have to change in order to adapt to the new technology, and even though it's easy for us to deal with this situation, human nature causes us to resist learning new skills or making big changes in our lives.

For example, when the printing industry began replacing movable type, a lot of skilled workers suddenly had skills that no business needed. And some businesses were producing products that nobody wanted. Ideally, all of these people and businesses would have calmly and quickly adapted to the changes, but many of the people affected by the new technology were terrified at the thought of learning a new skill, or finding a new job, or starting a new business. As a result, lots of people and labor unions put up resistance to the new technology.

We have to face the fact that most people are not very adventurous, and they don't want to learn new skills. Most people are terrified at the thought of finding a new job. People in management positions are so terrified that they help one another to keep their jobs. The end result is that when a business has to reduce employees, the management selfishly removes some of the lowest paid workers, thereby keeping a lot of unnecessary management.

We don't solve this type of problem by giving financial assistance to businesses that are unable to eliminate excess employees. With our current economic system, our only sensible solution is to tell those businesses to quit begging for money and deal with their financial problems. And ideally we would have discussions of how to improve our society so that it's easier for people to learn a new skill, find a job they enjoy, and start a business.

The people in the chemical business are an interesting example of this problem. There's a lot of evidence that many of their chemicals are causing birth defects, and causing girls to mature years too soon, and causing boys to become feminine, but the employees of the chemical companies are so afraid of losing their jobs that they resist attempts to develop safer alternatives, and many employees are even willing to ignore the possibility that they and their children are suffering health problems from their chemicals.

It's so difficult to find jobs that people will remain in a job that is potentially dangerous to themselves and their family. The most extreme examples that I'm aware of are the poor people in China who roast circuit boards over open flames in order to remove components for recycling. They expose themselves and their neighbors to toxic compounds. They're all suffering health problems, but they continue to do it because they can't find any other job.

The fear of losing a job is so extreme that many people will work at a job they are appalled with, and many people will lie about the dangers of their products. This is not an economic system to be proud of. We have to stop this idiotic attitude that we're patriotic when we use the social systems that developed centuries ago. We're fools to use those primitive systems. Our economic system is crude, and it needs to be updated for our modern era.

We need an economic system in which we can easily shut down entire industries if we decide we don't want them. We need an economic system where businesses can tell large numbers of employees - including people in management positions - that they're no longer needed. Businesses shouldn't have to fight with labor unions or worry about lawsuits from employees.

There's a lot of possible reasons as to why the automobile executives allowed their financial problems to grow to extreme levels. But trying to figure out their motives is like trying to figure out everybody's motive for faking the Apollo moon landing. And we don't have to know the details anyway in order to realize that we have a serious problem.

For example, if the executives are truly as incompetent as they appear, they should have been replaced long ago, so why weren't they? Where are the stockholders? They're supposed to watch over the management. Our economic system is failing us when it allows such incredible incompetence.

And if the executives are working with a crime network, they should have been arrested long ago. Our legal system, police, and government is failing us if it allows such phenomenal crimes to occur.

We don't have to know why the executives are begging for money. The important lesson to learn from their begging is that our economic system, government system, and legal system needs to be thrown in the trash, and we need to develop something that's better suited to this modern world. We have to modernize our social systems just like we modernize our plumbing, our airplanes, and our computers.

If we force the automobile companies to deal with their financial problems by themselves, they may declare bankruptcy. This issue of bankruptcy is another important issue that we have to deal with. Large corporations seem to use bankruptcy as a way to eliminate debt or get out of certain types of contracts.

Declaring bankruptcy is a serious problem to the owner of a small business, but to a large corporation, it's similar to going to a dentist to have your teeth cleaned. Large corporations use bankruptcy to start over, sometimes with the same disgusting, greedy, and criminal management.

It's interesting to consider what would happen if we allowed employees to do the equivalent of declaring bankruptcy. Imagine a factory worker continually doing a terrible job, and when his boss tells him to find another job, he declares the equivalent of bankruptcy, and then his boss is required to erase his history of bad performance and let him start all over. He then continues on his job as if he had just been hired.

Or imagine watching a sports event in which one of the athletes is doing a terrible job. When the coach yells at him to get out of the game, he calls a timeout and declares bankruptcy. His coach, and the television commentators, then erase his history of bad performance, and then the game resumes.

We shouldn't recycle incompetent people. When a person cannot perform properly, we should let somebody else have a chance.

Another area where our economic and legal system is failing us is in regards to removing abusive or dishonest businessmen. Hundreds of years ago there wasn't much business activity, and most businesses were small, neighborhood operations, so it was easy for people to avoid the disgusting businessmen. I've already discussed this issue in other files so I won't go into it again, but I haven't mentioned the problem of businessmen who follow the law but who have a terrible effect on society because they simply have a very crude personality.

For example, imagine two factories that are producing doorknobs. One factory is run by a man who wants his city to be beautiful. He spends a small amount of his time and profit to keeping his factory clean, attractive, and comfortable. He provides an attractive area for his employees to have lunch, and he keeps the sidewalk in front of his building clean.

The other factory is run by a man who doesn't have much of an interest in what his city looks like, or what his own business looks like. It doesn't bother him to live and work around homeless bums, garbage dumps, ugly buildings, or businesses that are suffering from so much crime that they're covered with steel grates and security cameras. This man doesn't spend any of his time or money to make his business attractive. He doesn't care if the windows are filthy, or the sidewalk in front of his building is full of trash and chewing gum. He doesn't care what the inside of the factory looks like either. All he cares about is making lots of money.

It should be obvious that the man who doesn't have any concern about society is going to have a financial advantage because he doesn't spend any of his money or time on non-productive activities. All of his time and money goes into his factory.

Our economic system assumes that consumers will make wise decisions about which businesses to support, and this concept works to a certain extent. Retail stores, for example, are under pressure to provide us with attractive and pleasant shopping areas because when most consumers are given the choice between shopping at a filthy, ugly, noisy retail store and a retail store that's attractive, they'll select the store that's attractive. As a result, the retail areas of our cities are usually the most attractive sections.

The ugliest part of our cities are usually where the factories are located. Our economic system assumes that people will work at the businesses they are most interested in, but the difficulty in finding a job causes a lot of people to take whatever job they can find, and most people don't have much of an interest in their city anyway. Most people are more concerned with getting a paycheck, and then titillating themselves with television, alcohol, food, babies, and sex.

The end result is that people with crude and disgusting personalities can dominate industrial production. It's difficult for normal people to compete against the factory owners who don't care about anything except money. Have you ever seen some of the factories that operate in New York City? There's no sensible reason that Americans have to set up factories that look like they belong in a Bangladesh slum. Those businesses are disgusting because the people who are operating them simply don't care about anything except making money. How is a normal person going to compete successfully against those type of businessmen?

And how can a normal businessman compete against a businessman who sets up a factory in a poor nation so that he can use children as low-cost factory workers?

Consumers are supposed to be driving the disgusting businessmen to bankruptcy, but most people have no idea where any of their products come from, and many people don't care anyway.

Cities all over the world are unattractive, disorganized, noisy, and filthy. There are only a few areas within our cities that are attractive, and it's usually where there's lot of competition for retail sales. Churches are often attractive, also, especially if they were built centuries ago.

However, we have the technology and resources to make every building, bridge, road, and sidewalk attractive. We have the ability to put all of our telephone lines and power lines underground. Factories could be just as beautiful as the nicest retail area or church. Factories could even have stained-glass windows and gardens.

We could make our cities so attractive that we have less an incentive to travel, and more of an incentive to enjoy our own city. Americans shouldn't have to travel to Europe to see a decorative building. We should be able to go to the industrial section of our own city and take tours of our own factories.

It's even possible to make office cubicles more attractive. I'll post a photo of an different style of cubicle in the article that has this audio file in case you've never seen or imagined an alternative to the standard dreary, gray cubicle.

Our current economic system treats humans as animals. Money is used as an incentive to make us work, just like a mechanical bone is held in front of race dogs to make them run around a race track.

We are victims of our current economic system, not masters of it. We are at the mercy of an enormous horde of consumers and businessmen, many of whom are mentally ill, dishonest, and irresponsible. We should change the system so that we can take control of it.

It may be true that the majority of people are not much more advanced than an animal, but some of us can function without money being used as an incentive.

An example is a military base. The military is funded with taxes, not from sales, so there's no financial incentive for them to make their base attractive. People will continue to join the military even if the bases are as ugly as our cities. Also, nobody is using money as an incentive to entice the military personell into cleaning their clothing or combing their hair.

So, why are the military bases so clean and orderly? Why are people in the military cleaning their clothing and combing their hair? If humans don't function without financial incentives, then how do we explain a military? Why aren't the military bases as ugly as our ugliest factories? Why aren't the houses on the military bases full of trash and broken windows? Why aren't the military bases full of unwanted pet dogs and cats? Why don't the military people dress as sloppy as the rest of the population?

The people in the military are keeping themselves, their clothing, and their bases clean and attractive because the military is dominated by people who want to behave like this, not because somebody is holding money in front of them as an incentive. It's true that a lot of people in the military are sloppy, dishonest, mentally ill, and disgusting, but those are not the people who dominate the military.

Imagine if the people who control our businesses had the same personality as the people who dominate the military. In such a case, every business owner would keep himself and his factory clean and attractive. And every businessman would do this without any financial incentives. They wouldn't do it to attract customers or employees. They would do this simply because this is how they wanted to live.

People who want to behave in a respectable manner don't need an incentive to behave properly, and they don't need policemen to threaten them. If we put people like that into leadership positions, then our leaders will behave properly because they want to, not because of incentives or threats.

The current attitude all over the world is that badly behaved people can be corrected with threats and incentives. When a businessman is caught misbehaving, the reaction from most people is to make his business give money to his victim, or put him in jail for a short period of time. A better philosophy is that any businessman who needs incentives or threats should be replaced with a higher quality person.

We should change our attitudes and quit treating humans as circus animals. And we should stop pretending that all people are identical. We have to face the fact that many people are crude, dishonest, or mentally ill. And we shouldn't try to correct their terrible behavior. We should let everybody behave in whatever manner is natural for them. If we don't approve of a person's behavior, we should prevent them from getting into positions of importance. And if a person's behavior is extremely annoying, or destructive, then we can exile them to some other city so that they don't bother the rest of us.

If the only reason a man is making his business attractive is because he's worried about losing sales, then we don't need him. Those type of businessmen should be regarded as savages. The ideal businessman is a man who has a natural desire to behave in a respectable manner.

And if the only reason a school teacher is not having sex with his students is because he's afraid of the police, then we don't need him, either. The ideal teacher is a person who has a natural desire to teach students in a respectable manner.

Imagine living in a world in which the people are honest because they want to be honest, not because they're afraid of the police. And imagine people keeping their city clean and attractive because they want to live this way, not because somebody is holding out money as an incentive.

Our economic system considers a businessman to be successful if he can make profit, but we shouldn't care about profit. We should care about the effect the business has on society. We should be able to remove businessmen - and even shut down entire businesses - if we decide that we don't like what they offer us.

One of the most extreme examples that I'm aware of is a radio show called the Opie and Anthony show. There's a video on the Internet in which they're looking for an intern for their show. They tell one of the men who wants to become an intern that in order to qualify, he has to allow another man to vomit in his mouth. As amazing as this may seem, this man agrees to it, and so one man drinks a lot of eggnog, and then vomits into the mouth of the man who wants to become an intern.

Opie and Anthony are just two of many people who are very successful in our current economic system. Howard Stern makes tens of millions of dollars every year for his show which is similar to that of Opie and Anthony. Gambling casinos are also very profitable. But why should we care whether a business is profitable? We should look at the effect it has on society and ask ourselves such questions as, How is society benefiting from these businesses? And, How would life be worse for us if we got rid of these businesses?

A lot of people will respond to me that since I don't like Howard Stern, I should ignore him. They will tell me that I'm under no obligation to listen to anything he says or give him any of my money. They will tell me that Howard Stern isn't hurting me or other people.

However, this issue is much more complex than it seems. The way our economic system is designed, money is like votes. People with the most money have the most influence over our economy. I don't know what Howard Stern does with his millions of dollars each year, but consider what that money allows him to do.

If he purchases apartment buildings or shopping malls, then he may become your landlord. If he purchases a business that is competing with your business, then he can affect your job. If he uses his money to finance political candidates, then he may gain influence over the nation. And if he helped criminals create strip clubs or gambling casinos, then he could help finance a crime network.

The idea that we can ignore businesses that we don't approve of is ridiculous. Another good example are the businesses that produce products and services for children. Children are not miniature adults. They don't think very well, and their behavior is more like a primitive savage or an animal. As a result, children have a much stronger attraction to products and services that adults don't care much for, such as the type of entertainment that we refer to as "toilet humor".

The MTV television station is a good example. They're making an enormous amount of money by entertaining children with what most adults would consider disgusting behavior. We shouldn't care that these businesses are profitable. We should ask ourselves, how are they improving life for us?

Furthermore, their enormous profit gives them an enormous influence over the world. We should change our economic system so that we can pass judgment on what type of businesses we want, and who we want in leadership roles. We shouldn't allow people to become influential simply because they're capable of making a profit.

We should take control of our economy so that we can put better people in control of businesses and so that we can determine which products and services we want.

This also applies to the people who provide us with news articles. Did you notice the headlines for the news articles that described NASA's recently developed water recycling device for the space station? Instead of sensible headlines, such as, “NASA tests water treatment device for space station” or “NASA develops wastewater recycling machine”, there were hundreds of headlines such as:

Space Station residents to drink recycled urine

That headline comes from cnet, which is supposed to be a serious source for news about technology.

The Associated Press had an article with the title:

Astronauts tinker with urine-to-water machine

The Australian government has a Department of Natural Resources and Water, and they posted an article that had the headline:

Astronauts drink urine

Imagine a newsstand that sells two different newspapers. Both of them are the same price, and both have similar articles. However, one of them is very serious, and the other is full of toilet humor, sexual images, comic strips, and gossip about Hollywood stars. Most people, especially when they're young, will select the idiotic newspaper.

Our economic system doesn't pass judgment on which newspaper is more useful to the human race. From the point of view of our current economic system, the product that has the highest sales is the better product.

This is not a trivial issue that we can ignore. One reason that crime networks can be so successful in business is because they're more willing to engage in abusive advertising and marketing, such as titillating people with toilet humor, or implying that their product will make us feel special, or by exaggerating the value of their products.

How are respectable people going to survive when they have to compete against businesses who are willing to abuse, manipulate, and deceive?

All throughout my life I've seen remarks about businesses becoming financially successful after they got help with marketing or advertising. And I've seen remarks that engineers are good at designing products, but they're terrible at selling products. The sad aspect of this is that the reason engineers fail at selling products is because most of them are too serious and honest.

If respectable people competed only with other respectable people, then serious advertisements would be successful. But when respectable people have to compete against immoral, crude, and disgusting people, then the serious advertisements are failures.

The advertisements that are the most successful have the least useful information in them. Television advertisements are idiotic skits in which actors simulate excitement about a product. This type of advertisement is successful because most humans behave like dumb animals who follow one other. Most people don't like to think, and most people are not very intelligent anyway, and so they don't respond to intelligent information. Instead, they respond to smiling faces, and they mimic other people.

Printed advertisements don't have much useful information, either. The most successful printed advertisements contain phrases, such as “New”! or “Lemon Freshness”, as well as images that stimulate our emotions for sex, babies, or status.

The type of advertising that we tolerate right now should be described as abusive and disgusting. However, we should not try to force the disgusting businessmen to behave better. Instead, we should look for people who behave better naturally.

Another interesting problem with our economy can be seen right now during the month of December. Every year in December an enormous number of businesses worry about selling Christmas gifts. If people don't purchase a lot of Christmas gifts, thousands of people will lose their jobs and hundreds of businesses will go bankrupt. And today China is concerned about the Christmas shopping of Americans because the Chinese are producing a lot of these gifts.

It's pathetic that large, technically advanced nations are concerned every year about Americans purchasing Christmas gifts.

Thousands of years ago Christmas was just a relaxing social event, but the lack of leadership in our societies and the incredible emphasis on money has caused Christmas to evolve into a major economic event. But it's an event of incredible stupidity and waste because a lot of the gifts that people give each other quickly end up in the trash. The gifts are wasting resources and creating pollution.

Businesses shouldn't be trying to manipulate us, or grab our attention, or convince us to purchase their products. Their only concern should be contributing something of value to human life.

My recommendation is to ignore the financial problems that America and other nations are suffering from now. Our economic system, government system, and other social systems are so primitive that I don't think there's any point in trying to fix them. I think our best policy is to face the fact that life has changed dramatically for the human race, and it's time for us to start developing a more appropriate economic system, government system, and other social systems.

Our legal system is so corrupt that the police won't even investigate Larry Silverstein's involvement in the 9/11 attack. What is the point of trying to save such an absurd nation? We have to throw the Constitution in the trash. We need to start over.

And the Europeans need to throw their monarchies in the trash, and their economic system, and their policies towards immigration, and their government systems. They also need to modernize.

The majority of people assume that there are simple solutions to our problems, such as reducing taxes or getting rid of labor unions. But I think our problem is that we're trying to function on crude social systems and primitive attitudes towards life, crime, happiness, and religion, and I think we have to make some dramatic changes to our nations and our attitudes.

In regards to the economy, I've already explained in other files that we need to develop an economy that we can supervise, and we also need to change the competition between businesses from selling products to contributing something of value to society.

Since I've already discussed this, I won't repeat it, but I'll give you a couple of actual examples of products that would be very easy to improve upon if we could get control of our economy.

The first example are the water heaters that we use to provide our homes with hot water. The water heater that I have in my house right now, and the heater that was in the house I grew up in, and heater my neighbors have, is a cylindrical tank that is heated by natural gas. The flames burn at the bottom, and hot air rises up the center tube to heat the water.

This is a ridiculous design because when the flames are off, a flow of cool air rises continuously up the tube, which carries away heat. Years ago I put a lid on the top of my heater to stop this, and I was amazed to discover that I had to turn off the thermostat because the pilot light was capable of providing almost all of the hot water that I needed, especially during the summer, and most of the hot water I needed during the winter. I'll put a diagram of what I did on the page that has this audio file.

According to the theory of free enterprise, when a person develops a better product, or an improvement to an existing product, he can put it on the market, and consumers will purchase it. But in reality this theory fails all the time for a variety of reasons. For one reason, this is not the Middle Ages in which products are so simple that we can produce them by ourselves. Putting products on the market today is extremely difficult.

In order for me to produce this type of water heater, I would have to get a lot of funding to develop them. And I would have to test them, and get government approval, and set up a manufacturing plant and a distribution network. It would not be an easy task.

And even if I did get this manufacturing plant established, I would have to struggle to get retail stores to carry my water heater, and if my water heaters sold, my competitors could copy my design and drive me out of business.

And consider refrigerators. They should be designed like air-conditioning units. Specifically, they use air from outside of the house to cool the refrigerant. According to the theory of free enterprise, I could start a business and produce these type of refrigerators, and consumers would purchase them in order to save money. But in reality consumers are not going to purchase this type of refrigerator because they don't fit into our houses without expensive modifications to the house.

This problem occurs every time new technology is developed. The solution is for the government to get involved and supervise the transition from one type of technology to another. The government is doing is right now in order to allow businesses to switch to digital television. Since television is the primary interest of most people, the government will do this for the television industry, but it has no desire to do this for refrigerators or other products.

And consider the coolant in your automobile radiator. The way my car has been designed, when the coolant gets hot and expands, the excess empties into a small plastic container. When the car has been turned off, the coolant contracts and is sucked back into the radiator. However, the flow in and out of the plastic container brings air from the atmosphere in and out of the container, and that causes dust to build up in the coolant. So I put a plastic bag in the container so that the coolant expands and contracts within the plastic bag rather than in the atmosphere. This keeps the coolant much cleaner.

Why don't the automobile companies provide this simple improvement? Haven't they ever thought about it?

It's possible that they are aware of it, but they ignore it. This brings up an important problem with our current economic system. Businesses are only concerned with selling products. As a result, businesses are very likely to pretend that they don't see an improvement to a product if it reduces the sale of the product.

The chemical companies that produce radiator coolant don't have any incentive to reduce the sale of their product. As a result, those companies are not looking for ways to make the cooler last longer. Instead, they spend their time trying to figure out how to attract the attention of consumers, and how to increase their profit margin, and how to sell more chemicals.

It's possible that the chemical companies are truly oblivious to some of the simple ways to reduce the need for their chemicals, but it's also possible that they're aware of hundreds of methods of reducing the need for those chemicals, but they pretend they don't know about them because they don't want to reduce their sales.

In a better economic system, the goal of a business would be to improve society, and one way to improve it is to reduce the consumption of resources and the production of garbage.

It might be easier to understand this concept if you imagine an extreme example. Imagine that there's a nation on this planet that has the exact same lifestyle that we have right now. They have the same houses, refrigerators, cars, and computers that we do.

However, imagine that their products are so efficient that they use almost no energy, and imagine that they're built so well that they last for hundreds of years without maintenance.

Your first thought might be that life will be identical in both nations since we both have the same products, but there would be some dramatic differences between us. That other nation wouldn't need as many assembly lines because they wouldn't need to produce as many replacement products. And they wouldn't need as many repair shops, and they wouldn't need as much iron ore or oil, and they wouldn't produce as much garbage or pollution.

Fewer people in that nation would be needed to maintain their lifestyle, and that would allow that nation to put more people on other tasks, such as research projects, or creating gardens for the city, or making their buildings and walkways more attractive.

A business will improve life for us when they provide us with the products we want for the least amount of resources and work. Consider the production of food if you need another example of this concept.

Thousands of years ago almost every man had to be a farmer because nobody could produce very much food. Not many people could spend their time doing research or making decorative buildings for the city.

However, during the past few centuries, technology has allowed a small percentage of the population to produce all of the food we need. This farming technology has released thousands of people from the farms. We no longer have to struggle to produce food. The majority of the human population today is now free to engage in other activities.

Of course, most of the population today are parasites because they take a lot of resources but don't provide anything of value in return. A small percentage of the population is doing almost all of the useful work. However, it doesn't have to be this way. If we change our economic system so that we can get control of it, then we could eliminate the worthless jobs in government, universities, insurance companies, and other businesses. And then we could tell some of those people to help us do the work that needs to be done so that we don't have to do it all by ourselves, and the remaining people can be put on completely new tasks. You have to wonder what would this world be like if the millions of parasites started contributing something of value to society.

The more efficient we can make society, the better for all of us. If we could figure out how to reduce our consumption of steel, electricity, refrigerators, and other products then some of the people involved in the production, maintenance, and disposal of those products would be free to do other activities.

Every business should be looking for ways to reduce the need and use of their products. People should be encouraged to find a way to put themselves out of a job.

With our current economic system, nobody wants to put themselves out of a job, but somebody who can figure out how to do that should be considered a talented and valuable member of society. And once he figured out how to eliminate his job, he could be moved to another job, and then we could hope that he figured out how to eliminate that job, also.

Another example of the problems of our economic system are the low flow toilets. I haven't found one that works properly. It's possible that the concept of a low flow toilet is impractical, but I suspect the problem is their design. They have a narrow passageway and hairpin turns. However, despite the endless complaints from consumers, these toilets continue to sell. In fact, I've already purchased three different brands, and I'm ready to purchase a fourth. But I'm not buying them because I like them. I'm trying to find one that works.

This is a ridiculous situation. There are people complaining about these toilets all over the nation, and yet they're still on the market. At what point are we going to demand that these toilets either be designed properly, or we abandon the concept of the low flow toilet?

And consider the houses that Americans live in. The house that I grew up in didn't have any thermal insulation at all, and the house that Christopher Bollyn grew up in, in Chicago, was even worse. For example, he told me that the homes in his neighborhood were built with sewage pipes that were made of some type of pressed paper, which deteriorated after 10 to 15 years. Everybody in the neighborhood had to replace their sewage lines.

This economic system is ridiculous. Businesses can make sales simply by producing products that are so crummy that people get disgusted with them and then purchase another one. In fact, I suspect that Microsoft was deliberately adding annoying features to Windows 95 and Windows 98 in order to entice us into purchasing upgrades.

Speaking of Christopher Bollyn, at his website right now is an article that has a photograph of him shaking hands with the Italian journalist and 9/11 researcher who produced the film about 9/11 called Zero.

Below that photograph is a photo of Anders Bjorkman. Bollyn claims that he worked with Bjorkman to organize a Truth Tour in 2008 to talk about the sinking of the ship "Estonia".

Consider the significance of this latest article and these photos. Bollyn left Chicago somewhere around June 11, 2007, and in all this time, about 1 year and half, nobody has been seen with Christopher Bollyn or any of his family members. This is the first photograph that shows him in contact with another person.

However, this Italian, whose name I can't imagine how to pronounce, is not just any person. He's one of the Italians that I've been accusing of being part of the Jewish crime network. And Anders Bjorkman is also not just any person. About a year ago I complained that Bollyn was promoting him, and that we should consider him to be following orders from the Jewish crime network.

I don't think it's a coincidence that after one and a half years of hiding from everybody, Bollyn decides to have contact with two of the men I consider to be working for the Jewish crime network.

I think that this latest article from Bollyn is an attempt by his kidnappers to prove to us that he's alive and well, and that he's free to travel. However, I say that this latest article is actually more evidence that this Italian man and Bjorkman are in direct contact with the crime network that kidnapped the Bollyn family.

And take a close look at the photo of Bollyn. Is it just low resolution? Or is there something wrong with his eyes?

I haven't received any e-mail messages from the Bollyns for almost a year, but about two weeks ago I received a message from him. I was on the cc list. He wasn't actually sending me the message. He was responding to a Japanese citizen who had asked him about my accusations that he's dead or kidnapped. Bollyn responded that he's fine and that I'm spreading lies about him.

So I responded to both of them with an offer to pay for airline tickets and hotel rooms for the entire Bollyn family so that they can take a trip to Japan, and I said I would also travel to Japan, and then I can see for myself that they really are alive and free to travel, and so can the Japanese, and then the Bollyn family can go on their way and have an all-expense-paid vacation.

I have yet to hear back from either the Bollyns on that Japanese person. I suppose that Japanese person was working with the Jewish crime network, and this was just another of their idiotic attempts to convince me that the Bollyn family is free and safe. I'll post the e-mail messages in case you're interested in reading them.

Getting back to the issue of world's economic problems, another problem that every nation faces is that as technology advances each year, there are fewer citizens who have the ability to become engineers or scientists or technicians. A few centuries ago an enormous percentage of the population was capable of becoming an engineer because a man needed only a basic understanding of math and science to qualify.

Today a child has to spend years in school, and he has to have a lot of talent in order to become an engineer. And the children 50 years in the future will need even more training and talent.

Have you seen the robots that are being developed in Japan right now? How many people in this world today have the ability to design the hardware or software for a robot? When Japan puts those robots on the market, will they have any competition from America? If not, don't blame the unions or the environmental regulations or the taxes. It will be because of other problems, such as incompetent management, or a shortage of talented engineers.

The other day I posted a news article about Japanese companies that are encouraging their employees to have more babies. Many Japanese believe that they can solve the shortage of technical talent by encouraging more people to have more children, but having more babies doesn't solve the problem. The world is already full of people. We only have a shortage of people who truly fit into this modern world. There's no shortage of dishonest people, mentally ill people, criminals, idiots, alcoholics, or weirdos.

It's interesting to consider the possibility that America actually has enough technical talent to build robots, trains, and other products that are just as good or better than what we see from Japan and Germany. It's possible that one of the reasons American industries are deteriorating is because we're wasting a lot of our talent on toys, electronic gambling devices, weapons, X-ray equipment for airport security, special effects for Hollywood movies, and other idiotic products.

And what is NASA doing with all of their scientists and engineers? Have you seen some of the suspicious photographs from the Mars Rovers? There's one that seems to show a piece of wood on Mars. The Jews on Internet message boards and at the Jeff Rense website are claiming that the wood is proof that Mars once had forests, but I say the wood is evidence that the Mars rovers are in the Australian desert.

Every society should occasionally do an analysis of their citizens and pass judgment on which of them are contributing something of value, and which of them are just wasting resources. It's possible that if America did an inventory of its technical talent, we would discover that we're wasting most of it.

Why should we try to fix this idiotic economic system? We should develop a system that we can get control of so that we can shift some of our technical talent and resources away from the entertainment businesses and into products that are more useful.

We should also take a serious look at the people who call themselves scientists and professors because I've met some of them, and I think our schools are giving college diplomas to people who shouldn't be calling themselves professors or scientists.

The people who get college diplomas in religion are perhaps the most extreme and obvious example. It's certainly possible for a person to learn about the different religions and their history, but it doesn't make any sense for a person to claim that he's an expert on God or the devil simply because he went to school.

And consider the field of astronomy. We should do an inventory to figure out how many astronomers we support, and what these people are doing with their lives. It seems as if we support hundreds of them, and it seems that most of them do nothing but take photographs. But there are supposedly billions of stars. Do astronomers plan to take a photograph of every one of them? Taking photos of stars is like taking photos of the grains of sand at a beach. There's a point at which we have enough photos. And how many more telescopes are we going to build?

I'm happy to support astronomers who are helping us to understand the Earth, its magnetic fields, the sun, and the universe, but how many astronomers actually have the talent to help us to understand the universe? It's possible that most of them are just glorified photographers. Furthermore, some astronomers are promoting the Apollo moon landing hoax, UFO nonsense, and other scams. Those astronomers ought to be investigated for their connections to crime networks.

I'm sure a lot of scientists, engineers, and other people will be horrified at my suggestion of forcing them to find another job, but if we change our economy to make it easier to find jobs, and if we allow our economy to be supervised, then I bet a lot of people would love to switch jobs. The scientists who don't really have the talent to be scientists certainly have the talent to be successful at thousands of other jobs, such as helping us develop better cities, or a better school system, or a better transportation system. And they would get a lot more job satisfaction doing something useful.

I don't see any point in trying to fix America or Europe. I think our best policy is to let these nations deteriorate, and try to find people who want to create a better world. I don't even think we should try to maintain American cities. Most of our buildings are ugly, and our trains don't work very well, and many of our industries are using outdated equipment. Why should we try to save this mess? It would be better to start over and design completely new cities and a new society.

The idea of building a completely new city might seem absurd, but it's very easy. All we do is set aside an area of land, design a city for it, and then build it. How difficult is that?

If you think I'm exaggerating, take a look at government statistics. Last year more than 1 million new homes were built in America, and that's just houses for people, not office buildings, roads, or bridges. Every year the American construction crews are building the equivalent of a very large city. Or, we could say that every year America builds the equivalent of 10 medium-sized cities.

Right now thousands of individual citizens are scattering buildings and roads around the nation almost at random. All we have to do is coordinate all of these construction crews so that they build one advanced city.

The people who insist that we can't design and build new cities are simply looking for an excuse to avoid the issue. And the reason they want to avoid the issue is because they don't have much of an interest in improving society. Their primary interest is satisfying their own emotional cravings for status, material items, sex, and food. These people should be regarded as primitive savages. They're like dirt in a transmission. They interfere with progress because they discourage other people from trying to do something useful for the human race. They promote the philosophy that each of us should satisfy ourselves rather than be concerned with society.

It's sad to think that people have been capable of designing cities for thousands of years. We don't need any special technology to do this, and we don't need large amounts of money or resources.

In fact, between 4 and 5000 years ago some people in the area of modern Pakistan and India got together to design cities for themselves, such as the cities we know as Harappa and Mohenjo Daro. Those cities had extensive brickwork that set up a primitive sewage system and pathways for the people to walk on. The cities were technically primitive by our standards, but they're proof that some people had gotten together about 5000 years ago to do some simplistic city planning.

Designing and building a completely new city is very simple. It only requires people who can cooperate for the benefit of society. Our primitive ancestors 50,000 years ago were capable of planning how to set up a campsite for themselves.

The only reason we're not designing better cities is because most of the human population doesn't have much of an interest in this activity. Take a look at the people who are successful in business. Their primary interest in life is becoming the dominant male, stockpiling material items, and having sex. Some of them have gigantic houses, and fleets of automobiles and airplanes and boats. These people don't care about society. They're just talking monkeys, not leaders for this modern world.

And the only reason we're not developing a better economic system or a better school system is because most of the human population doesn't care about those activities, either.

We don't need any new technology or resources to make this world a better place. We don't need fusion reactors or solar cells, and we don't need any more deposits of oil or gold. What we need are some advanced humans that we can trust and who have the ability to work together for the benefit of society.

If we could put higher quality men into leadership positions, then it would be very easy for us to design and build completely new cities. We could also isolate the new city economically from the rest of society so that we could experiment with a different economic system, and even a different monetary system. We could even experiment with different electrical systems, or different phone systems. We can do whatever we want. We're not helpless. All we need is to find thousands of higher quality men.

I would also bet that we're capable of designing a better transportation system. The automobiles and trucks that use internal combustion engines will probably be of value for a long time in the future, but I think that by redesigning our cities, the majority of people will be able to get around the city with other types of transportation devices.

I'll explain one of the ideas I had a few decades ago in the hope that I can inspire you to think about these issues. Of course, I never actually developed this concept beyond a fantasy, so it's possible that I'm overlooking something that would make it technically impractical, but even if my idea has a flaw, I'm sure the human race has the talent to develop a city with a better transportation system than what we have right now.

I'll put a diagram on the page that has this audio file to help you understand my idea.

Our current automobiles travel on roadways that are much wider than the automobile because we cannot control an automobile precisely. Imagine that instead of a wide roadway, every road is reduced to two narrow tracks that are not much wider than the tires. The area between and around the tracks could be dirt or grass or rocks.

Humans couldn't possibly keep the cars on those narrow tracks, but there is a third track running along the side of, or in between, the other two tracks. This third track would have a narrow slot in it. The car would have a rod that fits into the slot. The car would remain on the track by adjusting the steering to keep the rod in the center of that slot so that it doesn't rub against either of the walls.

Inside this third track would be an electrical cable. The car would take electricity from that cable to power its electric motor. The car wouldn't need an engine or batteries.

The slot would be narrow, and the electrical line would be far enough inside that there would be no concern about children touching it with their fingers.

The cars would be capable of making only left turns or right turns. Unlike intersections for railroad tracks, these intersections wouldn't need any moving parts to switch the car from one track to another. In order to make a left turn, the car simply follows the left wall of the slot.

It would be so easy for the car to make left or right turns onto different tracks that it's possible to let the car drive itself. When I first thought of this idea, there were no small computers, so I didn't think of computers controlling it. Instead, I thought that if a person was traveling on a certain path on a regular basis, such as from his house to his job, he could have a long, narrow paper card with notches cut onto its left and right sides to signify the sequence of left and right turns that he needs to make in order to get to his destination. He would insert this notched card into the automobile, and the automobile would follow the sequence of left and right turns.

With modern computers, this type of system can be automated to an unbelievable extent. The driver would only have to specify his destination, and the computer would look in its database to figure out the sequence of left and right turns from wherever it happens to be at the time.

Since these cars are following tracks, it would be easy to prevent accidents. Traffic computers could monitor every car on the tracks, and the cars would have sensors to determine when they are near one another in case they have to override the traffic computers.

Nobody would have to drive these cars. We would only need a manual override to deal with electrical or mechanical failures.

Furthermore, we could design society and this transportation system so that nobody owns any of the cars. Instead, the cars would be analogous to taxicabs.

When you wanted to travel somewhere, you would request an automobile, such as by pushing a button next to a roadway, or sending a signal from a cell phone or a computer. If you frequently traveled to a certain place at a certain time, such as to get to a job, you could arrange for a car to be ready and waiting for you at a certain place and at a certain time. After the car dropped you off at your destination, it would travel along the tracks to the next person who wanted it, or it would sit in storage until somebody needed it.

People have a strong attraction to material items, and we want to take possession of every material item that we see. However, the fewer items that we own, the simpler our life becomes. If we don't own any of the cars, then we don't have to maintain them or purchase new ones.

Furthermore, we wouldn't have to worry about parking the cars. Most of the time you would use them like a taxicab. They would take you somewhere, and then they would go on their way. The only time you would want to hold onto a particular car is if you had packages inside it, or if you were stopping for a short period of time.

For example, if you had packages in your car, and you wanted to stop somewhere for food or to visit somebody, instead of taking out your packages every time you stopped and later getting a different car, you would tell your car to wait for you. Your car would automatically travel to the nearest storage center, and then it would wait for you to send a signal to pick you up. It would be like valet parking. And since the car can drive itself, it could pick you up at a location that was different from where it dropped you off. Therefore, you would be free to travel from wherever you were when the car dropped you off. And if you ended up getting a ride home with somebody else, you could tell your car to meet you at your house so that you could get your packages.

Children would be able to operate this type of car by themselves. Parents wouldn't have to drive their children anywhere.

Trucks could be designed with robotic arms so that they could pick up and drop off packages by themselves. With even more advanced robots, we could take this concept one step further and have the tracks go into the farming region so that the trucks can automatically pick up and deliver fresh food.

This system would be easier for the city to maintain because we would only have to maintain narrow tracks rather than extremely wide roads. This would make it easier for the city to maintain extremely smooth tracks. The tracks could even be made of steel. Smooth tracks reduce the noise from the tires, and the tires wouldn't need to be inflatable. The tires would need their rubber tread replaced once in a while, but nobody would have to worry about flat tires or spare tires.

Since this type of automobile is not locked onto the tracks, when one of them experienced a mechanical failure, it would be easy for a person to lift out its electrical arm and push it off the tracks and onto the side of the road where it could be picked up for repair.

Or, the next car that came along the track could slow down, touch up against it, and lock onto it, similar to how railroad cars connect together. After the car dropped off its passengers, it would push the broken car to a service station.

Because these automobiles would not need batteries, spare tires, or internal combustion engines, they would be smaller and lighter in weight than conventional automobiles. The smaller size would allow more cars to fit on the tracks, which in turn means that fewer tracks would be needed to transport the same amount of people compared to the amount of roadways that we currently need.

We could further boost the capacity of the tracks by computerizing the entire system. Instead of having traffic lights that people have to pay attention to, the cars would move automatically on the tracks by following commands from computers that are watching the movement of all the cars. The cars would move very quickly, just like products flowing on an assembly line.

The cars would be of different sizes so that you could request a larger car if you were part of a large group of people, or if you have a lot of packages to carry. The cars could also be designed to connect together like railroad cars. By connecting several cars together, large groups of people could travel as a group. This would also further increase the carrying capacity of the tracks.

There's a tremendous advantage to being able to move a large number of people on a small number of tracks. Specifically, it reduces the number of tracks that a city has to build and maintain. And the fewer tracks that we have to build, the more practical it becomes to put the tracks underground. Putting them underground reduces the noise in the city, and it allows the surface of the city to be used for walkways, gardens, and parks.

Furthermore, by setting up the system so that nobody owns any of the cars, the city wouldn't have to provide parking lots. We would only need small storage centers around the city for the cars to park themselves when they're not needed.

A typical city in America has an enormous amount of land area devoted to roads and parking lots. The buildings in a city are surrounded by concrete and asphalt. The constant flow of large, heavy cars and trucks creates a lot of noise and an endless flow of asphalt and rubber dust. Imagine how nice our cities would be if all of those roads were replaced by gardens and fields of grass and parks.

If nobody owns any of the cars, then neighborhoods wouldn't have cars parked along sidewalks and driveways. And if we provide everybody with free access to the transportation system, then we wouldn't need to waste resources or people on parking meters, toll booths, or other type of metering or billing systems.

Providing everybody with free access to a transportation system might seem wasteful, but if you've been listening to my audio files for a while, then you know my attitude is that we should reverse our attitude towards bad behavior. My philosophy is that we should design society for respectable people rather than for the worst behaved members. The people who don't fit in should be removed. We shouldn't impose complicated security systems, billing systems, or metering systems on society simply because a small percentage of the people are behaving like selfish or destructive savages.

America was created by, and is still dominated by, misfits and criminals, and so this nation has always promoted the attitude that we should feel sorry for Underdogs. However I think America is hopeless, and we should let it disintegrate. And when we redesign the nation, we should get rid of this attitude of feeling sorry for Underdogs.

Getting back to my transportation system, if we designed the cars to be completely under the control of computers, the cars wouldn't need a front or a rear. Instead, they would be able to travel from either direction. This would simplify the design of the tracks, and especially the storage areas. We wouldn't have to provide loops for the cars to turn around in. The seats could even be designed to swivel so that people could face whichever direction they pleased.

If we design the city with single-family homes, then instead of providing each home with a wide concrete or asphalt driveway, each home would have a short section of track to allow a car to pull off the main track and stop at the house. The car could stop under a covered area so that people would be protected from rain, but there wouldn't be a need for a completely enclosed garage because the car wouldn't remain at anybody's home for a long period of time.

If the city was designed so that homes are clustered together like apartment buildings or luxury resorts, then fewer tracks would be needed compared to a city that had single-family homes, and that would make underground tracks more affordable. A neighborhood in which the tracks and utilities are underground would be much more desirable compared to the neighborhoods of today. This type of neighborhood would be very quiet and clean, and the area that is currently wasted on roads could become grass fields, gardens, and pathways. Children would be able to play outside without any concerns about traffic.

This type of transportation system would also be much better suited to cities in cold climates. The tracks that are above ground would be very easy to keep clean of snow and ice. Whenever it started to snow, a group of snow plows would circulate on the tracks all by themselves.

They would only have to clean the narrow tracks and reduce the snow between the tracks to a level that the cars can drive over. By moving a smaller amount of snow compared to the snowplows in our cities today, the cities would be much more attractive. The streets wouldn't have enormous piles of snow along the edges. And if nobody owned any of the cars, there wouldn't be any cars parked along the streets to worry about. And nobody would have to struggle to start their car on cold days, or scrape ice off the windows.

A variation of this automobile could be designed for rural areas, and farms, and industrial zones. These cars would have either a battery or an engine so that they could leave the tracks. They would also either have more rugged tires, or a second set of tires that are lowered to the ground when they leave the tracks.

Well, that's my idea for a transportation system. Since it's never been anything more than a fantasy, I may be overlooking some important technical flaws, but the reason I wanted to discuss my fantasy is to counteract the tendency to feel as if our situation is hopeless. I frequently hear people complain that we can't do anything, and it's true that by ourselves we can't do much of anything to improve the world. However, we're not helpless if we work together.

Most of the people in this so-called truth movement are pumping out propaganda that frightens or discourages people. We're told that there will soon be a world war, or martial law, or food shortages, or economic chaos. We're told that the mysterious New World Order will use their hordes of mindless policemen and soldiers and put us into prison camps, and that there's nothing we can do to stop any of this because the crime network is too large and powerful, and because the police and soldiers are hopelessly stupid and corrupt.

These phony truth seekers are trying to dampen our enthusiasm, take away our hope for the future, and cause us to live in fear.

You can also see this with the people who call themselves Holocaust revisionists. Several of them have been arrested recently, and some have even been put into jail for short periods of time. However, I think they are deliberately staging these arrests in order to frighten us. For example, the Reverend Ted Pike, who has the website, posted an article on November 25, 2008 about the arrest of Frederick Tobin, who was arrested in London for Holocaust denial. One of the headings in Ted Pike's article is, "Could Germany Come for You?" And his article ends with the sentence, "Where shall we flee?"

His article is using the arrest of Tobin to frighten us into believing that we can get arrested for Holocaust denial in any nation, and that we should be looking for a place to run and hide.

The Reverend Pike doesn't encourage people to stand up to this nonsense and expose the HoloHoax. He's either a member of the Jewish crime network, or he's one of their puppets. Perhaps another blackmailed pedophile.

My advice is to ignore these truth seekers and their websites and their message boards. They will give you terrible attitudes that get you depressed. Some of these phony truth seekers are so desperate to attract your attention that they're even more critical of Israel and Jews than my website, but don't fall for that trick. Their criticism of Israel is just the bait they put on their hook to grab your attention.

It's easy for us to become disillusioned and assume that our situation is hopeless because every nation is still completely dominated by criminals, freaks, alcoholics, and idiots who never have nothing intelligent to say. But if you can maintain a good attitude and continue to encourage people to look at my website and discuss the issues I bring up, then we will eventually be able to find enough peole to do something.

But in case you don't think we're making progress, let me give you some evidence that we are indeed slowly defeating this crime network.

I started exposing the 9/11 attack in January 2002. The reaction from the public and the criminal Jews was that I was unpatriotic, a Nazi, an anti-Semite, and extreme left-wing liberal, and an extreme right wing patriot. Nobody ever accused me of being a Jew or a Zionist.

However, during the past year or so, more and more people are starting to accuse me of being a Jew or a Zionist. In case you don't understand the significance of this, in 2002, many Jews would proudly admit that they were Jewish, and the most extreme insult was to call me a Nazi. Today a lot of the Jews are afraid to admit that they are Jews, and the most extreme insult is to call me a Jew. This is proof that we're making progress.

During the past six years, millions of people have discovered that 9/11 and other crimes are coming from Jews. This information will continue to spread, and eventally being called a Jew will be the worst insult imaginable. Soon we might see parents scolding their children with remarks such as, "Stop acting like a Jew!"

At the top of Daryl Smith's site is a warning message that states: "Eric Hufschmid is an Agent Provocateur and handler who comes from a Jewish family and anyone that lends him any support is suspect."

Michael Collins Piper of the American Free Press, has also accused me of being a Jew, and he's accused Christopher Bollyn's wife of being a Jew.

How can we not defeat this crime network? These people are so stupid that they don't understand that when they can insult us by calling us a Jew, it's the Jews who are in big trouble, not us.

As I mentioned in my status report in July 2008, the Jews are losing their reputation as being a loving, peaceful, innocent people. Every day more people are realizing that lots of Jews are horrible, disgusting, psychotic criminals. And these criminal Jews think they're going to get out of this mess by calling me a Jew?! They're idiots!

More evidence that we're defeating this crime network can be seen with the mysterious website During the past few years, a lot of people have been asking me “Who runs this website” and “Can they be trusted?” I don't know who runs it, but I put a warning on my website to be suspicious of them. But now we can be certain that they are just another operation by criminal Jews. They now have a message board, and it's connected to a website that was originally the New Orleans, Louisiana John Birch Society. In case you don't know much about the John Birch Society, I have some information on my website that shows that they were infiltrated by criminal Jews a long time ago, and they're working with more than just judicial-inc. They also work with Alex Jones and other phony truth seekers.

The message board that judicial-inc is operating has one sentence to explain the rules of conduct. Their rule is:

No swearing, and we prefer you use the words Bolshevik, Communist, Neo-Con, Zionist, etc, but avoid saying Jew.

Why would they want us to stop saying the word Jew? If you've seen their website, then you've noticed that they appear to be extremely angry and disgusted with Jews, so why would they want people to stop using the word Jew on their message board?

The only people who seem to have a problem with the word “Jew” are the criminal Jews. Nobody else seems to care. It's a proper word in the English language to everybody else, just like the words Catholic, Muslim, Republican, and Canadian.

I think the sensitivity to the word Jew is because the criminal Jews have been hiding in the shadows for years, and they've been fooling us into blaming problems on Communists, Nazis, Muslims, Neo-Cons, corporations, the military-industrial establishment, and Arabs. For decades all of us were foolishly blaming our problems on the wrong group of people. The Jews would laugh as we blamed the Nazis or the corporations.

But during the past few years the Jews have been hearing more and more people switch from blaming Nazis or Arabs to blaming Jews. The Jews realize that we're talking about them now. They realize that we can see them in the shadows. They're not hiding from us any longer.

The Jews are becoming frightened, and that explains why they are trying to discourage us from using the word “Jew”. Judicial Inc. wants us to use the words Bolshevik, communist, or neocon. Even “Zionist” is better to them than the word “Jew”.

We CAN defeat this crime network. It's true that they have a lot of people in their network, and they may be bribing tens of thousands of people in our government, police departments, and military, but it seems as if most of the people in their network are in terrible mental health. It's possible that they outnumber us, but we're not having a fistfight with them, so don't get discouraged. We ARE beating them.

I realize that it's easy to get discouraged. In fact, one of the reasons I haven't posted an audio file for the past two months is because I got discouraged after watching my relatives and more than 100 million other Americans arguing over whether we should elect Obama or McCain as president. It's easy to lose hope for the human race when you realize that you're surrounded by people who are only slightly more advanced than a monkey.

It can also be discouraging when you see a report about a person who is caught taking bribes. Crime networks can manipulate most people very easily by offering them money. Most people are like a circus animal, but instead of performing tricks for food, they commit crimes for money. It's depressing, but we have to remain cheerful and optimistic.

Remind yourself that there are lots of higher quality humans on this planet, and if we can find enough of them, we can work together to transform this planet into a paradise. The talking monkeys that dominate the planet are not going to help us, but they're not going to stop us either. So, just ignore them.

Once we find enough high-quality humans, we'll be able to do a lot more than just improve our water heaters, transportation systems, and other products. We will also be able to improve our economic system, school system, and government system. We're not helpless.

However, improving our social systems requires a major change in attitudes. Most people consider it patriotic to follow the social systems that developed centuries ago, but those people are as foolish as somebody who insists that we use the transportation systems that developed centuries ago.

We need to find people who realize that it's acceptable to throw an entire government system in the trash and develop something new. The American Constitution is a crude document, and we need to find people who can throw it in the trash. And the Europeans need to discard their monarchies in the trash, as well as their government and economic systems. We need to find people who will let go of this primitive technology and help us develop something better.

Well, I'm getting near the 120 minute mark (note: I should have said 80 minutes, or 1 hour 20 minutes) which is the limit for an audio CD so I'll stop, but now that I've recovered from the depressing election, I'll put up another audio file very soon so that I can finish where I left off because I have a lot more to say. 


Important message below:

Nobody promotes me or Christopher Bollyn,
except ordinary people like yourself,
so tell people about us.
Help counteract the propaganda!
Free videos at my site: