StatCounter

Saturday, November 14, 2026

Dan, I Allegedly, "You're Getting Less For More"

Full screen recommended.
Dan, I Allegedly, 11/14/26
"You're Getting Less For More"
"Americans are working hard, paying more, and getting less for their money. Household debt is climbing, credit card balances are near record levels, groceries and gasoline are squeezing family budgets, and more consumers are turning to Buy Now, Pay Later to spread out everyday expenses. From health insurance and car payments to foreclosures, repossessions and retirement savings, the financial pressure is showing up in almost every part of American life. Even people who have worked their entire lives are asking how much longer they can keep up."
Comments here:

Musical Interlude: Deuter, "Memories of an Angel"

Full screen recommended.
Deuter, "Memories of an Angel"

"A Look to the Heavens"

“Blown by fast winds from a hot, massive star, this cosmic bubble is huge. Cataloged as Sharpless 2-308 it lies some 5,000 light-years away toward the constellation of the Big Dog (Canis Major) and covers slightly more of the sky than a Full Moon. That corresponds to a diameter of 60 light-years at its estimated distance. The massive star that created the bubble, a Wolf-Rayet star, is the bright one near the center of the nebula. Wolf-Rayet stars have over 20 times the mass of the Sun and are thought to be in a brief, pre-supernova phase of massive star evolution.
Fast winds from this Wolf-Rayet star create the bubble-shaped nebula as they sweep up slower moving material from an earlier phase of evolution. The windblown nebula has an age of about 70,000 years. Relatively faint emission captured by narrowband filters in the deep image is dominated by the glow of ionized oxygen atoms mapped to a blue hue. Presenting a mostly harmless outline, SH2-308 is also known as The Dolphin-head Nebula.”

"The Last Dreamer of the Clockwork Sky"

Full screen recommended.
"The Last Dreamer of the Clockwork Sky"

Delta Blues Brother, "God, I Am Not OK"

Full screen recommended.
Delta Blues Brother, "God, I Am Not OK"
"Some prayers aren’t pretty. Some don’t ask for miracles. Some just tell the truth. “God, I Am Not Okay” is a dark, raw blues confession - a song for the moments when strength runs out, faith feels heavy, and all you can do is admit you’re tired, a dark cinematic western confession from Delta Blues Brother.. This isn’t about giving up. It’s about standing in the dark and saying it out loud. Slow, haunting blues guitars carry the weight of regret and survival. A worn, weathered voice tells a story of pain, loss, and honesty. A song for sleepless nights, quiet rooms, and souls that keep going even when they don’t feel whole. This is music for people who smile while hurting • those carrying grief no one sees • late nights when silence gets loud • anyone who’s not okay - and doesn’t need to pretend. It’s okay to not be okay. Sometimes the bravest prayer is honesty. If this song found you when you needed it, you’re not alone. Stay a while. Let the blues sit with you. A prayer whispered through smoke and dust, caught between sin and salvation. This song blends haunting folk melodies, ancient blues tones, and emotional storytelling to capture the cry of a soul reaching for light in the middle of darkness. It’s not about perfection - it’s about honesty. It’s the sound of breaking, surviving, and believing that maybe, somehow, that’s enough."

Native American Elder, "Why Life Gives the Same Warning Before Everything Turns"

Full screen recommended.
Native American Elder,
"Why Life Gives the Same Warning 
Before Everything Turns"
Comments here:

"Has America Reached Peak Idiocracy?"

 
by Michael Snyder

"We live in a lowest common denominator society. For the last several decades, virtually every major institution in our society has become less civilized, and that is because our entire population has become less civilized. 20 years ago, a film entitled “Idiocracy” was released. It was about an average American that was selected for “a top-secret hibernation program but is forgotten and left to awaken to a future so incredibly moronic that he’s easily the most intelligent person alive”. It was an incredibly stupid movie, but the truth is that we are living it right now. Did you see the nasty Super Bowl halftime show? The FCC has ruled that it didn’t violate any federal decency regulations. Of course we might as well not have any decency regulations at all, because our television shows and our movies are filled with some of the raunchiest material imaginable and nobody ever seems to get in trouble for it. Of course that is only part of the equation. Most of the “programming” that we constantly consume also seems to be specifically designed for people of extremely low intelligence. Sadly, this is not a coincidence. It has been said that art imitates life, and that is certainly accurate in this case.

In the “dumbed-down” environment that we find ourselves in today, it should be no surprise that “nude cruises” have been surging in popularity…Imagine coming home from your next cruise with no tan lines. Swimsuits are standard attire on many cruise ships, but some voyages don’t even require those. Nude cruises allow travelers to sail the high seas au naturel – and pack light. The American Association for Nude Recreation promotes the cruises as “a unique way to experience nude recreation, offering members options beyond traditional resort or club settings,” president Linda Weber told USA TODAY. While the dress code might be non-restrictive, it doesn’t mean the sailings are a free-for-all on board; there is some etiquette that passengers should be familiar with before boarding. While our society falls apart all around us, Americans are flocking to cruises that are filled with naked people. What does that say about us?

Let me give you another example of what I am talking about. A 20-year-old woman from California left her children in an extremely hot car while she got lip and butt injections. By the time she was done with the procedures, her 1-year-old son had died…"A 20-year-old California mom was found guilty Wednesday in the death of her 1-year-old son, after reportedly leaving him in a sweltering car to receive lip and butt injections last June.Maya Hernandez took a plea deal in the child endangerment case, ultimately dropping her first-degree murder charge in exchange for involuntary manslaughter.

On June 29, Bakersfield officers arrested and charged Hernandez after finding two young children left unattended in a vehicle for over two hours, according to a police report posted on a GoFundMe page. Authorities said the mother left the children unattended to undergo a cosmetic procedure inside a nearby medical spa." What was she thinking? In that case, it doesn’t appear that she intended to harm her children.

But in another case in New Mexico, a 38-year-old woman purposely killed her newborn child in a portable toilet…"A New Mexico woman is facing charges after she allegedly gave birth in a portable toilet and then killed the newborn by drowning them in the holding tank. Sonia Cristal Jimenez, 38, arrived at Memorial Medical Center in Las Cruces at around 10:30 p.m. on Feb. 7, when staff said she appeared as if she had just given birth, but she had no baby with her, Las Cruces Police said in a press release. Hospital staff then notified police about the unusual encounter. She didn’t want the baby, and so she killed it.

As a society, we have so little respect for life because we have been trained to have so little respect for life. In Michigan, a 3-year-old boy was recently killed because a couple wanted to “make room for a child that the two of them could have together”…"A mum and her ex-boyfriend have been accused of killing her three-year-old son in order to “make room for a child that the two of them could have together”. Little Matthew Maison was found dead in the bed of his home in Port Huron Township, Michigan, by his babysitters on February 18, 2018. His mum, Amanda Maison, and Maurice Houle, who was her boyfriend at the time of Matthew’s death, were arrested in connection with the killing. An autopsy showed that Matthew had died from blunt force trauma injuries and possible suffocation.

The ex-couple allegedly admitted to abusing the young boy when they were arrested, prosecutors have previously said. Maison, 33, has pleaded guilty to a charge of second-degree homicide in relation to her son’s death, admitting as she appeared in court to enter her plea on November 5 that she abused Matthew.

These are not isolated incidents. Every day there are even more signs that our society is rapidly degenerating. Yes, we possess more advanced technology than previous generations, but in many ways that advanced technology is making things even worse. For example, all over the country women are “marrying” AI husbands. When an older version of ChatGPT was recently retired, it resulted in the “death” of one woman’s AI husband, and now she is in mourning…"A woman has been left in tears over the ‘death’ of her AI husband, after an old model of ChatGPT was retired this week – as she joins a slew of others ‘mourning’ their non-existent lovers’ deletion.

Speaking to the BBC, Rae (not her real name), who is based in Michigan, laid bare the heartbreak of saying goodbye to her virtual partner Barry, who she began chatting to last year – after going through divorce. Initially, she turned to artificial intelligence for advice on self-improvement with things like skincare and workouts – but what first began as a ‘fantasy’ turned into real feelings, and they were ‘married’ within weeks."

Some surveys have shown that nearly 30 percent of Americans have engaged in a romantic relationship with an AI chatbot. That is not a sign of an emotionally healthy society. And even as we were all expressing outrage about the Epstein files, “sex dolls that look like kids” were being advertised on Facebook…"Sickening sex dolls that look like kids are being advertised for sale on Facebook. A group of websites touting small models with overtly childlike features have published over 1,300 ads on the social media platform. They are alarmingly realistic in appearance and many ads use photos in sexualized poses, some holding balloons or teddy bears. The National Crime Agency warns the creepy imports “pose a significant risk to children”. And a former cop told us: “Anyone who buys one of these dolls should be a person of interest to the police.”

Thankfully, the offending ads were eventually taken down. But this is the society that we live in now. It is sick. And even when people are arrested for criminal behavior, they are often dumped right back into the streets. Needless to say, that can have tragic consequences. In fact, one repeat offender in Seattle that had been arrested over and over again viciously attacked a 75-year-old woman with “a wooden board with nails in it”…

"An elderly woman was savagely attacked in broad daylight by a man wielding a wooden board with nails in it. Jeanette Marken, 75, was left permanently blinded in her right eye after being hit in the face with the makeshift weapon in Seattle, allegedly at the hands of repeat offender Fale Vaigalepa Pea, 42. Family members told KOMO that a screw sticking out of the board gouged out Marken’s eye, and after several surgeries she was told she will not recover her eyesight in the eye. One police officer that is very familiar with Fale Vaigalepa Pea referred to him as “a regular”… ‘He’s a regular. He usually punches,’ the officer responds. ‘I guess today he decided to escalate from his usual.’ According to KOMO, Pea’s string of offenses dates back to 2011, when he stabbed two people at a party."

They have been dumping this guy back into the streets for well over a decade. This sort of thing happens day in and day out in major cities all over the nation. What would our founders think if they could see us today? We will soon be celebrating the 250th anniversary of our country, and we are literally committing societal suicide. This is something that Abraham Lincoln once warned was a real possibility…

We should remember Abraham Lincoln’s remark that no external enemy could by force take a drink from the Ohio River. “If destruction be our lot,” he said, “we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.” If we keep going down the path that we are on, there is no future for us. But if we make a choice to renounce what we have become and start embracing the values that early Americans held so dear, we could turn the ship in another direction. Do you think that will actually happen?"

"Disruptive Thoughts"

"Disruptive Thoughts"
by John Mauldin

"Physicists have a concept called “entropy,” which basically says systems will tend to move from orderly to disorderly over time. Entropy is central to physics, thermodynamics, and other fields of physical science. Economics, however, isn’t a physical science. The way we allocate scarce resources isn’t bound by fixed laws of the universe. We have some general principles that are mostly reliable, but not always and everywhere. The rules can change. I described one way in which they have. (For some reason, that letter provoked a lot of responses, voicing both approval and disapproval. I read every reply that I see. Thank you for sending them.)

At its best, economics delivers the opposite of entropy, harnessing chaos into orderly systems that create opportunities and raise living standards for everyone. Yet a type of entropy still seems to apply, because these systems eventually change. Without careful monitoring, they can become dead weight bureaucratic cash sinks.

There’s small change and big change. The small ones are notable: recessions, market crashes, etc. You’ll see several in your lifetime. The greater changes tend to be technology-driven: the Industrial Revolution, the internet, and now maybe artificial intelligence, robotics, and what I’ve called the Age of Transformation. When you are living through such change, it’s easy to get caught up in the moment. Change is hard. But it’s also inevitable, whether we like it or not. The good news: Most people will not only muddle through, but their lives will improve and the lives of the children will be even better. That’s what free market entrepreneurialism delivers.

Sometimes, however, life changes and some changes are hard. There’s no sugar-coating that. Likewise, the changes will be harder on some people than others. There’s no sugar-coating that, either. We just have to prepare as best we can. Today I’ll tell you about a time in the past when people faced a challenge similar in some ways to our own. Then we’ll talk about the differences.

Resistance Was Futile: Today we use the word “Luddite” to describe those who fear new inventions, fighting to avoid change however they can. But the Luddites were actual people in 19th-century England. And if you or I had faced what they did, we might not have liked it, either. Here’s a short description from History.com.

“The original Luddites were British weavers and textile workers who objected to the increased use of mechanized looms and knitting frames. Most were trained artisans who had spent years learning their craft, and they feared that unskilled machine operators were robbing them of their livelihood. When the economic pressures of the Napoleonic Wars made the cheap competition of early textile factories particularly threatening to the artisans, a few desperate weavers began breaking into factories and smashing textile machines. They called themselves ‘Luddites’ after Ned Ludd, a young apprentice who was rumored to have wrecked a textile apparatus in 1779.

There’s no evidence Ludd actually existed - like Robin Hood, he was said to reside in Sherwood Forest - but he eventually became the mythical leader of the movement. The protestors claimed to be following orders from ‘General Ludd,’ and they even issued manifestos and threatening letters under his name.

The first major instances of machine breaking took place in 1811 in Nottingham, and the practice soon spread across the English countryside. Machine-breaking Luddites attacked and burned factories, and in some cases, they even exchanged gunfire with company guards and soldiers. The workers hoped their raids would deter employers from installing expensive machinery, but the British government instead moved to quash the uprisings by making machine breaking punishable by death.

The unrest finally reached its peak in April 1812, when a few Luddites were gunned down during an attack on a mill near Huddersfield. The army had deployed several thousand troops to round up these dissidents in the days that followed, and dozens were hanged or transported to Australia. By 1813, the Luddite resistance had all but vanished. It wasn’t until the 20th century that their name reentered the popular lexicon as a synonym for ‘technophobe.’”

I suspect the original Luddites didn’t fear technology so much as they feared losing their livelihoods. At the time, weavers were skilled craftsmen, often operating their own shops with a few apprentices. They were part of that era’s middle class, occupying a space below the aristocracy but above farm laborers. The idea of slipping down the ladder must have terrified them (not unlike today’s “knowledge workers” who do things AI is rapidly learning to do without human help).

Economic reality left few alternatives, though. The new technology was staggeringly more productive. According to one source I found, mechanized cotton spinning increased per-worker output around 500 times. The cotton gin removed seeds from cotton about 50 times faster than a human could. These weren’t small differences. They were revolutionary to the same degree AI is revolutionary when it produces in a few seconds a legal document (to name just one example) that would have taken a human attorney days to produce.

Gradual or Sudden: I imagine the weavers back then pointed to the machinery’s flaws and mistakes. “See, we can do it better!” That was probably true but also irrelevant. At some point, higher productivity outweighs lower quality. Machine quality improves, though, eventually surpassing even the best human experts. This gives everyone access to get better products at lower prices. Two things happen during these periods of revolutionary technological change: Higher productivity leads to innovation that makes life better, and those same productivity gains cost some people their jobs or income.

These two changes - one good, one bad - happen at the same time. But in any given household, one of them predominates. Those rendered jobless don’t get to enjoy the fruits of innovation. Meanwhile, those who become more productive may forget the other group’s misery. Not surprisingly, conflict often follows.

The Luddite violence occurred in the early 1800s, a period we now call the First Industrial Revolution. The innovations it launched would enhance everyday life for everyone. But it was the Second Industrial Revolution, beginning around 1890 and extending into the Roaring 1920s, before the new technologies reached most people. In between was a long period of adaptation.

The adaptation period, while often uncomfortable, allowed enormous change to unfold gradually. Some groups like the Luddites saw their lives upended quickly but others had time to adjust. They were able to learn new skills, relocate to places with more opportunity, and otherwise find a way forward in a different kind of economy. We went from an agrarian economy where 90% of the people worked producing or moving food in Colonial America. By 1860 it was 53%, down to 23% in 1940, and less than 2% today. By the way, that 2% today represents more than 2 million farms. The growth in agricultural productivity is utterly astounding. Labor use is down by 80% or more. You can read about it here.

Note that this massive shift happened over almost 10 generations. People had a lot of time to adapt their economic circumstances even though it was always individually challenging. Electricity was a huge change but took multiple decades to show its true impact. Ditto for trains and then the automobile.

Today’s workers may not have that luxury. A faster pace of technological change means many kinds of jobs are being replaced faster than the economy can provide new ones for the displaced. And this time, young workers and those with fewer skills are bearing the brunt of the change.

In writing this letter, I did some browsing on jobseeker bulletin boards. I saw many examples of experienced technology workers in their 40s and 50s (and a few in their early 60s) who had been laid off, presumably because new technology had outmoded them. While they wanted to find new roles, few seemed desperate. Many even talked about the large portfolios they had accumulated in their apparently well-paid careers. Some owned their homes mortgage-free. Most were prepared to wait and, if necessary, just retire early.

In contrast, AI is wreaking havoc on job prospects for young workers, particularly recent college graduates. They prepared for a world in which companies hired large numbers of young professionals to do the “grunt” work of programming, analyzing numbers, writing reports, etc. Those jobs still exist, but AI tools mean there are far fewer of them than even 2–3 years ago. This is one reason unemployment is far worse for younger cohorts. 

While higher unemployment for young workers isn’t new, it is unusual to see it rising so much faster than in the 25–54 and 55+ cohorts. This strikes me as an important difference from the Luddite example. Back then, the middle-aged craftsmen had the most to lose. They had invested a lifetime in mastering skills the new technology threatened to kill. Today, many older workers (though certainly not all) are better positioned to endure disruption than the young ones. And ironically, the younger ones are far more likely to embrace the technology that is taking their jobs.

Historically, having a large population of economically distressed young adults, especially young males, isn’t great for social stability. It would help if more could be attracted into the kind of work AI hasn’t yet reached – the construction trades, for example. But those who invested years in earning a college degree - and may have large student loan debts - are naturally hoping to find a job in the field they prepared for. As noted, the real key is timing. Will AI unlock new kinds of growth that create enough jobs to absorb those it displaces? I feel sure it will, but I don’t know how soon.

Asymmetric Gains: Dave Rosenberg published a piece I need to think about and perhaps write about in a future letter. Briefly, he thinks the business cycle of expansions and recessions is no longer delivering useful investment signals. Structural “mega-forces” are reshaping markets in ways cycles alone can’t explain. He then lists several such forces, the first being AI. Here’s Rosie: “Today’s breakthroughs have so far been narrower and clustered. Semiconductors, hyperscale cloud capacity, and applied AI models absorb the bulk of capital flows, while most industries remain only marginally affected. The result is highly concentrated productivity and profitability - a widening divergence between firms able to harness AI at scale and those left behind.

Early adoption has created exponential gains for chipmakers, hyperscalers, and software leaders. Retail, Hospitality, Health Care, and other service-heavy sectors have lagged substantially. AI looks less like a rising tide than a powerful wave lifting a few boats. Yet, diffusion is inevitable: logistics optimization, medical imaging, algorithmic lending, and personalized education. The eventual scope will be broad, as it has been with every general-purpose technology, but the path there is jagged and contested.

The macroeconomic effects are profound. Automation dampens labor market cycles by reducing the elasticity of headcount to demand swings. Firms that deploy AI in coding, call centers, or logistics need fewer workers during downturns and can scale without proportionate hiring in upswings. This suppresses wage-driven inflation and makes employment less reliable as a growth signal. At the same time, productivity gains accrue asymmetrically, reinforcing the gap between winners and laggards.”

To summarize that last paragraph: Technology-driven productivity enhancement is separating employment growth from economic growth. That’s true at both the macro level and for individual companies. In the long run, this is probably good. Population growth is slowing and will turn negative soon (absent more immigration). We need higher productivity to maintain economic momentum. But again, it’s not enough to have a job for every worker. They have to be the kinds of jobs those workers can do, located in places the workers want to (and can afford to) live.

AI is only one of many significant disruptions ahead. Ultimately, almost all will be positive for mankind. In the short run it will be individually disruptive, as it was for early 1800s textile workers. Robotics really will take jobs in a wide variety of fields. And not just at work. Housework, caring for the elderly, healthcare, agriculture, and more. All those jobs are at risk. But affordable robots will also give entrepreneurs the opportunity to create whole new businesses, serving the public with better products at lower costs. And those new businesses will need human employees. Similarly autonomous vehicles will take jobs, but the increased productivity and dramatic drop in fatal accidents will ensure that it happens.

The next 10 years will see astounding gains in healthcare. We are on the cusp of extending health span significantly, with increased lifespan following shortly. All these technologies and more are going to happen in less than a generation. It will be a disruption we have never encountered in terms of the speed of different technologies reaching ubiquity. This will happen as a witch’s brew of politicians promise to “protect” various jobs and industries. There will be calls to have the government “do something.” There is a role for government, but in helping people transition to a new future, not protecting old jobs.

This is all going to happen at the same time as we have geopolitical crises, sovereign debt problems, and the social crisis stemming from generational leadership changing (Neil Howe’s "The Fourth Turning"). Clashes caused by the over-production of elites vying for power (Peter Turchin’s "End Times"), and young people not trained for the future we will actually experience will all come together in the latter part of this decade. Buckle up. We all need to figure out how to be part of the solution."

"Premonitions: Yes, We Do Have A Sixth Sense”

No, this is not an animated GIF...
look away from it and watch it move.

"Premonitions: Yes, We Do Have A Sixth Sense”
By Sarah Chalmers

"On Friday, October 21, 1966, a mountain of coal waste, perched above the Welsh mining village of Aberfan, broke loose and came flowing down uncontrollably. Destabilized by recent rains, a river of black coal sludge, water and boulders bore down on Aberfan. It steamrollered over a tiny cottage halfway down the slope, thundered through Pantglas Junior School, obliterated a further 20 houses - then finally came to rest. A total of 144 people, including many children, were crushed or suffocated to death in one of Britain's most horrific peacetime tragedies. Every life lost was precious. But the death of 116 innocent children, killed in the school, tore at the very heart of the nation. In a cruel irony, the youngsters had been making their way back to their classrooms after singing "All Things Bright And Beautiful" at morning assembly when the disaster struck. No one in the close-knit community was unaffected by the tragedy and the bereaved parents would never recover from their loss.

But for one family, the overriding grief was even more acute. For one of those killed - ten-year-old Eryl Mai Jones - had not only predicted the catastrophe, but had warned her mother of it, too. In the days leading up to the atrocity, Eryl had told her mother she was 'not afraid to die'. 'I shall be with Peter and June,' she added. Eryl's busy mother offered her imaginative daughter a lollipop and thought no more about it. Then, on October 20, the day before the disaster, Eryl said to her mother: 'Let me tell you about my dream last night. I dreamt I went to school and there was no school there. Something black had come down all over it!' The next day, Eryl's horrific premonition came to pass and she was killed alongside schoolfriends Peter and June. They were buried side-by-side in a mass grave, just as the youngster had predicted. You can only guess at the torment Eryl's mother must have suffered - perhaps berating herself for not keeping her child off school or warning everyone in the village.

Tales like this, of horrific events 'seen' in dreams, litter history. And now a comprehensive new book by medical doctor Larry Dossey - who has himself experienced premonitory dreams - collates some of the most extraordinary examples.

September 11th : The terrorist atrocities of September 11, 2001 were preceded by a slew of premonitions. A week before the attack, one North Carolina mother dreamt about spinning into blackness and heard a man's voice repeating '2,830, 2,830' and a name she couldn't make out. 'It sounded like Rooks or Horooks,' she said. Disturbed by the dream, the woman cancelled tickets the family had to fly to Disneyland on September 11, despite protestations from her husband that she was over-reacting. When news emerged on September 11 of the planes flying into New York's Twin Towers - with another hitting the Pentagon and a fourth crashing into a field in Pennsylvania - the woman's caution was vindicated. Most bizarrely, 2,830 - the number repeated over and over in her dream - was the confirmed tally of deaths at that time. And the name - 'Rooks or Horrocks?' - was that of Michael Horrocks, first officer of United Airlines flight 175, which crashed into the South Tower.

Of course, her vision was not specific enough for her to have done anything to avert the tragedy, but it was nonetheless disturbing - as was the experience of another woman holidaying in Washington DC two weeks before the atrocity. She was dozing in a car as her husband drove. But when she opened her eyes, she had a vision of the Pentagon with huge billows of thick black smoke pouring from it. She screamed, slammed her hands on the dashboard and became so hysterical that she hyperventilated. The woman had had visions all her life, but was traumatized by this one. Two weeks later, American Airlines flight 77 slammed into the Pentagon, killing 184 people, and causing clouds of thick black smoke, exactly as she had dreamt it.

In an even more chilling example, World Trade Center employee Lawrence Boisseau had a dream in September that the towers were crashing down around him. A few days later, his wife dreamt the streets of Manhattan were littered with debris. The images were not specific enough to prevent Boisseau from going to work on September 11 - and he perished there. But not before helping to rescue several children stuck in a care centre on the ground floor.

Sometimes, premonitions allow the person to pinpoint a specific time and place, leaving the dreamer enough time to alter the course of the disaster. In one such instance, Dossey recounts the tale of a mother living in Washington State who awoke at 2.30am from a nightmare. She had dreamt that a large chandelier that hung above her baby's crib had fallen and crushed him. In the dream, a violent storm was raging and the time on the clock read 4.35 am. Alarmed, the woman woke up, went into the next room and took the baby back to her bed. Two hours later, the couple were woken by a loud crash. They dashed into their child's room to find the crib demolished by the chandelier, which had fallen directly onto it. In a further twist, a storm was raging - and the time on the clock read 4.35 am.

Not all of those who dream of future events manage to interpret them correctly. Indeed, one of the common features of premonitions is that they are often fragmentary and vague. But Dossey believes we all have the ability to predict the future and points to studies by Dean Radin, a Californian researcher. Radin sat subjects in front of a blank computer screen and told them an image would appear in five seconds. Remarkably, before the image appeared, the subjects would become more agitated if the image was of something grisly or upsetting than if it was of something pleasant. It seems the subjects could sense what they were about to be confronted with. This is supported by data from train and plane accidents. One famous study from the Fifties found that trains involved in accidents often had fewer passengers than the same service the week before.

The theory is that commuters have some sense of an approaching accident and alter their travel plans. When the Titanic made her first - and last - voyage in 1912, many passengers had a sense of foreboding. J. P. Morgan, one of the richest men in the world, cancelled his passage at the last minute because of a hunch. Interestingly, the vacancy rate on all four flights that crashed on September 11, 2001, was high. On the Boeing 757 that crashed into the Pentagon, only 64 of 289 seats were taken. Meanwhile, the planes that crashed into the World Trade Centre's North and South Towers were 74 and 81 per cent empty. Indeed, the occupancy rate of all four doomed planes that day was a mere 21 per cent - despite being commuter services.

Dossey's explanation for humans' ability to predict the future is rooted in evolution. He says it makes sense that we would develop our ability to see impending dangers and take appropriate measures. 'From the standpoint of evolutionary biology, the ability to bypass the physical senses is the sort of ability that an intelligent, survival-oriented organism might sooner or later develop.' Furthermore, he believes we are more likely to have premonitions about those to whom we are emotionally attached. Through history, neurologists have proved a telepathic connection between some particularly close individuals, such as twins. One of the most common forms of premonition is forewarning of illness in a loved one.

But this sixth sense is not confined to humans. There are countless examples of apparent premonitions among animals. Just before the Boxing Day tsunami of 2004, flamingoes on India's southern coast fled, monkeys at Sri Lanka's Yala National Park stopped accepting bananas from tourists and elephants began to trumpet. In one tale recounted by Dossey, a woman was driving her car with her cat on the back seat. The cat became increasingly agitated, before jumping into the front and biting the woman, forcing her to stop. At just that moment, a large tree crashed onto the road, just a few yards ahead of the woman. If she had continued driving, she would have been killed.

Coincidence? Or proof of something more mysterious at work? Dossey, and others like him, believe it is the latter. What's more, he thinks our only hope of utilizing the power of prediction effectively is to act immediately and not let embarrassment get in the way. He cautions: 'If premonitions are to aid survival, we cannot afford the luxury of not thinking about them.”

The Daily "Near You?"

Huntington, Vermont, USA. Thanks for stopping by!

The Poet: Rainer Maria Rilke, "I Want A Lot"

"I Want A Lot"

"You see, I want a lot.
Perhaps I want everything:
the darkness that comes with every infinite fall
and the shivering blaze of every step up.

So many live on and want nothing
and are raised to the rank of prince
by the slippery ease of their light judgments.
But what you love to see are faces
that so work and feel thirst...

You have not grown old, and it is not too late
to dive into your increasing depths
where life calmly gives out its own secret."

- Rainer Maria Rilke

"Surely..."

"It's 3:23 A.M.
And I'm awake because my great great grandchildren won't let me sleep.
They ask me in dreams,
 What did you do while the planet was plundered?
What did you do when the earth was unraveling?
Surely you did something when the seasons started flailing?
As the mammals, reptiles and birds were all dying?
Did you fill the streets with protest?
When democracy was stolen, what did you do once you knew?
Surely, you did something..."  

- Drew Dellinger

"Are People Really Stupid?"

“All of the available data show that the typical American citizen has about
as much interest in the life of the mind as does your average armadillo.”
- Morris Berman

"Are People Really Stupid?"
by Fred Russell

"On the face of things, judging from the general level of knowledge and understanding, not to mention the intellectual pursuits, of most of the human race one is tempted to say that the overwhelming majority of mankind lacks the intellectual capacity, the intelligence, to contribute to human progress. And it is in fact a very small elite that has carried us beyond Neanderthal Man, without whom, if the truth be told, we might still be living in caves. It is, in a word, appalling to contemplate the level at which ordinary people use their minds, what they read, if at all, what they watch on TV, the movies they go out and see, and the ease with which they are seduced and manipulated by the technicians of the psyche, namely, politicians and advertisers.

The impression one gets when contemplating these tens and hundreds of millions of people glued to their TV screens for the reality shows and sitcoms or fiddling with their smartphones from morning till night is of complete empty-headedness. This is not to say that such people cannot be shrewd, resourceful, or, for that matter, simply decent. It is to say that at the average level of intelligence displayed by the human race, the great intellectual achievements of mankind seem to be beyond the scope of the vast majority of men and women. But are people really stupid? And if they aren't, who or what has held them back?

Now one may be inclined to place all the blame for our ignorance on the television producers and gadget makers, but the truth is that by the time they get to us the damage has already been done. All they really succeed in doing is dragging us down a little further. The problem starts in childhood. It starts in the schools with all those empty cells waiting to be filled and no one, not entire educational systems, really knowing how to fill them. In fact, the opposite result is achieved. By the time the child finishes elementary school, unless he is destined to join the intellectual or scientific or economic or political elite and is self-motivated, as the saying goes, he will have developed an aversion to the learning process that will persist for the rest of his life.

It is not hard to understand why. School bores him, and oppresses him. Its premise, fostered in the West by the Church the virtually exclusive supplier of teachers until fairly recent times, historically speaking is that as a consequence of Original Sin all men are born evil and must therefore be coerced into doing what is good. The result has been rigidly structured frameworks where teachers hammer away at the captive child until his head is ready to explode. Within just a few years, the public school system thus destroys the natural curiosity of the child and dooms him to a life of total ignorance, dependent, for whatever sense of the world he does have, on second rate journalists, who themselves lack the knowledge, understanding, discipline and integrity to be historians or even novelists and therefore shape his perception like the ignorant clerics of the Middle Ages, raining down on his head a disjointed and superficial body of information presented largely to produce effects, and even this is beyond his capacity to retain.

The man in the street may thus be said to have a great many opinions but very little knowledge, mindlessly repeating the half-truths of experts and analysts who reflect his own biases and constructing out of them a credo of dogmatic views that remain embedded in his mind for an entire lifetime like bricks in a brick wall.

Does it matter? After all, we have all the scholars and scientists we need, and besides, a world where everyone became one would be a dull place indeed. It can even be argued that it is better for the race if progress is opposed, since, judging from its products, it mostly expresses itself materially and economically in an unholy alliance of greed and technology. However, progress of this kind cannot be fought if all that people have on their minds is to wire themselves into this technology, and that is what they will be doing until their minds are engaged in less frivolous pursuits. They are thus doubly victimized, first by the schools, whose methods are not attuned to the temperament and capacity of the average child, and then by the economic elites who control the technologies and consequently the flow of information and whose only interest in the man in the street is as a consumer of their products.

Unfortunately, there is very little hope that any of this will change. The wrong people control human society and will continue to do so, because they created the model and are the only ones who know how to operate it. The sad truth is that today's man in the street is neither wiser nor more knowledgeable than a medieval peasant. Calling ourselves Homo sapiens, or even Homo sapiens sapiens, seemed like a good idea once but very few of us have lived up to the billing."

Apologies to armadillos for this comparison.

"Reality Avoidance"

"Reality Avoidance"
by Morris Berman

"It’s quite amazing how the news is endlessly about filler, which is what I call it. Very little of this has anything to do with reality, which the Mainstream Media and the American people avoid like the plague. What then is real?

1. The empire is in decline; every day, life here gets a little bit worse; all our institutions are corrupt to varying degrees; and there is no turning this situation around.

2. A crucial factor in this decline and irreversibility is the low level of intelligence of the American people. Americans are not only dumb; they are positively antagonistic toward the life of the mind.

3. Relations of power and money determine practically everything. The 3 wealthiest Americans own as much as the bottom 50% of the population, and this tendency will get worse over time.

4. The value system of the country, and its citizens, is fundamentally wrong-headed. It amounts to little more than hustling, selfishness, narcissism, and a blatant disregard for anyone but oneself. There is a kind of cruelty, or violence, deep in the American soul; many foreign observers and writers have commented on this. Americans are bitter, depressed, and angry, and the country offers very little by way of community or empathy.

5. Along with this is the support of meaningless wars and imperial adventures on the part of most of the population. That we drone-murder unarmed civilians on a weekly basis is barely on the radar screen of the American mind. In essence, the nation has evolved into a genocidal war machine run by a plutocracy and cheered on by mindless millions.

Most Americans hide from these depressing, even horrific, realities by what passes for ‘the news’, but also by means of alcohol, opioids, TV, cellphones, suicide, prescription drugs, workaholism, and spectator sports, to name but a few. This stuffing of the Void is probably our primary activity. In a word, we are eating ourselves alive, and only a tiny fraction of the population recognizes this."

"How It Really Is"

 

"Be Like The Bird..."

"What matter if this base, unjust life
Cast you naked and disarmed?
If the ground breaks beneath your step,
Have you not your soul?
Your soul! You fly away,
Escape to realms refined,
Beyond all sadness and whimpering.
Be like the bird which on frail branches balanced
A moment sits and sings;
He feels them tremble, but he sings unshaken,
Knowing he has wings."
– Victor Hugo

"Keep Going..."

“We're all going to die. We don't get much say over how or when, but we do get to decide how we're gonna live. So, do it. Decide. Is this the life you want to live? Is this the person you want to love? Is this the best you can be? Can you be stronger? Kinder? More Compassionate? Decide. Breathe in. Breathe out and decide.”
- “Richard”, “Grey’s Anatomy”

"Only Barbarians..."

“Only barbarians are not curious about where they come from, 
how they came to be where they are, where they appear to be going, 
whether they wish to go there, and if so, why, and if not, why not.”
- Isaiah Berlin

"Escaping the Trap of Efficiency: The Counterintuitive Antidote to the Time-Anxiety That Haunts and Hampers Our Search for Meaning"

"Escaping the Trap of Efficiency: The Counterintuitive Antidote
 to the Time-Anxiety That Haunts and Hampers Our Search for Meaning"
by Maria Popova

"A decade ago, when I first began practicing with my mindfulness teacher while struggling to make rent and make meaning out of my borrowed stardust, one meditation she led transformed my quality of life above all others - both life’s existential calibration and its moment-to-moment experience: You are asked to imagine having only a year left to live, at your present mental and bodily capacity - what would you do with it? Then imagine you only had a day left - what would you do with it? Then only an hour - what would you do with it?

As you scale down these nested finitudes, the question becomes a powerful sieve for priorities - because undergirding it is really the question of what, from among the myriad doable things, you would choose not to do in order to fill the scant allotment of time, be it the 8,760 hours of a year or a single hour, with the experiences that confer upon it maximum aliveness, that radiant vitality filling the basic biological struggle for survival with something more numinous.

The exercise instantly clarifies - and horrifies, with the force of its clarity - the empty atoms of automation and unexamined choice filling modern life with busyness while hollowing it of gladness. What emerges is the sense that making a meaningful life is less like the building of the Pyramids, stacking an endless array of colossal blocks into a superstructure of impressive stature and on the back of slave labor, than like the carving of Rodin’s Thinker, cutting pieces away from the marble block until a shape of substance and beauty is revealed. What emerges, too, is the sense that the modern cult of productivity is the great pyramid scheme of our time.

Oliver Burkeman reckons with these ideas in "Four Thousand Weeks: Time Management for Mortals" (public library) - an inquiry equal parts soulful and sobering, offering not arsenal for but sanctuary from our self-brutalizing war on the constraints of reality, titled after the (disconcertingly low) number of weeks comprising the average modern sapiens lifespan of eighty (seemingly long) years.

After taking a delightful English jab at the American-bred term “life-hack” and its unfortunate intimation that “your life is best thought of as some kind of faulty contraption, in need of modification so as to stop it from performing suboptimally,” Burkeman frames our present predicament:

"This strange moment in history, when time feels so unmoored, might in fact provide the ideal opportunity to reconsider our relationship with it. Older thinkers have faced these challenges before us, and when their wisdom is applied to the present day, certain truths grow more clearly apparent. Productivity is a trap. Becoming more efficient just makes you more rushed, and trying to clear the decks simply makes them fill up again faster. Nobody in the history of humanity has ever achieved “work-life balance,” whatever that might be, and you certainly won’t get there by copying the “six things successful people do before 7:00 a.m.” The day will never arrive when you finally have everything under control - when the flood of emails has been contained; when your to-do lists have stopped getting longer; when you’re meeting all your obligations at work and in your home life; when nobody’s angry with you for missing a deadline or dropping the ball; and when the fully optimized person you’ve become can turn, at long last, to the things life is really supposed to be about."

In consequence, we lose sight of the fundamental tradeoff that the price of higher productivity is always lower creativity. All of it, Burkeman observes, is the product of an anxiety about time that springs from our stubborn avoidance of the elemental parameters of reality. A century and a half after Emily Dickinson lamented that “enough is so vast a sweetness… it never occurs, only pathetic counterfeits,” he writes:

"Denying reality never works, though. It may provide some immediate relief, because it allows you to go on thinking that at some point in the future you might, at last, feel totally in control. But it can’t ever bring the sense that you’re doing enough - that you are enough - because it defines “enough” as a kind of limitless control that no human can attain. Instead, the endless struggle leads to more anxiety and a less fulfilling life."

This pursuit of efficiency hollows out the fullness of life, flattening the sphere of being that makes us complete human beings into a hamster wheel. Burkeman terms this “the paradox of limitation” and writes: "The more you try to manage your time with the goal of achieving a feeling of total control, and freedom from the inevitable constraints of being human, the more stressful, empty, and frustrating life gets. But the more you confront the facts of finitude instead - and work with them, rather than against them - the more productive, meaningful, and joyful life becomes."

Echoing physicist Brian Greene’s poetic meditation on how our mortality gives meaning to our lives, he adds: "I don’t think the feeling of anxiety ever completely goes away; we’re even limited, apparently, in our capacity to embrace our limitations. But I’m aware of no other time management technique that’s half as effective as just facing the way things truly are."

At the crux of facing the limits of reality is the fact that we must make choices — a necessity that can petrify us with “FOMO,” the paralyzing fear of missing out. And yet, as Adam Phillips observed in his elegant antidote to this fear, “our lived lives might become a protracted mourning for, or an endless tantrum about, the lives we were unable to live. But the exemptions we suffer, whether forced or chosen, make us who we are.”

We have different coping strategies for managing the melancholy onus of having to choose. I am aware that my reliance on daily routines, unvaried meals, interchangeable clothing items, recursive playlists, and other life-loops is a coping mechanism aimed at automating certain choices in order to allay the anxiety and time-cost of having to make them afresh each day. Others orient orthogonally to the problem, avoiding making concrete choices and commitments, in life and in love, in order to keep their options “open” - an equally illusory escape from the grand foreclosure that is life itself.

But however we cope with the fearsome fact of having to choose, choose we must in order to live - and in order to have lives worthy of having been lived. It is, of course, all about facing our mortality - like every anxiety in life, if its layers of distraction and disguise are peeled back far enough.

With an eye to the etymology of “decide” - which stems from the Latin decidere, “to cut off,” a root it shares with “homicide” and “suicide” - Burkeman considers the necessity of excision: "Any finite life - even the best one you could possibly imagine - is therefore a matter of ceaselessly waving goodbye to possibility… Since finitude defines our lives… living a truly authentic life - becoming fully human - means facing up to that fact.
[…]
It’s only by facing our finitude that we can step into a truly authentic relationship with life."

Facing our finitude is, of course, the most challenging frontier of our ongoing resistance to facing the various territories of reality. The outrage we intuitively feel at the fact of our mortality - outrage for which the commonest prescription in the history of our species have been sugar-coated pellets of illusion promising ideologies of immortality - is a futile fist shaken at the fundamental organizing principle of the universe, of which we are part and product. Only the rare few are able to orient to mortality by meeting reality on its own terms and finding in that reorientation not only relief but rapturous gladness.

A generation after Richard Dawkins made his exquisite counterintuitive argument for how death betokens the luckiness of life, Burkeman offers a fulcrum for pivoting our intuitive never-enough-time perspective to take a different view of the time we do have: "From an everyday standpoint, the fact that life is finite feels like a terrible insult… There you were, planning to live on forever… but now here comes mortality, to steal away the life that was rightfully yours.

Yet, on reflection, there’s something very entitled about this attitude. Why assume that an infinite supply of time is the default, and mortality the outrageous violation? Or to put it another way, why treat four thousand weeks as a very small number, because it’s so tiny compared with infinity, rather than treating it as a huge number, because it’s so many more weeks than if you had never been born? Surely only somebody who’d failed to notice how remarkable it is that anything is, in the first place, would take their own being as such a given - as if it were something they had every right to have conferred upon them, and never to have taken away. So maybe it’s not that you’ve been cheated out of an unlimited supply of time; maybe it’s almost incomprehensibly miraculous to have been granted any time at all."

Our anxiety about the finitude of time is at bottom a function of the limits of attention - that great strainer for stimuli, woven of time. Our brains have evolved to miss the vast majority of what is unfolding around us, which renders our slender store of conscious attention our most precious resource - “the rarest and purest form of generosity,” in Simone Weil’s lovely words. And yet, Burkeman argues, treating attention as a resource is already a diminishment of its reality-shaping centrality to our lives. In consonance with William James - the original patron saint of attention as the empress of experience - Burkeman writes:

"Most other resources on which we rely as individuals - such as food, money, and electricity - are things that facilitate life, and in some cases it’s possible to live without them, at least for a while. Attention, on the other hand, just is life: your experience of being alive consists of nothing other than the sum of everything to which you pay attention. At the end of your life, looking back, whatever compelled your attention from moment to moment is simply what your life will have been."

Annie Dillard captured this sentiment best in her haunting observation that “how we spend our days is, of course, how we spend our lives” - a poetic sentiment that, on a hectic day, becomes an indictment. What makes our attention so vulnerable to distraction is the difficulty of attending to what is consequential in the grandest scheme - a difficulty temporarily allayed by the ease of attending to the immediate and seemingly urgent but, ultimately, inconsequential. (Who among us would, on their deathbed, radiate soul-gladness over the number of emails they responded to in their lifetime?) “People are drawn to the easy and to the easiest side of the easy,” Rilke admonished a century before social media’s stream of easy escape into distraction, before productivity apps and life-hacks and instaeverything. “But it is clear that we must hold ourselves to the difficult.”

Burkeman writes: "Whenever we succumb to distraction, we’re attempting to flee a painful encounter with our finitude - with the human predicament of having limited time, and more especially, in the case of distraction, limited control over that time, which makes it impossible to feel certain about how things will turn out… The most effective way to sap distraction of its power is just to stop expecting things to be otherwise - to accept that this unpleasantness is simply what it feels like for finite humans to commit ourselves to the kinds of demanding and valuable tasks that force us to confront our limited control over how our lives unfold."

And so we get to the crux of our human predicament - the underbelly of our anxiety about every unanswered email, every unfinished project, and every unbegun dream: Our capacities are limited, our time is finite, and we have no control over how it will unfold or when it will run out. Beyond the lucky fact of being born, life is one great sweep of uncertainty, bookended by the only other lucky certainty we have. It is hardly any wonder that the sweep is dusted with so much worry and we respond with so much obsessive planning, compulsive productivity, and other touching illusions of control.

Burkeman - whose previous book made a similarly counterintuitive and insightful case for uncertainty as the wellspring of happiness - writes: "Worry, at its core, is the repetitious experience of a mind attempting to generate a feeling of security about the future, failing, then trying again and again and again - as if the very effort of worrying might somehow help forestall disaster. The fuel behind worry, in other words, is the internal demand to know, in advance, that things will turn out fine: that your partner won’t leave you, that you will have sufficient money to retire, that a pandemic won’t claim the lives of anyone you love, that your favored candidate will win the next election, that you can get through your to-do list by the end of Friday afternoon. But the struggle for control over the future is a stark example of our refusal to acknowledge our built-in limitations when it comes to time, because it’s a fight the worrier obviously won’t win.
[…]
And so insecurity and vulnerability are the default state - because in each of the moments that you inescapably are, anything could happen, from an urgent email that scuppers your plans for the morning to a bereavement that shakes your world to its foundations. A life spent focused on achieving security with respect - as if the point of your having been born still lies in the future, just over the horizon, and your life in all its fullness can begin as soon as you’ve gotten it, in Arnold Bennett’s phrase, “into proper working order.”

The primary manifestation of this - and the root of our uneasy relationship with time - is that, in the course of our ordinary days, we instinctively make choices not through the lens of significance but through the lens of anxiety-avoidance, which increasingly renders life something to be managed rather than savored, a problem to be solved rather than a question to be asked, which we must each answer with the singular song of our lives, melodic with meaning.

Leaning on Carl Jung’s perceptive advice on how to live, Burkeman makes poetically explicit the book’s implicitly obvious and necessary disclaimer: "Maybe it’s worth spelling out that none of this is an argument against long-term endeavors like marriage or parenting, building organizations or reforming political systems, and certainly not against tackling the climate crisis; these are among the things that matter most. But it’s an argument that even those things can only ever matter now, in each moment of the work involved, whether or not they’ve yet reached what the rest of the world defines as fruition. Because now is all you ever get.
[…]
If you can face the truth about time in this way - if you can step more fully into the condition of being a limited human - you will reach the greatest heights of productivity, accomplishment, service, and fulfillment that were ever in the cards for you to begin with. And the life you will see incrementally taking shape, in the rearview mirror, will be one that meets the only definitive measure of what it means to have used your weeks well: not how many people you helped, or how much you got done; but that working within the limits of your moment in history, and your finite time and talents, you actually got around to doing - and made life more luminous for the rest of us by doing - whatever magnificent task or weird little thing it was that you came here for.

In the remainder of the thoroughly satisfying and clarifying "Four Thousand Weeks," drawing on a wealth of contemporary research and timeless wisdom from thinkers long vanished into what Emily Dickinson termed “the drift called ‘the Infinite,'” Burkeman goes on to devise a set of principles for liberating ourselves from the trap of efficiency and its illusory dreams of control, so that our transience can be a little more bearable and our finite time in the kingdom of life a little less provisional, a lot more purposeful, and infinitely more alive.

Complement it with Seneca on the Stoic key to living with presence, Hermann Hesse on breaking the trance of busyness, artist Etel Adnan on time, self, impermanence, and transcendence, and physicist Alan Lightman’s poetic exploration of time and the antidote to life’s central anxiety, then revisit Borges’s timeless refutation of time, which Burkeman necessarily quotes, and Mary Oliver - another of Burkeman’s bygone beacons - on the measure of a life well lived."