Ten oz

To influence future pre-consciouse decisions you are implying our real time decisions are true decisions and not illusions of choice. Believe we are making choices for ourselves does provide a source of motivation. If my wife orders me to vacuum the carpet I won't want to do it. If my wife hints it needs tobe done and then at some point I make the choice to do I will then want to do and feel good about doing it. The illusion of choice could purely be internal manipulation designed to keep of motivated and satisfied. When I become aware in my dreams I am able to control my actions within the dream. However the world of the dream itself continues beyond my control. If I become aware I amdreamin the middle of a dream about hiking in the forrest I remain in the forrest I just gain control over myself. The world as presented and thechoices I am presented still exist beyond my understanding. It is a bit like a video game in a way. We can control our character, control their choices, but ultimately are confined by the game itself. As such the characters we are "controlling" never actually do anything unpredictable or beyond the confines of the game.

I don't think it is anything outside us or anything profound within. It seems the unconscious process is actually rather basic. Most animals seem to have fight or flight. Have a instantaneous cognitive process that guides them. Maybe it is the most straight forward way a mind works. It is selfish and entirely focused on need/desire. Our self aware consciousness may have been a filter that simply allowed us to cooperate or organize thought into language. Or believing we had a choice may have had the evolutionary advantage of enabling us to manifest the motivation to do things which we emotionally didn't want to do but needed to do.

Conservatives consistantly vote against their own self interest. Even the couple conservatives on this site acknowledge Republicans are basically dishonst and or wrong about most things yet indicate they'd support them all over again.

They made it clear they wanted to repeal the ACA.The house voted to do so over 70 times over the years. They lied about their reasons for wanting to do so but they made it clear they wanted it gone. The Tea Party movement that gave the control in 2010 was largely a anti ACA (Obamacare) movement. Yes, they are cheaters. Enough isn't made of it from progressives.

What if we aren't making any choices. What if the belief we are has an evolutionary advantage of some kind. Our unconscious directs us through life using a series of false choices. I am not saying this is the case. I am just pondering. The jacket was a bad example. I was not able to this of an ideal example. Ultimately thoughts pop into a person's head all day dealing with everything from desires to memories. So you are right that the choices aren't always yes vs no. Sometypes it isn't even a choice at all. Sometimes it is smiling out of nowhere because of a random thought. What I am interested is understand the relationship, why it exist, and where the thought come from. The relationship - are they equal? Why it exists - does our consciousness need to be stimulated international to function? Obvious we receive external stimulation in the form of sight, hearing, smell, and etc. Maybe that isn't enough. Perhap it requires a dilemna? Where the thoughts come from - is it genetic. Like animals that are born know migration patterns and what not. Are we born with certian desires, fears, thoughts,and etc? How do you know the choice is also ours to make? I didn't choose to be a hetrosexual. I just react to my attraction to women. I suppose I could choose to try and ignore it but that would cause a termendous amount of misery and pain. There are things that make people feel good which are good and may never have been good. Some sick people feel good murdering people. Other people amputate limbs as part of freakish fetishes.

We seem to have the ability to make choices about how to handle our compulsions but no control over what our compulsions are. To me that possibly mean that we aren't fully self aware. Rather we are confined/limited to only making specific choices by a larger or more dominate consciousness in our minds which we are unaware of.

This is what "the people" want. Republicans have been campaigning since 2010 that they repeal the ACA and have won majorities in the House and Senate. I understand that the majority of the country actually supports keeping the ACA as is but we elected politicians who made it crystal clear they would not keep the ACA. It doesn't make any sensethat voters have done this, voting in people to do what they don't want done, but they have.

There have been a couple good threads recently which deal with awareness and consciousness which has gotten me thinking a bit about the function of consciousness and what it actually does and doesn't do. I consciously reason and make choices in life but only after I have unconciously interpreted things. I know instantaneously without any thought what I do and don't want or how I feel about everything. My consciousness chooses an action but the action chosen seldom ever changes what I want or feel. Simply examples of this happen all day everyday. While walking down the street I see a jacket in a store window and immediately am aware that I want it. The desire to have it comes without any thought. Then I consciously tell himself that I don't need it because I have others,can't afford it, don't have time to go in the store, or whatever and continue walking. Despite making the choice not to obtain the jacket the desire to have it, which sprung from up without any thought I was aware of remains. A stronger example would be a homosexual who spends decades of their life trying to consciously suppress their desires yet is unable to. Why would one be unable to change that which they desire if one has conscious control over their own mind? If I am fully self aware and consciousnessly control my own mind than I should be able to choose to desire healthy food, choose not to fear spiders, and etc. Instead I have the ability to ignore my desires and fears. I cannot control what those fears and desires are. Which means I actually have limited influence over what things I will be making choices between. I do not consciousnessly determine what captures my attention, what pops into my mind. Instead my unconscious interprets the world and presents me with actions and ideas which I consciously reason through. My consciousness is led by unconscious thought I do not control and prehaps have no influence over. Some will agrue that a person can tap into or learn to control their fears, desires, and etc. I am very skeptical of this. There are millions of depressed people who would strongly prefer not to be depressed. Millions of people who suffer form one of a thousand personality disorders who would prefer to just make them go away. It isn't simple. Is self awareness simply a mechanism our minds use to make choices?

Different regions and cultures are more closely related. The OP seems to be using Ethnic group and race interchangably to a large extent. We are all the same at the end of the day. Some populations are less genetically diverse but that can change in a single generation. We live in a world where people are born and raised in India immigrate to England and end up having children with someone from Ireland. Or a person raise in Africa moves to Hawaii and has a children with someone from Nebraska and that child moves to Chicago and eventually becomes POTUS.

Any relationship which is mutually beneficial.

1 - Any population which is more genetically diverse. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19633717 http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-study-finds-genetic-diversity-may-be-key-taller-smarter/ 2 - No and your examples excluded and/or ignored countries in Asia which aren't getting along as well like parts of Myanmar, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, rural China, North Korea, and etc. 3 - No 4 - We are all related 5 - Enthic group typically refers to culture while race refers to preceived differences in physical appearance.

Trump needs Healthcare to pass or else his tax plan is not possible. Enough Republicans want those tax cuts. They can only avoid a fillibuster in the Senate and pass the tax bill if it isn't projected to add to the deficit over ten years. Eliminating the ACA with its various subsidies gives Republicans some breathing room on paper to cut taxes without adding to the deficit over ten years. The bill the House just voted on however hasn't been scored by the Congressional Budget Office yet. I don't think the Senate touches it until that happens. Once those figures do come out I think the bill is more or less dead. It will save little money and millions will lose coverage. I don't think it will find enough support to pass in the Seante. This will drag out and become a centeral issue in the mid term election.

When confronted with 2 "experts" of differing opinion most people, in my opinion, tend to favor the middle. There is a over simplified concept of equality or fairness where people assume conceding some to bothsides of an argument is automatically better than not. Those who refuse to take the "bothsides have valid points" position is typically veiwed as some combination of arrogant, self righteous, rude, or out of touch. Because of this a tactful debater can almost always force a draw in a discussion regardless of the level of error contained in their argument(s). Many people are aware and take advantage of this in order to forward concepts that are provably false. People have no problem trusting experts who provide them with innovations they enjoy. Techonolgy companies from Apple to Tesla enjoy loyal costumer bases who trust their products. People seem to be less impressed/interested in innovations which do not provide entertainment or something immediately useful to their own lives directly. Consumerism seems to be one of the few areas in society where people marvel at science without defaulting to accepting that all pros and all cons are equal.

That was my point about commuting. I see a lot of my co-workers giving up a lot of their travel just to sit in traffic. It clearly wears on them phycology as the mere suggestion of changes to the daily schedule is enough to give a few what seems like a near nervous breakdown.

I think commute is a major factor when calculating a work weeks and attempting to relate it to illness and workdays missed. I work with people that have round trip commutes of over 2 hours. That turns ordinary 40hr work weeks into 50 plus hour work weeks. I live in walking distance to my job. I am far more willing to Saturday late, come in early, and work extra days than my co-workers who have commutes.

I meant your position regarding North Korea, not the election. You supported strikes in previous posts.

Does that mean your overall all position has changed, can you elaborate?

The government of North Korean conducted a nuclear detonation on 9 September 2016. That is what I was referring to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_2016_North_Korean_nuclear_test Sept, April, or whenever is all the same far as question I asked. What has changed. What is true today that wasn't true prior to the inauguration?

What is this new capability you reference? I asked what changed, what was true today that wasn't prior to the inauguration. To my knowledge North Korea has done nothing since their last Weapons test in Sept. Are you referencing some new intel Trump has and if so do you have a citiation? My Wyoming comment was meant to be a bit redundant. We have a large base with assets on the DMZ, Bases in Japan, and regular Navy patrols throughout the region. The showy increase Trump brag prior to any assets actually doing anything provides no strategic benefit. We already have more than enough in the region. Correct. North Korea doesn't recognize a divided Korea. One of the big fears has been that North Korea will attack South Korea. Ironically South Korea doesn't like some of the steps we have taken like THAAD and would prefer to deal with North Korea directly.

It is too early in context of understanding what Trump is doing but it isn't too early overall. Bush declared North Korea part of the "Axis of Evil" 15yrs ago. That took tensions from about a 6 and brought them up to like an 8.5 on a scale to ten. Since then we have stayed at an 8.5 until Trump bumped us up to a 9.5 a couple weeks back. That I can tell nothing has changed. Nothing new has happened. That isn't to say all is well and perfect but why the escalation? What is true today that wasn't true before the inauguration? Trump has said he is open to speaking with North Korea. I am encouraged by that. Diplomacy is the best option to move forward with first in my opinion. However Trump has moved in THAAD and deployed Navy assests to the region. Such a show of force accomplishes nothing. The U.S. Air Force can launch bombers from Wyoming to strike targets in North Korea. We don't need to physically have Subs and Carriers there for any reason other than to intimidate. I don't feel it is useful to diplomacy.

In fiscal year 2009, which started almost four months before Obama's presidency began and ended eight months into it, the deficit was 9.8 percent of GDP. The 2014 shortfall is 2.8 percent of GDP -- a decrease of 71 percent. So that's where the claim comes from. The situation largely tracks if you use real dollars. Using the same comparison with Congressional Budget Office figures, the deficit fell from $1.4 trillion in the 2009 fiscal year to $486 billion in the 2014 fiscal year -- a drop of about 66 percent http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jan/20/barack-obama/barack-obama-claims-deficit-has-decreased-two-thir/

Trump is playing it by ear. He came to DC without any real plans. He is making it up as he goes. I am sure he must have had some key agendas but we, the public, have no idea what they are. For now the effect is total uncertainty: - After campaigning on some never explained form of govt paid single payer healthcare he has asked house Republicans to come up with a replacement for the ACA and seemingly has no real involvement other than just demanding something get done. - After exhaustively campaigning that he would build a big beautiful single unbroken wall Mexico would pay for he asked for tens of billions in new spending to build a segments of a wall that we will be paying for. - He said he planned to spend a trillion dollars on infrastructure but instead is slashing all the Departments that deal with infrastructure and his people are saying his tax cut plan is his jobs plan. - He campaigned that he'd renegotiate NAFTA but he has changed his mind. - He campaigned he'd label China a currency manipulator and renegotiate our trade deals with China but has since changed his mind. - he campaigned against foriegn Military intervention calling Iraq a mistake and repeatedly criticizing Obama for our involvement in Syria. Meanwhile he has increased our role in Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan, and is openly considering a massive intervention into North Korea.

Is the current set up good? Our current set up is far from perfect. However no system ever will be perfect. Anger over taxes in biblical. Even Jesus got mad about taxes, lol. Since the economic collapse we have seen continued growth in home values, GDP, jobs, and reductions in deficits. All the stuff we would like to see. Why rock the boat? Considering the long term consistency of our economic improvement over the last several years I think small modifications would best and not a total overhaul which would have untested results. The massive cuts proposed will 100% increase deficits and spur major cuts to govt services. Both sides of the aisle acknowledge that. Republicans merely add the caveat of "in the short term". Historically a federal reduction in services hasn't led to greater economic growth. The opposite has been true. Govt spending money helps which is why every recession is fought with federal spending. Meanwhile tax cut have seemingly always produced temporary bumps in private sector bullishness which later gave way to recessions. Life is also full of wildcards. Trump hasn't had a 9/11, Katrina, billion dollar wall street Ponzi scheme, massive oil spill, earthquake, or etc.....yet. Just like I have a savings account and credit cards I keep empty for unforseen emergencies our govt needs to be flexible. sh!* happens. Our economic environment is akin to an ecosystem and not merely a dog that needs to be unleashed. Long story short is that the system we currently have has been serving us better than other interpretations of it had for a awhile. Best not to make any major changes for now.

Many people don't like to eat their vegetable either. At lot of what managing govt involves is tough choices. In a perfect world numerous things like police, courts, prisons, and etc would not be needed. In a perfect world no industries would put carcinogens in public water. This is a perfect world though. In my opinion Republican rhetoric basically demands to have things free. Conservates want a strong military, border protection, roads, bridges, tunnels, ports, insurance, clean water, and etc but then don't want to pay any tax. Every lone dollar spent of something Republicans don't like makes them blind to the hundred dollars spent of things which are essential. The below is an example of a multi dimensional problem that the govt is trying to resolve that many people view as overreach & freedom limiting or. I use this example because the economic benefits of roads and bridges is too on the nose. This example is meant to be nuanced and a little out of left field for this conversation. I was reading about the National Park Service (NPS) work to save the California Condor in the Grand Canyon recently. In the early 80's Condors were down to 22 individuals. Lead poisoning was killing them. Condors fly around looking for carcasses of dead animals to eat. Most of the carcasses were left by hunters who had uses lead bullets. iN the 90's the NPS caputured and tagged the remaining and then realeased and monitored them. Leaving lead free carcasses near their nests. Numbers rose to a couple of hundred. Then a few years back groups started pushing for limits on lead ammo. The National Rifle Association (NRA), of course, called it an assualt on freedom or whatever. Places like California were successful in forcing some different martials used for bullets. One of Obama's last acts was to ban lead bullets, not hunting, on wildlife refugees. Today Condor numbers are nearing 500. One of Trump's Interior Sec. first act was to repeal the ban calling it an assualt on gun owners. Lead is a heavier material than copper and the other alternatives. Lead bullets travel further and are more accurate. At what cost? There are long term impacts and at the end of the day the overwhelming majority of hunters are just out there for recreation and not for survival. Trump's only dog in this fight is that NRA members voted for him. http://e360.yale.edu/features/will_lead_in_bullets_finally_kill_off_california_condor https://ww2.kqed.org/science/2017/03/02/trump-administration-revokes-lead-bullet-ban-but-californias-may-hold/

Cable news is ratings driven. Trump's tweets get better ratings than civil war in Syria. People have grown accustomed to short black and white headlines. Anything that requires lengthy reading, has nuanced pros and cons, or difficult solutions gets ignored by most people. That is just the reality of it. If Syria got ratings CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC, and etc would report on it around the clock.