The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[lkwdblds]

I'm sure she is still very attractive!

Lakey wrote:


Wot's with this "was" bit? I find her to be a scintillatingly exciting spirit from 3,000 miles away, and I've not even set eyes on her!

R

Rog, I am sure she is still very attractive but I did not want to be disingenous and just say she is still beautiful when I have not seen her in about 29 years. That would be just social veneer. I saw the woman twice a week around 30 years ago on course. She was 49 at the time, and I remarked to my new wife how beautiful she still looked at 49. That I saw with my own eyes. As far as spiritual beauty, I never knew her then and never knew her now. We have never exchanged deep seated beliefs. All I know is this, she is still married to her man after 29 years and that shows a lot of beauty and class. I am still married after 29 years as well but my marriage will be ending in a month or two as we have filed our papers. One thing though, my wife and I are better friends now than we ever were as a married couple except perhaps for the first 3 or 4 years.
Lakey

 

[thetanic]

Every time I see this video, I think of couples who've escaped the SO together, like Marc and Claire Headley.

Love is our Resistance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPE9uSFFxrI

Lyrics here.

(And yes, they do give awesome arena shows....)

 

[lkwdblds]

Lakey, Spouse and I were married in 1981.
It's OK. A lot of us have messed up timetracks. But I am certain of the year Spouse and I married. Hahaha.
Thanks. E. is an attractive woman also.

Challenge

Aha, Challenge, I said E. and D. broke up in late 1980, and then I htiched up with E. and you hitched up with D. but I did not mean that it all happened the next day after they split up. We started dating and dated for 6 months before marrying on May 3, 1981. I know we married first, probably by a couple of months. D. was a very good looking guy, E. still talks of him fondly and even has kept up a slight correspondence with his Dad. E. and D. both hail from Detroit and E.'s Father died at age 90 in 2003 and she went back to Detroit for the funeral. While there, she called D.'s Father and had a long talk with him about how D i s doing. His Dad always liked E. and was glad that she called. E. is a lawyer now, getting her law degree in 1997. We have two kids a boy 27 and a daughter 22. They are both beautiful kids. If you want to know any more or D. is interested just email me. You have always both been special to me even though I never knew either of you because of E's and D's close relationship. Whether its photos you would like to see or whaever, just PM me.
Lakey

 

[SweetnessandLight]

He may well have been an awful human but he could write enchantingly beautiful music.


Mark A. Baker

I agree!

 

[Challenge]

Lakey, loose lips sink ships.

Not everyone on ESMB is my friend.

This is a lot more info than I would choose to post on a public message board.
Please discontinue discussion about my personal life.

No. I don't participate in the PM/ Back Channel Gossip Fest.

Challenge

 

[lkwdblds]

Consider it terminated.

Lakey, loose lips sink ships.

Not everyone on ESMB is my friend.

This is a lot more info than I would choose to post on a public message board.
Please discontinue discussion about my personal life.

No. I don't participate in the PM/ Back Channel Gossip Fest.

Challenge

Consider the discussion terminated.
Lakey

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

From US News and World Report

How to Be a Savvy Cheapskate

Katy Marquardt, On Wednesday April 14, 2010, 11:40 am EDT

Don't judge this penny pincher by his cover. Jeff Yeager may be the author of The Ultimate Cheapskate's Roadmap to True Riches--which one might assume to be filled with coupon-clipping strategies and saving tricks--but his philosophy isn't as much about how to get more for less as it is learning to live with less, period. Sure, he blogs about "12 Surprising Ways to Reuse Aluminum Foil," making cider bisque out of your jack-o-lantern, and using just enough toilet paper, but the bigger goal here is to live green, not just cheap. Ultimately, Yeager says, consumers should direct their frugal efforts toward downsizing their lifestyle--in major areas like housing and transportation--rather than saving a buck here and there. U.S. News recently spoke to Yeager about the most effective ways to economize. Excerpts:

Explain your 'cheapskate' philosophy.

I don't really write about penny-pinching tips. I focus more on quality-of-life and happiness issues ... especially the idea of deciding what "enough" is for you. Most people don't ask themselves that. What would be enough money and enough stuff for you? My wife and I answered that question early in marriage, in our 30s. We were living a comfortable lifestyle--why would we want to spend every last dollar we earned as our salaries increased over the years? We established what I call a "permanent standard of living," a level we still live comfortably at today, even though we could afford to spend more ... we managed, for example, to pay off our house in 15 years and essentially retire in our 40s. It's all about the decisions you make.

What sorts of decisions?

Well, for me, it's all about the bigger financial decisions in life. I rail against the latte factor ... for 20 years, pundits have been saying that if you give up your daily Starbucks cup and bank the money, you can attain financial security. That may work on paper, but I don't think it works that way in reality, for most people. One [of the bigger decisions] is housing. I'm a big believer in finishing in your starter home: Buy a modest home when you're first starting out and ignore people who tell you not to pay it off right away. Pay off your mortgage as quickly as you can, settle in and get to know your neighbors, and make your house your home. The conventional wisdom before the housing bubble burst was that if you could afford to pay down your mortgage early, instead take that extra money and invest it because mortgage money is relatively inexpensive to borrow. The financial pundits at the time said that any idiot could make a return on their investment above 5 percent or 4 percent of their mortgage interest. ... Well, it didn't work out that way.

These days with the tight economy, you hear so much in the media about economizing. But that's almost always about "how to get more for less" ... how to clip a coupon or find a bargain. But I think we're missing what could be the golden epiphany of these hard times: We shouldn't be asking ourselves "How can we afford it?" We should instead be asking, "Do we really need it?" There's lots of social science that shows that once you're above poverty level, more money and more stuff doesn't contribute to happiness. I believe that most Americans would be happier, and the quality of their lives would increase, if they would only spend and consume less. If you believe as I do, I think there will be a lot of upsides to the current recession in the long run.

What are those upsides?

For example, when gas was $4, we all complained about it, but two-thirds of people reported that they changed their driving habits as a result. And unless I'm missing all the horror stories, nothing awful happened because of it. Certainly driving less is better for the environment and better for our pocketbooks, so where's the downside? Another example: Since the start of the recession, the size of new homes being built in the U.S. has dropped by about 11 percent ... 300 fewer square feet. Again, that's a change, but I don't think that's a bad thing. Think about the tremendous financial impact that the decision to live in a smaller home will have on your life. Not only it cost more to buy [a larger home] in the first place, but once you have those extra 300 square feet, you have to insure it, decorate it, heat and cool it, maintain it, repair it, and pay taxes on it. That's the kind of fundamental decision that has enslaved so many Americans to the yoke of too much debt. So apparently now were going to be living in slightly smaller houses, but why is that a bad thing?

If you read the book The Not So Big House, it says that as humans, we're uncomfortable in big spaces. If we have a chance to move into the mansion on the hill, we're not really comfortable with it. We're learning some lessons in the recession. Personal savings rates are up. Even though things are tighter now, we're somehow magically able to put money in the bank. Go figure.

Aside from driving less and being happy with a smaller house, what other significant things we should cut back on?

Eating lower on the food chain, for one. I try to spend only a dollar a pound on food. It's a myth that it costs more to eat healthy. You can spend a lot, but when you think about the kinds of things we should eat the most of--whole grains, legumes, and produce--they tend to cost less per pound than things that are bad for us like red meat and many processed foods that are high in trans saturated fats. I encourage people to eat more meals at home. Forty-five percent of the average U.S. family food budget is spent on food prepared outside of home. And they cost an average of 80 percent more than preparing the same food at home. There's a lot of waste, too. According to the USDA, about 25 percent of food is thrown away, so arguably you could reduce your spending here by 25 percent simply by being smarter about food storage and portion control.

You write a lot about the relationship between being frugal and environmentally conscious on thedailygreen.com. Any takeaways?

For most Americans, the greenest thing you can do is consume less, which probably means spending less. I think there's some hypocrisy in the current green movement, even though I've been an ardent environmentalist my whole adult life. I fear that the so-called green movement is catching on now because there's a bunch of cool, expensive green stuff we can by. It's become what I call a "cause de stuff." Much of the current environmental movement in the U.S. seems to be built around the very thing it should be seeking to combat ... rampant consumerism. Take green cleaning products. They tend to be more expensive than the toxic products. But you can clean almost everything with baking soda and vinegar, which are safer for the environment than green products and cost less than any other cleaning products, green or toxic. Hybrid vehicles are another example. It's cool now to own a $35,000 Prius, although driving a gas guzzler to work instead is better for the environment IF you carpool with four friends. Sure, the greenest choice would be to carpool in a hybrid, but I don't see Americans being that committed to environmentalism. We're really mostly committed to buying cool, expensive, green stuff. That's the hypocrisy I'm talking about.

You must make big purchases every now and then. What's your strategy?

I'm a big believer in the Consumer Reports approach to shopping. Buyer's remorse is at epidemic proportions. How is spending money on something we'll regret later a good thing? It makes us poorer, and clearly hasn't made us happy. My advice is to have a mandatory waiting period. Wait at least a week after you see something in the store that you want. I guarantee that half the time, you won't go buy it.

Once or twice a year, I look at the things I've spent more money on, and ask myself one simple question: "If I had it to do over again, would I have spent that money?" I call it a 'what heck was I thinking? audit." Maybe you'll see that you spend a lot on restaurant meals that you regret. I noticed that when I had a regular 9-to-5 job, when I was stressed at work, I'd often buy things I regretted later. It's a way of helping you learn from your mistakes and change your spending behavior.

 

[Blue Spirit]

Common Sense

Carmelo, there is a certain aesthetic to common sense.

We thank you.

 

[lkwdblds]

Nice pairing of words - aesthetics & common sense.

Carmelo, there is a certain aesthetic to common sense.

We thank you.

Nice connecting of words, Blue, aesthetics and common sense. It seems as if common sense solutions tend to be simple. You don't do a lot of thinking, after all, "its just common sense". Common sense requires that something be done by the being in the exercising of judgement in choosing a course of action. What is a person doing when he elects to use "common sense"?

Is it looking, the first thing that came to my mind? Is it knowing or is it just accepting wisdom from one's culture or society or just looking into one's past and accepting things which have worked earlier.

In doing a Google search, American patriot Thomas Paine addressed the issue in an essay in 1776, his emphasis seems to be not a general treatise on what the words mean but more what it meant as to the issue of the United States of America separating from Great Britain.

Does anyone have anything pertinent to say about the topic of Common Sense. I can see that when I look at what it means and put some attention on it, it is a very hot button which I never looked at in all of my auditing in C of S. It relates back to whether beings know inately how to handle themselves in all the various situations which show up in the Physical Universe or if they don't know what to do when an unusual situation arises, do they have "charge" or upset on not knowing or are they okay with not knowing and just move forward attempting to acquire the knowledge they feel they need to know. It seems like a very large philosophical topic.
Lakey

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Nice connecting of words, Blue, aesthetics and common sense. It seems as if common sense solutions tend to be simple. You don't do a lot of thinking, after all, "its just common sense". Common sense requires that something be done by the being in the exercising of judgement in choosing a course of action. What is a person doing when he elects to use "common sense"?

Is it looking, the first thing that came to my mind? Is it knowing or is it just accepting wisdom from one's culture or society or just looking into one's past and accepting things which have worked earlier.

In doing a Google search, American patriot Thomas Paine addressed the issue in an essay in 1776, his emphasis seems to be not a general treatise on what the words mean but more what it meant as to the issue of the United States of America separating from Great Britain.

Does anyone have anything pertinent to say about the topic of Common Sense. I can see that when I look at what it means and put some attention on it, it is a very hot button which I never looked at in all of my auditing in C of S. It relates back to whether beings know inately how to handle themselves in all the various situations which show up in the Physical Universe or if they don't know what to do when an unusual situation arises, do they have "charge" or upset on not knowing or are they okay with not knowing and just move forward attempting to acquire the knowledge they feel they need to know. It seems like a very large philosophical topic.
Lakey

My sense of "common sense' is that it is uncommon. It requires, knowledge from experience (not book learning), and the ability to directly observe.

When I was 2, and stuck a nail into an electrical outlet, I learned something. since that time, I try to turn off the electricity before I touch any hot wires. Nevertheless, I know what a shock feels like. i've also touched hot wires around horse corrals by accident. This encourages me to look more carefully where there might be an open hot wire. I think this is good common sense. had I never experienced the pain(s), I would not have any sense of the danger(s) involved.

Over my life, I've probably lost a million dollars or three. Those losses, on occasion, are painful. Each time I learned. I'm still learning. So when I see someone wasting money, I may not say anything, but I can think to myself, that the person is devoid of "common sense." What I think they are really devoid of is having felt enough pain, and experienced enough reflection on the error of their ways.

Sometimes it isn't lack of pain, but a stuck picture or idea, that doesn't allow them to recognize what is.

This is where I would say they are not directly observing something obvious.

If prices are dropping at the grocery store, the gas station, in real estate, in interest paid on CDs, and someone is worried about inflation, I'd say they had a stuck picture that blinds them to observing the obvious.

 

[lkwdblds]

Good Answer

My sense of "common sense' is that it is uncommon. It requires, knowledge from experience (not book learning), and the ability to directly observe.

When I was 2, and stuck a nail into an electrical outlet, I learned something. since that time, I try to turn off the electricity before I touch any hot wires. Nevertheless, I know what a shock feels like. i've also touched hot wires around horse corrals by accident. This encourages me to look more carefully where there might be an open hot wire. I think this is good common sense. had I never experienced the pain(s), I would not have any sense of the danger(s) involved.

Over my life, I've probably lost a million dollars or three. Those losses, on occasion, are painful. Each time I learned. I'm still learning. So when I see someone wasting money, I may not say anything, but I can think to myself, that the person is devoid of "common sense." What I think they are really devoid of is having felt enough pain, and experienced enough reflection on the error of their ways.

Sometimes it isn't lack of pain, but a stuck picture or idea, that doesn't allow them to recognize what is.

This is where I would say they are not directly observing something obvious.

If prices are dropping at the grocery store, the gas station, in real estate, in interest paid on CDs, and someone is worried about inflation, I'd say they had a stuck picture that blinds them to observing the obvious.

Very good answer. The dictionary mentions the application of practical experience or knowledge. You seem to be saying that people pick up practical knowledge through their errors and the feeling of pain. A baby touching a hot stove learns this way as do animals. Adult humans do as well. I like your statement that common sense is "uncommon". Also. I like that you mention that it comes from observing and not book learning.

WHEN BOOK LEARNING BUTTS HEADS WITH COMMON SENSE: We run into a lot of edicts and laws made by governments and legislatures which come about through the route of book learning, rather than common sense. Most law makers in governments create their laws through the application of book learning. Many law makers have never lived through a particular situation and made the mistakes and learned lessons, rather, they feel they know what is best for society by what they have studied in the Universities or read from books. Insane laws are made which are put on the books which harm people's lives.

FOR SOME ODD REASON, BOOK LEARNING AND OBTAINING A "DEGREE" SEEMS TO BE GRANTED MUCH MORE CREDENCE THAN COMMON SENSE IN WESTERN CULTURES. If a Government or a Corporation wants something done, they call in "experts" who have studied various fields in books instead of real experts who know fields through the experience of working in the field and having made most of the possible mistakes. The practical experts are thought of as fools of a sort, simpletons may be a better world. What they have to say is often ignored and worse yet is mocked, while what the book learned "experts" have to say is accepted with awe. As a result, we have big, powerful entities such as the State of California, once full of major industries and the richest State in the United States, now virtually broke and busily assessing new high user taxes and seeking help from a Federal government, already trillions of dollars in debt, to bail them out so that they will not have to declare bankruptcy.

One thing about the book learning crowd, they are incapable of reflection and learning from their mistakes. They feel the solution lies in simply doing more of what has brought them to the brink of bankruptcy. They feel that if they only do more of what has already failed, then they will be able to bail themselves out. This is the antitheseis of COMMON SENSE.
Lakey

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Very good answer. The dictionary mentions the application of practical experience or knowledge. You seem to be saying that people pick up practical knowledge through their errors and the feeling of pain. A baby touching a hot stove learns this way as do animals. Adult humans do as well. I like your statement that common sense is "uncommon". Also. I like that you mention that it comes from observing and not book learning.

WHEN BOOK LEARNING BUTTS HEADS WITH COMMON SENSE: We run into a lot of edicts and laws made by governments and legislatures which come about through the route of book learning, rather than common sense. Most law makers in governments create their laws through the application of book learning. Many law makers have never lived through a particular situation and made the mistakes and learned lessons, rather, they feel they know what is best for society by what they have studied in the Universities or read from books. Insane laws are made which are put on the books which harm people's lives.

FOR SOME ODD REASON, BOOK LEARNING AND OBTAINING A "DEGREE" SEEMS TO BE GRANTED MUCH MORE CREDENCE THAN COMMON SENSE IN WESTERN CULTURES. If a Government or a Corporation wants something done, they call in "experts" who have studied various fields in books instead of real experts who know fields through the experience of working in the field and having made most of the possible mistakes. The practical experts are thought of as fools of a sort, simpletons may be a better world. What they have to say is often ignored and worse yet is mocked, while what the book learned "experts" have to say is accepted with awe. As a result, we have big, powerful entities such as the State of California, once full of major industries and the richest State in the United States, now virtually broke and busily assessing new high user taxes and seeking help from a Federal government, already trillions of dollars in debt, to bail them out so that they will not have to declare bankruptcy.

One thing about the book learning crowd, they are incapable of reflection and learning from their mistakes. They feel the solution lies in simply doing more of what has brought them to the brink of bankruptcy. They feel that if they only do more of what has already failed, then they will be able to bail themselves out. This is the antitheseis of COMMON SENSE.
Lakey

Very good point about "education."

We live in a small city. The garbage company is named after the city. The garbage company has been around for 70 years. The city has only been incorporated for 50 years. Our city council, in its infinite wisdom, decided to see what other garbage companies would do all the jobs for, ie. garbage, recycling, tree trimmings, city garbage in the downtown, etc. They hired an independent consultant to judge the bids. After six months of study, the independent consultant decided to go with a different garbage company, it will save each resident a dollar a month. The old garbage company has drivers, who smile and wave at us when they see us. They recognize us. they don't have GPS on their trucks (something the new company will have) because they know where they are. The new company serves other cities that we have rental properties in. We get lots of complaints and repeat complaints about the garbage not being picked up. The company is unresponsive, to say the least. Our old company has worked with the chamber of commerce, the merchants' association, the Kiwanis, etc for decades cleaning up after parades, fairs, festivals. They did it for free, and they scheduled it, planned it, and put cans out. The new company will contract with each organizing committee to do these things on a separate contract basis. They currently aren't scheduling for the Corvette Sunday in October, because their contract hasn't been ratified, and it won't begin until late September.

Thank god we saved the taxpayers a dollar a month. Adding columns of numbers doesn't really quantify a service. Loyalty, once broken , is hard, if not impossible to resurrect. One of the city council members, who was getting a lot of heat about dumping our garbage company, stated in the council meeting, that he doesn't pay any attention to e mails. It is all one logical construct for him. It has nothing to do with factors that can't be quantified: loyalty, trust, dependability, fairness, people's jobs and well being.

 

[Blue Spirit]

University Education

Very good answer. The dictionary mentions the application of practical experience or knowledge. You seem to be saying that people pick up practical knowledge through their errors and the feeling of pain. A baby touching a hot stove learns this way as do animals. Adult humans do as well. I like your statement that common sense is "uncommon". Also. I like that you mention that it comes from observing and not book learning.

WHEN BOOK LEARNING BUTTS HEADS WITH COMMON SENSE: We run into a lot of edicts and laws made by governments and legislatures which come about through the route of book learning, rather than common sense. Most law makers in governments create their laws through the application of book learning. Many law makers have never lived through a particular situation and made the mistakes and learned lessons, rather, they feel they know what is best for society by what they have studied in the Universities or read from books. Insane laws are made which are put on the books which harm people's lives.

FOR SOME ODD REASON, BOOK LEARNING AND OBTAINING A "DEGREE" SEEMS TO BE GRANTED MUCH MORE CREDENCE THAN COMMON SENSE IN WESTERN CULTURES. If a Government or a Corporation wants something done, they call in "experts" who have studied various fields in books instead of real experts who know fields through the experience of working in the field and having made most of the possible mistakes. The practical experts are thought of as fools of a sort, simpletons may be a better world. What they have to say is often ignored and worse yet is mocked, while what the book learned "experts" have to say is accepted with awe. As a result, we have big, powerful entities such as the State of California, once full of major industries and the richest State in the United States, now virtually broke and busily assessing new high user taxes and seeking help from a Federal government, already trillions of dollars in debt, to bail them out so that they will not have to declare bankruptcy.

One thing about the book learning crowd, they are incapable of reflection and learning from their mistakes. They feel the solution lies in simply doing more of what has brought them to the brink of bankruptcy. They feel that if they only do more of what has already failed, then they will be able to bail themselves out. This is the antitheseis of COMMON SENSE.
Lakey

A University Education:

Universally avoiding COMMON SENSE by the hypnotizing agreements to blindly

follow Authority by accepting all of their insistent suggestions as Fixed Ideas

that make up a neat box to trap a being with an overwhelming amount of

Now-I'm-Supposed-To's and disconnected with reality significances.

 

[Ted]

Very good point about "education."

We live in a small city. The garbage company is named after the city. The garbage company has been around for 70 years. The city has only been incorporated for 50 years. Our city council, in its infinite wisdom, decided to see what other garbage companies would do all the jobs for, ie. garbage, recycling, tree trimmings, city garbage in the downtown, etc. They hired an independent consultant to judge the bids. After six months of study, the independent consultant decided to go with a different garbage company, it will save each resident a dollar a month. The old garbage company has drivers, who smile and wave at us when they see us. They recognize us. they don't have GPS on their trucks (something the new company will have) because they know where they are. The new company serves other cities that we have rental properties in. We get lots of complaints and repeat complaints about the garbage not being picked up. The company is unresponsive, to say the least. Our old company has worked with the chamber of commerce, the merchants' association, the Kiwanis, etc for decades cleaning up after parades, fairs, festivals. They did it for free, and they scheduled it, planned it, and put cans out. The new company will contract with each organizing committee to do these things on a separate contract basis. They currently aren't scheduling for the Corvette Sunday in October, because their contract hasn't been ratified, and it won't begin until late September.

Thank god we saved the taxpayers a dollar a month. Adding columns of numbers doesn't really quantify a service. Loyalty, once broken , is hard, if not impossible to resurrect. One of the city council members, who was getting a lot of heat about dumping our garbage company, stated in the council meeting, that he doesn't pay any attention to e mails. It is all one logical construct for him. It has nothing to do with factors that can't be quantified: loyalty, trust, dependability, fairness, people's jobs and well being.

I have a friend out in California that I speak with every once in a while. This professional built and maintains the business on good service AND good people skills.

Yes, the customer does want to have the best value for his dollar, but many customers will gravitate towards the company or service provider who is dependable, trustworthy, fair, etc. All of my business comes by word-of-mouth, i.e. referrals. (Even my pc clients.) Many people will throw me their keys and give me the run of the house, the refrigerator, the A/C,... Whatever I might need or want. That kind of trust only comes to the trustworthy.

 

[lkwdblds]

The often harmful effects of governments on business.

I have a friend out in California that I speak with every once in a while. This professional built and maintains the business on good service AND good people skills.

Yes, the customer does want to have the best value for his dollar, but many customers will gravitate towards the company or service provider who is dependable, trustworthy, fair, etc. All of my business comes by word-of-mouth, i.e. referrals. (Even my pc clients.) Many people will throw me their keys and give me the run of the house, the refrigerator, the A/C,... Whatever I might need or want. That kind of trust only comes to the trustworthy.

I agree strongly in what you say above. However, in a growing number of instances, we have two silent partners State Governments and the Federal Government. My industry, home remodeling, is particularly succeptible to the intrusion of government bureaucratic interference.

It all started back around 1974 when I left the Sea Org and joined my Dad's business. In 1975, in the City of Lakewood, an edict came down that no longer could a flat roof be put on an addition and another edict that that a hot water heater could not be covered by a sheet metal structure but had to be built of wood and stucco so as to look like part of the house.

In 1987, a viscious tax was imposed by all school districts via the State, called "School Fees". It made sense for new homes that a fee had to be paid to a school district because new homes were being built, bringing in new kids to the school system but this fee was piggy backed on to room additions of over 500 sq feet as well. Starting at $1.50 per sq ft, it is now up around $3.50 per sq. ft.

After the 1992 Northridge earthquake, engineering codes were strengthened so that every house could survive the "big one". More recently, energy and going "green" awareness has increased and the result is more and more necessities being added to the jobs such as dual paned, low energy glass windows and patio doors, thicker amounts of insulation, roofing lumber being fitted with heat reflecting silver paper, flourescent lighting in kitchens and baths and soon to be enacted, in an entire house and and and on. You want to take down your cottage cheese looking acoustic ceiling spray, not so fast, you can't just call a handyman to come and do it for $75. No, it must be tested for asbestos and if that is found, it may cost $1,500 to remove it legally, bag it and take it to the proper dump.

This stuff is not all bad!! The product has improved greatly in the 36 years since I started. However, back in the 60's (so they tell me) and into the 70's, taking out a building permit required a short trip to your local building department of an hour or so and a fee of $300 or so. The same job today, with school fee and all, could require the job to sit down at the City for 2 to 3 months in various plan checks, etc. and then the fees could be $4000 to $5000.

AN UNDERGROUND MARKET TENDS TO ARISE WHEN AN INDUSTRY BECOMES OVER REGULATED. As with most products which became heavily regulated, construction has developed an underground industry of unlicensed "contractors". I just bid a job for $39,500, bidding it low because I needed a start. One of my main competitors who is usually close to me in price wanted $50,000. There was a third bidder, from the underground economy who literally stoledld the job for $17,500. The owner's checked out his work right in their neigborhood and found some happy customers and signed with these guys. The people liked me the best and asked me to look at their bid sheet and said they would still go with me if I could get close. I looked at it and they were doing a lot less than what I was going to do and they were doing the job with no plans and no permit. I bid the job in the same form as this other company and came up with $19,000 in costs and bid $25,000 to do the job. The people told me that perhaps at $19,000 or so they would have gone with me because I was better qualiified but they would not jump from $17,500 to $25,000 to go with me so I lost the job to the underground economy. This just goes to illustrate my point that the governments are your silent partner in business and if you play by their rules, and have your insurance and all licenses and everything legal and if the economy goes into a large slump as it is in right now, you are going to lose a lot of work to an underground economy which has formed. In good times, such as 2005 or 2006, that job would have sold all day in the low $50,000's and today, the people were able to get a decontented version of the job for $17,500.

It is these types of huge price drops which tend to keep inflation from taking off even though trillions of paper dollars are being pumped into the economy by the Obama administration.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

An interesting chat on another thread

On another thread, Telepathic and I had a nice exchange. We started out talking about the lack of freedom of speech within the C of S, our having to remain silent when we saw something that we did not like. Telepathic made the following post:

Originally Posted by Telepathetic
The silence that we were forced to maintain was the key ingredient which kept us there for so long in spite of all the incongruities witnessed by us. We were also indoctrinated to always introspect when things went wrong. It could never be LRH, the "tech" or management, they were infallible.

It still makes me cringe to I think how docilely I and others accepted all this.

I have come to a conclusion that Ethics Tech is one of the most dangerous tool in the "church."

TP

I replied as follows in blue print:

You summarize it very well. I accepted this rule of silence "docilely" as well. I granted Hubbard superiority over me mentally and spiritually. I figured I was struggling just trying to keep a small business going and hold a marriage together and raise only two kids while by contrast, Hubbard had single handidly solved all the riddles of the Universe and was successfully repairing the societies on this planet. I felt that he had a million times more ability and wisdom than I had. Plenty of times I felt that what he was saying was wrong but I dociley accepted his viewpoint because I felt he was a million times wiser than me.

Had I been able to discuss these matters in an open forum using free speech. I would have discovered, along with everyone else, that much of what Hubbard was touting was not working and many were taking big losses, not just me. Hubbard anticipated that this type of phenomena would occur and so blocked free speech in his Orgs. The key is that he touted Free Speech in his various Codes and Proclamations but then blocked it inside of his own organizations. This was the warning flag for people to see which would have led them out of C of S but until the internet came along, very few people were able to see this.

The large defections which occurred in the early 80's were mostly rebellions against DM's administration and not Hubbard. Hubbard was still held in extremely high esteem by the vast majority of those early defectors.
Lakey

This made for a follow up change where Telepathic had a nice win by being duplicated by me and made some more inciteful comments. I thought this made for some pretty interesting reading so I am posting it here.
Lakey

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Lakey,

See if you can guess or deduce or figure out my current brand new avatar.

(it's a joke.)

 

[lkwdblds]

You happened to be on the German - Danish border?

Lakey,

See if you can guess or deduce or figure out my current brand new avatar.

(it's a joke.)

Were you on the German / Danish border at the pool party when the beautiful naked girl skydiver fell in the pool? If so, the Avatar shows that you got her a towel and a bathrobe and she was grateful and posed with you to show her appreciation.

Well you said it was a joke. If you had not said that, I would have figured it was one of your daughter's posing with her fiancee after announcing her engagement. I know going in that neither of these answers is correct.
Lakey

 

[Ted]

A Post Appropriate to the Old Days Aboard Apollo

From: Patrick Jost
Date: Mon, Nov 22 1993 11:37 am
Email: [email protected] (Patrick Jost)
Groups: alt.religion.scientology, alt.clearing.technology
Not yet rated


In the late 1970s/early 1980s I was involved with a consulting firm operating in Europe, North Africa and the Middle East. This was after I had been declared SP and "blown" a CoS org.


I left this business to complete my Ph.D., get married and so on. The parent company of this business is still operating, so some information has been left out intentionally at their request.


We were approached by a very unusual group of people. All young, mostly American and British, most wearing some sort of naval uniform. They wanted help getting some supplies for their ship as well as in solving some problems with the local authorities. Even though we were winding down operations there, we agreed to help.


After an initial meeting, I thought for sure that they were some sort of terrorists or drug dealers. They were obsessed with secrecy, and their story of "offering courses for executives on the ship" sounded very funny. I asked them what country they were from, as no one recognised the uniforms and few countries had many women naval officers. After getting more nonsense, I told them that we would not even take a chance with them, and asked them to leave.


Two days later, they came back and said that they had "talked it over, decided to tell you we are the Church of Scientology". I asked them how they intended to pay. They said they had cash... wrong answer. I said this is too much like drug dealing, we can only accept a wire transfer to our bank in London. At this point, they went out to talk among themselves.


When they came back in, they asked me if I'd be willing to talk to "the Commodore". I asked them if they meant L. Ron Hubbard, they said yes. I told them that he'd have to come to me, as I wasn't about to get on their bloody ship.


The meeting was about a week later...some of my associates were going to be away.


The usual entourage (in very spiffy clean uniforms) arrived, the Commodore about fifteen minutes later. We had planned a way to control the meeting; all of us spoke Farsi, which was not the local language, and is a language we figured none of them could speak or understand. I would be the only one to speak or "pretend" to understand English (although almost everyone else actually did).


Hubbard came on very strong...we were interfering with important work, blah, blah, we didn't know who we were messing with, and so on. I told him a brief version of my experiences with the CoS, and that I was not impressed. At this point, he changed...on came the charm that allowed him to con people. He told me that if we would help them, he'd undo the SP declare, arrange for all sorts of free processing.


I told him that I thought the processing was worthless. I told him that he would have to demonstrate, then and there, what clears, OTs, etc. could do. I told him that someone in his "crew" probably "knew" either the local language or Farsi, that if someone could demonstrate this ability we'd be convinced.


I proposed this test. An associate of mine, who spoke only the local language or Farsi would come into the room. Hubbard, or his designate, would ask the person to ask some of the people in the room (CoS as well as non-CoS) their name, place of residence, a few simlpe things like that. I said that I'd be willing to have this in a sealed envelope for our group, and that we'd be happy to get the same answers back. I told them that this was a simple...they had to demonstrate adequate ability in speaking and reading...Hubbard obviously gave this a lot of thought, he stared off into space, then he said something like "fine...we'll show you!"


Hubbard and the group said they would want to do an auditing session. We said they could go back to the ship to do it, or they could do it in our office under supervision. He laughed and said something like "well unlike all of your native talking we have nothing to hide". He sat three or four of them down and said something like "recall a time when you could speak Farsi"; when the person said "ok" he would say "ok".


(I must admit to having expected something wilder)


After this-it must only have taken 15 minutes, he said, "OK, time for the test". We brought in someone who only spoke the local language. I said "converse with our friend here, all of us will be able to understand". Hubbard motioned to one of the men-he started babbling in a passable "imitation" of the local language...sort of like going "ah so, ah so" for
Japanese. My friend just sat there. Then the man started speaking "pidgin": "hey, buddy, you good buddy" and then "ask buddy how many bambino, writey down" and so on...


I said "flunk" (Hubbard gave me a VERY dirty look).


The next person (one of the women) tried much the same thing, but without the nonsense, just lots of body language-waving of hands and so on.


I said "flunk, you can't do it".


Hubbard said "fine, we'll pay you". I told him to come back tomorrow, that we were tired of his nonsense.


The next day they came back, projecting a funny mixture of politeness and aggression. I asked where his "linguists" were; he said "in the RPF". I told him he belonged in the RPF, if all of this worked, he should have been able to do it. I told him releasing them from the RPF was now a condition of doing business, he sent someone to the ship to see to it.


At this point my partner, who had said nothing in English said "Mr. Hubbard, if you do not behave like a civilised man not only will we throw you out but we will tell the locals that you are practicing black magic".


I spent about three hours working things out with Hubbard and "officers". I have to say not one of them was all that bright- Hubbard chain smoked like mad, seemd to have a bad memory, and kept complaning about costs. His officers didn't say much, but it was clear few of them had much education.


We solved their problems. At one point I had to go on board their ship-with three or four "friends" as my level of trust was low. Several people said fairly nasty things to me, the people I had to work with were pretty sullen. The ship was very dirty, and I got the impression few, if any of these people knew anything... (I was fortunate to have a former merchant seaman with me to tell me these things, I'm not a sailor).


At one one point, Hubbard came in, made an expanisve gesture, and said "you are invited to eat at the Commodore's table". OK, off to lunch...


After some small talk, he gave me a "lecture" on how I had "missed the point" of what Scientology was all about. I told him that I didn't care what he said, he made claims he could not prove (a few gasps from CoSers in the room), and that since I had verified the wire transfer to London, I didn't care what he thought. I finished my lunch, and left the ship.


About a year later I was living in Los Angeles, and I was contacted by the secetary of Rev. Heber Jentszch. I had no idea who this was, and ignored the call. She persisted. She said he wanted to discuss the wire transfer from Mr. Hubbard. I told her to have him call me himself.


Two days later he called. He said that as part of a routine internal audit, the charges had been examined and deemed excessive. He said he would appreciate it if I could help arrange for a full refund until appropriate charges could be determined. I told him that this was out of the question. He asked for a meeting, I told him this was also out of the question. He said that I was being unreasonable; I said I'd come down and talk for two hours for a consulting fee of $500 (I did not think they would pay). He said that if would come down tomorrow, a bank cheque would be waiting for me.


I went down the next day. I went in and got the cheque, and gave it to a friend who was waiting in my car...then I went back in (yes, you're right, I didn't trust them either).


I was taken up to a very nice office and introduced to Heber Jentszch and David Miscavige. They said that they wanted to clear up the meeting I had with Hubbard. They said that I had tricked Hubbard, overcharged him, and caused all sorts of problems. They asked to "take a look" at the cheque that had been given to me at the reception area...they were not amused when I told them it was out of the building.


I told them that they'd paid for 2 hours of my time. They went into no end of drivel, altnernating science fiction with threats about what OTs could do to me. I told them that I thought I'd shown OTs could not do much except act like monkeys. At this point, Miscavige picked up a letter opener/knife and said "you know, bad things could happen to you". I laughed-Miscavige is a little tiny guy...I told him not even a poodle would be afraid of him.


Jentszch wanted to know why I had "tricked Hubbard with the language test". I told him that it wasn't a trick, but a real test...one they could not pass either. Jentszch told me that I was missing the point, that in the long run OTs really could do these things, that they'd be happy to help me if I'd just get the money back.


At this point their 2 hours were up. I got up and took my leave, after making it very clear that I would have NOTHING else to do with them, and that I wasn't afraid of them...


Since then I have had no contact with the CoS. I will say that L. Ron Hubbard seemed to be an interesting fellow, and I was sad to hear of his passing. A con man can still be a nice guy, you just have to watch your wallet...


--
Patrick Jost / U.S. Department of the Treasury / [email protected]
semi-tame computational linguist / fretless bassist / troublemaker


--

 

[lkwdblds]

Update on Svelana and the Government business.

Swetlana began emailing me last week about coming in to her office for a follow up conference. I responded that I wanted to back out of the deal I had signed and had stopped payment on the $900 check. I wrote further that I would go with her company's program if they would modify their payment plan so that the $4,500 up front fee was collected from the first check I would receive for my first government. She kept insisting that I come in to her office immediately. To her company's credit, they did not try and cash the $900 check I gave them until last Wednesday, about a month after I had been there. I told Svetlana in my email that I had put a stop payment on the check.

Last Friday, Svetlana called me by cell phone for the first time and was very upset with me, she raised her voice a bit and demanded I come in and have a meeting one on one with her. She said her company had put in a lot of time getting me qualified and I was now ready to contract and she had 3 jobs ready for me to bid on and that she could let me look over the jobs, with the contact information blocked out. She started getting a little nasty, saying that we had a contract and that her company had put in a lot of administrative time getting me qualified. I kept reiterating that I would not put $4,500 down up front "sight unseen".

She kept insisting I come there and meet with her so in my typical Lakey fashion, I brought up directly that she was a very attractive woman, and this was being used against me to close me. She asked why I went ahead and signed the contract and left the check instead of refusing to sign when I was there. I accepted responsibility and said that I was wrong in signing because I was dead set against paying $4,500 down. She wailed about all the work her company had put in and did not even get their $900. I said that if they would mail me a bill documenting their out of pocket costs and the hours they had spent qualifying me, I would pay the $900 if the bill looked legitimate. I then brought up that I had gone to her web site and the only experience shown there was in acting and modeling and that this was all in Estonia and Lithuania. She asked what the point was in looking at this information. I just said that it showed no background in business. She said her background in business was none of my business. I had bought her company, not her. We left it that she would call me on Tuesday and really needed me to come in.

Yesterday she called but I was busy with a client and let it go to voice mail. In checking the message later, Svetlana had said that due to my erratic behavior and not sticking to my contract, her company had selected someone else in place of me. I had been disqualified and to just forget about it as they now had another contractor from my area who started yesterday.

SUMMARY - I did not handle this correctly, I should not have signed or left a check on the first visit. I thought that it sounded good and did not want to risk losing business opportunity so I signed as a stall to give me time to check out the company. I took this route and though I got out unharmed financially, it created bad feelings and I did renege on my contract so my hands are dirty. The "reg" cycle they did on me was quite similar to the hard closes done in the C of $. I wanted the product, an endless supply of government jobs, so badly that I kept agreeing to the next step of the "reg" cycle. It is so similar to wanting the promised End Phenomena of the various steps on the C of $ bridge. She was a good sales person, just like the reges in the Orgs. I think her company, knowing that all the contractors will be male, picked an actress / model type for their registrar but in all fairness to Svetlana, she never once flaunted her sex appeal on me or used it in any way. She was all business and did a nice job hard "reging" me. I'll never know 100% if I passed up a great opportunity or was just smart in nipping this in the bud. I got about 10 replies from people when it happened and 10 out of 10 recommended strongly that I pull out.
Lakey