Low Return So Bad It Can Only Be Sustained in a Needs Based Economy (Communism)
Caveat: This was written in the cold and rain in a park gazebo. It does not reflect my work if I had not had multiple laptops stolen and had been trespassed from the library because Tony wanted to and wanted to exercise that he could arbitrarily, because the library itself was private property even if it was publicly funded. Please fire Tony. He is sincerely out of control. He has called the police on people who didn't pay for a sixth page (this was not myself; I have been paying for philosophy research well after I couldn't pay for it), and has been calling the police on another woman who is about my age and impression, meaning he is targeting women of this impression. This man is out of control. Sincerely. Please fire Tony. I believe he views women like myself and this young lady as a threat to him keeping his job. He needs to learn to control his body and urges, not trespass these women arbitrarily. That is horrific. This was described in Credibile by Deborah Tuerkheimer where a dentist fired a dental assistant because he himself was fantasizing about her and it was a threat to his marriage. She had done nothing wrong. This is not ok. I am in the cold and rain because he doesn't have it. He just shouldn't have the job where he is potentially exposed to such women he can't handle, not deprive the women of needed resources from a horrifically selfish perspective. Please fire Tony. It's this horrific. I had watched him trespass a young woman who was doing literally nothing and getting resources and warmth for herself at the library. I had even told a trooper who was in the area about it. The next time I went in, he did the same thing to me. It needs to stop. He needs to go.
A return of -$3,500:$9 is so low return it is clear the dynamic is only occurring from a needs based perspective. Legal pay is structured and itemized. The payment is consented to, not given in ways that evade consent. Evasion of consent is violation of consent. That is a NO. The person returning -$3,500:$9 receiving/demanding has a return so it low it can only be seen as intellectually disabled, and not only that, but from a care-giving perspective as well. This is while committing caregiver financial abuse, financially abusing the caregiver. This is also a no. It needs a competent outside party to help the extremely disabled person restructure the caregiver’s pay to a more sane, financially competent level. Rapacious reparations and resulting inflation that rendered civilian labor and skill valueless in post-Nazi Germany led to a similar effect that required a--at the time but no longer under Putin--competent 3rd party to help restructure the pay to a sustainable level by the USSR. When it was ready, Germany’s economy recovered and even became a role model and go-to to men like Putin himself well after the passing of the USSR. This is a job well done where communism is used for emergencies. It is functional when prevented from forming an oligarchy. These oligarchies tend to incentivize the emergency state to stay around to defeat the purpose and fatten the oligarchic ruling class. Germany was then reintegrated—in the case of Germany—to social capitalism using an earned, merit-based mutual sovereign governmental design residing in Germany’s history. Social capitalism was phased in when it was ready. Beating people who seem like a threat to capitalism with a stick shows a comparatively and concerning lower comprehension than a developmentally intelligent response to an inflation situation so bad people with full skills were busy being treated as essentially worthless. This was done incrementally with an ecological and developmental gift towards Germany’s consensual, power-sharing “princeling” past very similar to the “King Arthur’s Round Table” design. But with the UK clearly struggling comparatively in Brexit to accept the true “roundness” of that table, to which even the king was subject. This was successful in both England and Germany because consensus based power sharing maximizes comprehension, sovereignty, sensemaking, equality and economically exponentiating synergy, and not a false and violating synergy at that. -$3,500:$9 is the opposite of synergy. It is a clear case of what, without the caregiving lens toward the intellectually disabled, would be considered parasitism. It is so obviously egregious it can be concluded that the person is disabled enough to never be able to see or understand the problem here so it needed a 3rd party outside help like the USSR was to Germany pre-Putin when it still had a relatively analytically gifted covert Christianity that was behind this caregiver supportive stance to it. Though retaliatory rapists that were not Christian did still exist in the USSR, they were the minority. They are now the majority under Putin. It is no longer a Christian country, and its prefrontal cortical control has been lost in a “use it or lose it” perspective in just that way. That does not mean justice does not matter, however it does temper justice to never reach such horrifically inaccurate violently inflationary extremes so people with skills and labor would be treated like all they had worked for and at meant absolutely nothing. The violation was so egregious and horrific that it absolutely needed to end. In either case, a return of -$3,500:$9 is so horrifically asymmetrical in its return that suggests the -$3,500:$9 return is in profound need and so unable to see its own criminal asymmetries that it is intellectually disabled, and even under altruism, the return is so low it is not even bodily-computationally possible to continue, like entering radioactive Chernobyl without a hazmat on. Without the hazmat suit, your body will literally pay for the horrific intelligence failure of working such material well before the intelligence was there to genuinely and sustainably support it. Like a miscarriage on a body fighting sickness or not used to pregnancy, Chernobyl did not have the supportive intelligence to carry and bring what they were attempting to carry and bring to fruition. That does not mean it won’t in the future, but it does mean it has to stop until the surrounding intelligence infrastructure is there. Like two places with equivalent natural beauty charging the same price for real estate with completely and grotesquely different transportation infrastructure, to the point one location is not even competitive with the other despite the similar natural beauty, it’s not about equality as it is to how much value is actually logically backed by the surroundings and infrastructure. It shows low skill with understanding how value is backed to attempt otherwise, and like beating someone with a stick other-handicapping them about capitalism to get them to enter the economy is disabled insofar as it chronically will have the opposite effect of its intended goal. Disability needs to be respected. Having disabled people recenter the economy will lower the quality and value of labor even more if they are placed without often expensive accommodations where otherwise able people are. It is profoundly low comprehension to therefore tinker with the social security net, like washing a wedding ring in the sink without a drain stop or a pipe bar to stop it should it be cast down. If the ring is the economy, such a risk is gross incompetence. So, a disabled person continuing with a -$3,500:$9 return on the -$3,500:$9 return side is a needs based paradigm if they demand it to continue. They insinuate that capitalism is behind their profit, their demand, almost autistically as the only ecological variable, when, from the other side that is economic suicide if not brutal homicide. Given they can’t see that, profound need and disability is the conclusion. They need outside help to restructure it more equitably so synergy, which is the exponentiating backbone between true equals—roundtable style— can actually begin to build the economy with consensus building and with its sense-making to comprehension building competence. $7,000 for repairs is what I asked to make financial sense to me given that would cancel my negative, keep their $3,500 in place and bring me to about the same level. Instead I was met with another $130 stolen. This is profound disability and requires international 3rd party support and intervention and investment to bring it back to a more sustainable level. It is not only demanding inherently the other party be altruistic, which can only be demanded as a rarity given the high cost of altruism as a signal of social intelligence, but beyond that point to computational-bodily impossibility like an immune system requesting heart help from a body clogged with cholesterol. More responsive and competent investment not coming in a timely way will ultimately lead to death no matter how many emergency Trump buck heart attack style payments are allotted and administered all too late. A more sustainable, healthy and responsive financial pattern is required—aka, as a doctor would demand healthier diet and body if at all good.
To demand actors continue to behave with unsustainable, bodily altruism due to the other side’s excessive profits is not only completely devoid of ecological and somatic intelligence, as well as parasitic, is also is a needs based paradigm demand the caregiving it is contemptuous, ironically, of in favor of capitalism. It can’t self-exponentiate therefore through mutual financial business sense made and shows no sustainable growth ability. Any “growth” from such a low comprehension of “profit” is essentially a cancer tumor; it is not a mutual growth and has no real ability to turn the ignition of synergy and keep it warm as a consensus, time-merit shared governance round table style economy has and can. It does not maximize local economies to a greater overall profit by maximizing the preservation of local sovereignty; which, which in not engaged in self-harm such as governmental torture and repression, maximizes that sovereignty’s economy by design. Therefore anything that tries to beat people into engaging in action that no longer makes even basic bodily, much less financial sense, due to failure to even basically see the cancerous properties of such asymmetrical profit—experienced as horrific and rapacious by the other side— is not only communism, notably lower down the economic comprehension scale compared to the alleged merits of well comprehended local first, center second social capitalism, but an unsustainable caregiving situation during communism—an economic emergency—if that were not bad enough. When you review what countries communist countries show from an accountancy perspective, “caregiving” towards they are either war-riddled engaged in self-harm or they are third world. Neither is even basically possessed of economic mastery; the war-riddled country by no fault of its own other than other-handicapping. The third world country however is suffering in this way by fault of its own in many cases, such as resistant narcissism evading intelligibility structures that maximize sense-making like constitutionalism as an evasive tactic to remain an addictive, often monarchic, power like the those addicted to domestic violence; an echoic, meaningless structure that has hegemonized itself incentivizing further meaningless abuse that goes nowhere day to day and just builds a castle in the sky read to be destroyed at any time. This of course what is being described fundamentally when we describe the extreme vulnerabilities of the narcissist. We can therefore conclude the -$3,500:$9 return is not only stereotypical narcissism, but also disabled narcissism. Meaning, it is the narcissism of one used to being embedded in a disability system that they do not experience or see the inner workings of, but merely the final labor product of when it is already healthy, upright and functioning. For the final fate of disability narcissism, I refer to my original post. True Ugliness, Statement on Leaving Goodreads | Talentcel and Narcissism Research
A more responsive, competent and consistently egalitarian pay structure is required for myself and people like me to remain in society. The rest is trying to force people to stay in an economy against the financial sense of it, often made by alleged capitalists who have an echoic, parasitic rather than responsive mutualistic understanding of capitalism which is, ironically, cancerous and therefore disabling in the long run. So to force people to act against their financial sense and try to shepherd them back into the economy is not only incompetent shepherding mistaking skin for wool, but so in-astute to their own financial disability mistaking the financial wool for the financial skin that it is not resolvable without international outside support genuinely, not narcissistically, possessed of high comprehension of the material. The conclusion is to force people into this economy against their financial sense to extract rapacious data without even basically competent return, even when viewed altruistically. It is actually the opposite of capitalism, at least the German “social capitalism” model which, like a Christmas Market whose taxes upkeep the local cathedral demonstrates itself inherently as a world renowned mutualistic, and self-enforcing high-functioning mastery of the economy enough so that many countries, even first world countries, come first to Germany for help with such matters. This is very different from the beat them with the stick understanding, beating them until they're socially capitalist. (Ironically, that would be antisocially capitalist.) Even more ironically, this would create more disabled which incentivizes more communism through greater and greater genuine need for a needs based perspective via a need based economy (communism; each according to their need). Essentially, these behaviors personalize the low comprehension of capitalism while screaming about its merits in a way that personifies cybertruck; if knowledge is integration of application to the material, the non-integrated and cutting curves would be echoic reasoning, where much efficiency and excessive costs are waged where they would not have been if the reasoning was properly integrated into the knowledge base (the integrated curve which saves the design the costs of excessive air resistance, much less a fall on a sharp edge risk for the driver). In fact, low comprehension itself is like a sharp, artless sheet where curve would not only save these costs but therefore save time as the saved costs; it is not integrated optimally to the material. It is clunky at best and sends everyone back a level. That’s the opposite of capitalism, at least the “social capitalist” German sort, which is often the subject of reference due to its authority of being solicited for aid oftentimes by even its worldwide peers during crisis.