한 예비역 장군의 직격탄...‘국방부 이전 반대’ 전직 합참의장 11명에게 최보식의 언론 김영교 예비역 육군준장 2018년 문재인 정부가 몇 시간의 졸속으로 평양에서 맺은 9.19 군사합의 시에는 어디에 계셨습니까? 대한민국이 아니 저 별나라, 달나라에 외유 중이었습니까? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "갑자기 안보 운운하는 문재앙이 역겹다 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ "문크예거2 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11403534871 문재앙 정부의 안보 정책ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 1. 대전차 방호벽 철거 2. 한강해도 북괴에 전달 3. GP초소 폭파 철거 4. 인천공항 강화도를 공격할 수 있는 북괴군의 함박도 점령 국민안전은 한순간의 빈틈도 없어야 한다고? 씨발 저 새끼 입을 찢어놔야 한다 강도 들어오라고 앞뒷문 다 열어놓은 역겨운 간첩새끼임 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 김정숙 버킷리스트의 진실 소송 타임라인 ㄷㄷ Araboja http://www.ilbe.com/view/11403506440 1. 중앙일보 남정호 기자가 김정숙여사의 해외 여행순방 관련 칼럼을 씀 https://www.joongang.co.kr/article/23493217#home 2. 빡친 청와대가 소송했는데 이건 언론에 재갈 물리기 위한 이른바 전략적 봉쇄 소송 3. 2년간 법정 싸움에서 법원이 남정호 기자의 손을 들어줌 행정부 청와대가 왜 개인 김정숙의 쉴드를 쳐줌??이 판결 이유 4. 대통령 부부 공식 인도 순방 4개월 뒤 김정숙이 또 단독으로 인도에 갔던 타지마할 고우시다 같은 케이스는 인도에서 김정숙의 재방문을 요구했다고 청와대가 거짓말했음이 드러남 원래는 그 흰머리 통역관 출신 여자 외교부 장관이 가기를 원했었음 ㅋ 5. 이휘호, 권양숙, 손명숙 여사 등등 다른 영부인들은 해외순방에서 봉사활동이나 공관 국민들 격려하는데 씨발정숙은 대부분 미술관 박물관 관람했음이 재판기록으로 드러남 ㅋㅋㅋ 6. 청와대가 소송에 패한 뒤 외국언론에서 이 사건을 다룸 문재앙정권은 남에 대한 비판은 잘하면서 남이 하는 비판은 못견뎌함 이코노미스트 문잘알 ㄷㄷㄷ 7. BTS 유엔총회에서 유니세프 관련 스피치 행사 할 때 그 행사에는 원래 유니세프 이사장인 송교수란 사람이 가기로 했음 국제 회의장이라 자리가 한정되어 있기에 송교수가 들어가기로 되어있지만 김정숙이 들어간다고 해서 김정숙씨 보호 경호원이랑 같이 들어가야 되므로 결국 송교수는 못들어가고 청중석에서 보게됨 8. 재판은 2년동안 지속되었고 남정호 기자 힘들었을 듯 그런데 전국민 코로나로 해외도 못가고 자영업 소상공인 무너져갈때 김정숙년이 이집트에 가서 또 비공개로 피라미드 관람한거 뒤늦게 걸림 탁현민새끼가 쉴드침 ㅋ 9. 남정호 기자는 그간의 재판과정을 이번 3월달에 책으로 냄 해외순방은 국익 극대화란 원칙 아래 일정을 짜도록 되어 있지만 재판과정 중 청와대가 제출한 자료를 통해 오히려 김정숙의 관광을 위해 문대통령의 일정이 결정됐다는 구체적인 정황들을 찾아냄 ㄷㄷ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 일베간 김정숙 까르띠에 팬더 브로치 진품이면 가격이 무려 1억5천만원대로 국정조사 들어가야 할 사안이다. 디오미드 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11403555616 이 브로치는 카르띠에의 오리지널 팬더 시리즈들중 하나로 보이는데 구글에서 panthere de cartier brooch price 로 검색해본 결과 1억 5천에서 2억대가 대부분이었다. https://www.1stdibs.com/jewelry/brooches/brooches/cartier-diamond-onyx-panthere-brooch/id-j_14968192/ 만약 진품이라면 도대체 무슨 돈으로 구입했는지 필히 따져야 하고 진품이 아니라 모조품이라면 일국의 영부인이 지적 재산권의 보호를 침범하는 모조 브로찌를 하고 다닌 천박한 짓으로 엄청난 국격 실추 사건이 될 수도 있다. 전문가 있으면 등판해라 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 정은경 질병관리청장 "거리두기 한계 언급" ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 이새로미 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11403559962 실컷 영업시간 제한, 거리두기 강화, 백신 4차접종, 청소년 접종 등등 문재인 정부에서 질병관리청장까지 된 사람이 이제 윤석열 정부 들어서려니까 정책들이 바뀌기 시작하네 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 정은경처럼 신분 상승이 드라마틱하게 된 경우는 처음 봄 박근혜 정부에서 메르스 대응실패로 징계 받은 사람이 질병관리청장, K-방역 영웅, 타임지 영향력있는 100인 선정까지 ㅋㅋㅋㅋ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (속보) 채널A가 문재인 용산이전 반대 이유 공개함 ㅋㅋㅋㅋ.jpg 지헌 http://www.ilbe.com/view/11403539597 강경파들이 지방선거때문에 결사반대했다고 함 "청와대 공개 = 지선 참패" 청와대 공개해서 사람 몰리는 순간 지방선거는 끝이라고 저쪽에서 개난리를 쳤다네 ㅋㅋ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 친일 우크라이나는 독도를 "다케시마" 그런데 우리는 왜 키예프를 "키이우"?/ 궁지에 몰린 마리우폴 아조프 대대/하나로 뭉친 러시아/러시아 외자기업에 최후통첩 /악성인플레이션의 공포 박상후의 문명개화 https://youtu.be/yuSsZGAzVkM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 통계의 환상 노동통계국이 가격 인덱스와 국내총생산 등을 계산할 때 적용하는 원칙은 쾌락주의이다. 그 방법은 질의 변화를 가격에 도입하는 것이다. 그래서 시장에서 하나의 상품이 가격이 높아도, 통계국 직원의 눈에 가격보다도 질의 상승이 더 크다면, 상품의 가격은 실제로는 하락하게 된다. 그리고 이런 방법을 모든 상품에 적용하게 되면, 인플레는 하락하게 된다. 나아가 쾌락 원칙을 적용한 통계로 인해 전반적으로 가격은 상승하지만 인플레는 낮아지고, 경제는 허약해도 생산성은 높아지는 기적이 일어나게 된다. 하지만 결국 쾌락주의 통계란 조작을 의미한다. 무엇인가를 측정하려면 항구적인 측정 기준이 있어야 한다. 하지만 통계국에서 측정하려는 가격은 늘 변하게 마련이고, 또 기준이 되는 기준 상품들(goods basket) 역시 마찬가지다. The Illusions of Hedonics Antony P. Mueller The term “hedonics” is derived from ancient Greek and basically means “pleasure doctrine”. It is also the doctrine which the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) applies when calculating the price indices and for the computation of the real gross domestic product and of productivity.1 The idea behind hedonic price index calculation is to incorporate quality changes into prices. This way, a product may be on the market at a higher price, but when the product qualities have augmented more than the price in the eyes of the BLS, it will calculate that the price of this product has actually fallen. Applying the hedonic technique to a host of goods and services means that even when prices were generally rising, but product improvement are deemed to be larger than the price increases, the calculated inflation rate will fall. With a lower inflation rate, the transformation of nominal gross domestic product (GDP) into real GDP will render a higher result. Likewise, given a constant labor input, productivity will increase. Hedonics opens the door to producing magical results: a lower inflation rate with generally rising prices, a higher growth rate although the economy may be weaker, and a higher productivity number, although productivity would have been declining without the hedonic imputations. The BLS felt compelled to incorporate “quality changes” into its calculation of the price statistics in the second half of the 1990s when many new and modified goods and services appeared on the market and studies were launched that suggested that the conventional statistics overestimates the “true inflation rate." 2 With hedonics, the BLS wants to introduce more “objectivity” into the calculation of price changes, but it needs a human being to determine quality in the first place. Not any new gadget can go through as an improvement of the product. Before determining its inflationary or deflationary price change, there must be a BLS official who has to ponder the problem of whether this new or modified good or service really provides more or less “pleasure” to the user than the chosen reference product. A product, like a refrigerator, for example, is not just a refrigerator in the view of the BLS. Contrary to the act of use and consumption by the individual and contrary to the fact that one normally buys the whole product and not only a few parts, the BLS calculates price changes on the basis that the refrigerator or a certain TV set or a CD player consist of various different parts or product features. While the BLS avoids claiming to know exactly how to calculate the pleasure that the whole product renders, the Bureau maintains that it is in a position to determine whether the electrical generator in the fridge has improved or not. This improvement then gets compared with a reference element of the product, as it was earlier on the market. Depending on what the expert decides, the overall product receives a new price from the BLS that is different from the market price of the product. Quality, so the BLS determined, has many aspects. For this purpose they run a so-called hedonic regression through their computers. Whatever the type of regression that gets applied in order to calculate the “true price”, first of all an official from the BLS must determine whether a certain feature constitutes a quality change or not. Ludwig von Mises observed this problem long ago: “All methods suggested for a measurement of the changes in the monetary unit’s purchasing power are more or less unwittingly founded on the illusory image of an eternal and immutable being who determines by the application of an immutable standard the quantity of satisfaction which a unit of money conveys to him. It is a poor justification of this ill-thought idea that what is wanted is merely to measure changes in the purchasing power of money.”3 The company, which offers the new or modified product, will be happy to say that there is an improvement, and the technicians, who developed the product, will be eager to provide exact calculations of this quality change. However, how many technical improvements are being offered every day and there is no market for them? How many inventors have patents that are registered but there are only a few or no buyers at all for the product? The crucial point here is that only pseudo-standards are available for evaluation, the assessment of the utility of a product is subjective and individual, and for the individual himself, the standards of evaluation change according to the specific situation. It is quite obvious that hedonic imputations open the way to all kinds of manipulation. Given the implicit pressure that governments and central banks want to hear low inflation rates to be reported, due delivery would suggest to search mainly for quality improvements, and to calculate these even when they are of a dubious nature. The impact of the techniques that get applied by the BLS reaches far beyond pure price statistics. The indices are not only used as indicators of price inflation, but with the price indices the statistician holds also the key in his hands to a series of other prominent economic figures. In order to calculate productivity, real output, real input, and real investment and their changes, one needs a deflator, and a deflator is derived from the price index. Given a certain nominal GDP (in dollars or any other currency unit), the number for the deflator determines the size of real GDP and its real growth rate. If the measured inflation rate is low, the real GDP will be higher and vice versa, and along with that one also gets higher or lower numbers for productivity changes. Determining price changes for a modern economy characterized by the modification of products, the emergence of new product, and a high share of services, the calculation of the price index and thus of real economic growth and a series of other indicators becomes a dubious statistical construct. Different assumptions and techniques bring about dramatic changes of results. Most of what appears like an objective standard of measurement in economic statistics is a deeply flawed endeavor to measure the non-measurable. As the price statistician must admit, there is no meaningful way to measure the “price level”. At best, it is changes of the price level that can be constructed. But even with these changes, the measurement is flawed, because one cannot measure something, when both, the measurement rod and the object of measurement, are subject to change. The price statistician constructs a basket of products in order to measure the changes of the value of money. He claims that this basket is representative. But he cannot ignore the fact that the composition of this basket changes over time. Some products become obsolete, other products get modified and new goods and services appear. So he will change the composition of the basket. By this procedure, however, he implicitly changes also the units of measurement. It was this problem, after all, that caused the headaches at the BLS. Therefore it resorted to the hedonic technique as a way to make the basket “constant”. The current endeavors of the statistical bureau are directed at constructing a basket, which is not just representative, but also constant in terms of quality or rather in terms of the pleasure the product gives to the consumer. However, no sophistication can surmount the principle barrier that the claim of being “representative” or that of determining what is an improvement can be settled in an objective way. Economists call the unnoticed effect of monetary changes on prices the “money illusion”. Likewise one may call the price index a “statistical illusion” based on the chimera of a fixed basket of products as the unit of measurement. Both illusions consist in taking something as stable that is not constant. In both cases, no correct measurement and no solid assessment occur. The published inflation rate along with the derived numbers for real economic growth and productivity get utmost attention, while the dubious nature of these figures is widely ignored. In order to measure something one needs a constant measuring rod on. One cannot measure something in a meaningful sense when both are variables: the price changes as the object of measurement and the goods basket as the meter. The problem with the price index is that both do change: the composition of the individual basket of goods changes and the quantity of money. The urge to measure the “price level” appeared after the demise of the gold standard. Under the gold standard, money was fairly stable, at least to a degree that allowed individuals and business to perform sound economic calculation. With the abandonment of the gold standard, the necessity emerged to “measure” the purchasing power of money. With money now as the variable, a “representative” basket of products was said to serve as the measuring rod. The BLS felt rightly so that the traditional way of calculating the price index was flawed. Now they use hedonics. However, the critique against measuring the un-measurable as put forth by Ludwig von Mises still holds that the “notion of stability and stabilization are empty if they do not refer to a state of rigidity and its preservation."4 Who needs these statistics anyway other than governments and central banks that claim to be in charge of “the economy”, and the econometricians and prognosticators who build their models on these numbers? The consumer himself will judge to his best knowledge and preferences whether he likes the product or not. With respect to its price, he will decide to buy or to abstain. Companies may use “hedonics” and other techniques as long as they are based on technical criteria. But it is something quite different when the statistics are said to measure the overall economy and its performance, and to measure the so-called price level and the value of money. Governments want the best available figures for the economy as a whole, for such indicators as real economic growth and productivity. If the government asks for it, the statisticians can deliver. Beyond government, the utility of aggregates and averages such as the “gross domestic production” of the “price-level”, are minimal or rather detrimental. If the variation of these figures is small, the significance of the number for business and the consumer is nil, and if these changes are large, any housewife, businessman and employee is aware of the new situation. For economic and monetary policy formulation, the price index represents a central indicator. It affects directly social security payments and translates indirectly into the determination of the figures for real economic growth and productivity. The so-called “inflation rate” is central to the conduct of monetary policy, and for investors it serves to determine the real yields of bonds and stocks. However, what is published as the number for inflation is a highly crude number at best and a very deceiving one at worst. When taken naively at its face value, the inflation rate as it gets published not only distorts policy decisions, but also those of the private investor. Originally published July 29, 2005. 1.Bureau of Labor Statistics( www.bls.gov). For the Bureau’s research on hedonic price index see “Publications and other documentation” at its site. 2.The Boskin report of 1996 (“Toward a more accurate measure of the cost of living” available online under http://www.ssa.gov/history/reports/boskinrpt.html) suggested that the statistical practices used at that time overestimated the inflation rate. The obvious problem here is that in order to determine whether the conventional price index over- or underestimates true inflation, one must have a correct measuring rod in the first place. 3.Ludwig von Mises: Human Action . Auburn. The Ludwig von Mises Institute. 1998, p. 221. 4.Ludwig von Mises, op. cit., p. 223 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 정신병 환자에 대한 강압과 “치료 국가”를 반대한 토마스 사스 토마스 사스는 정신병 환자를 치료하는데 강압적 방법을 사용하는 건 고문의 일종이라고 믿었다. 그는 자유의 가치를 드높인 학자였다. Dr. Thomas Szasz’s Campaign against Psychiatric Coercion and the "Therapeutic State" Bernardo Decoster During the Cold War, people were shocked to see the Soviet Union lock up dissidents in state mental institutions because being against socialism was “proof of mental illness.” Soviet psychiatrists were condemned for violating the Hippocratic oath, with one of the most important promises of that oath being “First, do no harm.” While psychiatry in the United States has not gone as far as what happened in the former USSR, many psychiatric institutions in the US have nonetheless engaged in harm, and one brave—and often reviled—psychiatrist was not afraid to speak out against what he called “torture” and “kidnapping.” Dr. Thomas Szasz was well known both in libertarian and professional circles for speaking out against what he called the “therapeutic state” and the use of coercion in treating people with mental disorders. His message was popular with many followers, but also earned him the enmity of others in his profession. What Was Szasz Fighting Against? An article published in Lancet Psychiatry in 2015 began with the following paragraph: Have asylums disappeared, or have they simply changed their form? Over the past 50 years these notorious institutions have largely been closed down in the USA and Europe. But before modern society becomes too complacent about this apparent sign of progress, it should ask whether the asylum has been replaced with an environment that similarly constrains and damages vulnerable individuals—prison. To the common layperson outside the fields of psychology and psychiatry, this might come as a surprise. “Mental asylums are an environment that constrains and damages vulnerable individuals as much as a prison? Impossible! They’re a place designed to help people,” one might scoff at the statement. But no one can be helped unless they want to be helped, and even worse, one does not help someone by torturing them. Mental asylums were originally created by “social reformers” and “progressive” politicians in the latter half of the eighteenth century. These places were the definition of torture: multiple patients were crammed into a single room, screams were heard at night, common treatments were spinning, branding, and malaria, and patients had to fake wellness to be released, with many committing suicide soon after leaving. By the beginning of the twentieth century, nearly every state had at least one government-run mental asylum. Szasz identified these institutions as part of the “therapeutic state,” a term that refers to government subversion of psychology and psychiatry to remove or correct those who do not conform to what the government deems socially good. For example, homosexuals have always been a target of state oppression, and for a long time the therapeutic state deemed them “mentally ill” people who needed to be corrected, involuntarily committing them to mental asylums. Women who defied their husbands and even “unruly” children were also committed involuntarily to mental asylums (where many died). The therapeutic state still exists today around the world, causing immeasurable harm to humans, as noted by multiple studies (Cohen and Minas 2017; World Health Organization 2012, 2013; Human Rights Watch 2016; Irmansyah et al. 2009; Drew et al. 2011; Bass et al. 2012; Krishnakumar 2001; Carey 2015; Minas 2009; Minas and Diatri 2008). But most of the care of those considered “mentally ill” has been transferred to outpatient care centers (no overnight stays), and mental asylums have been closing in droves for the last fifty years, to the point of near extinction. These are the results of an ongoing crusade against torture led by Dr. Thomas Szasz, whose legacy endures despite his having passed away in 2012. Szasz’s Proposed Alternative View Cofounder of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights and the American Association for the Abolition of Involuntary Mental Hospitalization, a distinguished lifetime fellow of the American Psychiatric Association, and a life member of the American Psychoanalytic Association, Dr. Szasz won many awards during his career, such as the Award for Greatest Public Service Benefiting the Disadvantaged (1974), the Martin Buber Award (1974), the Humanist Laureate Award (1995), the Great Lakes Association of Clinical Medicine Patients’ Rights Advocate Award (1995), and the American Psychological Association Rollo May Award (1998). Szasz sought to analyze human behavior in terms of freedom, choice, and responsibility. The Hippocratic oath is a declaration of the rights of patients, which psychiatric institutions violated by declaring people “mentally ill.” To Szasz, mental illness is a stigmatizing term invented to justify social removal of those who do not fit into the therapeutic state’s list of acceptable behavior. He describes these conditions as human behaviors rather than illnesses. Until the middle of the nineteenth century, and beyond, illnesses meant a bodily disorder whose typical manifestation was an alteration of bodily structure: that is, a visible deformity, disease, or lesion, such as a misshapen extremity, ulcerated skin, or a fracture or wound. Since in this original meaning of it, illness was identified by altered bodily structure, physicians distinguished diseases from nondiseases according to whether or not they could detect an abnormal change in the structure of a person’s body.1 An illness is a disorder, a deviation from the normal. There are normal body structures, but what is “normal” human behavior? The very term mental illness already carries a social stigma. The illnesses of body medicine were discovered; those in psychiatry were invented. It is important to understand clearly that modern psychiatry—and the identification of new psychiatric diseases—began not by identifying such diseases by means of the established methods of pathology, but by creating a new criterion of what constitutes disease: to the established criterion of detectable alteration of bodily structure was now added the fresh criterion of alteration of bodily function; and, as the former was detected by observing the patient’s body, so the latter was detected by observing his behavior.2 The agents of the therapeutic state observed the behavior of human beings, and if said behavior did not fit the procrustean mold of what they wanted in society, it was deemed a “mental illness.” Human action is purposeful, goal-oriented behavior. It is desire put into motion. If a person is eating too much, they are using their will to employ means, seeking the achievement of their ends. An actor “bulking up” for a future role is not considered mentally ill, but someone that wants to increase their weight is. In both cases, the person is unsatisfied with their current body and is seeking to change it, but only the latter psychiatrists would claim they are mentally ill, claiming body dysmorphia, gender dysphoria, etc. The criteria used by psychiatrists are loosely defined and grounded solely on what behavior the therapeutic state wants in society. Human suffering exists. Some behaviors can be self-damaging. But it is ultimately up to the person to seek help. This is by no means to suggest that those who suffer should be ignored. But it also does not mean that those who suffer should be kidnapped and put into a chemical bliss through forced drugging or taken to electroconvulsive therapy. The central argument in Szasz’s analysis is that coercion aggravates human suffering, while voluntary treatment mitigates it. Why Szasz Is Correct As someone who studies psychology, I have found that therapies and treatments only work when the client wants to undergo them. The first session of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), for example, is designed to make the person seeking help comfortable working with the therapist: the two set goals together, begin talking about the core beliefs that are causing harm, and start to build an environment in which the person feels safe talking about what has been bothering them. Without the person’s consent and voluntary decision to cooperate with the therapist, CBT simply doesn’t work. Forcing the person to continue will only generate animosity and possibly even trauma, leading to an internalized phobia of psychologists, therapists, and professionals alike, and to the person closing themselves to any help. The person’s behavior can only truly be changed by choice, through willpower that comes from within. Contrast the empirically proven and ethical methodology of cognitive behavioral therapy with the torturous and sadistic methods many psychiatric institutions continue to use to this very day. Instead of voluntarily undertaking an amicable and moral CBT treatment plan, people are kidnapped against their will, taken to electroconvulsive therapy, drugged, and then imprisoned in a mental asylum for the rest of their lives. Szasz was a supporter of psychotherapy (which he correctly believed was more effective than compulsive treatment) and also of the right of people to freely buy drugs. But he did not disregard alternative treatment methods. If the patient wants to, for example, do a “primal scream” session and this helps them, then let them scream! If it’s done voluntarily, and it’s helping the patient, why interfere? If someone’s depression was cured by voluntarily going to the gym and taking cold showers instead of getting hooked on antidepressants, there is nothing wrong with it. Szasz thought that any method that helped mitigate human suffering was welcome as long as it didn’t violate the patient’s or others’ freedoms. Conclusion Szasz’s argument against the psychiatric method of his time is threefold: (1) coercion aggravates human suffering, while voluntary treatment mitigates it; (2) drugs aren’t the only way to help people—any voluntary method that helps reduce people’s suffering is welcome; and (3) no such thing as mental illness exists, but we should still help those who voluntarily seek help. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------