It's the same justification that a corrupt government official uses, an African warlord or someone abusing the welfare system. It's one of the worst aspect of human culture and anyone who celebrates it should be derided.
The teenagers I know want both an iPhone and cable TV. And one study in 2012 stated that teenagers watch nearly four hours of TV a day up from three hours in 2004 (study from Sanford C. Bernstein). In my experience, teenagers are embarrassed if they don't have everything they think someone else has.
How does Somalia represent classical liberalism? (If you assume that libertarianism is a subset of classical liberalism.)
Also, how does saying that the federal government doesn't have the authority to create the FDA or manage healthcare imply that I'm against traffic lights? (To reference another commonly said argument.) I like the FDA and federal healthcare services but I believe, technically, there should be an amendment to the Constitution for them to exist.
My Samsung TV wonderfully plays videos from the USB port. All I had to do was change the internal settings of the TV to a different model which causes it to randomly turn off/on once every few hours.
I hate to be cynical but after he realized his career was gone, why not take the $500,000 and buy a house nearby San Marino. And then both him and his wife get any job possible, even if they had to lie on their applications.
It's seems extremely reckless to know that things are going bad but spend all your savings and borrow all your equity hoping on some Hail Mary miracle that you'll get another high paying job.
How is it not woefully naive and self-deceptive to let it come to that. The article is nice but the lesson I see is one he doesn't seem to recognize; humility. Be financially realistic, live under your means and reduce your monthly expenses as much as possible especially in a time of crisis.
For the skeptics who say Stratfor is just a news organization, consider basic human psychology. These guys consider themselves to be private spies and they have the highest level connections. Unchecked power naturally corrupts people.
Stratefor supports the GWOT and thus supports the defense industry. They may have acted like amateurs but they were actively training people to turn intelligence sources both in the US and overseas and then trading this information with whoever they wanted. You'd think some of their activities would violate federal law.
I've known a fair number of intelligence employees and contractors. In one strange area of aerospace, I witnessed some unbelievable things. Some things involving fraud. A lot with ego and bravado, using their connections for business deals and other favors. In one instance, I reported these activities to an investigator at the ODNI.
My experience with this is limited but from what I've seen, these types of individuals can do what they want with little concern of scrutiny. They're on "our" side after all.
This is an old e-mail from Stratfor's CEO. However, I can't see how anyone could defend them as being a "news organization" after reading it. This is from George Friedman to Reva Bhalla (a young attractive woman) regarding an alleged Israeli intelligence source:
------------------
"If this is a source you suspect may have value, you have to take control od him. Control means financial, sexual or psychological control to the point where he would reveal his sourcing and be tasked. This is difficult to do when you are known to be affiliated with an intelligence organization.
The decision on approach would not come from you but from your handler. This is because you're position is too close to the source and your judgment by definition suspect. Each meeting would be planned between you and your handler and each meeting would have a specific goal not built around discussing the topic of interest which would ideally be hidden but in analyzing him personally and moving toward control.
The justification for the op would be specific classes of information and on gaining control the first step would be determining his access. If he failed the test contact would be terminated.
the problem of analysts in the field is that they tend to want to discuss the topic, which raises the targets awareness, rather than focus on establishing the control relationship.
So from a professional point of view this target knows your affiliation, understands your interests and you have not established any control which is defined as a high confidence in his obedience.
So washington is filled with gossip with people whose access is not established.
Just laying this out so you understand the core challenge. To be effective your goal is the person and not the subject. Otherwise its gossip which is information that you cannot definitively confirm.
This is intended to start our conversation on your next phase."
Reva's pretty hot. I see why the CEO told her to exploit an Israeli intelligence source by "financial, sexual or psychological control to the point where he would reveal his sourcing and be tasked."[1] The CEO added that this is difficult with her being associated with an intelligence organization.
On the ground human intelligence is power. And Barron's called Stratfor "the shadow CIA".
I have limited experience in this but I've seen some egregious things with current intelligence employees and private contractors. I think you are underestimating outside ways these guys could profit and/or use their intelligence collection news company to encourage those profits.
To be fair, the guy joking about India attacking Pakistan and Israel having an excuse to go back into Gaza is the FOUNDER and CHAIRMAN of Stratfor. He ended the email with, "We are looking at a tense and profitable week."
Except liberty is in the national motto of France. Those words are certainly used for manipulation but they also reflect the positive transformative nature of classical liberalism.