Controlling Drugs

Regarding drugs …

Let’s rid ourselves of the term legalization.

Control is a better word.

If we use the term legalization, then people get the idea that cocaine and heroin are going to be sold right next to the Skittles at the drugstore.

The word control is better.

The word control involves intelligent thought.

How will we control drugs? How will we control addiction rates?

That’s what we want: intelligence.

What we don’t want are mindless politicians involved in drug policy.

Currently, we can’t get anywhere with regard to drug policy and addiction rates because the political debate is controlled by two widely opposing schools of thought.

Those two schools of thought are complete legalization versus complete banning on drugs.

This is not going to work.

We want to put a rheostat on all drugs.

There are probably five to ten parameters that can be adjusted on each particular drug in an attempt to control it.

Those parameters would include how much a person can buy, who can buy it, when can they buy it, where can they buy it, for what purpose can they buy it, how frequently can they buy it.

I’m sure you can think of a few more.

What we want to achieve is the lowest addiction rate and the least amount of illegal drugs.

All of this can be graphed out, analyzed and then controlled by using the above parameters.

This would best be handled by an independent board comprised of schooled professionals, mathematicians, social workers, attorneys and healthcare providers.

The last thing we want is a politician making hay over these issues.

This particular individual, the politician, is best relegated to that of the irrelevant village idiot who dances haplessly in a remote corner of the room.

To achieve a better world, the term legalization when it comes to drug use should be eliminated from our vocabulary.

The word legal is an unfortunate and almost useless word to use.

Yes, a drug can be legalized – but at a 5% level thus making it effectively illegal.

Alcohol is legal, yet it is illegal for people under 21.

Control is a better word.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Who We Are

Follow this through.

As I may have stated before, my father died when I was 13 years of age. That produced a significant amount of trauma in our family’s life.

I was not immune to that trauma.

If that was the only trauma that I had suffered, I might’ve had a chance at a normal life.

I might have been able to get married and have kids.

The Lord took me in a different direction.

My mother remarried when I was 15 years of age, and that remarriage doubled the amount of trauma to my developing psychosexual identity.

Suddenly I inherited a stepfather and two step brothers, and we lived under the same roof.

It’s a strange thing to combine two families together.

It’s a tremendous adjustment, more so if you are in early to mid adolescence.

I know the transition was difficult on my older stepbrother Stevie, who turned to drugs.

It was tough for me even though I stayed away from drugs.

Combining two families is stressful. It’s nothing like you see on television.

Television portrays the combination of two families as a joyful, non-stressful event that the children are willing and gleeful to engage in.

Perhaps this is true for many families, but I suspect that for the majority of families the children are not desirous of their parent’s remarriage.

This is a true story.

Our combined families minus the parents were sitting around in our recreation room watching an episode of My Three Sons.

In this particular episode Steve Douglas, played by Fred McMurray, along with his soon to be bride named Barbara approach the children from both families in their living room and announce that they are getting married.

The children upon hearing the news immediately rise up in vigorous happiness and congratulate their parents.

When our real combined families saw this scene, there was a moment of silence before we all burst out in laughter.

It was obvious that none of the children from our combined family wanted our parents to get married.

There’s a reason for this.

In the developing child there are two forces, one from the father, and one from the mother, that are attempting to integrate with each other into a unique personality that is you.

The child desperately wants to integrate these forces into a nice tight integrated dovetailed joint.

Divorce and death weaken this joint. What you get is a weak unstable joint and, consequently, a weak unstable personality – one that is more fractured.

The older you are in adolescence, the stronger this joint is should the parents divorce, or should one parent die.

The earlier you are in adolescence, the weaker this joint becomes.

This is why trauma in the family affects younger adolescents more than it does older adolescents.

When this trauma hits, the child will do anything to preserve and strengthen this joint.

They definitely do not want their parents to remarry. That is a television fantasy.

In my case, this double hit from both my father’s death and my mother’s remarriage cause me to become more angry and introverted.

I lost all the socialization that normally takes place during high school years.

I participated in almost no activities. Sure, there were a few, but only a few.

There was an entire world of student parties and socialization that I was oblivious to.

It’s difficult to remember back on fifty years with extreme clarity, but I remember going through a decision process in my mind with regard to survival and direction in my life.

Somewhere in my subconscious I made a childlike decision, because I was a child, that close relationships could result in extreme pain should one of those relations die.

It would therefore cause me less pain emotionally if I was not closely attached to other people.

This is logical, but it is not normal logic. It’s aberrant because most people don’t think this way.

Nevertheless I was a child.

It therefore became logical to my childlike mind that if I never had any girlfriends, or by extension a wife, I could not have children. If I did not have a wife or children, they could not die on me. Therefore I would experience less pain.

Thus my child-like mind embraced this logic, and there grew within me a force that would automatically prevent me from interacting normally with the opposite sex even though I had a biological desire to do so.

I remember experiencing this force in high school. There was this girl that I liked and wanted to ask out, but I could feel this force within me preventing me from doing so.

This force has persisted throughout my life.

It feels at times as if I am missing a set of instructions, or if there is a blockage on a set of instructions within me.

It causes me to act awkwardly when I try to engage the opposite sex in a sexual way.

It is not a force that I can defeat.

It has become part of my integrated, aberrant personality.

This force is so strong that when I have tried to have sex with the opposite sex, my body shuts down.

It’s a protective mechanism gone awry.

I was able to obtain an erection by myself, but not with the opposite sex.

My body shuts down. There is nothing that I can do to control this.

This was frustrating to me when I was young, but now that I am older and understand what’s going on, I am not frustrated at all.

The mind of a child when undergoing stress in adolescence, when psychosexual identity is being forged, makes conclusions about life.

Those conclusions define who you are throughout your life. You cannot alter them.

I suspect that homosexuality, pedophilia, asexuality has its roots in the forging of psychosexual identity during adolescence.

People want to know why they are the way they are. I can only give you insight into the way that I am.

Jeffrey Dahmer wanted to know why he was the way he was.

Let’s put aside the notion that a hernia surgery caused by Jeffrey Dahmer to be the way he was. There is no evidence, nor will there ever be any evidence that a hernia surgery leads to this type of activity.

What we do know is that Jeffrey Dahmer‘s parents argued and fought constantly.

I suspect that the extreme trauma that he was undergoing during his early childhood and adolescence disrupted his integrating personality.

In an attempt to survive and stay alive, he made internal conclusions which became part of his personality. He reached out into his own experiences and used those experiences to form a psychosexual identity, unique to him, which permitted him to survive.

Of course these internal conclusions were flawed and aberrant. Of course these conclusions made and make no sense. He made these conclusions when he was a child.

Internally to him they made sense. To us they are flawed and aberrant.

He understood that his logic was aberrant to the rest of us, but to himself, the logic was valid.

In terms of his own body and psyche, his actions seemed right and valid. He understood that his actions were wrong in terms of the rest of society, but to his own self his actions were right, not wrong.

Similarly, in my case, my logic seems right to me in terms of my own survival. I understand that my logic is flawed in the broader context, but in terms of myself it is correct.

I bring this up to point out the flawed legal concept of knowing right from wrong.

Yes, Jeffrey Dahmer knew that you believed his actions were wrong, but in terms of himself, he believed his actions were right.

Much time is consumed in the legal system as to whether an individual who commits a crime knows right from wrong.

It’s a waste of time.

A person who commits a crime obviously feels within his own context that what he’s doing is right.

The only thing that counts in the legal system is what the majority of the people think.

In that sense, anybody who commits a crime, obviously has some psychological trait that is aberrant from the norm.

Why is this important?

It’s important because we then begin to realize that all crime and aberrancy has a psychological basis.

This realization then compels us to prevent this aberrancy to the highest degree possible.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

This realization also compels us to understand that much of aberrancy is not fixable.

You can’t fix me into being a normal functioning heterosexual unless you’re willing to send me to North Korea and have Kim Jong-un take me down to a baby and rebuild my personality, something you’re not willing to do.

You can’t fix a homosexual. They are who they are.

You can’t fix a pedophile. They are who they are.

You can’t fix Jeffrey Dahmer. He was who he was.

There is no rehabilitation possible. There is no conversion therapy that is going to work.

What you see is what you get.

What you can do, is prevent sexual aberrancy. What you can do is prevent aberrance of all types.

You can create a society where families are not stressed out economically. You can ensure an economy that works to provide more people more money.

You can create a more stable family structure. You can eliminate pornography as a force that affects children adversely.

You can delete society of mindless algorithms and standardized tests which place too much pressure upon adults and children.

You can treat stop treating people as numbers.

You can stop human resource departments from treating people as widgets.

Of course, you can’t prevent a parent who dies of a heart attack, but you can create a healthier society.

You can put high taxes on deep fried foods, and foods that contain high fructose corn syrup.

You can give monetary inducements to the Medicaid and Medicare populations for keeping their weight within certain limits.

You can put intelligent controls on all addictive drugs that would find the healthiest balance between the lowest addiction rates and the least amount of organized crime.

You can deemphasize gambling in the United States.

If we are going to have a service economy forever, we can mandate that workers in the service economy must make a living wage.

We can do a lot of things.

All of these public measures can impact the family and the developing child.

None of these measures can impact me and my particular psychosexual identity because I am old and because I am who I am.

But we may be able to prevent so many people from moving down aberrant pathways.

I will leave you with this analogy.

A developing psychosexual identity is akin to an offshore oil platform being built upon the sea.

As long as the sea is calm, the platform is fine. Everything is as it should be.

But what happens when an earthquake or rogue wave hits the platform.

The platform becomes destabilized.

The structures begin to waver up and down, and move from side to side.

The men on the platform become frightened and furiously move to stabilize the platform. They take whatever materials they have on hand and Gerry rig a solution.

The solution isn’t perfect; indeed, the solution is twisted and perhaps a little ugly.

But it works. It holds the platform together and enables the men to survive.

Well, this is what happens with a developing psychosexual identity that has been traumatized.

The only difference is that there’s no one to come around and rescue an individual.

The men on the platform can call for help, get on a boat and escape. Later the oil platform can be towed into port and rebuilt.

A human being can not.

What you see is what you get.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

How to Succeed

Are you desiring to succeed in life?

How is this done?

I can illustrate a few principles.

In your line of work whatever that may be whether you are a butcher, a baker, a candlestick maker, or even an attorney or a physician, treat everybody the same.

Don’t play favorites even though you may have some.

Don’t classify people into movers and shakers in order to weed out the undesirables.

Don’t dismiss people because you either don’t like them or you find them beneath you.

Don’t get rid of people because they ask you a lot of questions.

Attend to everyone thoroughly with the same measure of respect.

There are going to be clients who try your patience. Work through these clients diligently. Forget about your own personal feelings. Take care of their needs first.

Put yourself second.

You may think that their questions are silly; it doesn’t matter.

You should listen to their concerns no matter how trivial because their concerns may be valid, and you may be wrong.

Or addressing their concerns will lead you to ask questions which will reveal greater problems that unaddressed will cause you grief.

If you are concerned about being sued for your own malfeasance and are desiring to protect your assets, let me buy you a ticket on the clue train.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Forget about obsessively shielding your assets. Ultimately no amount of legal stratagem will protect you from your own malfeasance.

The best way to prevent malfeasance is to diligently take care of your clients.

Dismiss none of their concerns.

You may want to go home at five or five-thirty. Too bad. You should answer all the telephone calls and texts that you receive during the day.

Follow up on everything as soon as possible.

If you take care of your clients, your clients will take care of you.

If you take care of your clients, your life will take care of itself.

Don’t be a fake. Be yourself.

The most important thing in business is to be yourself.

Don’t be pigeonholed into the ideal that academics try to cram you into.

If people don’t like you, that’s not a bad thing.

Pray that they tell their friends because it’s a good chance their friends think like them.

It’s better to have clients who are in sync with your personality.

You can’t be all things to all people.

That’s why you are always better off by being yourself.

By being yourself you are going to attract people like you.

When you run a business you are selling yourself.

Let’s look at pediatrics. Because that is what I do.

Most pediatricians practice the same way. Any pediatrician can prescribe an amoxicillin prescription. Any pediatrician can order a CBC.

Most pediatricians practice uniformly.

Where we differ is in our personalities.

Over the years I have been able to detect fairly well when a patient belongs not with me but with another pediatrician who I know.

One time I was in the office on a Saturday and a patient came into my office. As I was interviewing the patient for the first time I said to myself, this is a patient who looks as if they belong with Dr. Wells. Not more than a minute after I had that thought, the patient said to me, well, Dr. Wells wasn’t open today, so that’s why I came over here.

You want people in your practice or business who think like you and who have your values.

What you don’t want are people who don’t think like you, or who don’t have your values.

For example, I am a very laid-back pediatrician. I have never worn a white coat and a tie. I take a quite different approach to pediatrics than a traditional pediatrician who might wear a white coat and a tie.

That’s a good thing because there are many people out there in the world today.

There are people who like traditional pediatricians, there are people who like informal pediatricians like myself.

If I am myself, I am more likely to attract people who are likely to follow my orders.

That has made me more successful than I ever thought I would be.

Well, those are a few important points that I would make you if you are desirous of being successful in life.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Celebrity Puppets

Why are celebrities puppets?

They didn’t used to be.

Some always were, but many weren’t.

With the advent of television and radio in the past century, the United States increasingly became centralized.

Schools like Harvard began to “nationalize” themselves.

Harvard and the Harvard cabal grew stronger.

So did the mainstream media itself.

It didn’t start off that way.

Television, radio stations and newspapers were largely local operations that increasingly became consolidated as the decades rolled by.

Local operators were principally focused on making money, not an engineering society.

It was possible for a individual from nowhere named Elvis Presley to grow organically.

Plus, Elvis never felt the “need” to tell us what we should think about abortion or gay marriage.

He was too busy singing songs for the sake of our enjoyment

That’s less possible now.

As television grew up, so did the realization that television could be a powerful tool in manipulating people.

The celebrity became an instrumental tool in that manipulation.

Fifty to seventy-five years ago you saw celebrities who went their own way in voicing their own opinions.

Lots of celebrities spoke out against the Vietnam war even though Corporate America was in favor of the Vietnam war.

Nowadays, you almost never see a celebrity who goes against what Corporate America desires.

The Vietnam war was an important watershed moment in producing this shift.

It was the people of the United States who shut down the Vietnam war.

The celebrities were extremely important in moving the people.

Corporate America took notice.

They said to themselves at the higher levels where the owners of these corporations meet: This is never gonna happen again. We are going to not only own the media, but the social influencers as well. And we are going to own them lock stock and barrel.

Soon after the Vietnam war, Corporate America led by the Harvard cabal launched into high gear into consolidating the media on all levels.

You saw the rise of Clear Channel.

You saw the invasion of Corporate America into media organizations that were traditionally standalone operations.

General Electric became the owner of NBC.

This was a dangerous trend.

It’s still is.

We are now in a state of America where Corporate America and the media are the same.

The media is not just the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the major networks.

The media involves film, radio, television, sports, music, music venues, internet, books, magazines and newspapers at all levels.

Corporate America controls it all. They also control these so-called avant-garde media publications that pose as revolutionary, countercultural voices.

These would be these so-called hip publications with hip names like Daily Beast, Vox, and Buzzfeed.

With this vast control Corporate America has immense power to influence the American people.

It also has the power to make and break people who aspire to be celebrities.

You’ve heard of the saying that was spoken in Hollywood years ago: You’ll never work in this town again?

Well, this statement is more true than it ever was.

If you don’t go along with what Corporate America wants, you’re out.

If you do go along, you can make hundreds of millions of dollars.

Which celebrity is going to jeopardize an income like that?

Which celebrity given jets and fabulous houses is going to jeopardize that standing?

Not too many.

The Dixie Chicks spoke up against George Bush’s war in Iraq many years ago, and they were excommunicated.

Cornel West spoke up in defense of the Palestinians, and he was denied tenure at Harvard.

James Woods spoke out for conservative issues, and he was marginalized.

Jeffrey Sachs speaks out against the American empire, and he will be marginalized.

This is where we are.

Celebrity control by Corporate America was on display during the recent pandemic.

I don’t remember one major celebrity speaking out against the measures of Dr. Fauci.

Not one.

To a man they all parroted the government propaganda to shelter at home, socially distance, and flatten the curve.

And that is what happened.

The wealthy elite own the minds of the poor, and these wealthy elite are growing in strength.

You can thank your celebrity puppet for that.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Regime Change Rishi

So what was Liz Truss’s resignation all about?

As an American who is not exposed to British affairs all day long, I was somewhat mystified.

Why were the markets roiled over her policies?

I thought her energy cap for the poor was good. I thought her tax cuts for high earners making 160,000 pounds and up was good.

I don’t see people making 160,000 pounds as rich people who have the money to purchase yachts and mansions around the world.

There’s certainly not in Johnny Depp territory. Johnny Depp can afford to buy entire villages in France.

So what gives?

Liz Truss graduated from Oxford. She was certainly in the club.

Or so I thought.

Why would the power elite be upset with her?

Well, it sure wasn’t because of the policies.

It is now clear to me.

I was listening to Mike Graham’s show on Talk TV.

A caller, a native Brit, called in to inform the listeners that Truss’s apparent successor Rishi Sunak was a billionaire.

I immediately began to research him on Wikipedia.

Well, he’s not quite a billionaire yet. But he by virtue of marrying his wife is worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

Not only that.

He graduated from Oxford and Stanford, and he worked at Goldman Sachs.

So there you have it, he’s another Goldman Sachs jerk off placed in a high position of power.

I’ll bet you the power elite are salivating today.

What a winner for them.

They were the ones who created the bond crisis through their speculative investments and their compliant paid-off main stream media, which was able to spread the fear amongst other bond traders, and they’re the ones who will be the chief beneficiary of the regime change in the United Kingdom.

This is a dark day for the United Kingdom.

It’s also an enlightening day, because if you can’t see now that the game is rigged against regular people, you’ll never be able to see it.

Wait and see what happens now.

Another great crisis is sure to ensue which will put more money in the hands of big banks and big corporations.

A new round of money printing will begin which will make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

Corporations are getting an erection.

No bond market will be roiled now.

The specters of money printing and inflation will disappear now that the power elite have their man in charge.

Oh, but conspiracies can’t happen.



Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Liz Truss’s Plan

Liz Truss’s plan was a good plan.

What’s wrong with energy price caps for the poor?

What’s wrong with giving a tax break to people making 160,000 pounds a year?

Both measures would have put money in the pockets of regular people.

Let’s be clear here: people who make 160,000 pounds a year are not rich. Jeff Bezos is rich; Elon Musk is rich; Richard Branson is rich. A guy or gal who makes 160,000 pounds a year is upper middle class at best.

Putting more money in the hands of regular people is not trickle down economics. Trickle down economics is when you give the government more power to give more money to big corporations.

Where are the concerns about inflation when money is printed up for military spending?

They don’t exist; they only arise when a leader proposes printing up a few bucks to help regular people.

Where was the roiling of the bond market when money was printed up to benefit large corporations?

Where was the roiling of the bond market when money was printed up to send money to Ukraine? It didn’t exist.

With Liz Truss’s resignation, the message is clear to every political leader: do nothing to help the poor and middle class or we the bankers and the ruling elite will wreck you and your political career.

Liz Truss’s resignation is a bad deal for the citizens of the UK.

It’s not only a bad deal economically; it’s also a bad deal educationally.

It’s a bad deal educationally because it helps promote the canard – promoted by the wealthy elite and their mainstream media – that trickle down economics is equivalent to giving tax cuts to people who make a few more bucks.

As stated previously, putting more money in the hands of regular people is not trickle down economics. Trickle down economics is when you give the government more power to give more money to big corporations.

Giving the government more money to build projects which ostensibly help the poor is not trickle up economics. Trickle up economics is when you give regular people more money in their pockets to make choices which are more relevant to their lives.

The problem with public projects (NHS) is that the government is not always wise with the people’s money. More often than not a big cut of the money goes to connected government contractors who are cronies of the government officials.

Consequently what seems to be trickle up isn’t reality trickle down. It is trickle down because these large corporations who steal public money through grants and contracts don’t pass this extra loot on to their employees.

That’s why Liz Truss’s plan was a good plan.

Would her plan have led to inflation?

I don’t think so. I think her plan would have stimulated the economy.

With more money in their pockets, the confidence and well-being of people would have improved. That’s an important part of the economy that should not be underestimated.

Improving confidence is a deflationary move.

Greater confidence leads to greater innovation and greater productivity.

People who might not have started a business under austerity and gloom – that will now surely befall the UK – would have begun new businesses that would increase employment in the UK. More people would be making more money. Good times would return.

That is not a possibility now.

Now, the UK will descend slowly into the muck and mire of penny-pinching austerity.

That’s a shame.

Liz Truss’s plan was a good plan.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Message to Wharton School graduates.

Congratulations! You graduated from the Wharton School.

My condolences.

Now, it’s time for you to get a real education.

You certainly didn’t learn anything about the business world there.

What you learned from your ignorant professors there was how to stack a board room, how to set up offshore accounts, how to ship well-paying jobs from America to slave shops overseas, how to exploit people, how to walk around like you’re one of the best and brightest, how to pull Machiavellian tricks, how to take sneaky use of Roberts Rules of Order to your benefit, how to dress for success, how to cheat fellow Americans out of their hard earned money, and how to polarize wealth in the world to your advantage.

All of that will surely make you a lot of money.

None of that will do a damn bit of good for America the Republic.

Undoubtedly, you were taught at the Wharton school that the purpose of a business is to turn a profit.

That is not true.

The purpose of the business is to add value to society.

In the old days, they would say that the purpose of a business is to glorify God.

If the purpose of a business is only to turn a profit, then it will logically lead you to pulling every immoral trick in the book in order to maximize profits.

If the purpose of the business is to add value to society, then it becomes clear that your immorality doesn’t make society better, but worse.

I highly urge you to reject many of the lessons that you learned at the Wharton School.

Stacking a board drum, pulling sneaky tricks with Roberts Rules of Order, creating arcane stock class mechanisms that favor you over the common man, and shipping jobs overseas do not add value to society. They make you rich while enslaving millions, no billions.

Empires do not benefit anyone in the empire.

They do not benefit the people being exploited, nor do they benefit the citizens in the exploiting country.

Your Wharton School is part of the University of Pennsylvania that was founded by Dr. Benjamin Franklin many centuries ago.

Have any of your professors read The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin?

Has anyone in the administration of the Wharton School read The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin?

It’s doubtful that anyone there has read what he has to say.

The essence of The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin can be reduced to two words.

The take-home message of advice that Benjamin Franklin gave to young men (and women) in order to succeed in life was the following:

Imitate Jesus.

Does this sound like anything that you learned at the Wharton School?

I know damn well that it doesn’t, because I’ve seen the fruits of the current crop of Wharton School graduates.

Jesus to you and them is a third baseman from the Dominican Republic who plays for the San Diego Padres.

Jesus is as alien to you as you are to me.

I detest you.

I detest the Master of the Universe policies that you have foisted upon the peoples of the world.

You raped the people of Indonesia.

You raped the people of Haiti.

You raped the people of Central America.

You raped the people of Africa.

You raped the people of America.

You are all about yourself and your supposed glory.

Well, you will have no glory. You will be the architect of your own demise.

And it will be a welcome demise.

Here are the lessons you should have learned.

A penny saved is a penny earned.

Save for a rainy day.

A stitch in time saves nine.

When you help others you help yourself.

Pride preceded the fall.

Love your enemies, for they tell you your faults.

He that falls in love with himself will have no rivals.

There never was a good war or a bad peace.

He that lies down with dogs, shall rise up with fleas.

Better slip with foot than tongue.

OK, I threw in a couple of my own, but no matter. They sound like something Franklin would say and believe.

Now, does that sound like any of the knuckleheads that taught you at the Wharton School? Does that sound like any of the knuckleheads in government who have graduated from the Wharton School?

Does that sound like any of the arrogant, warmongering, prideful Wharton School jerk-offs that have run up the national debt so as to glorify themselves through endless war and oppressive Third World exploitation.

I doubt it.

So congratulations Wharton School graduate. You’ve joined the club.

You’ve succeeded in becoming a loser.

By the way fuck face, did Jesus ride around in a first class chariot? Was Jesus the richest guy in Bethlehem, or Nazareth, or anywhere else? Did Jesus advocate accumulating as much money as possible? Did Jesus wear bling?

Did you know that Jesus was an economist also?

He was. He instinctively understood that when you help others you help yourself.

Have you ever thought for one second that enabling the poor and middle class would have positive rewards for you?

Of course you haven’t. You’re too busy looking at yourself in the mirror.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Inflation and the Bogus UK Crisis

Let’s look at the UK’s economic crisis to explain a few points about the economy and the way that I view it.

To begin with, I think Liz Truss, the Prime Minister, had a decent plan to revive the economy in the UK.

Obviously, the power elite did not agree with her.

When you see the power elite of the world line up against someone or some policy, you should start thinking that maybe that policy is the way to go.

If the elites are going to be that unified and angry about something, it must have benefit for you.

Remember, our elites in this day and age are no different than Nero and Caligula. They are psychopathic nut jobs who are addicted to money accumulation. They love to stare at their piles of cash.

Thank you Leo Iacocca. Thank you for ushering in the age of unrelenting CEO greed.

Let’s be clear, as I have stated before, this bond crisis in the United Kingdom was manufactured by the power elite in order to trash the Prime Minister‘s economic plan which would have been good for the regular people in the United Kingdom.

Why do I think this way?

Let’s start with a definition of inflation. The inflation index is equivalent to the number of eco-available people divided by the amount of eco-available dollars.

If we increase eco-available people, that is a deflationary move. If we increase eco-available dollars, that is an inflationary move.

The Prime Minister‘s plan had two key components: energy caps for the poor, and tax cuts for the upper middle class, people making over 160,000 pounds per year, which is about $160,000 per year.

An important point: People who make 160,000 pounds to 300,000 pounds per year are not rich.

Elon Musk is rich. Mark Cuban is rich. Richard Branson is rich. Warren Buffett is rich. Charles Munger is rich. These people are billionaires.

People who make 160,000 pounds to 300,000 pounds per year are not rich.

They don’t have their own jets. They don’t have palatial estates in the countryside. They don’t have several homes around the world. They are not rich.

They don’t own mansions that you see in Downton Abbey.

They are not Mr. Darcy.

The argument that the Prime Minister was giving tax cuts to the rich is totally bogus.

OK, let’s proceed.

When Liz Truss, the Prime Minister, suggests caps on energy prices to the poor, she is putting more money in their pocket, thus increasing choice and human welfare. When the Prime Minister gives tax cuts to the well-off, she is putting more money in their pocket thus increasing choice and human welfare.

This increases the eco-availability of the people. This is a deflationary move. This is offset by the printing of money which is an inflationary move. The net affect is zero.

Okay then, what happens when the government prints up money and gives it to big corporations? The printing of money is an inflationary move; however, unlike the prior example, the printing of money is not offset by greater eco-availability of people which is a deflationary move.

This does not happen because giving money to large corporations decreases the eco-availability of people which is an inflationary move.

Why would this be?

Principally because corporations in this day and age do not pass along the money to regular people in the form of wage and salary increases. The money now goes to CEOs who put it in their rich piles of cash.

These rich piles of cash now are transferred to other rich piles of cash.

The money while stored in financial institutions is not used to benefit people.

This is helped along by higher interest rates and banking practices which make it more difficult for regular people to get loans.

Thus, while the total money supply has increased, the eco-availability of the people has not increased.

Thus you get inflation.

In summary, printing up of money will not cause inflation if the money goes to the people; printing up of money will cause inflation if the money goes to wealthy billionaires and large corporations who sequester the money away from themselves.

Now, of course, all of this is contingent upon having a healthy working environment which produces stuff both physical and abstract. Of course, inflation will increase if you give money to people to sit around and watch television. Or if you pay them to remain in their house hiding from a virus that they cannot hide from.

The entire point of this argument is to point out that the fears of inflation that were raised when Liz Truss offered forth her economic plan are bogus. These fears were raised by the elites and their puppets in the media in order to trash any plan that would put money in regular people’s pockets.

The elites become infuriated when regular people have a few bucks that might challenge their immoral and illegitimate tyranny.

It was the elites who created the fear that caused the plunging of the bond market in the United Kingdom.

Why did the bond market suddenly plunge at this point in time within days after the Prime Minister made her announcement?

These titans of industry had effectively been buying bonds on margin for a long time. Why did this crisis happen now?

It happened right now because the elites have the power to create fear in the markets which will cause these crises.

The elites control the minds of men.

They created this fear, and they based this fear on a faulty understanding of inflation and how inflation comes about.

Actually, they don’t have a faulty understanding of inflation at all. The elites know full well what they are doing.

They never raise bogus concerns about inflation when it comes to printing up money for large corporations. They never raise bogus concerns about inflation when it comes to printing up money for war. Only, when someone suggests printing up money to help regular people do these concerns come about.

Of course they do. The power elite in the United Kingdom (and the United States) are psychopaths. They are sick people who are addicted to money.

They created a bogus crisis solely to benefit themselves.

They are no different than King Louis and his whore wife Marie-Antoinette who partook of pheasant and fine wine at Versailles while the people in Paris rotted away.

A few bucks for the peasants in Paris?

Forget it!


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

The NFL Must Change

The NFL must change.

The recent concussion of Tua Tagovailoa proves it.

The concussion protocols are a joke.

Of course they are.

Why would we permit a player who had suffered a concussion to go back out after one to two weeks when we know that a player with a bad sprain or fracture requires four to eight weeks?

What’s going on with a concussion?

The brain is striking the inside of the skull.

Normally you have tissue that suspends the brain and prevents it from striking the skull during normal activity.

When the brain hits the skull the tissue is stretched and weakened. That is why when you suffer one concussion you are more likely to suffer another.

This tissue will repair but it may never repair to the effectiveness it had previously.

Thus there is the need for rest.

In my practice, ideally, I recommend a minimum of six weeks reprieve from sports.

My experience has taught me that the healthy human body repairs itself at a rate of 50% every two weeks. Thus at six weeks of rest the tissues generally achieve a repair effectiveness of 87.5%.

This isn’t perfect, but it’s better than the silly concussion protocol that now exists.

Of course a patients memory and cognition should be tested but only within the context of six weeks rest.

Naturally the NFL doesn’t want that.

It wants its stars to keep playing.

If the stars don’t play, the fans will walk away.

Too bad.

What the NFL needs to do is change its way of play.

Tackling must be banned.

The game must transform itself into some hybrid between soccer, rugby and Irish football.

Concussions must be minimized.

Here’s the thing. It’s not just traumatic encephalopathy that must be prevented but other trauma related injuries as well.

What the NFL is not looking at are the number of dissecting aortic aneurysms that NFL players may be suffering.

You see, the human body is not made for football. It’s not made for two men running into each other at 15 miles per hour.

The additive force of 15 miles per hour is equal to 30 miles per hour on a direct hit.

Yes, the pads cushion some of that blow, but repetitive stress at a combined cushioned force of 15 miles per hour can do a lot of damage over time.

Let’s look at what happens when you fall off a building keeping in mind that each foot of drop equals 1 MPH.

If each story equals 10 feet, then a one story drop yields 10 MPH, two story 20 MPH, and three story 30 MPH.

What happens if you fall one story. Assuming you don’t hit your head, you’ll probably get a bad sprain. You may break a bone.

How about two stories? You’ll break a bone.

How about three stories? You’ll not only break a bone there’s a good chance you’ll die.

How about four stories? I’m sorry, but you are going to die.

Why do we die?

What’s the reason? What’s going on?

We die because the connective tissues that maintain the integrity of our blood vessels fracture.

We don’t die of broken bones. We die because blood vessels rupture. When the blood vessels rupture, we can’t get blood to the vital organs. The blood pools in areas it’s not supposed to pool. Blood pressure drops. Consciousness is lost to the brain. The body dies.

I am arguing that the repetitive trauma that football players suffer is doing damage to the aorta and other vital blood vessels in the body.

Football players are dying early not just because of traumatic brain encephalopathy.

They are dying early for other reasons as well.

The human body is not made for football.

It’s one thing for eight year old boys to run at each other. They can’t run very fast, and they don’t weigh a lot.

It’s a different ballgame with adults. 250 to 300 pound football players do weigh a lot, and they can run fast.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

You Made Your Bed

Dear Harvard graduate,

It’s not my fault that you went to Harvard.

You did that on your own.

You became seduced.

You became seduced by greatness.

You didn’t even know that you were being seduced.

You didn’t know because the seduction began when you were a small child.

You were roped into believing in the greatness of men.

As were we all.

You were regaled by the media of the supposed greatness of people like FDR, Eisenhower, Churchhill, and so forth.

Of course, they weren’t great men. They were robbers of people’s potential. They were puppets of the empire, and their true goal was to gain money and wealth for the powerful elite.

They did not stand up for the common man. Indeed, they compromised the common man through war and foreign exploitation.

These are the people who are talked about.

You wanted to be one of those people, and because you are smart, it was only natural that you could be one of them too.

To achieve this end, our society conditioned you to believe in the greatness of Harvard University and its ability to mold great men.

This is how you became seduced.

You wanted to be one of the people who are talked about.

You made a deal with the devil.

To be fair, you didn’t know that you made a deal with the devil. You were only seventeen years at the time.

But you did.

You went to Harvard, and the grooming stepped up a notch.

You began to meet important people at Harvard. Famous actors stopped by at the Hasty Pudding Club.

Maybe Tom Cruise. Maybe Brad Pitt.

Prominent politicians gave guest lectures.

Your professors personally knew the so-called movers and shakers in society.

Perhaps, you were even invited to parties and soirées where royalty was present.

Hey look, there is Prince William.

Gradually, gradually, gradually the Harvard machine indoctrinated you.

They roped you into the cult.

When you got married, an announcement was made in the New York Times. Then when you had a baby, that announcement was made as well.

The Sulzberger clan (the publishers of the NYT) are part of the Harvard machine. They engage in deep propaganda, so deep that you don’t even know you’re being propagandized.

Your name in the New York Times! Just think of it!

Why, you must be important! Why, you must be better than other people! Why, you must be a demigod!

Why, why, why you must even be God’s representative on Earth!

That’s a heavy experience.

When you went to apply for a job, large corporations took notice. The big guys coveted you.

You were put on the fast track, and you didn’t even know it.

Of course, you were doing it yourself, you convinced yourself.

How could it have been any other way, you reasoned.

When you wanted to write a book, it was a piece of cake for you to get an agent and a hearing with a major publishing house.

That’s what the Harvard machine can do for you.

It’s not just a school; it’s a connection network.

It’s not my fault that this happened to you.

It is my problem though.

And it’s your problem as well.

It’s your problem because you think that because you went on to Harvard, that you are going to be invited into the true power structure of the United States and by extension the world.

But you’re not.

The true power structure is only going to give you a taste of power.

For that taste of power, they are going to use you in their money making rackets.

If you are a politician, they will humiliate you, then, if they decide to do so, toss you away into the wastebasket.

Have you heard of the Rothschilds?

They are a very wealthy family, and they have a lot of power in the world.

One branch of the family lives in the United Kingdom.

According to Evelyn de Rothschild, the Rothschilds are not part of British aristocracy. Their family is too new. They have only been in England for a few hundred years. There are families who have been there eight hundred years.

How about your family, Mr. And Ms. Harvard graduate?

You came from regular people, didn’t you?

Do you seriously think that American aristocracy is going to let you run the place?

Think again.

Think of all the Harvard Cabal graduates who have been thrown under the bus by the ruling elite.

Bill Clinton, Scooter Libby, Henry Cisneros, and more.

How about Alexander Acosta? He was the lawyer who was working on the Jeffrey Epstein case in Florida. He was the one who got Jeffrey Epstein off on a light sentence.

Alexander Acosta’s political career is over. He couldn’t win a race for dog catcher in a one-man town.

I’m sure he wanted to go far in politics.

He’s not going to go far. He’s another guy who joined the cabal thinking that he was going to be in the power structure.

They used him.

I’m sure the cabal will take care of him in some way, but, alas, his name is ruined.

Is that what you want, Mr. and Ms. Harvard graduate?

Well, sorry to tell you, it doesn’t matter what you want anymore. That’s what you signed up for.

By now, you have already received many of the perks that the cabal can offer, and one of these days the cabal may ask you for a favor.

Here is my advice to you: if you want to retain your privileges, if you want to keep your first class ticket on the jet, you damn well better do what they tell you to do.

If you don’t do what they tell you to do, you’re going to find out just how important that cabal was to your success.

And it won’t be pretty for you.

That’s the reality. That’s what you bought into.

That’s the way it works.

You made your bed, you sleep in it.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved