New Shared links now take you directly to the source!

All links shared by fellow members now take you directly to the source. Click on a video, something to do or a yellow comments icon and you’ll stay on Living well and doing good just got faster!



“Whatever you are, be a good one.”
— Abraham Lincoln

I am good at giving a damn.


  • BlueCollarCritic commented on a link

    Why I'm Building A New Clean Plate Culture via

    BlueCollarCriticabout 1 month ago

    Noble intentions however the problem isn't simply that kids and Adults eat too much but that they eat too much junk food including the kind disguised as healthy or non-junk food.

    Thanks to abusive actions against the soil by corporate farming and harm done to the environment by illegal and unethical chemical dumping (also by corporations) the soil has been depleted of its nutrients and this has been passed onto the foods grown in these soils. Just 2 generations back when most of the food grown in America was done by small and or independent farms (back before government got involved in regulation and price fixing) the average American was able to eat less and get more from that because the solis were rich. The small farmer and independent (or family owned) farms regularly rotated use of the soils. More importantly is the fact that they weren’t using that crap from Monsanto which in the long run has caused more harm than any good (assuming Monsanto had good intentions which is debatable) that was marketed to the public.

    Kids are obese and unhealthy because they are being raised on fast food crap like McDonalds. However the problem does not end with the fast food chains. The food we buy from grocery stores (and other food sellers) are often grown in depleted soils and so the same portion of food today has far less nutrients then say 50 years ago. This means your body has to consume more in volume to get the level of nutrients it needs. If you think this is wild conspiracy theory then just look at areas of the world where the modern Americanized Corporate controlled farming practice has yet to take over. The Amish are an excellent example because they have been steadfast about keeping out the corporate way of life from farming to politics.

    Generally speaking the Amish who live an agrarian lifestyle and who abstain from modern day practices like vaccinations have a far better health record than any other group in the world. There are some Amish communities where a portion have been vaccinated but in general there are few vaccinations among Amish communities. Within an Amish community of 25,000 in Indiana a study was done and it showed that the rate of allergic sensitization was less then %8, a number far lower than the rest of the world. The Amish also have a near %0 rate of autism because the number of Amish born persons with autism is in the single digits and that’s among all the Amish communities. Within the Indiana Amish community only 1 child had autism and it just happened that the child was one of the few who had been vaccinated. While correlation does not always equal causation there is a point where you have to ask yourself just how many correlations do we accept before we start asking ourselves if it really is just an unusually large number of correlations? I can say that all humans breathe and all humans die and so the correlation is that if you breather you will die but that sounds absurd and it for good reason. The reverse is also true. There are just so many correlations that can occur naturally before it becomes blatantly obvious that it’s not just a correlation.

    The Amish also drink raw milk which is non-pasteurized. That means their milk is not nuked/radiated before they consume it. This means the milk they use has to be as clean as possible. In modern day dairy farms the milk often has blood and other little goodies in it that the FDA allows because the milk is radiated via the pasteurization and so any supposedly bad things in the milk are killed before it is sent to the stores for consumption. This also cooks out much of the good in milk. It’s interesting to note that more than a few states have treated raw milk like a drug or alcohol making it illegal to carry across state borders. In some states/cities you can’t sale raw milk to the public, you have to have a private group or club with registered members. Within one Amish community

    It’s an outrage that in America you can be raided by SWAT team members with their weapons drawn just for having raw milk and raw milk products like cheese. There is a well-known video of a store in California (Rawesome foods) that was raided by weapons drawn law enforcement solely because the private members only club had Raw milk and raw milk products. There are many testimonies from families stating that when they put their child on a raw milk diet their health improved. Many of these law abiding citizens are seen as criminals by the state because they dare to defy the state and decide what food they can eat. It’s not like as if we are talking about the consumption of a drug, this is milk.

    I applaud your desire to want to make the world a better place but the solution is not less its more and that’s more freedom for the individual to choose what he/she grows, sells and most importantly consumes. So long as government dictates what we can grow, sale and consume we will continue to live in a quasi-prison where those in charge tell us what we can do, when we can do it and what punishment we get if we try to practice any of our constitutionally enumerated rights that the state does not have the authority to challenge but does.

    Join the discussion

  • BlueCollarCritic replied to a comment by scientastic

    In Case You Can't See the Difference Between The Affordable Care Act and Rocket Science via


    scientastic5 months ago

    Prevention is not rocket science, but it doesn't require the national takeover and complete bungling of our health insurance industry, dumping millions out of their current health plans, and driving up costs for vast numbers of people!

    As you say in the article, "how can we as *individuals* invest in prevention? ...we can start by taking charge of our *own* health and becoming our *own* health advocates." This does not require a massive, complex and incompetent federal bureaucracy! It just requires a bit of responsibility and common sense.

    If the government must have anything to do with it, the best solution for our skyrocketing health care *costs* that I've seen from government is HSAs paired with high-deductible insurance plans. I first encountered these in liberal California, and they make great sense because they take out the middle man (the insurance company) for the vast majority of non-critical health care transactions. You pay the doctor directly, so you have an incentive to keep the costs down. However, the money is there for you in your account and can be used only for health-related costs, so you have no excuse not to use it for preventive care. Coupled with common sense, this kind of plan has been very satisfactory to my family and many others, whether I was working for an employer or self-employed throughout the years. With the "ACA" these plans are being dialed back.

    BlueCollarCritic5 months ago


    Well said. However the Affordable Care Act is working perfectly, exactly as planned. It just looks like as if it’s not working because the media in conjunction with the government is presenting Obamacare as something its not. Obamacare was never designed to provide less expensive insurance and or better coverage to Americans. Obamacare is large scale ‘insurance industry targeted’ corporate welfare. The goal; was to provide a system in which insurance companies could replace no-profitable/less profitable plans with more profitable plans via the following:

    1) Require all persons of legal age to buy insurance. This alone should have set of red alerts across the board but it didn’t and that is quite possibly the saddest part to this Obamacare nightmare, that the majority are clueless to how forcing people to engage in commerce is unethical, and unconstitutional even if the corrupt legal system has said ‘Its OK because we are going to call it a tax’.
    2) Erect a framework that requires coverage for services least likely to be used while raising deductibles and premiums. By providing services that are either less likely to be used or that will be used by only a small percent of the population the insurance company is able to reduce its annual pay outs while increasing its monthly/annual income.
    3) Including in that framework language that allows the healthcare insurance industry to drop less profitable plans by requiring that all plans include services currently not found in most existing plans.
    4) Engage with mainstream media and other entertainment providers in a campaign to paint Obamacare as something its not.

    The Affordable Healthcare Act is quite possibly the largest handover of money and power from government to the private/corporate sector after TARP.

    Join the discussion

  • BlueCollarCritic commented on a link

    Going to Feed the Homeless This Holiday? They Need Help on Other Days, Too via


    BlueCollarCritic5 months ago

    Handing Out Food To The Homeless Will Get You Arrested in some cities so be sure to check your local lawas before you engage in this charitable act. Yes it is absolutely ridicolous that any level of government be it local, satte or Federal believes it has the right to tell you that you can't help out those in need by proviidng food but thats exactly how it is in some cities.

    I imagine its not illegal on skid row (else why would the articles author promote handing out free food) but other areas like Chicago have different laws about what you can do and can not do in public and in some areas handing out food for free to anyone will get you arrested.

    Think thats just consporacy non-sense? Google it!

    Join the discussion

  • BlueCollarCritic commented on a link

    A Good Design Glossary to Decode the Jargon via

    BlueCollarCriticabout 1 year ago

    Social Design - "Is an umbrella term used to describe any design done for the public good or with the express intent of positively impacting society"

    This is a classic example of verbal misdirection; saying something that implies one meaning but which is designed to allow for an alternative interpretation. Lawyers specializing in corporate protection make heavy use of this so as to provide their clients with protection without letting the customers know it. The Federal Government as well as State and Local level governments also use it to enable/allow actions that the public would otherwise be against.

    In the case of “Social Design” we get a definition that on the outside sounds perfectly reasonable and well-meaning but for which there is no honesty. Everything in that definition is intended to “imply” positive and well-meaning thoughts without actually committing to exacts. Case in point, who gets to decide what is defined as the “public good“ ? Who determines if some action is “positively impacting society”? The answer is, the government.

    What you will not find defined is any protection of the individual and their rights as guaranteed in the US Constitution or even in State level constitutions and that is by design. In order to convince the public to let government take actions that would violate ones individual rights, freedoms and liberties a justification for the good of the majority must be made. This is the true intent of “Social Design” and all the other misleading terms surrounding it such as sustainable growth and sustainable living.

    Never believe anything government tells you without having proof. As a wise man once said, government is like fire. It is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. The big difference is that fire will not like to your face nor use deceptive terminology to convince you to give up your rights and protections for the betterment of all. Fire is honest about how its going to burn you if you let it grow beyond your control.

    Join the discussion

  • BlueCollarCritic replied to a comment by Joshua Terry

    Election Day Is a Perfect Time to Think About Our Interdependence  via


    Joshua Terryover 1 year ago

    I have long been of the belief that American citizens should not have the automatic "Right" to vote. Before your ire bubbles up at this statement, hear me out! I believe that all Americans regardless of even age should be allowed to meet a single requirement in order to obtain their voting "Right" for an election. What requirement? A short test, covering the position itself and the stance of the candidates who are running.

    Seem drastic? Perhaps, but elections today are run more like popularity contests. The average voter knows more about this seasons American Idol contestants than any of the people running for office. I have long held that the "Right" to vote is not a right at all but instead, a responsibility and a privilege. People have the individual right to be uniformed, but when that right affects a larger group it actually infringes on freedom rather than supporting it.

    Consider the following scenario for a moment. You, your spouse, and 4 children are hungry. To maintain fairness meals are voted on. As parents you represent the informed minority, your children represent the uninformed majority. Why don't we do things this way? Because every meal would be McDonalds! Why? Because the majority is uninformed and thus incapable of making informed decisions.

    I believe the statement "Majority Rule" should be revised to "Informed Majority Rule". I would rather count the vote of a 15 year old who understands the issues on which he is voting, than the average person that pulls a handle simply to fit a designated label (Democrat or Republican). Americans should have the right to remain uninformed, but that privilege should come at the cost losing the right to lead.

    Just my two cents, but I'm open to opposing views if you have them.

    BlueCollarCriticover 1 year ago

    “I have long held that the "Right" to vote is not a right at all but instead, a responsibility and a privilege. People have the individual right to be uniformed, but when that right affects a larger group it actually infringes on freedom rather than supporting it.” ~ @Joshua

    I understand your frustration and desire to limit the important act of voting to only those person who treat it seriously but the problem with any kind of test is it opens the door for voting restrictions and that in turn opens the door for future voter discrimination based on lesser ideals.

    Incremental-ism is the weapon of choice of tyrants and dictators because it allows one to do just about anything so long as you’re willing to wait for it and to get there via small steps. If a test were a required part of voting it would be just the first step of many down a path to where only those person with inside connections and power/money are lowed to vote. The founding fathers never dreamed of an America were persons of voting age would not take the act of voting seriously. They fought and died to secure freedom and the right to elect their representatives. To the people of that time and era the idea of a citizen voting for someone based on some meaningless reason is as foreign to them as the idea of using an out-house is to us today.

    Instead of requiring one to pass a test to vote, require that all who run for political office must sign a pledge/promise which outlines what they will and will not od and in that pledge they agree to voluntarily vacate their post before their term is up if the fail to live up to their promises. Instead of putting the burden on the voter place it instead on the person seeking the seat of power.

    You are however wrong about voting being a responsibility and a privilege.

    Join the discussion

  • BlueCollarCritic commented on a link

    Election Day Is a Perfect Time to Think About Our Interdependence  via


    BlueCollarCriticover 1 year ago

    We are NOT interdependent! If we were then disconnected tribes in faraway lands of ancient history would have not been able to survive.

    We are interconnected but that’s not the same as interdependent. Interdependent says that I cannot without you. I cannot eat without your assistance to plant crops. I cannot live without your assistance to provide shelter. Every adult human being that is not inflicted with some real disease or aliment has the ability to survive without the assistance of others.

    The push for interdependency is a push for collectivism which is a push for forced equality which in turn requires the use of force to enforce said equality. Dependency leads to resentment which leads to hate which leads to a very bad place.

    Promote uniqueness, sovereignty and the individual; not the group!

    You may have had good intentions with your interdependence push but the idea of interdependence is rooted in collectivism which promotes the idea of the whole over the individual. This is very dangerous as it is how the evil come to power over the rest of us. The only way to ensure people are protected from others mistakes is understand that while we are interconnected we are not interdependent.

    Join the discussion

  • BlueCollarCritic commented on a link

    What You Won't Hear in the Presidential Debates: A Response to Racism in America  via


    BlueCollarCriticover 1 year ago

    I guess I shouldn't be surprised that an article titled "What You Won't Hear In The Presidential Debates" doesn't actually discuss the taboo things that will be avoided in the presidential debate like the lies both candidates have perpetuated or how they 2 have far more in common then they would like to admit to?

    A "What You Won't Hear In The Presidential Debate" article SHOULD list things like:

    Why Have You [President Obama] failed to keep your promise to bring the troops home, to end the unnecessary wars America is engaged in and to shut down the torture chamber called Guantanamo?

    Or this one..

    Why Governor Romney do you say one thing and do the total opposite until its election time when you go right back to saying you will do what you said you would do before but never actually did?

    After all we can’t expect our elected representatives to held accountable for their doing the complete opposite of what they said they would do when they were campaigning, now can we?

    Its just beyond ridiculous to think that we should judge a person by their deeds and not by their words right? Because if we elected politicians based on how many of their promises they kept instead of how good a liar they are then we would find ourselves voting for people like Ron Paul and the media has taught us that Ron Paul is unelectable. Right? After all the media are far more intelligent and far more qualified then we the public to tell us who we should vote for and who we should ignore, right?

    It matters not if a Ron Paul or some other non-establishment chosen and endorsed candidate actually represents what we would really like to see in a president, we have to put aside our wants and desires and instead put the needs of the corporate leaders and other special interest parties first. After all they provide the majority of funding for both political party candidates and so don’t they deserve more representation and more say so in how our government is run?

    If there’s one thing you can always be guaranteed will never be heard at a presidential debate that consists of only the 2 established party’s approved candidates it is the TRUTH. To an establishment politician that is bought and paid for the TRUTH is a vile creature that must be avoided at all costs.

    Join the discussion

  • BlueCollarCritic commented on a link

    Can Schools Teach Entrepreneurship? via


    BlueCollarCriticover 1 year ago

    A more relevant and far more important question is how long before the government eliminates the ability for one to be an entrepreneur?

    Throughout the country local law enforcement have been shutting down lemonade stands and fining and or arresting the operators of these unlawful establishments engaged in pirate commerce. The local bureaucrats are shutting down as many acts of open trade and commerce as they can effectively ending the practice of non-government sanctioned commerce and trade. Some local governments have gone so far as to enact local statues that ban the use of cash purchases for used items such as the case with yard sales and the like. Sounds crazy doesn’t it? That’s why its been able to fly under the main stream media radar for the most part.

    Before worrying about where entrepreneurship is learned/taught you should first focus on how to protect your right to engage in free and open trade/commerce with fellow American citizens so that you will have a foundation from which to become an entrepreneur.

    Join the discussion

  • BlueCollarCritic replied to a comment by murky303

    What You Won't Hear in the Presidential Debates: Getting Dark Money Corruption Out of Politics via


    murky303over 1 year ago

    Yes, I have something to say. Citizens United didn't start big money corruption of the electoral process. Unions did, through their own PACs. No one ever mentions union PACs, yet almost every American has to pay into them indirectly because almost every public school system is either a closed union shop or exerts incredible, illegal, against-the-Taft-Hartley Act pressure on teachers to join teachers' unions and contribute to political speech they have NO WAY of helping shape.

    BlueCollarCriticover 1 year ago


    Citizens United DID however grant legal status to the bribery of a public official (they use to be public servants) .

    Join the discussion

  • BlueCollarCritic is now following…