2010 is almost upon us and this new economy has inspired me to make resolutions in accordance with it. In fact, there is only one such resolution that makes any sense.

  1. ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR MONEY

     I figure that will pretty much solve all of my problems. First of all, I would no longer have to go to my extremely boring and irritating job, nor would I need a car. The primary reason for owning a car is so that I have a way to get to work. Without the need for money, I would not need a job and I would also not need a car. I could easily ride a bike to the gym or to the grocery, but my workplace is 15 miles distant and a safe bike route would likely exceed 25 miles, nor would it even be remotely close to safe. The United States is designed around the automobile; the whole place here is completely fucked up, in my opinion. The roads themselves increase the carbon dioxide entering the atmosphere, since no plant life can grow on them and live for very long.
     Anyway, I can't eliminate the need for money without eliminating myself, so I must accept this horrible reality in which I exist. It's important to understand that I did not design the United States, nor am I in charge. There's nothing I can do to make things better. For example, why is fast food legal?
     Most people are not aware that fast food is unhealthy; this is why it is legal. Also, most people are not aware that cigarettes are unhealthy, despite the massive negative marketing against them. However, I don't actually believe a lack of knowledge can explain why those things are legal. The reason why they are legal is because they generate a lot of money in taxes that the government can use to accomplish their goals. This explains why certain drugs, such as cocaine and marijuana, are not legal. The goverment would have trouble taxing them, so they simply make them illegal. This also explains why prostitution is not legal; it would be difficult to collect that tax money.
     Why do I have to sit down and figure this stuff out, these basic things about reality? Why, for instance, are we not taught in grade school to avoid fast food? Even worse, why do they serve fast food in grade schools? The United States is not a very intelligent nation. This is why many Asian nations completely destroy our students' test scores. In the United States, we WANT extremely fat people with vast overflowing bellies to be able to buy 8 f---ing boxes of Dove ice cream bars with food stamps. I'm not making this shit up; I've seen it. I saw a very large black man and his wife buy vast quantities of junk food with food stamps at my local Schnucks grocery store. I was thinking to myself, Why does the government support this bullshit? They gave that fat couple the food stamps. Why? Why? Why? Why is a fat person allowed to get junk food for free? If a man with a very large stomach walks into a building and tries to get food stamps, he should be turned away, simply on account of the fact that he is well-fed. That man does not need more food - he needs knowledge. He needs to know that simply by changing his diet he can lose the gigantic mountainous distension flowing over his belt. And he can save a lot of money, too. There is no need for food stamps if one eats healthy, because that type of food is much cheaper.
     You can not imagine how angry this country makes me, because we have the ability to make it better. There are people like myself that know how to make it better. It seems to me that the first thing to do would be to remove all of the lawmakers and politicians and replace them with people that want to improve the country. For example, the lawmakers and politicians we have right now do not want to improve the United States. They are not making laws to outlaw fast food, for example. They are not making laws to ban cigarettes. They are not making laws against obesity. My God, if you like looking at giant amorphous bellies and asses, then come to the United States, THE LAND OF DISGUSTING FAT PEOPLE THAT ARE FULLY SUPPORTED BY THE GOVERNMENT.

1) tell fedex to suck my balls (already accomplished)
2) be done with the mortgage by summer
3) move the hell away from chicago to the AZ desert
4) never see snow again

Read even more books than I did this year

Currently on the docket:
- Glenn Beck: Arguing with Idiots
- Bernard Goldberg: Arrogance: Rescuing America from the Media Elite
- Bernard Goldberg: A Slobbering Love Affair, the Torrid Romance between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media
- Once Upon a Nightwish: The Official Biography 1996-2006
- The United States of Wal-Mart (who I ironically work for)
- Dave Berry: Boogers Are My Beat
- F&*K: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties

To Jodo: Are you kidding? Anything that's fun at least costs eight bucks.

Also, if you make no money and you don't pay for your goverment provided health care, won't they throw you in jail when you fail to pay your fines? That'll take care of that homeless problem real quick.

Sounds like you've read enough Glenn Beck already

I usually resolve to make no resolutions, it's the only one that ever sticks. =p

LOL. Actually, I thought that up after reading an article about Baucus' bill on MSN; I don't think I've read anything from Beck that directly focuses on the health care bill yet (indirectly I'm sure), but their probably is something in the newest book about it.

Add Goldberg's "100 people screwing up America" for an entertaining read.

Welcome in advance! So long as you stay away from the higher elevations (Flagstaff for instance) then #4 won't be an issue. I've been here 24 years and I think I've seen snow twice and missed it once. In all cases said snow was gone by 11:00 AM.

Resolutions for me:

1. Finish my degrees
2. Exercise regularly
3. Eat healthier
4. Lose 10 pounds (should follow from 2 and 3)
5. Refill my savings account (probably the hardest resolution for me to accomplish)
6. Start writing music again
7. Be more greedy

Number seven is an odd one, but it actually does make sense. Honest. I'm way too much of a doormat and I need to stop letting everyone walk all over me. Time for me to call some of the shots.

Jodo, amazing, amazing post. I completely agree, man; America is no longer the land of the free, it's the land of the fat and the lazy. Have a cholesterol problem? Just take a pill! Why get off your ass and exercise or improve your diet when you can just pop some medication and continue to demolish your body from the inside out as well as keep the pharma companies' pockets full? Why pay 99 cents for an organic apple - that is not only alive but also full of enzymes and uncooked and plentiful nutrients, things that your body was designed to ingest and process - when you can spend that same 99 cents on a McDonald's hamburger that's full of all kinds of artificial shit, chemicals, refined sugars and hard-to-digest animal flesh that will leave your gut and pipework in ruins? Why treat your mind, body and soul with love and healthy food when you can just rip open a bag of Doritos and sit in front of the TV all day and completely miss out on the beautiful experience of being alive?

People tell me I'm "too skinny", which I think is a load of crap. I'm almost 6 feet tall and I weigh between 145 and 150 pounds. I'm very lean, but I have strong and noticeable muscles in my upper body and my legs are cut. My clothes fit my body snugly without being too tight and don't hang off of my frame. The way I see it is that I'm the perfect size for my height, but I look "too skinny" compared to the amount of heavy/fat/obese people that are living in America, so therefore it's my body that looks weird, not everyone else's. Then again, I don't eat any processed foods (not even canned vegetables or fruits), I'm a raw foodist, I eat mostly organic foods, I exercise and practice yoga regularly, I stay hydrated, I don't intake any refined or processed sugars (raw agave nectar is amazing and a naturally low glycemic sweetener), I rarely eat out at restaurants (unless it's the one I'm working at or is another organic and raw restaurant), and so on and so forth. Humans are the only species on the planet that either have or cause cholesterol problems or cancer problems or serious health problems on other species, but we're also the only ones that process food, enslave other species for material and financial gain and take advantage of the gifts that nature has given us. The way I see it, the closer to nature one is, the closer one is to his or her true potential and optimal health, and if that makes me "too skinny" compared to someone who's carrying an extra 40 pounds on his or her body, then I guess I'm just going to be "too skinny", despite the fact that I feel amazing and am living the life I want to live.

Anyway. I don't have any new year's resolutions of my own, for a few reasons. It's mostly because I will resolve to do anything regardless of the time of the year, and I think that waiting until January 1st is just an excuse to put something off until the future. If I want to make a change, I'll make that change now, not wait until a specified date. (Just a personal preference and mindset; no offense to anyone here, of course!) I also think the Gregorian calendar is a bunch of horseshit and prefer to see the lunar cycles as a way to gauge "fresh starts" instead of the beginning of the next calendar year. I believe that's nature's way of reminding us that things go through cycles and that everything begins anew; I don't need some dead Pope from the 1500's telling me when cycles should start and end. HOWEVER. If I have to mention something that I want to do in the new year, it is to stay healthy, to continue to give my body and soul the gift of raw, organic, whole foods, to enjoy the path that I'm on and to be thankful for wherever it takes me, and to always, always rock out.

Oh, and to play Resident Evil 4 again. Obviously.

My biggest goal is to ditch about 30-40 pounds. Doing this will require eating better and exercising more. The sad reality of things is that junk food is significantly cheaper than eating healthy food and I went through a period where money was tight. It's still tight... but I'm prioritizing.

Already have and read it, agreed.

Until your ribs are protruding from your chest, or your having fainting spells like some bulimic Hollywood actress, I'd tell people to ^%$# off.

currently eyeing housing in the east valley (Mesa, Gold Canyon, especially the entrada del oro subdivision just off 60 a little SE of CG), or Surprise/Peoria (Pleasant Valley airport is big on ultralight flying). I want year round mountain biking so we're staying in the valley. We're visiting again around the end of march to check out the NW area.

I've felt for quite some years that the USA isn't anything close to the type of society I wish to live in, but have barely skirted around researching the steps of actually moving one's permanent residence to another country.

Would trying to maintain a dual citizenship be feasible, or just double your tax load by having to pay to both places?  Would you have to revoke being a US citizen to avoid still paying US taxes on your income earned elsewhere? 

In general, it seems that legal immigration and citizen issues occupy huge amounts of paperwork, money, and time, but if anyone has any good links/faqs about the topic of moving OUT of America, it might be handy someday...

Jodo has a great post, but also makes some incorrect statements! Fear not Jodo, I'm here to watch your back

First off, it wouldn't be hard at all to tax cannabis and cocaine. In fact, in Massachusetts they recently passed a bill that makes owning a small amount of cannabis a civil offense. In other words, if you're caught with it, you don't go to jail, you only pay a fine. This is for all practical purposes a tax. Of course, selling cannabis is still illegal, but there is LOTS of talk about making it legal. If it were ever legalized, there would be a huge tax on it. Also, keep in mind that smoking cannabis is very harmful! People who say it's harmless are clueless

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2419713.stm

However, it's clearly not as harmful as cocaine. Cocaine was of course once legal, and it is now illegal in the vast (or is it all?) majority of countries, because it is extremely destructive. In some countries, simply possessing cocaine and/or cannabis is enough to warrant a death sentence! For example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanmugam_Murugesu

Making cocaine legal has been a subject of contention for many years

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/08/18/opini … gewanted=1

I think cannabis might one day be legalized, but I doubt cocaine will ever be legal.

Also, Jodo makes the claim that "most people" don't realize that fast food and smoking is bad for their health. However, Jodo gives no statistics and/or links to articles to back-up his claim, therefore his claim is nothing more than his personal opinion. From my impressions, I think most people DO realize fast food and smoking is bad for them, but they don't care. They prefer to "live a little" and worry about the consequences later. I of course disagree, but hey, they are allowed to live life the way they want to... or should they? What is the cost for the average American? It turns out it costs quite a bit of money to help support our burgeoning behemoths of  fat! In Japan, it's illegal to be fat, should the US adopt a similar law?

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/japa … ng-the-law

I can understand Jodo's frustration with people who have food stamps and purchase crappy food. However, can you tell people what to purchase? You should NEVER judge someone unless you've been in his or her shoes... not all people who use food stamps are 'obnoxious people who have never done real work for a minute in their lives' (this is the mentality some people have about people who rely on food stamps). True, there is abuse of the system, but many people have had really hard lives, and they find eating sweets as a release. Of course exercise and healthy foods are a better release, but again, you can't force people to change!

Lastly, Jodo says "how angry this country makes me, because we have the ability to make it better" -that's a beautiful statement! We do have the ability to make it better, so lets do so! Carl, on the other hand, is thinking of moving to another country? Well, I've been to quite a few other countries, and I firmly believe the VAST majority of the world is MUCH worse than America in MANY ways!! In fact, there aren't many countries in the world I would be willing to live in, and even then, many of those countries don't offer the same opportunities that the US does. I really do believe that hard work pays off! I know a grad student from China who says in China you don't get second chances. He actually switched fields, worked hard, and is now on the PhD track. He says that often working hard doesn't get you very far in China (connections apparently are huge). I've heard the same thing from students originally from other countries. Anyway, the fact that hard work gets you somewhere in the US is golden! OK, enough ranting
Hope everyone has had great Holidays!

Zane, you're too skinny!! I'm totally kidding bro
You know I completely agree with you about the whole organic and healthy foods deal! In fact, my juicer is working overtime these days!

cheers,

-avatar!

Usually I don't feel the urge to make changes or improvements to my lifestyle till around spring.  That said I would LIKE to start posting weekly reviews to this site.  Will see if I can stick with that goal this year.

Well I would start with living in another country and worry about citizenship and the such after you've been there for a couple years.  You'd have to research on other countries but in Japan you don't pay taxes on your income earned there to the USA unless it exceeds a certain amount (which my rather average teacher's salary does not).  Of course you've got visa issues to consider but I would imagine for most places citizenship doesn't have to be your initial concern.

Thanks, I needed a good laugh. Smoking's bad? No way, I thought those things "had vitamin C in them and stuff*"

Really, you want to know the greatest deterrent that keeps me from smoking: the cost. It's not the health issues at all... and to be honest, as dark as it sounds, I don't want to live till I'm 70 or even 80. "Screw those adult diaper wearing, dialysis years, you can have them we don't want them!*"

* = Denis Leary, No Cure for Cancer 1993.

The USA no longer has the ability to adapt or change itself, as the sheer size and scale of the country very much inhibits ANY type of sweeping nationwide change from occurring.  So I'd want a smaller country which can be more maneuverable and adaptable to change.  For example, most people agree that having renewable energy is a good thing, while so far only smaller countries have been able to adapt and almost achieve that goal already.

I don't desire the typical American lifestyle either: which is to have multiple cars, a huge house and yard, and to define your success through a vast amount of possessions.

Just one point would be that I'd prefer to live in a pedestrian based metropolitan area that has clean and efficient public transport so that I don't have to own a vehicle.  Within the US though, any metro area large enough to have a transit system also have big crime problems, and Chicago's transit system is filthy and outdated. 

I suppose my New Year's Resolution would be to list out lifestyle preferences and do research into which cities might fit. I certainly enjoyed a few weeks in Tokyo, but I'd have to look into other cities which come recommended by global-minded publications, such as Copenhagen, Stockholm, Vienna, Melbourne, Helsinki, etc.

But of course, just picking a place wouldn't matter if I couldn't get a paying job there.  I can't even manage to find a good career match for myself here in the US, so a career search elsewhere would be quite a difficult endeavor.
These days it's primarily the job (wherever you can find work) that determines where you live.

This is the part where I stopped agreeing with you. Of course I don't want multiple car loans, but it's tough having to choose between just a Ferrari or a Lamborghini

Here's a new law, which isn't as harsh as I think it should be, but it's a good start!

http://www.wivb.com/dpp/news/new_york/A … gh-DWI-law

also, here's a good read on what we've been talking about (fat Americans, health care, etc)...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/12/28/f … index.html

cheers,

-avatar!

You know, I honestly don't understand why it freakin' matters HOW you kill yourself/how you die. In the end, unless your death is immediate and swift, it's going to cost money (excluding thing like burial expenses, etc.) So what is the difference if a 50 year old dies from a heart attack from eating unhealthy food vs an 80 yr old that slowly withers away from cancer? I'll tell you - 30 less years to pay for something else that may go wrong. People should be happy that people want to kill themselves off with unhealthy habits.

Let's be honest here, that's what all this is about - money. It's not about compassion and/or understanding. And to go one step further, it's about free will being under attack by fascism.

Next thing you know it’ll be illegal to commit suicide (oh, wait...) and I’ll have to eat a candy bar under my sheets on my bed with all the windows and doors locked so the chocolate sniffing dogs don’t nail me.

Totally true, it is about money. These days, modern medicine can keep you alive for quite a while (when just 50 years ago you would be dead as a doornail)! This is very good business for lots of people, especially harmaceutical companies. I've been told a number of times from people who work at hospitals that these harmaceutical companies don't want people dead, but they don't want them healthy either. Right in the middle, is where most of the money is to be had. Very sad... and I think the point of the CNN article was that if people took better care of themselves then we wouldn't have to spend billions upon billions of dollars trying to thwart people's own self-destructive habits. As for what's the difference if you die now or in 30 years? Well, first off I don't know too many people who want to die earlier, but I tell you, I think the real issue is quality of life.  The cure here is simply eat healthier (it's mostly diet) and get some exercise.

Also, I laughed at  your chocolate police line
It conjured-up images of 1984 meets Roald Dahl!

cheers,

-avatar!

I have to admit, I was kind of worried about how you where going to respond to my response. After writing it I thought it seemed aimed more at you than the problem/debate and the ideas to combat it itself. And I did get a little biblish/conservative-like with the free will line. Don't get me wrong, I may agree with more conservative ideas but I don't think the Republicans and/or Democrats in Washington are anybody's friends or looking out for our best interest. That ship sailed a long time ago.

And honestly, I'm not at all denying we have a problem - not at all. Almost everyday I see overweight people at work carting out mounds of soda out of our store on those little scooter things. Part of you really wants to say “enough already!” Don't know how you can notice that and not think about it on a deeper level. And, not to be self-righteous, I'm glad I took this/that job because - especially with the recent holiday - there is a real ugly side to America "the Beautiful" - and I’m not talking about the low paying behemoth of a company or people's looks. Hopefully it’s a lesson I don’t forget.

But really, keeping with the soda thing, taxing it like some people have suggested is not going to make people stop drinking it and think twice about their health. That worked really well with cigarettes.

Ah, but many people would rather eat less healthy and do less WORK on exercise, and consider the 'quality of life' BETTER.

The U.S. smoking rate has progressively fallen over the past few decades continuing into the 21st century so if that last part of your post is sarcasm then I'm not sure exactly what you're getting at.  You might argue that rising cigarette prices aren't entirely responsible for the decline in use but you'd be hard pressed to prove that it hasn't had some effect.

And if you hike the price of soda up a significant percentage it may not entirely stop some people from drinking it but I feel quite sure that it will lower the amount of consumption.  Basic economics, no?

its crazy how people will pay almost as much for a cold 20 ounce bottle of pop as a room temp 2-liter in the isle. I guess compared to the $2-$3 'energy' drinks they hawk at the grocery store checkout, that's supposed to be a deal?

I used to buy the 2-liters of pop but I switched over to crystal light (or wal-mart brand) tea last summer. stock up when that stuff is buy-one-get-one, plus i make it half strength. I always have a gallon pitcher made up in the fridge (lasts about 2 days in summer, 4 in winter). I'm a cheap-ass.. allowing us to go to the casino again for new years eve

isn't it a strange turn of events how, when you're an adult, you WANT your parents to give you socks and underwear for your birthday, instead of something material that will just clutter up your place?

Heh, I've bought those a few times, but a couple of those were when the power was out at home. It's cheaper than buying a 20oz cup at a fast food place at least (and less potentially messy). Of course, many places that sell em ALSO have cold vending machines right outside...
(Of course, you can't use a credit card with a vending machine)

That may be true, but think about it, did they really quit for the right reason? Like I said, I don't smoke because of the cost - not the health concerns. Hitting someone in the wallet may be a way to get someone to do something you want them do do, but so is holding a gun to their head - "ORDER THE F%^$ING SALAD OR YOU DIE!" Is it really the place of the government to protect people from themselves as much as it is to protect people from one another? And really, I'm sure all that tax money goes to worthy causes (do those truth commercials really make you think, at all? Add in things like TiVO and you're not reaching as big of audience as you once where), just like a soda tax would, paying for a wax museum about the history of soda.

Additionally, what doesn't kill you or give you cancer these days? "From the moment of birth we are already dying." The only difference is the rate or if we help it along.

Here's something I ran into when living in Pittsburgh. One day I was walking to school and there was a TON of anti-abortion things (flyers, people, and banners) downtown (that's pro-life right? I sometimes get things confused because politicians love to twist words) with full-blown, graphic pictures of aborted fetuses on them. Exquisite. Exquisitely disgusting. This actually sparked a debate (something we're having here) in some of my graphic design classes about getting your message across and grabbing people's attention. However, the more I thought about it, would such imagery be more likely change the minds of those whose situation (like a single, unwed mother-to-be making minimum wage) was extremely relevant to issue being raised or those NOT in such a situation? It's a lot easier to be against something when you're not the one affected.

And before you say they could give the baby up for adoption, look at how hard it is to even adopt a baby. My former boss (who owns a business - and most people equate those with owning a business as "well off") tried and said screw it, instead adopting two children from the Ukraine.

You bring up some great points! First, should the government tell people how to live? The answer is definitely NO! However, the government should "protect" people from hazards -for example second-hand something is a hazard, so the fact that no smoking is allowed in public places is fine (once in your own home, smoke as much as you want). As for charging a tax on cigarettes, it seems like it's meant to "punish" those who smoke, but in reality smokers as a whole end up costing the average taxpayer a ridiculous amount of money.

http://www.pr-inside.com/aig-bonuses-dw … 125060.htm

Yes, you are helping to take care of people who did not take care of themselves. Therefore by taxing cigarettes we're having smokers help pay for their medical bills. Should their similarly be a fast-food tax? Absolutely! Also note that the fact that cigarettes are relatively speaking expensive, does limit how many people will "try" them and then become addicted. If junk food was the same price as "good" food, I think many Americans would lead a much healthier life.

cheers,

-avatar!

Since we're on this topic, here is an article from 2008 where a Dutch research group found that the lifetime health care costs for smokers and the obese would be less than for "healthy" people (primarily because end-of-life care is the most expensive, and smokers and the obese die sooner than "healthy" people):

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/healt … 48884.html

Lifetime health care costs for non-obese non-smokers: $417,000
Lifetime health care costs for the obese: $371,000
Lifetime health care costs for smokers: $326,000

Granted, these were simulated results, but it still gives you something to think about.

Yup, I don't believe their results. I'm certain their model if faulty. There are tons of papers out there that show the exact opposite. In other words, unhealthy people cost more. Why? -well for one thing because unhealthy people do NOT die much more quickly than healthy people. Sure, if you're 35 and unfortunately contract a terrible form of cancer, what can you do? You won't cost as much in that sad instance as some other people, but even then a few years of hospitalization is VERY expensive. Furthermore, as modern medicine improves, people will continue living longer. Not necessarily living better, just longer. People are fat, have high cholesterol, etc... they take 10 drugs, always go to see their doctor, get some surgery here and there... you can keep this up for a long time, and the cost is enormous! Also:

"The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs."

Seems like they didn't take much at all into account ... in fact, I'm beginning to wonder if these doctors didn't just step out of the Lars von Trier series 'Riget'! So yeah, I think their results are bogus. When one group claims results that contract just about every other scientific result, it's almost always true that the former is WRONG!

cheers,

-avatar!

@ Crash - I've read about that study and found it interesting, not going to say it's bulletproof tho... truth is you can find a study to back up any kind of view these days.

Completely true, but part at what I was getting at was that more of the decline was probably due to people chosing not to start smoking in the first place. Most people would probably agree not starting to do something is easier than trying to quit, and there are probably more of those people today due to the general knowledge that smoking is bad (or else they've moved on to food.)

As far a taxing cigarettes, I'm not really against it if that money was going towards paying smokers' medical bills. Only problem is, a lot of it isn't. Isn't it a smack in the face of justice that states use some of that money to maintain things like roads? I mean really, all these taxes and states still have major budget deficits?

As for a fast food tax, I'm not really on board with that. At least fast food has nutritional value to it (perhaps a bit too much nutritional value), cigarettes on the other hand do not. (Disclaimer: ok, I'm sure as screwed up as people are someone has eaten cigarettes, but I don't know any personally.)

I'd like to resolve to actually play more games than I buy this year. I've a nasty two-fold habit when I get depressed of buying games and then not playing them (or doing much of anything else).

I wouldn't mind getting back into writing, either. It's kind of a bummer to come across something I wrote ten years ago and find I was better at expressing myself then than I am now.

Actually, these are two things I'd like to focus on, but I know the "play more games" thing is a lost cause. Haven't touched a single game since... fall? Castlevania LoI and IV. Do want to play Xenosaga III/Ninja Gaiden II: The Dark Sword of Chaos but haven't gone online to hunt for a copy yet and lord knows if I would actually play them when I got em. Not to rile anybody's feathers but everytime I go into a game store, I can't help but think how lame video games have become to me lately.

As for writing, still want to keep up on that, but I don't want to write reviews about the kind of product the whole time, like VGM soundtracks - want to spread it out to games, soundtracks, normal music CDs, etc.

Very well, we'll slaughter everyone at age 30, like in the movie Logan's Run. That'll slash health care costs.

  As for the article, I did not ever even once think of that. Other than a breakthrough in biology, the only way I can think of reducing health care costs in the elderly is to eliminate the elderly. While this may seem frightening, I mean it in the most reasonable way. Actually completely eliminate the elderly. This means that no one will ever advance to the point where expensive problems are more likely to occur. Rather, they will transfer their consciousness into a computer sufficiently advanced enough to model the human brain (a conscious machine) and then transfer it into a new body grown from their stem cells and DNA. This could be done at age 40, like in the novel Friends Come in Boxes - a very interesting book, by the way.