Ethical Egoism Essay – 1596 Words – studymode.com

Posted on by

Love Your Neighbor As Yourself: Response to Ethical EgoismPHIL-12222 March 2013

We are often taught at an early age that when struggling to make a decision to let our consciences be our guides. Conscience can be defined as our adherence to moral principles, or our considerations of fairness and justice. The word consideration is used because every individual has their own standards for what they feel to be morally right versus what they feel to be morally wrong, however this concept is not as black and white as it may seem.

We accredit our moral considerations to many external and internal factors. An example of an external factor is government laws because they are predetermined rules about behavior and action that have been societally deemed as morally wrong. Laws are based on sociological mores, which follow a cultures commonly shared and widely observed moral behavior, therefore breaking a law implies going against the proper code your society. Prison also has an external influence on our decision making because it serves as a threat for the negative consequences of disobeying laws, such as the loss of our freedom. Internal factors are our own self-value and personal virtues as well as our sense of selfishness and our concerns of morality.

Ethical egoism is the philosophical belief that moral agents ought to do what is in their own self-interest because that is the rational way to live. It contrasts with the theory of ethical altruism, which holds thats it is our moral obligation to help others. A philosopher and avid supporter of ethical egoism named Ayn Rand however saw ethical altruism in a different way. She viewed altruism as self-sacrifice, and as a state of mind absent from the reality of the life and worth of a human being. Rand was the creator of the property of ethical egoism known as objectivism, or the philosophy that the proper life for rational beings is the pursuit of happiness, and that altruism is incompatible with rational morality. She asked, Why is it moral to serve the happiness of others but not our own?

Rand was a promoter of self-value and believed that, our lives belong to us and therefore it is our moral obligation to live it in the most personally satisfying way as possible. She wrote, You have been taught that morality is a code of behavior imposed on you by whim, the whim of a supernatural power or the whim of society, to serve Gods purpose on your neighbors welfare, to please an authority beyond the grave or else next door- but not to serve your life or pleasure. Your pleasure, you have been taught, is to be found in immorality, your interests would best be served by evil, and any moral code must be designed not for you, but against you, not to further your life, but to drain it. (Rand, 532)

Rand saw our existences as having one of two options: to live or not to live. She viewed the world as a competitive place where the strong and knowledgeable dominated survival simply by using their minds as their protection. A mans mind is his basic tool of survival. Life is given to him, survival is not. (Rand, 533) Unlike the organs inside our bodies that automatically function without our aid, our minds require us to think and use logic to obtain their benefits, and therefore those who choose to abstain from thinking and logical reasoning are deprived of one of their two defense mechanisms.

In relation to our ability to reasons are our values and virtues, because we need a code of values to guide our actions, and our virtues are our actions themselves. Value is that which one acts to gain and keep, virtue is the action by which one gains and keeps it. (Rand, 533) Rand believed that all virtues and values derive from our desire to exist or to diminish and that the three most crucial values to survival are reason, purpose, and self-esteem and the most important virtue to be that of pride. Reason can only be produced through our willingness...

Bibliography: Pojman, Louis P. Egoism and Altruism: A Critique of Ayn Rand The Moral Life: An Introductory Reader in Ethics and Literature. Louis P. Pojman & Lewis Vaughn. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.Rand, Ayn. In Defense of Ethical Egoism The Moral Life: An Introductory Reader in Ethics and Literature. Louis P. Pojman & Lewis Vaughn. New York: Oxford University Press,2011.

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

Read the original:

Ethical Egoism Essay - 1596 Words - studymode.com

Egoism | philosophy | Britannica.com

Posted on by

Egoism, (from Latin ego, I), in philosophy, an ethical theory holding that the good is based on the pursuit of self-interest. The word is sometimes misused for egotism, the overstressing of ones own worth.

Egoist doctrines are less concerned with the philosophic problem of what is the self than with the common notions of a person and his concerns. They see perfection sought through the furthering of a mans own welfare and profitallowing, however, that sometimes he may not know where these lie and must be brought to recognize them.

Many ethical theories have an egoist bias. The hedonism of the ancient Greeks bids each man to seek his own greatest happiness; in the 17th century, Thomas Hobbes, a Materialist, and Benedict de Spinoza, a Rationalist, held in different ways that self-preservation is the good; and those who stress the tending of ones own conscience and moral growth are likewise egoists in this sense. In contrast with such views is an ethics that is governed more by mans social aspects, which stresses the importance of the community rather than that of the individual. Under this head come such theories as Stoic cosmopolitanism, tribal solidarity, and utilitarianism, which are all forms of what the positivist Auguste Comte called altruism. The distinction, however, cannot always be neatly drawn.

Originally posted here:

Egoism | philosophy | Britannica.com

The Differences Between Utilitarianism & Ethical Egoism

Posted on by

Consequentialism is a moral theory that states that the consequences of one's actions are the basis for any morality or judgment toward that action. Both utilitarianism and ethical egoism are theories within consequentialism that focus on the outcome of conduct as the primary motivation of that action and any critique of whether or not that conduct is ethical. The major difference between utilitarianism and ethical egoism is where those acts are directed.

Utilitarianism focuses on the idea of the greater good. Essentially, this ethical theory intends to maximize good for the the most people. The moral worth of any action is judged by how much good results for all sentient beings. While some individuals may suffer from these actions, utilitarianism holds that the conduct may still be ethical if it does more good for a greater number of people than it harms.

Ethical egoism, also known simply as egoism, holds that moral conduct ought to be judged through self-interest. Egoism states that the good consequences for the individual agent outweigh the consequences placed upon others. In egoism, actions could be considered ethical for the individual if the one taking the action is benefited, while any benefit or detriment to the welfare of others is a side effect and not as important as the consequences for the individual.

The primary differences between these two theories, keeping in mind that there are numerous sub-theories within each branch of thought, is the value placed between the individual and others. In utilitarianism, the most ethical action may be that which harms the individual agent but maximizes the positive impact for the most people overall, essentially placing the emphasis on the whole as opposed to the individual. In egoism, the individual has a greater value than others, thus it is ethical to act in one's own self-interest even if it may potentially harm others.

Utilitarianism seeks to maximize good by minimizing harm to all while egoism seeks to maximize good by keeping the individual happy. In utilitarianism, actions must be judged on the amount of people (or beings) that benefit from the action as opposed to how many the same action may potentially harm. Proponents argue that utilitarianism results in a greater sum of benefit to its harm, based upon outcome and not intention. However, critics of utilitarianism argue that following the interest of the greater good may result in tremendous harm to a large number of individuals.

Meanwhile, egoists argue that acting in self-interest can result in position action because the individual knows best how to benefit his own self, and if everyone were to act in the interest of others, then the general welfare of all would decrease as they are never working for their own good. Egoists trust that others will act in their own interests, thus making it unnecessary to take action solely for their benefit.

See the original post:

The Differences Between Utilitarianism & Ethical Egoism

Ethical Egoism, Essay Sample – essaybasics.com

Posted on by

Facebook 0Twitter Google+0ViberWhatsApp

The pursuit of own self-interest describes ethical egoism. This moral intuition dictates that people ought to do what they perceive as morally right. Thus, acts whose results benefit the doer qualifies to be ethical. It represents a true contrast with ethical altruism that advocates for helping others. Despite acting on ones interest, ethical egoism cautions against harming the wellbeing of others. Ethical egoism is further divided into three categories which include personal, individual and universal ethical egoism. Personal ethical egoism stipulates that an act arises from the self-interest motive with no regard to other motives. Individual ethical egoism upholds that people should serve ones self-interest. On the other hand, universal ethical egoism dictates that all persons have the right to pursue own interests in exclusivity.

The best approach to promoting the general good arises from allowing people to pursue their own self-interest. In most instances, as individuals gratify their insatiable desires they unintentionally benefit the society through an invisible hand. In fact, all persons are better off if each follows their own interest.

Coercing individuals to sacrifice their moral interest for the large society implies denying them their fundamental value of personal decision-making. Nonetheless, ones well-being is a moral concern for that person that calls for non-interference from other sources. Also, an act should be motivated by the benefits one derives from it. One ought to only care for oneself.

The concept of ethical egoism promotes admirable virtues like rationality, productivity, and personal responsibility. These virtues are crucial for personal development and growth. Therefore, allowing external influence hinders cognitive independence.

Traditional morality embraces the fact that the well-being of people forms part of ones jurisdiction or act. Caring for others is a warranted concern without which, it leads to egoist radicalization. Radical ethical egoist will care less about causing harm or pain to others so long as they receive their benefit. In essence, ethics exist to limit harms while maximizing benefits arising from peoples actions.

It lacks a moral basis through which people can amicably resolve conflicts. It never suggests a resolution amidst conflicting interest yet individuals are encouraged to serve their interests. Without a moral obligation to compromise or sacrifice for another, radical egoists will never have a common ground. Unlike egoism, altruism dictates the need to sacrifice ones good for the benefit of other people.

The occurrence of interpersonal decisions may transcend an egoists opinion. Self-denial sets in due to the intersection of interpersonal benefits. Thus, it is difficult for an ethical egoist individual to advise others as it creates self-contradiction.

Ethical egoism fails to uphold the impartiality principle. It acknowledges preferential treatment to oneself instead of discouraging discrimination. Under morality, a fundamental principle exists that stipulates that we should treat others equal and never make exceptions of ourselves. The human race is rich in diversity and rarely can one act in the similar capacity as another.

In conclusion, the virtue of selfishness does not count in egoism. Self-sacrifice is not a virtue but a detrimental aspect to egoists. Ethical egoism promotes individualism leading to a drawback on the observation and adherence to societal morals by individuals. Unfortunately, egoism operates in a society where people constantly interact. Therefore, ignoring the actions, reactions and influence of other people on ones life and decisions are hardly inevitable. Nonetheless, meeting personal interests sometimes requires the sacrifice of other self-interests to create a balance in life. This is to quantify the fact that ethical egoism may not function in a vacuum but requires the intervention of other ethical standings.

Facebook 0Twitter Google+0ViberWhatsApp

Here is the original post:

Ethical Egoism, Essay Sample - essaybasics.com

Ethical Egoism Essay – 1537 Words | Bartleby

Posted on by

1537 Words 7 Pages

That is their essential ethical principle. Finally, there is the hypothetical egoist, who argues that all individuals ought to pursue their own interests if they are looking for coming to a specific end. In a way, that type of egoist is not an actual egoist; he is rather a utilitarian who believes that happiness for all can be enhanced if each person looks out after his own self. A true ethical egoist would argue against the hypothetical egoist. He would not look to increase the happiness of others, only that of himself. A true ethical egoist must not become a hypothetical egoist, because then he is no longer an egoist. Nor should he become an individual egoist, because it would not be ethical. In addition, the truest ethical egoist must not publicize, or even try to persuade, others of his own policy. When an individual advocates his own doctrine upon others, he is then persuading them to do the same. Hence, each person would begin to pursue his or her own interest and thus it would not be to the persuaders advantage, for it will harm his own interest. A true ethical egoist would convince people to do otherwise, and in return, this will serve the individuals greatest interests. What is meant by my own good? David P. Gauthier, author of Morality and Rational Self-Interest, says that Either that the thing I get is good, or that my possessing it is good. What he is stating is that good can differ in

More here:

Ethical Egoism Essay - 1537 Words | Bartleby

Nanotechnology Conferences 2018-2019 | Nanobiotechnology …

Posted on by

Estimates of the global nanotechnology market in 2010 range from about $15.7 billion to $1 trillion. By 2016, the market may be worth more than $2.4 trillion, according to different analysts. These differences reflect not only different analytical methods and assumptions, but also different definitions of the nanotechnology market (e.g., whether to include decades-old technologies such as carbon black rubber reinforcers and photographic silver, or whether to base the market value on nanotechnology inputs alone, as opposed to the total value of products that incorporate nanotechnology).

The new title on Nanomedicine Market (Neurology, Cardiovascular, Anti-inflammatory, Anti-infective, and Oncology Applications) - Global Industry Analysis, Size, Share, Growth, Trends and Forecast, 2013 - 2019," predicts that the total nanomedicine market globally will be worth USD 177.60 billion by 2019, growing considerably from its 2012 value of USD 78.54 billion. This market is expected to achieve a compounded annual growth rate of 12.3% between 2013 and 2019.

The global market for nanotechnology products was valued at $22.9 billion in 2013 and increased to about $26 billion in 2014. This market is expected to reach about $64.2 billion by 2019; a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 19.8% from 2014 to 2019.The global market for nanotechnology-enabled printing technology was estimated to total $14 billion in 2013. The market is expected to grow at a projected compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 17.7% over the next five years to total $31.8 billion by 2018.

Nanomedicine Conferences|Nanotechnology Events|Healthcare Meeting

September 17-19, 2018 Abu Dhabi, UAE

Nanomedicine Meet 2018 is includes a well-balanced line-up of speakers, covering both broad and specific topics of interest. And it provides an opportunity to learn about the complexity of the Diseases, discuss interventional procedures, look at new and advances in Nanotechnology and their efficiency and efficacy in diagnosing and treating various diseases and also in Healthcare treatments.

Conference Highlights:

Nanotechnology in Medicine and Medical Devices,Nanorobots in Medicine,Nanoparticles in Photodynamic Therapy,Importance of Nanotechnology in Biosensors,Green Nanoscience,Nanotechnology in Biology,Organic Nanoparticles,Biological Synthesis of Nanoparticles,Nanotechnology Based Drug Delivery System,Nanosuspention Formulation,Tissue Engineering & Regenerative Medicine,Polymeric Nanoparticles for Biomedical,Nanobubble in Nanomedicine,Natural product based Nanomedicine,Nanotechnology in Food science,Nanosurgery,Toxicity of Nanoparticles,Nanotechnology-Innovations in Medical Technology

Conference Title:28th International Conference and Expo on Nanosciences and Nanotechnology

NanotechnologyConferences|NanoScienceConferences|NanoConferences||Nanomaterials conferences|Material science Conferences|

Dates:Nov 26-28,2018

Venue:Barcelona, Spain

Short Name:Nanoscience 2018

Theme:Taking Nanotechnology to New Heights through Innovation and Collaboration

Accreditation: CPD

Conference Highlights:

Nanomedicine & Nanobiotechnology,Nanoparticles| Nanomaterials- production, synthesis and processing | Nano engineering | Micro/ Nano-fabrication, Nano patterning, Nano Lithography & Nano Imprinting | Graphene and Applications | Computation, Simulation & Modeling of Nanostructures, Nano systems & devices | Bio-Nanomaterials and biomedical devices, applications | Nanotechnology & Energy | Nanoelectronics and nanometrology | Nano photonics, Nano Imaging, Spectroscopy & Plasmonic devices | Nanotechnology: Environmental effects and Industrial safety | Future prospects of Nanotechnologies and commercial viability | Molecular Nanotechnology| Other Related research

Target Audience:

We welcome Academics | Scientists | Researchers | students and CEOs | Business Delegates

Nanomaterials 2016 is going to be held at Dubai, UAE during April 21-23, 2016 which will bring together world class professors, scientists and doctors to discuss about the current developments in the field of Nanotechnology. This International Nanomaterials conference is designed to provide diverse and current education that will keep Nanotechnology professionals to be updated with the advancements that are taking place in the field of Nanotechnology, The Conference will be organized with a theme Advances in Nanomaterials and Nanotechnology.

Nano 2016 conference is scheduled during May 19-21, 2016 at Osaka, Japan. It provides a premier technical forum for reporting and learning about the latest research and development, as well as for launching new applications and technologies. This nanotechnology conference is designed with the theme Nanotechnology in honouring the past, treasuring the present and shaping the future.

Medical Nanotechnology 2016 is scheduled during June 9-11, 2016 at Dallas, USA. This nanotechnology conference provides a perfect symposium for scientists, engineers, directors of companies and students in the field of Nanotechnology to meet and share their knowledge on the theme, Nano and molecular technologies in medical theranostics.

Nano Congress 2016 will be held at Valencia, Spain during June 27-29, 2016 with the theme Exploring Advancements in Nanotechnology highlighting the interdisciplinary nature of Nanotechnology. Scientific Tracks of this nanomaterial conference designed for this conference will enable the attendees and participants to learn extremes.

Nanoscience 2016 is scheduled during September 26-28, 2016 at London, UK. This scientific gathering and nanomaterial conference guarantees that offering the thoughts and ideas will enable and secure you the theme Taking Nanotechnology to New Heights through Innovation and Collaboration. It provides a premier technical forum for reporting and learning about the latest research and development, as well as for launching new applications and technologies.

Nano Expo 2016 would be the biggest marketplace for Nanotechnology, Nanomaterials and Organic Electronics applications, products and research in Australia during Nov 10-12, 2016 at Melbourne, Australia. This scientific gathering guarantees that offering the thoughts and ideas will enable and secure you the theme Nanotechnology for renewable materials.

Nanotek 2016 will address, identify and focus Nanobiotechnology, Biomedical engineering, Applications of Nanotechnology and showcase the current research in Nanomaterials and Nanocomposites. The nanotechnology conference gathering will highlight the challenges and opportunities in both medical and commercial usage of Nanotek products. Hopefully, this expert gathering of academicians, public and private agencies will provide spotlight and new insights on these critical areas. The meeting ensures that sharing the ideas and visions will empowers and establishes you by satisfy the Nanotek Conference theme Accelerating Research and Pioneering Expansion in Nanotechnology.

Visit link:

Nanotechnology Conferences 2018-2019 | Nanobiotechnology ...

What It Is and How It Works | Nano

Posted on by

Nanotechnology is the understanding and control of matter at the nanoscale, at dimensions between approximately 1 and 100 nanometers, where unique phenomena enable novel applications. Encompassing nanoscale science, engineering, and technology, nanotechnology involves imaging, measuring, modeling, and manipulating matter at this length scale.

Matter such as gases, liquids, and solids can exhibit unusual physical, chemical, and biological properties at the nanoscale, differing in important ways from the properties of bulk materials and single atoms or molecules. Some nanostructured materials are stronger or have different magnetic properties compared to other forms or sizes or the same material. Others are better at conducting heat or electricity. They may become more chemically reactive or reflect light better or change color as their size or structure is altered.

Quantum dots: the color of fluorescence is determined by the size of particles and the type of materials

Learn about the beginning of the science of studying the extremely small and its fundamental concepts.

A nanometer is one-billionth of a meter. Find out just how tiny that actually is.

Special high-powered microscopes have been developed to allow scientists to see and manipulate nanoscale materials. Learn about those microscopes here.

Learn how scientists can carefully create, control, move, and change materials at the nanoscale.

Find out what products use nanotechnology, how this improves them, and how they are made.

For more detailed information, see Frequently Asked Questions.

Go here to see the original:

What It Is and How It Works | Nano

Darwinism – Free online games at Gamesgames.com

Posted on by

Play free games online at GamesGames.com!

Do you like choices games?Try our latest mobile game by searching for: "Story Beats" on Google Play or on the AppStore

GamesGames.com has the biggest collection of free online games. Totally new handpicked games are added every day! Try action games for adventurers, cooking games for gourmets, creation games for artsy types, or family favorites like bubble shooter, bingo, and four-in-a-row games! Become the greatest battle royale hero in our latest IO games or impress your friends while you blast down some truly competitive race tracks with our racing games. If you love a challenge, exercise your noggin with tricky puzzle games like Mahjong, or invite some friends for a multiplayer fighting game. Play games that are easy to understand but delightfully difficult to master. With kids games, girls games, and sports games galore, there are plenty of online games for everyone. GamesGames.com is offering you the best free online games in the most popular categories like puzzle games, multiplayer games, io games, racing games, 2 player games, and math games. In one of the world's largest online gaming collections, you will always find the best games to play alone or with your friends. Discover GamesGames.com's bounty of free online games now!

Gamesgames.com has the biggest collection of free online games. Totally new games are added every day!

More here:

Darwinism - Free online games at Gamesgames.com

Mesothelioma – What is Malignant Mesothelioma Cancer

Posted on by

The American Cancer Society records about 3,000 new cases of mesothelioma each year in the U.S.

Its a disease that mostly affects people who worked with asbestos and products containing asbestos.

While there are treatments that control tumor growth, researchers have not found a definitive cure for the cancer.

Mesothelioma is a rare cancer caused by exposure to asbestos.

The cancer develops when a person ingests asbestos, and it causes changes to a persons DNA.

Our genes, which are made of DNA, control how cells grow, multiply and die. Changes in our genes may cause cells to divide out of control and may lead to cancer.

Tumors also can be benign (noncancerous). But when tumors are cancerous, doctors call the disease malignant mesothelioma. It is often shortened to mesothelioma.

Common mesothelioma symptoms include:

These mesothelioma symptoms usually do not show until tumors have grown and spread. Mesothelioma latency is 20-50 years. Thats how long it takes from initial exposure to accurate diagnosis. For that reason, many people with mesothelioma are in their 60s or 70s.

You should talk to a mesothelioma specialist soon if you have a history of asbestos exposure and experience these symptoms. An early diagnosis may improve your prognosis and life expectancy.

Select the diagnosis you or your loved one is facing and receive a free guide with the right information for you:

Oncologists name each type of mesothelioma by the location in the body where it develops.

The pleural and peritoneal types of mesothelioma are the most common. Pericardial accounts for 1 percent of cases. Another rare type is testicular mesothelioma. It represents less than 1 percent of all mesotheliomas.

Prognosis, symptoms and treatment options vary by type.

Asbestos use in the military was widespread from 1940 to 1980. Veterans from all branches of the U.S. armed forces were at risk of exposure. Navy veterans are most at risk. This branch used the largest quantity of asbestos products.

More than 75 occupations have exposed workers to asbestos. Auto mechanics, textile workers, steel mill workers, construction workers and firefighters are among the most at risk.

Asbestos workers unknowingly carried asbestos fibers on their body and clothing. This resulted in secondary asbestos exposure among residents such as women and children.

Younger patients and women have a better mesothelioma prognosis than older men. People diagnosed with peritoneal mesothelioma also have a higher chance of survival.

Patients eligible to undergo multimodal therapy, which is a combination of two or more standard-of-care treatments, have a better life expectancy and improved prognosis.

A patients mesothelioma cell type also plays a significant role in prognosis and life expectancy.

The three types of cells include:

The cancer is localized. Surgery is most effective at this stage. Survival rate is higher. Median life expectancy at stage 1 is 22.2 months.

Tumors have started to spread from the original location into adjacent structures. Surgery is still an option. Median life expectancy at stage 2 is 20 months.

Cancer has progressed to a more advanced stage with spread into the regional lymph nodes. Surgery may still be an option. Median life expectancy at stage 3 is 17.9 months.

Cancer has spread extensively in the area where it developed. Chemotherapy and immunotherapy control symptoms and prolong survival. Median life expectancy at stage 4 is 14.9 months or less.

Mesothelioma is a rare cancer. It represents only 0.3 percent of all cancer diagnoses. Most doctors and oncologists have never encountered it.

A 2009 study published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine states that cancer care requires the technical knowledge and skills of specialty physicians such as medical oncologists, surgeons and radiation oncologists.

These are factors that impact a mesothelioma patients survival. Thats why finding a mesothelioma specialist is so important.

Finding a mesothelioma specialty center with experienced mesothelioma doctors is crucial to survival.

Brigham and Women's Hospital

Dr. Abraham Lebenthal is a respected thoracic surgeon who treats pleural mesothelioma patients at Brigham & Womens Hospital and Boston VA Hospital. Lebenthal worked alongside Dr. David Sugarbaker at Brigham and teaches at Harvard Medical School.

UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center

Dr. Robert B. Cameron developed a lung-sparing surgery for pleural mesothelioma that not only extends survival, but offers greater quality of life by preserving the lung. Camerons surgery has a lower risk of complications and studies report longer survival times.

H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center

Dr. Jacques Fontaine is the Director of the Mesothelioma Research and Treatment Center at Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida. He specializes in minimally invasive thoracic surgery including robotic surgery. Fontaine became a pleural mesothelioma specialist at Brigham & Womens Hospitals International Mesothelioma Program.

Washington Cancer Center

Dr. Paul Sugarbaker is the countrys leading expert on peritoneal mesothelioma. He developed the widely renowned cytoreductive surgery and heated chemotherapy technique that changed the landscape of peritoneal cancer treatment. Many people with peritoneal mesothelioma are alive today because of Sugarbakers innovations.

Ridley-Tree Cancer Center

Dr. W. Charles Conway is an expert in peritoneal mesothelioma and the Director of Surgical Oncology at Ridley-Tree Cancer Center in Santa Barbara, California. He specializes in minimally invasive robotic surgery and heated chemotherapy for peritoneal mesothelioma.

UPMC Hillman Cancer Center

Dr. J.F. Pingpank Jr. is a peritoneal mesothelioma expert who advocates for regional therapy. The approach applies treatment locally around the cancer to limit damage to the rest of the body. Pingpank specializes in cytoreductive surgery and heated chemotherapy.

We can help you or a loved one find a mesothelioma doctor who specializes in chemotherapy.

Mesothelioma treatment helps patients live longer lives. But not every patient is eligible for each type of mesothelioma treatment.

The most common treatments for mesothelioma include:

More than 70 percent of mesothelioma patients undergo chemotherapy

Clinical trials offer mesothelioma patients access to experimental therapies. They also provide scientific and medical information for researches to develop new treatments. Patients in clinical trials also receive excellent medical care.

Herbal medicines, mind-body therapies, holistic healing and other complementary therapies may benefit patients.

Thank you for the doctor referral info. We met with the doctor and came away with what seemed like a weight lifted.

Read More Testimonials

We can help you or a loved one get a diagnosis or a second opinion from a mesothelioma specialist.

Many companies that produced, distributed or used asbestos products knew it was deadly. But they neglected to warn their employees. Filing a lawsuit can help mesothelioma patients cover lost wages, medical expenses and other costs.

$180,000 is the median value for mesothelioma claims, according to a 2010 report from the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit institution that conducts research and analysis on asbestos bankruptcy trusts.

A person with mesothelioma can file a personal injury lawsuit. Mesothelioma lawyers file these against companies responsible for their clients asbestos exposure. Families can file wrongful death claims when a loved one dies of mesothelioma.

Qualified mesothelioma attorneys can help you decide when to file a lawsuit. They can also guide you through the process. Time is of the essence because statute of limitations may expire. A mesothelioma lawyer will review your case so you receive the highest compensation.

Learn How to Hire a Qualified Mesothelioma Lawyer

Support is available for mesothelioma patients, survivors and loved ones in many forms.

The Mesothelioma Centers monthly online support group meets every second Wednesday. Licensed mental health counselor Dana Nolan runs the support group. Patients and survivors can share their experiences with others on a similar cancer journey.

Last Modified November 26, 2018

Registered Nurse and Patient Advocate

Karen Selby joined Asbestos.com in 2009. She is a registered nurse with a background in oncology and thoracic surgery and was the regional director of a tissue bank before becoming a Patient Advocate at The Mesothelioma Center. Karen has assisted surgeons with thoracic surgeries such as lung resections, lung transplants, pneumonectomies, pleurectomies and wedge resections. She is also a member of the Academy of Oncology Nurse & Patient Navigators.

13 Cited Article Sources

See the original post:

Mesothelioma - What is Malignant Mesothelioma Cancer

CA8: Randolph co-tenant consent doesnt limit domestic abuse …

Posted on by

ABA Journal Web 100, Best Law Blogs (2017); ABA Journal Blawg 100 (2015-16)

by John Wesley Hall Criminal Defense Lawyer and Search and seizure law consultant Little Rock, Arkansas Contact: forhall @ aol.com / The Book http://www.johnwesleyhall.com

2003-18,online since Feb. 24, 2003

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fourth Amendment cases, citations, and links

Latest Slip Opinions: U.S. Supreme Court (Home) Federal Appellate Courts Opinions First Circuit Second Circuit Third Circuit Fourth Circuit Fifth Circuit Sixth Circuit Seventh Circuit Eighth Circuit Ninth Circuit Tenth Circuit EleventhCircuit D.C. CircuitFederal CircuitForeign Intell.Surv.Ct.FDsys, many district courts, other federal courtsMilitary Courts: C.A.A.F., Army, AF, N-M, CG, SF State courts (and some USDC opinions)

Google Scholar Advanced Google Scholar Google search tips LexisWeb LII State Appellate Courts LexisONE free caselaw Findlaw Free Opinions To search Search and Seizure on Lexis.com $

Research Links: Supreme Court: SCOTUSBlog S. Ct. Docket Solicitor General's site SCOTUSreport Briefs online (but no amicus briefs) Oyez Project (NWU) "On the Docket"Medill S.Ct. Monitor: Law.com S.Ct. Com't'ry: Law.com

General (many free): LexisWeb Google Scholar | Google LexisOne Legal Website Directory Crimelynx Lexis.com $ Lexis.com (criminal law/ 4th Amd) $ Findlaw.com Findlaw.com (4th Amd) Westlaw.com $ F.R.Crim.P. 41 http://www.fd.org Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Resources FBI Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (2008) (pdf) DEA Agents Manual (2002) (download) DOJ Computer Search Manual (2009) (pdf)Stringrays (ACLU No. Cal.) (pdf)

Congressional Research Service: --Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2012) --Overview of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2012) --Outline of Federal Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping (2012) --Federal Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping (2012) --Federal Laws Relating to Cybersecurity: Discussion of Proposed Revisions (2012) ACLU on privacy Privacy FoundationElectronic Frontier Foundation NACDLs Domestic Drone Information Center Electronic Privacy Information Center Criminal Appeal (post-conviction) (9th Cir.) Section 1983 Blog

"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't." Me

I am still learning.Domenico Giuntalodi (but misattributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti (common phrase throughout 1500's)).

"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government." Shemaya, in the Thalmud

"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced." Williams v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold, J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).

"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence."Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).

"Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment."Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).

"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater than it is today." Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).

"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property." Entick v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)

"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth Amendment." United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)

"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated here, has notto put it mildlyrun smooth." Chapman v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).

"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the bottom of a turntable." Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)

"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected." Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)

Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Governments purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)

Libertythe freedom from unwarranted intrusion by governmentis as easily lost through insistent nibbles by government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark. United States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)

"You can't always get what you want / But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need." Mick Jagger & Keith Richards

"In Germany, they first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came for meand by that time there was nobody left to speak up." Martin Niemller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration camp]

You know, most men would get discouraged by now. Fortunately for you, I am not most men!---Pep Le Pew

Website design by Wally Waller, Little Rock

Visit link:

CA8: Randolph co-tenant consent doesnt limit domestic abuse ...

Fourth Amendment | The IT Law Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

Posted on by

Overview Edit

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that:

"The . . . constitutional prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures, has its source in that principle of the common law which finds expression in the maxim that 'every man's house is his castle.' English history discloses [that the] . . . constitutional provisions . . . had their origin 'in the . . . unwarrantable intrusion of executive agents into the houses . . . of individuals . . . .'"[1]

This right had a long history in English common law. Sometimes colloquially expressed as a mans house is his castle, it meant that one had a right to expect that ones home, possessions, and person were safe against arbitrary and forceful intrusion by the Kings agents. At the same time, it recognized that the lawful agents of the state can intrude on private property to execute or enforce the law, so long as they obey certain procedural rules that protect the subject of the search.

This protection was understood in 1787 to limit and regulate physical trespass, and the seizing of papers, effects, or "things." However, it gradually came to be seen as a protection of something more.[2] "[T]he principal object of the Fourth Amendment," the U.S. Supreme Court has explained, "is the protection of privacy rather than property.[3] In addition, "the Fourth Amendment protects people and not simply 'areas' against unreasonable searches and seizures."[4] Thus, in its seminal decision in Katz v. United States,[5] the Court held that police officers violated the Fourth Amendment when they conducted a warrantless search using a listening and recording device placed on the outside of a public phone booth to eavesdrop on the conversation of a suspect who had "'justifiably relied' upon . . . [the privacy of the] telephone booth."[6] The Court concluded that the Fourth Amendment protects both a person and that persons expectation of privacy from warrantless searches or seizures in places which are justifiably believed to be private.

The Amendment's operative text can be divided into two clauses. The first clause forbids the government from conducting any search or seizure that is "unreasonable." The second clause prohibits the government from issuing a warrant unless it is obtained based "upon probable cause," is "supported by Oath," and contains particularized descriptions of the "place to be searched" and what is "to be seized." Although "[t]here is nothing in the amendments text to suggest that a warrant is required to make a search or seizure reasonable,"[7] the U.S. Supreme Court has long since read these two clauses together, generally holding that a warrantless search or seizure is presumptively (if not per se) unreasonable.[8]

The critical triggering phrase of the fourth amendment is searches and seizures. If there is no search or seizure, then official behavior is not covered by the Fourth Amendment, and it need not be reasonable, based on probable cause, or carried out pursuant to a warrant. Although there may be statutory protections that require certain conduct, an individual does not have fourth amendment protections unless there is a search and seizure.

The U.S. Supreme Court has said that a search occurs where the Government infringes upon a persons reasonable expectation of privacy, consisting of both an actual, subjective expectation of privacy as well as an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy, which requires both that an individual manifested a subjective expectation of privacy in the searched object and that society is willing to recognize that expectation as reasonable.[9] Thus, the Fourth Amendment ultimately limits the governments ability to conduct a range of activities, such as physical searches of homes or offices and listening to phone conversations. As a general rule, the Fourth Amendment requires the government to demonstrate probable cause and obtain a warrant (unless a recognized warrant exception applies) before conducting a search.[10]

A seizure of a person occurs when a government official makes an individual reasonably believe that he or she is not at liberty to ignore the governments presence in view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident.

The secondary triggering phrase of the fourth amendment is unreasonable. Even if official conduct is regarded as a search or seizure, there is no invasion of fourth amendment protections if the conduct is reasonable. Determination of reasonableness depends on the judicial balancing of the individual interest, generally regarded as a privacy interest, against the governmental interest, including law and order, national security, internal security, and the proper administration of the laws. Reasonableness generally entails a predicate of probable cause and, with many exceptions, the issuance of a warrant.

The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the Fourth Amendment to include a presumptive warrant requirement on all searches and seizures conducted by the government, and has ruled that any violations of this standard will result in the suppression of any information derived therefrom.

Generally, the same warrant rules apply when preparing and executing a search warrant for digital evidence as in other investigations. Law enforcement should consider the following when preparing and executing a search warrant for digital evidence:

The U.S. Supreme Court, however, has also recognized situations that render the obtainment of a warrant impractical or against the publics interest, and has accordingly crafted various exceptions to the warrant and probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment.

While the right against unreasonable searches and seizures was originally applied only to tangible things, Supreme Court jurisprudence eventually expanded the contours of the Fourth Amendment to cover intangible items such as conversations. However, the extent to which the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement applies to the governments collection of information for intelligence gathering and other purposes unrelated to criminal investigations is unclear.

As communications technology has advanced, the technology for intrusion into private conversations has kept pace, as have government efforts to exploit such technology for law enforcement and intelligence purposes. At the same time, the Supreme Court has expanded its interpretation of the scope of the Fourth Amendment with respect to such techniques, and Congress has legislated both to protect privacy and to enable the government to pursue its legitimate interests in enforcing the law and gathering foreign intelligence information. Yet the precise boundaries of what the Constitution allows, as well as what it requires, are not fully demarcated, and the relevant statutes are not entirely free from ambiguity.

Although the surveillance of wire or oral communications for criminal law enforcement purposes was held to be subject to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment in 1967,[11] neither the Supreme Court nor Congress sought to regulate the use of such surveillance for national security purposes at that time. Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (as originally enacted), contained an exception that stated:

Several years later, the Supreme Court invalidated warrantless electronic surveillance of domestic organizations for national security purposes, but indicated that its conclusion might differ if the electronic surveillance targeted foreign powers or their agents.[13] A lower court has since upheld the statutory scheme governing the gathering of foreign intelligence information against a Fourth Amendment challenge, despite an assumption that orders issued pursuant to the statute might not constitute warrants for Fourth Amendment purposes.[14] The Supreme Court has not yet directly addressed the issue. However, even if the warrant requirement was found not to apply to searches for foreign intelligence or national security purposes, such searches would presumably be subject to the general Fourth Amendment reasonableness test.[15]

There are several well-recognized exceptions to securing a warrant. Although the following is not an exhaustive list, the examples provide an idea of how the common exceptions apply to the search and seizure of digital evidence.

Consent. Consent is a valuable tool for an investigator. It can come from many sources, including a log-in banner, terms-of-use agreement, or company policy. Some considerations include:

Exigent circumstances. To prevent the destruction of evidence, law enforcement can seize an electronic storage device. In certain cases in which there is an immediate danger of losing data, law enforcement may perform a limited search to preserve the data in its current state. Once the exigent circumstances end, so does the exception.

Search incident to arrest. The need to protect the safety of law enforcement or to preserve evidence can justify a full search of an arrestee and a limited search of the arrest scene. This search incident to arrest can include a search of an electronic storage device, such as a cell phone or pager, held by the subject.

Inventory search. The inventory search exception is intended to protect the property of a person in custody and guard against claims of damage or loss. This exception is untested in the courts, so it is uncertain whether the inventory search exception will allow law enforcement to access digital evidence without a warrant.

Plain view doctrine. The plain view doctrine may apply in some instances to the search for and seizure of digital evidence. For plain view to apply, law enforcement must legitimately be in the position to observe evidence, the incriminating character of which must be immediately apparent. Law enforcement officials should exercise caution when relying on the plain view doctrine in connection with digital media, as rules concerning the application of the doctrine vary among jurisdictions.

In contrast with its rulings on surveillance, the Supreme Court has not historically applied the protections of the Fourth Amendment to documents held by third parties. In 1976, it held that financial records in the possession of third parties could be obtained by the government without a warrant.[16] Later, it likewise held that the installation and use of a pen register a device used to capture telephone numbers dialed does not constitute a Fourth Amendment search.[17] The reasoning was that individuals have a lesser expectation of privacy with regard to information held by third parties.

In response to the Supreme Courts rulings regarding the Fourth Amendments non-application to documents held by third parties, Congress enacted the Right to Financial Privacy Act (RFPA)[18] to constrain government authorities access to individuals financial records. Although these privacy protections are subject to a foreign intelligence exception,[19] government authorities were not authorized to compel financial institutions to secretly turn over financial records until 1986.[20] That year, the FBI was also given authority, in the form of FBI-issued national security letters, to access customer records held by telephone companies and other communications service providers in specified instances justified by a national security rationale.[21] Two additional national security letter authorities were enacted in the mid-1990s. The first provided access to credit and financial records of federal employees with security clearances.[22] The second gave the FBI access to credit agency records in order to facilitate the identification of financial institutions utilized by the target of an investigation.[23]

At its broadest, a Fourth Amendment analysis is a two-stage inquiry. First, was the action of a government officer toward a person or thing sufficiently intrusive to constitute a search or seizure?[24] Second, if a search or seizure did occur, was the intrusion reasonable in light of the circumstances? The reasonableness of a particular government action is judged by balancing the governmental interest which allegedly justifies the official intrusion against a persons legitimate expectations of privacy. Courts must consider the scope of the particular intrusion, the manner in which it is conducted, the justification for initiating it, and the place in which it is conducted.

If a court determines that a government intrusion constitutes a search or seizure that was not reasonable in light of the relative weights of the governments interest and a persons constitutionally protected privacy interests, it will conclude that a Fourth Amendment violation has occurred. A violation of the Fourth Amendment may, as a general rule, result in the suppression of any information derived therefrom in a judicial proceeding.

In most circumstances, government action is implicated when a government official conducts a search. Generally speaking, the Fourth Amendments limitations do not apply to searches by private parties unless those searches are conducted at the direction of the government. Private parties who independently acquire evidence of a crime may turn it over to law enforcement.[25]

For example, if an employee discovers contraband files on a computer that is being repaired in a shop, the employees subsequent release of information to law enforcement does not violate the Fourth Amendment. In such a case, law enforcement may examine anything that the employee observed.

The Fourth Amendment applies when the searched party has an actual expectation of privacy in the place to be searched or thing to be seized, and then only if it is an expectation that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable.[26]

The subjective part of the test focuses attention on the means the individual employs to protect his or her privacy, e.g., closing the door of a phone booth or closing curtains. Additionally, the assumption of risk that the individual appears to take is considered in determining the individuals actual expectation of privacy. Under assumption of risk, an individual is presumed to assume the risk that another party to a conversation or activity may consent to a search. This assumption of risk prevails even if the consenting party is an informer or undercover agent.[28]

The objective part of the test looks to what society regards as a reasonable expectation of privacy. Yet, it requires this without specifying an objective referent. Is society todays opinion polls, longstanding norms and traditions, a reasonable person, or the knowledge that people have in common? The result of the objective part of the test is that the Court has implicitly constructed a continuum of circumstances under which society would regard an individual as having a reasonable expectation of privacy. The continuum ranges from public places (open fields, in plain view, public highway), in which there is no objective expectation of privacy except in unusual circumstances, to the inside of ones home with the windows and curtains shut and the door bolted, in which there is an objective expectation of privacy. The objective expectation of privacy along the continuum (shopping centers, motels, offices, automobiles, and yards) depends on judicial interpretation. The Court has modified the objective element, referring to it as a legitimate expectation of privacy."

Some courts treat a computer as a closed container for Fourth Amendment purposes. In some jurisdictions, looking at a computers subdirectories and files is akin to opening a closed container.

The second important component of Katz v. United States is the holding that the fourth amendment protects people, not places. The question of what protection the fourth amendment offers people remains unanswered, and defining the scope of such protection still necessitates reference to places. Moreover, the distinction between people and places has raised the question of whether the fourth amendment still protects property interests, or whether it now protects only more personal interests. The issue of the protection afforded people as distinct from that afforded places has become more significant with the growth of third-party recordkeepers, e.g., banks. The thrust of the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Katz seemed to represent an expansion, not a replacement, of the existing fourth amendment protections:

It has been argued that, based on Katz, analysis of privacy interests should replace the more traditional property analysis when the Government uses nonphysical methods of search and where relevant privacy interests do not have physical characteristics. The property aspect is viewed as still important because it gives specificity and concreteness to fourth amendment analysis. Yet, in some rulings the U.S. Supreme Court has treated privacy as the only interest protected by the fourth amendment.

This implies a further narrowing of fourth amendment protection, both because property interests are not considered and because of the problems of defining privacy. In evaluating the appropriateness of the use of electronic surveillance technologies by Government officials, the courts have worked within the framework established by Katz. By analogy to traditional surveillance devices, the courts have attempted to determine whether or not individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy. This becomes more difficult as surveillance devices become more technologically sophisticated because the analogy is often more remote and hence less convincing. The courts have generally continued to consider the place in which a surveillance device is located or the place that a device is monitoring. The courts generally have adopted the more expansive interpretation of Katz and have not abandoned higher levels of protection for certain places, e.g., homes and yards.

Yet, the Katz framework has not offered the courts sufficient policy guidance to deal with the range and uses of new surveillance technologies. "Reasonable expectation of privacy" is an inherently nebulous phrase and, despite decades of judicial application, predicting its meaning in a new context is difficult. Determining whether a place is sufficiently private to offer protection against official surveillance is more and more difficult as the public sphere of activities encroaches on what was once deemed private.

The Fourth Amendment search and seizure provision protects a right of privacy by requiring warrants before government may invade one's internal space or by requiring that warrantless invasions be reasonable. However, "the Fourth Amendment cannot be translated into a general constitutional right to privacy. That Amendment protects individual privacy against certain kinds of governmental intrusion, but its protections go further, and often have nothing to do with privacy at all."[30]

Read the original:

Fourth Amendment | The IT Law Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

President Donald J. Trump – Biography

Posted on by

Who Is Donald Trump?

Donald John Trump is the 45th and current President of the United States who took office January 20, 2017. Previously, he was a real estate mogul, and a former reality TV star. Born in Queens, New York, in 1971 Trump became involved in large, profitable building projects in Manhattan. In 1980, he opened the Grand Hyatt New York, which made him the city's best-known developer. In 2004, Trump began starring in the hit NBC reality series The Apprentice, which also spawned the offshoot The Celebrity Apprentice. Trump turned his attention to politics, and in 2015 he announced his candidacy for president of the United States on the Republican ticket. After winning a majority of the primaries and caucuses, Trump became the official Republican candidate for president on July 19, 2016. That November, Trump was elected the 45th President of the United States, after defeating Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.

Thanks for watching!Visit Website

Donald Trump was born on June 14, 1946, in Queens, New York.

According to a September 2017 Forbes estimate, Donald Trumps net worth is $3.1 billion. Of that, $1.6 billion is in New York real estate; $570 million is in golf clubs and resorts; $500 million is in non-New York real estate; $290 million is in cash and personal assets; and $200 million is in brand businesses. Thats down from $3.7 billion in 2016, according to Fortune, mostly due to declining New York real estate values.

Thanks for watching!Visit Website

Thanks for watching!Visit Website

Over the years, Trumps net worth has been a subject of public debate. In 1990, Trump asserted his own net worth in the neighborhood of $1.5 billion. However the real estate market was in decline, reducing the value of and income from Trump's empire; a Forbes magazine investigation into his assets revealed that his existing debt likely brought the number closer to $500 million. In any event, the Trump Organization required a massive infusion of loans to keep it from collapsing, a situation which raised questions as to whether the corporation could survive bankruptcy. Some observers saw Trump's decline as symbolic of many of the business, economic and social excesses that had arisen in the 1980s.

Donald Trump eventually managed to climb back from a reported deficit of nearly $900 million, claiming to have reached a zenith of more than $2 billion. However, independent sources again questioned his math, estimating his worth at something closer to $500 million by 1997.

Over the course of his 2016 presidential run, Trumps net worth was questioned and he courted controversy after repeatedly refusing to release his tax returns while they were being audited by the Internal Revenue Service. He did not release his tax returns before the November election the first time a major party candidate had not released such information to the public since Richard Nixon in 1972.

Donald Trump attends the 'All Star Celebrity Apprentice' finale in2013 in New York City. (Photo: Michael Stewart/WireImage)

Donald Trump was raised Presbyterian by his mother, and he identifies as a mainline Protestant.

The fourth of five children, Donald Trumps parents were Frederick C. and Mary Anne MacLeod Trump. Frederick Trump was a builder and real estate developer who specialized in constructing and operating middle-income apartments in Queens, Staten Island and Brooklyn. Mary MacLeod immigrated from Tong, Scotland, in 1929 at the age of 17. She married Fred Trump in 1936, and the couple settled in Jamaica, Queens, a neighborhood that was, at the time, filled with Western European immigrants. In the 1950s the Trumps wealth increased with the postwar real estate boom, and Mary became a New York socialite and philanthropist. Fred died in 1999, and Mary passed away the following year.

Donald J. Trump has had three wives and is currently married to Slovenian model Melania Knauss (now Trump), over 23 years his junior. In January 2005, the couple married in a highly-publicized and lavish wedding. Among the many celebrity guests at the wedding were Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton. Melania gave birth to their son, Barron William Trump, in March 2006.

In 1977, Trump married his first wife Ivana Zelnickova Winklmayr, a New York fashion model who had been an alternate on the 1972 Czech Olympic Ski Team. After the 1977 birth of the couple's first of three children, Donald John Trump Jr., Ivana Trump was named vice president in charge of design in the Trump Organization and played a major role in supervising the renovation of the Commodore and the Plaza Hotel. The couple had two more children together Ivanka Trump (born in 1981) and Eric Trump (born in 1984) and went through a highly publicized divorce which was finalized in 1992.

In 1993 Trump married his second wife, Marla Maples, an actress with whom he had been involved for some time and already had a daughter, Tiffany Trump (born in 1993). Trump would ultimately file for a highly publicized divorce from Maples in 1997, which became final in June 1999. A prenuptial agreement allotted $2 million to Maples.

Trump's sons Donald Jr. and Eric work as executive vice presidents for The Trump Organization, and took over the family business while their father serves as president. Trump's daughter Ivanka was also an executive vice president of The Trump Organization, but left the business and her own fashion label to join her father's administration and become an unpaid assistant to the president. Her husband, Jared Kushner, is also a senior adviser to President Trump.

Donald Trump gives two thumbs up to the crowd on the fourth day of the Republican National Convention on July 21, 2016 at the Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland, Ohio. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Donald was an energetic, assertive child. His parents sent him to the New York Military Academy at age 13, hoping the discipline of the school would channel his energy in a positive manner. Trump did well at the academy, both socially and academically, rising to become a star athlete and student leader by the time he graduated in 1964.

He then entered Fordham University and two years later transferred to the Wharton School of Finance at the University of Pennsylvania, from which he graduated in 1968 with a degree in economics. During his years at college, Trump worked at his fathers real estate business during the summer. He also secured education deferments for the Vietnam War draft and ultimately a 1-Y medical deferment after he graduated.

Trump began his political career by seeking the nomination for the Reform Party for the 2000 presidential race and withdrew; he again publicly announced he would be running for president in the 2012 election. However it wasnt until the 2016 election that Trump became the official Republican nominee for president and, defying polls and media projections, won the majority of electoral college votes in a stunning victory on November 8, 2016. Despite losing the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by almost 2.9 million votes, Trump's electoral win 306 votes to Clinton's 232 votes clinched his election as the 45th president of the United States.

After one of the most contentious presidential races in U.S. history, Trump's rise to the office of president was considered a resounding rejection of establishment politics by blue-collar and working class Americans. In his victory speech, Trump said: I pledge to every citizen of our land that I will be president for all Americans." About his supporters, he said: "As Ive said from the beginning, ours was not a campaign, but rather an incredible and great movement made up of millions of hard-working men and women who love their country and want a better, brighter future for themselves and for their families.

On July 21, 2016, Trump accepted the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland. In a speech lasting one hour and 15 minutes, one of the longest in recent history, Trump outlined the issues he would tackle as president, including violence in America, the economy, immigration, trade, terrorism, and the appointment of Supreme Court Justices.

On immigration, he said: We are going to build a great border wall to stop illegal immigration, to stop the gangs and the violence, and to stop the drugs from pouring into our communities. He also promised supporters that he would renegotiate trade deals, reduce taxes and government regulations, repeal the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare, defend Second Amendment gun rights, and rebuild our depleted military, asking the countries the U.S. is protecting "to pay their fair share."

On October 7, 2016, just two days before the second presidential debate between Trump and Clinton, the Republican presidential nominee was embroiled in another scandal when The Washington Post released a 2005 recording in which he lewdly described kissing and groping women, and trying to have sex with then-married television personality Nancy ODell. The three-minute recording captured Trump speaking to Billy Bush, co-anchor of Access Hollywood, as they prepared to meet soap opera actress Arianne Zucker for a segment of the show. "Ive gotta use some Tic Tacs, just in case I start kissing her, Trump said in the recording which was caught on a microphone that had not been turned off. You know Im automatically attracted to beautiful I just start kissing them. Its like a magnet. Just kiss. I dont even wait. And when youre a star they let you do it. You can do anything."

He also said that because of his celebrity status he could grab women by their genitals. In response, Trump released a statement saying: This was locker room banter, a private conversation that took place many years ago. Bill Clinton has said far worse to me on the golf course not even close. I apologize if anyone was offended.

Trump later posted a videotaped apology on Facebook in which he said: Ive never said Im a perfect person, nor pretended to be someone that Im not. Ive said and done things I regret, and the words released today on this more than a decade-old video are one of them. Anyone who knows me knows these words dont reflect who I am. I said it, I was wrong, and I apologize.

The backlash was immediate with some top Republicans, including Senators John McCain, Kelly Ayotte, Mike Crapo, Shelley Moore Capito and Martha Roby, withdrawing their support for Trump. House Speaker Paul Ryan reportedly told fellow GOP lawmakers that he would not campaign with or defend the presidential candidate. Some GOP critics also called for Trump to withdraw from the race, including former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Trump remained defiant, tweeting that he would stay in the race.

Around the same time as the video leak, numerous women began speaking publicly about their past experiences with Trump, alleging he had either sexually assaulted or harassed them based on their looks.

Throughout the election, Trump vehemently denied allegations he had a relationship with Russian PresidentVladimir Putin and was tied to the hacking of the DNC emails. In January 2017, a U.S. intelligence report prepared by the CIA, FBI and NSA concluded that Putin had ordered a campaign to influence the U.S. election. Russias goals were to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump," the report said.

Prior to the release of the report, President-elect Trump had cast doubt on Russian interference and the intelligence communitys assessment. Trump received an intelligence briefing on the matter, and in his first press conference as president-elect on January 11, he acknowledged Russias interference. However, in subsequent comments he again refused to condemn Russia for such activity, notably saying on multiple occasions that he believed Putin's denials.

In March 2018, the Trump administration formally acknowledged the charges by issuing sanctions on 19 Russians for interference in the 2016 presidential election and alleged cyberattacks. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin delivered the announcement, with thepresident remaining silent on the matter.

In July, days before President Trump was to meet with Putin in Finland, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced additional charges against12 Russian intelligence officers accused of hacking the DNC and the Clinton campaign.

On January 20, 2017, Trump was sworn in as the 45th president of the United States by Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts. Trump took the oath of office placing his hand on the Bible that was used at Abraham Lincoln's inauguration and his own family Bible, which was presented to him by his mother in 1955 when he graduated from Sunday school at his family's Presbyterian church.

In his inaugural speech on January 20th, Trump sent a populist message that he would put the American people above politics. What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people, he said. January 20, 2017, will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again.

He went on to paint a bleak picture of an America that had failed many of its citizens, describing families trapped in poverty, an ineffective education system, and crime, drugs and gangs. This American carnage stops right here and stops right now," he said.

The day after Trump's inauguration, millions of protesters demonstrated across the United States and around the world. The Women's March on Washington drew over half a million people to protest President Trump's stance on a variety issues ranging from immigration to environmental protection. Activists and celebrities including Gloria Steinem, Angela Davis, Madonna, Cher, Ashley Judd, Scarlett Johansson, America Ferrera, Alicia Keys and Janelle Mone participated. The president tweeted in response:

The first 100 days of Trumps presidency lasted from January 20, 2017 until April 29, 2017. In the first days of his presidency, President Trump issued a number of back-to-back executive orders to make good on some of his campaign promises, as well as several orders aimed at rolling back policies and regulations that were put into place during the Obama administration. Several of Trumps key policies that got rolling during Trumps first 100 days in office include his supreme court nomination; steps toward building a wall on the Mexico border; a travel ban for several predominantly Muslim countries; the first moves to dismantle the Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. Obamacare); and the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement.

In addition, Trump signed orders to implement a federal hiring freeze, withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and reinstate the Mexico City policy that bans federal funding of nongovernmental organizations abroad that promote or perform abortions. He signed an order to scale back financial regulation under the Dodd-Frank Act, created by the Obama administration and passed by Congress after the financial crisis of 2008. And he called for a lifetime foreign-lobbying ban for members of his administration and a five-year ban for all other lobbying.

On March 16, 2017, the president released his proposed budget. The budget outlined his plans for increased spending for the military, veterans affairs and national security, including building a wall on the border with Mexico. It also made drastic cuts to many government agencies including the Environmental Protection Agency and the State Department, as well as the elimination of the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the Community Development Block Grant program which supports Meals on Wheels.

On January 31, 2017, President Trump nominated Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. The 49-year-old conservative judge was appointed by President George W. Bush to the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit in Denver. Judge Gorsuch was educated at Columbia, Harvard and Oxford and clerked for Supreme Justices Byron White and Anthony Kennedy. The nomination came after Merrick Garland, President Obama's nominee to replace the late Antonin Scalia, was denied a confirmation hearing by Senate Republicans.

As Gorsuch's legal philosophy was considered to be similar to Scalia's, the choice drew strong praise from the conservative side of the aisle. "Millions of voters said this was the single most important issue for them when they voted for me for president," President Trump said. "I am a man of my word. Today I am keeping another promise to the American people by nominating Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court."

After Gorsuch gave three days of testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in March, the Senate convened on April 6 to advance his nomination. Democrats mostly held firm to deny the 60 votes necessary to proceed, resulting in the first successful partisan filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee. But Republicans quickly countered with another historic move, invoking the "nuclear option" to lower the threshold for advancing Supreme Court nominations from 60 votes to a simple majority of 50. On April 7, Gorsuch was confirmed by the Senate to become the 113th justice of the Supreme Court.

The following year, President Trump had another opportunity to continue the rightward push of the Supreme Court with the retirement of Justice Kennedy. On July 9, 2018, he nominated Brett Kavanaugh, another textualist and orginalist in the mold of Scalia. Democrats vowed to fight the nomination, though their options remained limited as the minority party.

Trump issued an executive order to build a wall at the United States border with Mexico. In his first televised interview as president, President Trump said the initial construction of the wall would be funded by U.S. taxpayer dollars, but that Mexico would reimburse the U.S. 100 percent in a plan to be negotiated and might include a suggested import tax on Mexican goods.

In response to the new administration's stance on a border wall, Mexican president Enrique Pea Nieto cancelled a planned visit to meet with President Trump. "Mexico does not believe in walls," the Mexican president said in a video statement. "I've said time again; Mexico will not pay for any wall." Trump and Pea Nieto spoke on the phone after their in-person meeting was cancelled, and "agreed at this point not to speak publicly about this controversial issue," according to a statement from the Mexican government.

After funding for the wall failed to materialize, from either Mexico or Congress, Trump in April 2018 announced that he wouldreinforce security along the U.S. border with Mexico by using American troops because of the "horrible, unsafe laws" that left the country vulnerable. The following day, the president signed a proclamation that directed National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Department of Homeland Security said that the deployment would be in coordination with governors, that the troops would "support federal law enforcement personnel, including [Customs and Border Protection]," and that federal immigration authorities would "direct enforcement efforts." The exact number of troops and duration of deployment had yet to be determined.

As part of attempts to seal the U.S. border with Mexico, the Trump administration in 2018 began following through on a "zero-tolerance" policy to prosecute anybody found to have crossed the border illegally. As children were legally not allowed to be detained with their parents, this meant that they were to be held separately as family cases wound through immigration courts.

A furor ensued after reports surfaced that nearly 2,000 children had been separated from their parents over a six-week period that ended in May 2018, compounded by photos of toddlers crying in cages. President Trump initially deflected blame for the situation, insisting it resulted from the efforts of predecessors and political opponents."The Democrats are forcing the breakup of families at the Border with their horrible and cruel legislative agenda," he tweeted.

The president ultimately caved to pressure from the bad PR, and on June 20 he signed an executive order thatdirected the Department of Homeland Security to keep families together. "I didnt like the sight or the feeling of families being separated," he said, adding that it remained important to have "zero tolerance for people that enter our country illegally" and for Congress to find a permanent solution to the problem. In the meantime, the DHS essentially revived the "catch-and-release" system that the zero-tolerance policy was meant to eradicate, while dealing with the logistics of reuniting families.

President Trump signed one of his most controversial executive orders on January 27, 2017, at the Pentagon, calling for "extreme vetting" to "keep radical Islamic terrorists out of the United States of America." The president's executive order was put into effect immediately, and refugees and immigrants from seven predominantly Muslim countries traveling to the U.S. were detained at U.S. airports. The order called for a ban on immigrants from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen for at least 90 days, temporarily suspended the entry of refugees for 120 days and barred Syrian refugees indefinitely. In an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network, President Trump also said he would give priority to Christian refugees trying to gain entry into the United States.

After facing multiple legal hurdles, President Trump signed a revised executive order on March 6, 2017,calling for a 90-day ban on travelers from six predominantly Muslim countries including Sudan, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. Iraq, which was included in the original executive order, was removed from the list. Travelers from the six listed countries, who hold green cards or have valid visas as of the signing of the order, will not be affected. Religious minorities would not get special preference, as was outlined in the original order, and an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees was reduced to 120 days.

On March 15, just hours before the revised ban was going to be put into effect, Derrick Watson, a federal judge in Hawaii, issued a temporary nationwide restraining order in a ruling that stated the executive order did not prove that a ban would protect the country from terrorism and that it was issued with a purpose to disfavor a particular religion, in spite of its stated, religiously neutral purpose. At a rally in Nashville, President Trump responded to the ruling, saying: "This is, in the opinion of many, an unprecedented judicial overreach.

Judge Theodore D. Chuang of Maryland also blocked the ban the following day, and in subsequent months, the ban was impeded in decisions handed down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Virginia, and the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals once again.

However, on June 26, 2017, Trump won a partial victory when the Supreme Court announced it was allowing the controversial ban to go into effect for foreign nationals who lacked a "bona fide relationship with any person or entity in the United States." The court agreed to hear oral arguments for the case in October, but with the 90-to-120-day timeline in place for the administration to conduct its reviews, it was believed the case would be rendered moot by that point.

On September 24, 2017, Trump issued a new presidential proclamation, which permanently bans travel to the United States for most citizens from seven countries. Most were on the original list, including Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, while the new order included Chad, North Korea and some citizens of Venezuela (certain government officials and their families). The tweak did little to pacify critics, who argued that the order was still heavily biased toward Islam. The fact that Trump has added North Korea with few visitors to the U.S. and a few government officials from Venezuela doesnt obfuscate the real fact that the administrations order is still a Muslim ban, said Anthony D. Romero, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

On October 10, the Supreme Court cancelled a planned hearing on an appeal of the original travel ban. On October 17, the day before the order was to take effect, Judge Watson of Hawaii issued a nationwide order freezing the Trump administrations new travel ban, writing that the order was a poor fit for the issues regarding the sharing of public-safety and terrorism-related information that the president identifies.

On December 4, 2017, the Supreme Court allowed the third version of the Trump administrations travel ban to go into effect despite the ongoing legal challenges. The courts orders urged appeals courts to determineas quickly as possible whether theban was lawful.

Under the ruling, the administration could fully enforce its new restrictions on travel from eight nations, six of them predominantly Muslim. Citizens of Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Chad and North Korea, along with some groups of people from Venezuela, would be unable to unable to emigrate to the United States permanently, with many barred from also working, studying or vacationing in the country.

On June 26, 2018, the Supreme Court upheld the president's travel ban by a 5-4 vote.Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said that Trump had the executive authority to make national security judgments in the realm of immigration, regardless of his previous statements about Islam. In a sharply worded dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said that the outcome was equivalent to that of Korematsu v. United States, which permitted the detention of Japanese-Americans during World War II.

The Valentine's Day 2018 shooting atMarjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, which left a total of 17 students and faculty dead, sparked a strong response from President Trump. He ordered the Justice Department to issue regulations banning bump stocks, and suggested he was willing to consider a range of measures, from strengthening background checks to raising the minimumage for buying rifles. He also backed an NRA-fueled proposal for arming teachers, which drew backlash from many in the profession.

The president remained invested in the issue even as the usual cycle of outrage began diminishing: In a televised February 28 meeting with lawmakers, he called for gun control legislation that would expand background checks to gun shows and internet transactions, secure schools and restrict sales for some young adults. At one point he called outPennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey for being "afraid of the NRA," and at another he suggested thatauthorities should seize guns from mentally ill or other potentially dangerous peoplewithout first going to court. "I like taking the guns early," he said. "Take the guns first, go through due process second."

His stances seemingly stunned the Republican lawmakers at the meeting, as well as the NRA, which previously considered the president as a strong supporter. However, within a few days, Trump was walking back his proposal to raise the age limit and mainly pushing for arming select teachers.

In early August 2017, intelligence experts confirmed that North Korea successfully produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead that fits inside its missiles, putting it one step closer to becoming a nuclear power. Around the same time, the North Korean state news agency said they were "examining the operational plan" to strike areas around the U.S. territory of Guam with medium-to-long-range strategic ballistic missiles. U.S. experts estimated North Koreas nuclear warheads at 60 and that the country could soon have an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the United States. Trump responded that North Korea would be met with fire and fury if the threats continued and that the U.S. military was locked and loaded.

On August 15, Korean leader Kim Jong-un said hed "watch a little more the foolish and stupid conduct of the Yankees," which Trump tweeted was a very wise and well reasoned decision. However on August 20, North Korea warned that the U.S. was risking an "uncontrollable phase of a nuclear war" by following through with military drills with South Korea.

On August 28, North Korea launched a missile over Japan. The following day, Trump said all options were on the table. At the United Nations General Assembly on September 19, Trump pejoratively called Kim Jong-un Rocketman and said he would totally destroy North Korea if it threatened the United States or its allies, hours after the group voted to enact additional sanctions against the country.

Two days later, Trump widened American economic sanctions; three days later North Korea threatened to shoot down American airplanes even if they were not in its airspace, calling Trumps comments a declaration of war. A week later, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the U.S. and North Korea were in direct communication and looking for a non-militarized path forward.

On October 20, CIA Director Mike Pompeo warned that North Korea was in the "final step" of being able to strike mainland America with nuclear warheads and the U.S. should react accordingly. However some foreign policy experts were concerned that war between the U.S. and North Korea was increasingly possible.

Following the 2018 Winter Olympics in PyeongChang, South Korea, during which North Korea made a show of unity with the host country, its officials also relayed interest in opening up communications with Washington.President Trump leaped at the opportunity, announcing that he was willing to sit down with Kim.

On June 12, 2018, Trump and Kim met at the secluded Capella resort in Singapore, marking the first such encounter between a sitting U.S. president and North Korean leader. The two held private talks with their interpreters, before expanding the meeting to include such top staffers as Pompeo (now U.S. secretary of state), National Security Adviser John Bolton and White House Chief of Staff John Kelly.

Afterward, in a televised ceremony, the leaders signed a joint statement in which Trump "committed to provide security guarantees" to North Korea and Kim "reaffirmed his firm and unwavering commitment to complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula." Although their talks marked an early step in a diplomatic process that some predicted could take years to complete, the president said he believed denuclearization on the peninsula would begin "very quickly."

"We're very proud of what took place today," Trump said. "I think our whole relationship with North Korea and the Korean Peninsula is going to be a very much different situation than it has in the past."

Two weeks after the meeting with Kim, the White House announced that Trump would hold his first formal discussions with Russian President Vladimir Putin inHelsinki, Finland, on July 16, 2018.

The two men met on the heels of Trump's heavily scrutinized summit with NATO leaders, and shortly after the Justice Department announced the indictment of 12 Russian operatives for interfering in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Prompted to address the issue of election hacking in a joint news conference for the two leaders,President Trump refused to point a finger at his counterpart. "I think we've all been foolish. I think we're all to blame," he said, adding that"President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today."

The comments drew a harsh response stateside, with several notable Republicans joining their Democratic colleagues to question why the president was siding with Putin over his intelligence agencies.Senator McCain called it "one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president in memory," and even Trump ally Newt Gingrich weighed in with strong words, tweeting, "It is the most serious mistake of his presidency and must be corrected immediately."

Trump sought to quiet the furor after returning to the White House, insisting that he had misspoken when saying he didn't see why Russia should be blamed and reminding that he has "on numerous occasions noted our intelligence findings that Russians attempted to interfere in our elections," though he again suggested that other parties could be responsible.

Around that time, it was revealed that Trump had instructed Bolton, his national security adviser, to invite Putin to the White House that fall, news that caught Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats off guard. Bolton soon disclosed that he would postpone the invitation until the conclusion of the special counsel investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Additionally, it was learned that the soccer ball gifted to President Trump from Putin, to commemorate the recently completed World Cup, was embedded with a transmitter chip. It turned out that the chip was a standard feature for the product, designed to provide access toplayer videos and other content for people using their mobile devices near the ball.

In May 2018, over the objections of European allies, President Trump announced that he was withdrawing the U.S. from theIran nuclear deal enacted by his predecessor and reimposing sanctions on the Middle Eastern country.

The announcement initially drew a tepid response from Iran, but PresidentHassan Rouhani had stronger words on the issue while addressing diplomats in July, noting that "war with Iran is the mother of all wars" and warning his American counterpart to"not play with the lion's tail, because you will regret it eternally."

That seemingly enraged Trump, who fired off an all-caps tweet addressed to Rouhani: "Never, ever threaten the United States again or you will suffer consequences the likes of which few throughout history have ever suffered before," he wrote. "We are no longer a country that will stand for your demented words of violence & death. Be cautious!"

One of President Trumps first executive orders in office was calling on federal agencies to "waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay" aspects of the Affordable Care Act to minimize financial burden on states, insurers and individuals.

On March 7, 2017, House Republicans, led by Speaker Paul Ryan, introduced the American Health Care Act, a plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA). However, the controversial bill ultimately didn't have enough Republican votes and was withdrawn a few weeks later, representing amajor legislative setback for Speaker Ryan and President Trump.

After intense negotiations among party factions, a new Republican health care plan was brought to a vote in the House of Representatives on May 4, 2017, and passed by a slim margin of 217 to 213. That passed the buck to the Senate. Almost immediately after a draft was unveiled on June 22, conservative senators such as Ted Cruz declared they could not support the bill's failure to significantly lower premiums, while moderates like Susan Collins voiced concerns over its steep cuts to Medicaid. On June 27, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell elected to delay his planned vote for the bill. When the third, so-called skinny repeal, bill finally went to a vote on in the Senate July 28, it failed by three votes.

In September, a new bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act was put forth by Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. However on September 26, Senate republicans announced they would not move forward with the current plan, as they were short of the required votes. We are disappointed in certain so-called Republicans, Trump responded.

On October 12, 2017 Trump signed an executive order in a move that could dismantle the ACA without Congresss approval, expanding health insurance products mostly less comprehensive plans through associations of small employers and more short-term medical coverage. He also announced that he would get rid of health insurance subsidies. Known as cost-sharing reduction payments, which lower the cost of deductibles for low-income Americans, they were expected to cost $9 billion in 2018 and $100 billion over the next decade.

On October 6, 2017, the Trump administration announced a rollback of the birth control mandate put in place by the Obama administrations Affordable Care Act, which required insurers to cover birth control at no cost without copayments as a preventive service. For years, the mandate was threatened by lawsuits from conservative and religious groups.

The Trump administration said the new exemption applies to any employer that objects to covering contraception services on the basis of sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions. The change is in line with Trumps promises as a candidate to ensure that religious groups are not bullied by the federal government because of their religious beliefs. Opponents of the measure say that it could potentially affect hundreds of thousands of women, and that access to the affordable contraception the mandate provided prevents unintended pregnancies and saves womens lives.

On April 26, 2017, just days away from his 100th day in office, President Trump announced his tax plan in a one-page outline that would dramatically change tax codes. The plan called for streamlining seven income tax brackets to three 10, 25 and 35 percent. However, the initial outline did not specify which income ranges would fall under those brackets. The plan also proposed to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 to 15 percent, eliminate the alternative-minimum tax and estate tax, and simplify the process for filing tax returns. The proposal did not address how the tax cuts might reduce federal revenue and increase debt.

On December 2, 2017, Trump achieved the first major legislative victory of his administration when the Senate passed a sweeping tax reform bill. Approved along party lines by a 51-49 vote, the bill drew criticism for extensive last-minute rewrites, with frustrated Democrats posting photos of pages filled with crossed-out text and handwriting crammed into the margins.

Among other measures, the Senate bill called for the slashing ofthe corporate tax rate from 35 to 20 percent, doubling personal deductions and ending the Obamacare mandate.It also included a controversial provision that allowed for "unborn children" to be named as beneficiaries of college savings accounts, which critics called an attempt to support the pro-life movement.Despite estimates by the Congressional Budget Office that the bill would cost $1.5 trillion over a decade, GOP senators insisted that charges would be offset by a growing economy.

After the bill's passage, President Trump tweeted: Biggest Tax Bill and Tax Cuts in history just passed in the Senate. Now these great Republicans will be going for final passage. Thank you to House and Senate Republicans for your hard work and commitment!On December 20, the final tax bill formally passed both chambers of Congress, needing only the president's signature to give him his first major legislative victory.

Following partisan battles over a spending bill in early 2018, which resulted in a brief government shutdown and stopgap measures, President Trump threatened to torpedo a $1.3 trillion spending bill with a last-minute veto. Reportedly angry that the bill did not fully fund his long-promised Mexican border wall, he nevertheless signed the bill into law on March 23, hours before another government shutdown would have gone into effect.

On March 1, 2018, after the conclusion of a Commerce Department investigation, President Trump announced that he was imposing tariffs of 25 percent on steel imports and 10 percent on aluminum. The following month, the administration said it was adding a 25 percent tariff on more than 1,000 Chinese products to penalize the country for its trade practices, though Trump ultimately granted temporary exemptions to China, the European Union, Canada and Mexico as he sought to renegotiate deals.

His actions resulted in new agreements with South Korea and multiple South American countries to restrain their metal exports, but talks with China, the E.U. and the border countries stalled. In late May, the administration announced that it was moving forward with all tariffs, including a tax on $34 billion worth of Chinese goods that went into effect in July.

The move drew a harsh response from the E.U., Canada and Mexico, which announced retaliatory measures. With Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau condemning Trump's "unacceptable actions" and French President Emmanuel Macron threatening to isolate the U.S. from the Group of 7, the president faced a frosty reception at the G-7 summit in Quebec in June. He ultimately left the summit early, making headlines on the way out by announcing he would not sign a communique between the seven nations and taking shots at Trudeau on Twitter. In July, Trump again had harsh words for allies at the NATO summit in Brussels, Belgium, including accusations that Germany was "captive" to Russia for its dependence on Russian natural gas, and followed with criticism of U.K. Prime MinisterTheresa Mayfor herhandling of Brexit.

Back home, the president attempted to head off the political fallout of a potentially costly trade war with the announcement that the administration would provide up to $12 billion in emergency relief funds for U.S. farmers.

On February 22, 2017 the Trump administration rolled back federal protection for transgender students to use bathrooms that correspond to their gender identity, allowing states and school districts to interpret federal anti-discrimination law. On March 27, 2017 President Trump signed several measures under the Congressional Review Act to reverse regulations related to education, land use and a "blacklisting rule" requiring federal contractors to disclose violations of federal labor, wage and workplace safety laws.

On December 6, 2017, President Trump announced that the U.S. was formally recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and would move the American embassy there from its current location in Tel Aviv. The declaration broke decades of precedent, in which the U.S. refused to take sides in the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians over territorial rights to the city.

Read the original here:

President Donald J. Trump - Biography

Bitcoin, Ethereum, Ripple Prices Surge Higher; FOMO Santa Rally?

Posted on by

Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Ethereum, Ripple: Prices, Charts and Analysis

Last weeks crypto rally continues going into the end of the year with the market awash with double-digit gains on heavy volume. The market has turned from being heavily oversold to now being overbought in the short-term but buyers continue to push the market higher across the board. Trading volume has doubled to around USD 25 billion/day, a multi-month high, lending the rally credibility. The latest rally has had no particular trigger, although most coins were trading in heavily oversold territory, while the latest sell-off in the global equity space may have added some shine to cryptomarket space.

While this Sanata rally will help holders, the market still remains in a long-term downtrend with most cryptos down by 85% or more this year from Januarys peaks. Any long-term rally will be driven by fundamental changes via regulaton or mass adoption of the underlying blockchain technology and not just by traders fear of missing out (FOMO).

Bitcoin, Ethereum, Ripple Prices Surge After Hitting Massively Oversold Conditions

If you are interested in trading the cryptocurrency market, we have produced aDay Trading Guide to Bitcoin and Other Cryptocurrenciesto help you better understand this highly volatile asset class.

After trading in hevaily oversold territory, Ethereum has soared higher and is changing hands at levels last seen five weeks ago. The coin is now targetting the $167 - $187 level which guards the August 14 low/September 21 high at $250. The RSI indicator does show ETH as heavily overbought, confirming the IG Retail Indicator which shows that 91% of investors are net-long of Ethereum and have increased their net-longs further over the last week. This gives us a strong bearish contrarian signal.

DailyFX analyst and Elliot Wave expert Jeremy Wagner highlighted the potential rally in Ethereum and Ripple in one of his regular webinars recently.

Investors remain net-long cryptocurrencies but recent changes give us a mixed trading bias across the space with some cryptos showing bullish contrarian readings while other remian negative. You can sign up to the IG Client Sentiment Indicator for free to get updated positioning data.

Cryptocurrency Trader Resources Free Practice Trading Accounts, Guides, Sentiment Indicators and Webinars

If you are interested in trading Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Ethereum, Litecoin or Ripple we can help you begin your journey. We have an Introduction to Bitcoin Trading Guide along with a Free Demo Account so you can practice trading this volatile asset class.

Whats your opinion on the latest cryptocurrency rally? Share your thoughts and ideas with us using the comments section at the end of the article or you can contact me on Twitter @nickcawley1 or via email at nicholas.cawley@ig.com.

--- Written by Nick Cawley, Analyst.

View post:

Bitcoin, Ethereum, Ripple Prices Surge Higher; FOMO Santa Rally?

Ethereum Co-Founder Calls the Cryptobottom of 2018 …

Posted on by

Joseph Lubin, co-founder of major cryptocurrency Ethereum (ETH), declared that he is calling the cryptobottom of 2018 in a tweet Dec. 21.

According to Lubin, the crypto markets bottom is marked by an epic amount of fear, uncertainty, and doubt, specifically from industry media and social commentators, which he refers to as our friends in the 4th and crypto-5th estates.

Continuing in a Twitter thread, the founder of Ethereum blockchain-focused software firm ConsenSys then evidently addressed his firms recently reported major layoffs:

ConsenSys remains healthy and is engaging in a rebalancing of priorities and activities which started about nine months ago.

He stated that Consensys continues investing in projects in its role as a blockchain tech incubator and venture firm and hiring for internal projects that remain core to our forward looking-business.

In the same thread, Lubin complained about an epic amount of conjecture and preemptive paranoia concerning situations journalists and bloggers don't have real data for, actual insight into, or understanding of.

Concluding, Lubin reiterated his optimism about the future of ConsenSys and Ethereum, stating:

The sky is not falling. From my perspective the future looks very bright. [...] Peaking [sic] into 2019, if you could see the landscape through my eyes, you'd have to wear shades.

Reports surfaced this week citing sources familiar with the matter that ConsenSys is spinning out startups it previously backed, some of them without financial support. The sources reported that the number of employees to be laid off could be anywhere between 50 and 60 percent of ConsenSys 1,200 person workforce.

This past week, Cointelegraph reported that in comparison to more significant job cuts in various industries globally, the current slump in the cryptocurrency markets and ensuring job cuts in associated companies seem relatively benign.

In September, Ethereums other co-founder Vitalik Buterin had pointed out that there is no chance that the cryptocurrency and blockchain space will see 1,000-times growth again.

View original post here:

Ethereum Co-Founder Calls the Cryptobottom of 2018 ...

Evolution | Pokmon Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

Posted on by

Evolution () is the first evolutionin the Pokmon franchisewhen one Pokmon, upon reaching a certain level, using a certain stone, learning a certain move, orbeing traded, evolves into a different kind ofPokmon. In Pokmon Gold, Silver, Crystal, HeartGold and SoulSilver games, it is stated that Professor Elm is an expert on evolution, and discovered that Pikachu evolves from Pichu.

In the anime, during evolution, a Pokmon will become surrounded by a light and slowly change shape. In the original, Advanced, and Diamond & Pearl series, the Pokmon is surrounded by a white light, while in the Best Wishes!, XY, and Sun & Moon series, the Pokmon is surrounded by a golden or blue light.

To some Pokmon, evolution means growing up, while to others, it just refers becoming another species or getting upgraded. However, many of them retain the memories of their life during their pre-evolution form.

Pokmon gain experience after battling wild Pokmon and Pokmon Trainers. The more experience a Pokmon gains, the more it levels up. When a Pokmon reaches a particular level, it will evolve into its next form (if it has one). This is very helpful to most Trainers who want their Pokmon to become stronger.

There are ways to share experience, such as allow a Pokmon you wish it to evolve to hold Exp. Share. It is a hold item that allows the user to earn experience even if it did not participate in the battle. This is a convenient tool if you want to level up a new or low-level Pokmon.

Evolution can be prevented by simply press the 'B' button on the Game when the Pokmon is attempting to evolve. This is useful as some Pokmon will learn moves that cannot be learnt in a later form or if you want a Pokmon to learn a move earlier than usual. For example, Gabite. If you let Gible evolve into Gabite at level 24 it will learn Dragon Rush at level 49, but if you keep Gible it will learn Dragon Rush at level 37. Sometimes it doesn't matter if you let it evolve or not. The Pokmon can hold an Everstone, which keeps them from evolving, so that you don't have to keep cancelling the evolution every time the Pokmon levels up. However, if your Pokmon has evolved, it might not evolve again (Raticate, Linoone, etc.) Although some Pokmon can evolve more than once (Poliwhirl, Cascoon, etc.), some basic Pokmon just can't evolve, due to undiscovered forms, or if they are really rare (Chatot, Groudon, etc.) There are also Pokmon that can evolve into different things like love, choice, etc. For example, Eevee, Poliwhirl, Wurmple, or Kirlia.

Some Pokmon will not evolve unless you use a special stones called Evolutionary Stones. These special Items are linked to the Pokmon's type. Here are a list of Pokmon that can evolve by giving them the stones.

Some items are needed for a Pokmon to evolve. If a Pokmon hold the item allowing it to evolve, let it level up once and it will then evolve into the second form.

A small group of Pokmon refuses to evolve, no matter if you are at the appropriate level to trigger the evolve process, unless you trade them with a friend. Some Pokmon need to have a held item to evolve when trading with a friend. Another group require specific Pokmon to be trade in order to evolve.

Small groups of Pokmon requires a gender to evolve into the next stage.

Certain Pokmon, especially baby Pokmon, requires friendship with its trainer and if they are fond enough, they are willing to evolve. Some Pokmon only evolves in a certain time of the day with friendship.

Special Pokmon evolve at a certain area of location.

Certain Pokmon need to know a move to evolve. This method was introduced in Generation IV, starting with Diamond/Pearl/Platinum.

The current time of day will sometimes affect evolution. This method was introduced in Generation VI, starting with X/Y/OR/AS.

Some Pokmon have certain type of unique way of evolve.

Certain Pokmon will be able to evolve into a Mega form, the final form for one-evolution families and second/true final form for two-evolution families with the use of a Mega Stone, a held object. However this evolution will devolve back into their previous form at the end of the battle.

There's a special evolution that Ash's Greninja can do due to his strong bond with Ash called Ash-Greninja, that was later described as Bond Phenomenon.

Primal Reversion is a similar state to Mega Evolution, but the Pokmon devolve to a previous state in the past.

It is a possible game mechanic in Pokmon Omega Ruby & Alpha Sapphire, most likely because this mechanic was founded during development of Pokmon Omega Ruby & Alpha Sapphire.

Devolution is a form of reverse evolution when a Pokemon reverts to a previous state. Devolution does not exist in the games but is common in the Manga and TCG. Devolution is achieved mainly unnaturally - through experimentation, or Devolution Spray. Though certain Pokemon, such as Isamu's Clefairy and Pikachu are capable of devolving themselves. The TCG also has it that Eeveelutions can revert into Eevee and that Mew has twospecial attacks named the Devolution Beam and Devo Crush - both of which which devolves the Pokemon hit by the attack. Golurk and Jirachi also possess special attacks which allow them to devolve an opposing Pokemon.

In the Anime Episode, Electric Shock Showdown, Misty points out that once Pikachu evolves with the use of the Thunder Stone, Pikachu won't revert back.

In An Epic Defense Force, Luke's Golett seemingly evolves to Golurk in a Movie then Devolves back to Golett, repairing the Golurk Statue, as it turns out to be fictitious.

Another instance of the non-existence of Devolution, is when Bonnie requested Ash's Frogadier to devolve back to Froakie, Clemont said that it would be impossible.

- Charmander

- Charmeleon

- Charizard

- Mega Charizard X

- Mega Charizard Y

- Bulbasaur

- Ivysaur

- Venusaur

- Mega Venusaur

- Squirtle

- Wartortle

- Blastoise

- Mega Blastoise

Go here to read the rest:

Evolution | Pokmon Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

Evolution (2015) – imdb.com

Posted on by

Edit Storyline

Nicolas is a boy living on a remote island set in the future, or another planet - or is it a dream? His village consists of white-painted houses located above the sea with a volcanic rock and black sand coastline, populated by young women and boys all of a similar age to Nicolas. Whilst swimming, Nicolas makes a discovery in the ocean, which is shrugged off by his mother, who, like all the women in the town has tied-back hair, is pale and wears a simple thin beige dress. Nicolas is curious, thinks that he is being lied to and starts to explore his environment, witnessing some unsettling scenes. He then finds himself taken to a hospital-like building where he, along with the others, undergoes a series of medical procedures by the women, dressed as nurses. He is befriended by one nurse, who becomes instrumental in the film's denouement. The film is not easy to categorise; it is not only enigmatic but beautifully filmed with deeply poetic imagery. It reflects the fear of the unknown, ...

Taglines:Grow to become something new.

See the original post here:

Evolution (2015) - imdb.com

THE TRANSHUMANIST SCRAPBOOK: ARTIFICIAL BODIES WAITING FOR …

Posted on by

Just when you thought the transhumanist craze had died down and was a "passing" fad of science fiction prognostication, this article from the U.K.'s Daily Mail comes along to dispel all the calm (shared by Mr. V.T.):

Bodies kept alive in plastic bags and lifeless 'blank' humans ready for a new consciousness to be uploaded: Controversial booth at CES claims to offer IMMORTALITY - but is all as it seems?

Now, the article is clear: this is all just a "marketing gimick" to promote a "new television show":

Murmurs of I dont like this, and no, this is too much for me, could be heard as CES attendees crowded around the Psychasec setup, greeted by what appeared to be lifeless human forms on display in large glass cases.

During a brief tour through the booth, exhibitors dressed in all white sold the idea of immortality, through a plan to upload human consciousness to human sleeves of whatever design you desire before concluding around the display of Joel, a fresh sleeve' in a vacuum sealed bag, breathing and eating through a tube.

All is well, however, since the whole exhibit and booth was nothing but a marketing scheme for a new series on Netflix:

It may be one of the most bizarre Netflix marketing schemes yet, going as far as plastering posters with Boycott #Psychasec and Immortality is Immoral along the outside of the booth (though an exhibitor insisted to Dailymail.com that this had been done by anti-Psychasec protestors).

The dystopian sci-fi Altered Carbon is set to premier on Netflix February 2.

But I have to wonder, is it really the case that all is well? Frankly, I find the idea of such a "marketing scheme" to be almost as abhorrent as the reality.

Why?

Because notice what is being done: downloading and uploading of "consciousness" is now being promoted as a service to be performed: it is being made a commodity which, to be downloaded and uploaded, means ultimately that it can be bought and sold. Similarly with the "sleeves," the "genetically engineered bodies", are reduced to so much material to be bought and sold - perhaps organ-by-organ. And with these possibilities comes another: that one enters into contractual arrangements with a mega-corporation encompassing all physical and non-physical (or spiritual if you will) aspects of human existence itself.

In other words, the meme is being planted, and given the nature of such television shows, a platform is being created not only to explore all these implications and speculations but more importantly to drive the conversations in a certain way toward the goal of making humanity itself, in all its parts, a commodity to be bought and sold and "serviced" by the corporate world.

So in other words, folks, transhumanism is no longer a rarefied academic or hypothetical discussion. It is now going to be promoted and driven into the public consciousness. I've pointed out several times, beginning with my very first book in this strange world of "alternative research," The Giza Death Star, that virtual immortality, or even a drastic improvement of human longevity to, say, hundreds of years, has a moral implication, for long ago, the Christian Church Father, St. John Chrysostom, pointed out that death, really, is an antidote to endless progress in evil. His point was, as I observed in that book, and as I have observed in prior blogs about this and related subjects, is that one can imagine an Albert Schweitzer or a Mother Teresa, having not decades, but perhaps centuries, to do their good works. But similarly, one can imagine a Chairman Mao or Joseph Stalin, or other genocidal mass murders having a similar opportunity to "perfect" their particular "inclinations."

See you on the flip side...

About Joseph P. FarrellJoseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and "strange stuff". His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into "alternative history and science".

Go here to read the rest:

THE TRANSHUMANIST SCRAPBOOK: ARTIFICIAL BODIES WAITING FOR ...

Darcizzle Offshore – YouTube

Posted on by

Darcizzle & Brian love to go fishing, diving, boating, vlogging and traveling to exotic locations around the world. We promote kids & veterans to get outdoors & fish while sharing fishing tips and tricks, how to videos & more!

Join us on our adventures, you wont be disappointed!

SUBSCRIBE http://bit.ly/Darcizzle-Sub...

Follow your Dream & Keep on Catching!

CLICK BELOW FOR MORE INFO & LINKS

SUBSCRIBE New? Subscribe & help me reach 200K Subscribers! http://bit.ly/Darcizzle-Sub...

FISH HOOK & ANCHOR BRACELETSAnchor Bracelets https://goo.gl/XmcnZUFish Hook Bracelets https://goo.gl/xN9duV

DARCIZZLE APPAREL BUY DARCIZZLE GEAR (T-Shirts, Long Sleeves, etc.) https://goo.gl/LDGVh5

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA Twitter http://bit.ly/Darcizzle-on-... UN: @_darcizzle_Instagram http://bit.ly/Darcizzle-on-... UN: @_darcizzle_FaceBook http://bit.ly/Darcizzle-on-... UN: Darcizzle Offshore

WEBSITE Official Website https://goo.gl/uYtmfV

AMAZON GATEWAY SUPPORT DARCIZZLE FOR FREE Buy anything on Amazon just like normal through my Amazon gate, no difference to you! http://bit.ly/Darcizzle-Ama...

SUPPORT DARCIZZLE Do you want to see premium exclusive content? Please become a premium Patron!Patreon http://bit.ly/Darcizzle-on-...

FAN MAIL! Darcizzle OffshorePO Box 3065Lantana, FL 33465-3065

CAMERA/VIDEO GEAR Drone Quadcopter http://amzn.to/2a8dBTKDrone Camera Filters http://amzn.to/2al140SBig Camera http://amzn.to/2alxSAsWaterproof Camera http://amzn.to/2feci8XWide Zoom Lens http://amzn.to/2acDAFn Flash for Canon http://amzn.to/2e4MZndCamera Bendy Tripod http://amzn.to/29hIrKrCamera Mount for Bendy Tripod http://amzn.to/2aFhwsnRode Microphone http://amzn.to/2a8eUlUWireless Mircophone http://amzn.to/2aFj3OZGoPro http://amzn.to/2acEgKEDive Filter for GoPro http://amzn.to/2kvTL6QGoPro Clamp & Gooseneck http://amzn.to/2lckILZGoPro Batteries (Cheap) http://amzn.to/2lcdzeSGoPro Microphone Adapter http://amzn.to/2kHm7gQGoPro Microphone http://amzn.to/2kHn60tSJCam Action Camera (Cheaper than GoPro) http://amzn.to/2kGDHyuAluminum Handle for Gopro/SJCam (short) http://amzn.to/2eiN5FeAluminum Handle for Gopro/SJCam (Long) http://amzn.to/2dTyMG5SD Card http://amzn.to/2eZadbM

*** Use & search hashtag: #DARCIZZLE ***

SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS ACR Artex (Saving Lives for 60 years) https://www.acrartex.com/ Landshark Lager http://www.landsharklager.c...... Soft Science Shoes http://www.softscience.com/ Bubba Blade Knives https://www.bubbablade.com/ Salt Life Optics http://www.biminibayoptics.... SeaDek Marine Non-Skid http://www.seadek.com/ Tsunami Fishing rods & tackle http://www.biminibayoutfitt...... Bimini Bay Outfitters http://www.biminibayoutfitt... Tuf-Line Braid http://tuf-line.com/ Mustad Hooks http://mustad-fishing.com/am/

BUSINESS INQUIRIES Email Address DarcizzleOffshore@gmail.com

Music from Epidemic Soundhttps://youtube.epidemicsou... Show less

See original here:

Darcizzle Offshore - YouTube

Offshore – Investopedia – Sharper Insight. Smarter Investing.

Posted on by

What is Offshore

"Offshore" refers to a location outside of one's national boundaries, whether or not that location is land- or water-based. The term "offshore" may be used to describe foreign banks, corporations, investments and deposits. A company may legitimately move offshore for the purpose of tax avoidance or to enjoy relaxed regulations. Offshore financial institutions can also be used for illicit purposes such as money laundering and tax evasion.

Offshore can refer to a variety of foreign-based entities or accounts. In order to qualify as offshore, the accounts or entity must be based in any country other than the customers or investors home nation. Many countries, territories and jurisdictions have offshore financial centers (OFCs). These include well-known centers such as Switzerland, Bermuda and the Cayman Islands, and lesser-known centers such as Mauritius, Dublin and Belize. The level of regulatory standards and transparency differs widely among OFCs. Supporters of OFCs argue that they improve the flow of capital and facilitate international business transactions.

In the terms of business activities, offshoring is often referred to as outsourcing the act of establishing certain business functions, such as manufacturing or call centers, in a nation other than the one in which the business most often does business. This is often to take advantage of more favorable conditions in a foreign country, such as lower wage requirements or looser regulations, and can result in significant cost savings for the business.

Offshore investing can involve any situation in which the investors reside outside of the nation in which they are investing. This practice is mostly used by high net worth investors, as the cost to operate offshore accounts can be notable. Offshore investing may require the creation of accounts in the nation in which the investor wishes to invest.

Offshore banking involves the securing of assets in financial institutions in foreign countries, which may be limited by the laws of the customers home nation, can be used to avoid certain unfavorable circumstances should the funds be kept in a financial institution in the home nation. This can include the avoidance of tax obligations as well as making it more difficult for these assets to be seized by a person or entity in the home nation. For those who work internationally, the ability to save and use funds in a foreign currency for international dealings can be a benefit, which can provide a simpler way to access funds in the needed currency without the need to account for rapidly changing exchange rates. Because banking regulations vary from nation to nation, it is possible the country in which offshore banking is conducted does not offer the same protections as other nations.

Businesses with significant sales overseas, such as Apple Inc. and Microsoft Corp., may take the opportunity to keep related profits in offshore accounts in countries with lower tax burdens. In 2015, it was estimated that $2.10 trillion in profits were held overseas, across 304 U.S. corporations, which was an 8% rise when compared to 2014.

Read more:

Offshore - Investopedia - Sharper Insight. Smarter Investing.

Eugenics in the United States Today: Are We on the Same …

Posted on by

Creating an Elite Class of Super Humans

by John P. ThomasHealth Impact News

This is the first part of a two part series exploring the relationship between the controversial eugenics movement of the past and modern genetics. Eugenics was dedicated to cleansing and purifying humanity from inferior members with the hope of solving various social problems related to poverty, disability, and illness. To accomplish this, it sought to create a superior race of people and to use forced sterilization and extermination to eliminate future generations of defective human beings. Darwins theory of evolution was used to justify the practice of eugenics. Later, when eugenics fell from favor, modern genetics began to grow up from the ashes of the former movement.

When Adolf Hitler applied Darwins theory of evolution and the principles of eugenics to the goals of the German state, the result was the murder of eleven million men, women and children. These lives were sacrificed in the name of eugenics. Eugenicists were seeking to improve the conditions of life for humanity by creating a superior race of people.

The eugenics movement had a very dark side, which led to social control, loss of reproductive freedom, and the loss of life. Should we be concerned that modern genetic science might have a dark side as well? Will the fruit of genetic research be misused by ill-intentioned people to gain control over others as happened with eugenics in the past? Has modern genetics completely severed itself from its roots? Or, might it become the tool that will be used to try to create a master class of genetically superior human beings in America?

What are the deceptions and dangers of the modern genetics movement? Does true health and true happiness lie in the human genome? Are we really bound to the set of genes that we received from our parents, or can we overcome what we were given? What are the factors that activate or deactivate certain genes, and how can we control the expression of our genetic make-up to promote our health and the health of our children? What are the motivations of certain groups who want us to believe that genes control every aspect of our lives that we have no other options than to suffer while genetic scientists look for genetic cures for all that ails us? Are we really more than our genes or is our genetic code all there is?

These questions and many more will be examined in these articles. Lets begin by learning about the development of eugenics.

The word Eugenics means good genes. Eugenicists believe that principles of Darwins theory regarding the survival of the fittest can be used to support the elimination of weak and undesirable people from society. They believe that human beings are inherently no different than animals, and therefore we can and should be bred like animals. A farmer does not allow deficient cows in his herd to reproduce, and in the same way, eugenicists believe that certain people in our society should control human reproduction.

Simply put, eugenics consists of rational methods for putting evolution on the fast track, so that only the best people will reproduce and become superior beings. It is also the fast track for helping inferior families and inferior groups of people to stop their reproduction and to quickly die out.

Eugenicists believe that natural attraction, affection, and love between men and women should not be the basis upon which procreation should be based. Rather, scientists and the medical system should provide scientific and common sense control over the individuals who should be allowed to mate with one another. People with the best traits should be encouraged to reproduce, and those with defective traits should be prevented from producing children by various methods such as sterilization, segregation, and, if necessary, death.

A steady stream of information has been distributed in every corner of society for over 150 years telling us that defective germplasm, or bad genes, lead to problems of child development, illness, low achievement, alcoholism, and even poverty. We are also told that good genes must be present in order for people to live healthy, prosperous, and happy lives.

The general teaching is that our personal genetic code is the master blueprint that determines nearly everything about us. It determines our intellectual gifts, our artistic gifts, our physical structure, and establishes the parameters through which we will develop certain illnesses and ultimately die. We have been taught that this blueprint is written in stone, and if couples produce children, then their combined genetic material will create a new, unchangeable blueprint for their children. We are also told that the real cure for diseases will come from genetic repairs that are just beyond the horizon of modern science.

Scientists are using techniques of genetic engineering to modify plants and animals (GMOs). We are told that human modification is just around the corner. We are promised that the next step in medicine will be a personal one, where our illnesses will be treated with drugs that have been specifically formulated to match the requirements of our genetics. However, until that time comes, we must continue to rely on existing pharmaceutical drugs.

In short, we are being told that in some cases, there isnt much hope for healing until modern genetics brings us the cure for all that ails us. Thus, some of us and some of our children are doomed to a life of illness and suffering unless we are willing to consider other options.

The Massacre of the Innocents at Bethlehem, by Matteo di Giovanni, 1487. Source.

Some people now believe that if parents decide that they wish to have the life of their child brought to an end before age five, because of disability, illness, inconvenience of the parents, or for any other reason, then the parents should have the right to abort the child. So, if you dont like the color of his hair, the color of her eyes, the developmental delays that you are observing, the illnesses that are making life difficult, or the behaviors that you cannot control, then you should have the right to have your child aborted (legally killed) up to age 5 or 6. [1, 2, 3]

Historically, killing a child after it is born was called infanticide. This is now being given a new name post-birth abortion or after-birth abortion.

Central to this way of thinking is the belief that children are only potential human beings until they reach the age of self-awareness, which is believed to happen around age five. Proponents of post-birth abortion see children as disposable until the child becomes aware of its existence as a person and can begin to develop goals and ambitions for life.

It is believed that prior to age 5, children live in a pre-aware state, and have an animal-like existence, which is just like a chimpanzee, a dog, a chicken, or a pig. Thus, killing a young child because of bad genetic composition is no different than killing a sick dog or a mature pig that is ready to be processed into sausage.

Those who believe in post-birth abortion are challenging American society to reconsider how we value human life. They are observing the fact that we already permit babies in the womb to be killed, we encourage the termination of the lives of animals when they are seriously ill, and most of us approve of slaughtering animals to supply food. Based on this, they ask, Why do we extend special privileges to young children who have the same level of consciousness as animals or babies in the womb? Why do we preserve the lives of defective people who are draining society of its resources?

These groups extend their argument to the elderly as well. If a person with some form of dementia such as Alzheimers is no longer aware of his or her own existence as a human being, can no longer understand his or her medical condition, and is so frail and feebleminded that he or she can no longer contribute anything to society, then they would tell us that the termination of that persons life is no different than euthanizing an animal or aborting a baby in the womb.

The idea that people in authority should have the legal right to terminate the lives of other people in certain circumstances to benefit the greater good of society is not new. These thoughts have a long history, which was part of the original eugenics movement that began in 1859. The human extermination program that was implemented by Adolf Hitler before and during World War II was a prime example of eugenics. He was trying to purify the human race by killing all those who he determined would have an inferior contribution to the human germplasm if they were to reproduce. He and other leaders of the Third Reich believed that only superior human beings should be allowed to reproduce, and the inferior should be eliminated.

The proposal that we legalize the killing of defective children is just the reappearance of old style eugenics with a slightly new twist.

Eugenicists believe that everything about us is determined by genetic composition. Who we are and how we behave is determined almost entirely by our germplasm our personal genetic code.

If we have bad genes, then there is nothing that can be done about the situation. If our genes are seriously defective, then eugenicists would say that sterilization or termination of life is the best solution to the problem. Both of these options would help preserve future generations from inheriting defective germplasm from defective parents.

Eugenicists seek to create a class of people who possess superior attributes such as intelligence, physical strength, and physical appearance. They also seek to discourage reproduction by inferior people.

When techniques of discouragement fail to reduce the birth of new defectives, then forced sterilization of undesirables is pursued under the authority of the state. When sterilization is not practical, then termination of life is used to decrease the surplus population of defectives.

Eugenics historian Edwin Black carefully described the development of the Eugenics movement from the period of time beginning with the work of Charles Darwin in 1859 to our present time. He described the goals of eugenicists and their influence over social policy. His 566 page book records the history of the eugenics movement and shows how eugenics was transformed into modern genetics. The book is filled with quotations in which eugenicists explain their theories and their beliefs in their own words. Here is a taste of what he reported in his book, War Against the Weak: Eugenics and Americas Campaign to Create a Master Race. Mr. Black stated:

On May 2 and May 3, 1911, in Palmer, Massachusetts, the research committees of the ABAs [American Breeders Association] eugenic section adopted a resolution creating a special new committee. Resolved: that the chair appoint a committee commissioned to study and report on the best practical means for cutting off the defective germ-plasm of the American population.

Ten groups were eventually identified [by the American Breeders Association] as socially unfit and targeted for elimination. First, the feebleminded; second, the pauper class; third, the inebriate class or alcoholics; fourth, criminals of all descriptions including petty criminals and those jailed for nonpayment of fines; fifth, epileptics; sixth, the insane; seventh, the constitutionally weak class; eighth, those predisposed to specific diseases; ninth, the deformed; tenth, those with defective sense organs, that is, the deaf, blind and mute. In this last category, there was no indication of how severe the defect need be to qualify; no distinction was made between blurry vision or bad hearing and outright blindness or deafness.

Not content to [only] eliminate those deemed unfit by virtue of some malady, transgression, disadvantage or adverse circumstance, the ABA committee targeted their extended families as well. Even if those relatives seemed perfectly normal and were not institutionalized, the breeders considered them equally unfit because they supposedly carried the defective germ-plasm that might crop up in a future generation. The committee carefully weighed the relative value of sterilizing all persons with defective germ-plasm, or just sterilizing only degenerates. The group agreed that defective and potential parents of defectives not in institutions were also unacceptable [to society]. [4]

The notion that certain elite groups should be in charge of cleansing society of defective persons was popular in the United States during the first 45 years of the 20th century. It was only after the full extent of the eugenics program in Nazi Germany was brought to light that eugenicists in the United States began to take a less public position.

When Charles Darwins book The Origin of Species was published in 1859, it provided the perfect theory for those who believed in human breeding. Darwins cousin, Sir Francis Galton of England, applied The Origin of Species to his concerns about the degenerate state of society. Francis Galton believed social problems were caused by defects in human germplasm (genes). He believed that if defective people could be prevented from conceiving and giving birth to children, then problems such as poverty, mental illness, mental retardation, and alcoholism would die out.

Australian researcher and writer Roger Sandall described how Francis Galtons life was transformed by the theory of Darwinian evolution. Roger Sandall wrote:

Coming at a critical stage of both his scientific career and his domestic life, Darwins book shattered Galtons religious beliefs and turned him towards biological research. He always had what he called a hereditary bent of mind, and from 1859 he proceeded to investigate, he said later, matters clustered round the central topics of Heredity and the possible improvement of the Human Race. [5]

I will summarize a few additional points drawn from Roger Sandalls discussion of Francis Galton and the early eugenics movement. These points are not just the old and moldy views of a long dead eugenicist, but are beliefs that continue to influence the thinking of many people today.

Francis Galton taught his followers that only the genetically perfect should be allowed to reproduce. In his 1873 essay Hereditary Improvement he insists that those of feeble constitution must embrace celibacy lest they should bring beings into existence whose race is predoomed to destruction by the laws of nature.

Galton believed that certain races were superior, and the reproduction of inferior races should be tightly controlled so that only the few best specimens of that race would be allowed to become parents, and only a few of their descendants should be allowed to live.

Galton recommended that his country (England) should be scoured for the names and addresses of gifted people who would be urged to intermarry. This intellectual aristocracy would receive special benefits. Defectives would receive nothing at all. Endowments would be used to maintain a privileged class living in healthy circumstances, which would enable it to multiply in comfort.

Galton declared that the gifted class should treat lower classes with all kindness, so long as they maintained celibacy. But if these lower classes continued to procreate children who are morally, intellectually, and physically inferior, then it is easy to believe the time may come when such persons would be considered to be enemies of the state. As such, he believed that they would forfeit all their claims to kindness from the superior class.

Roger Sandall summarized Galtons effect on society and its moral underpinnings. Sandall stated:

When Galton wrote, late in life, that the effect of Darwinism was to demolish a multitude of dogmatic barriers by a single stroke, and to arouse a spirit of rebellion against all ancient authorities whose positive and unauthenticated statements were contradicted by modern science, a radical antinomian spirit was unleashed; and when he declared that eugenics must be introduced into the national conscience, like a new religion, adding that it has indeed strong claims to become an orthodox religious tenet of the future, a kind of displaced religious zeal was put at the service of political compulsion: allied to German nationalism, it is unsurprising that it led, step by step, to policies of racial exclusion and finally annihilation. [6]

Proponents of eugenics believe that a pure bloodline should be created that contains only the best traits of humanity. They believe that techniques of good breeding should be used to create a race of super humans who are made in the image of the eugenicists. These super humans will all be highly intelligent, strong, healthy, beautiful, talented, prosperous, motivated, and capable of submitting their will to the will and greater good of society.

Physical appearance is also seen as being important. People will need to have a certain skin color, hair color, eye color, and meet high standards for mental acuity and emotional stability. They also must possess ideal physical strength and physical form (either male or female) in order to have the right to reproduce.

People with a personal or family history of poverty, chronic illness, addiction, disabilities, lack of motivation, minimal intellectual achievement, and non-conformist thinking would be unwelcome in this new society, and would not be allowed to reproduce.

Three Ku Klux Klan members standing at a 1922 parade in Virginia. Image source.

Very few people use the word eugenics today when speaking in public, because it is on the list of politically incorrect words. Despite the positive rhetoric of eugenics, it was a highly racist endeavor, which sought to elevate one race above all others. This will be discussed in detail at a later point in this article.

Even though people no longer openly use the word eugenics, the insidious principles of eugenics can still be observed all around us in 21st century America. Eugenics is insidious, because it destroys life, denies reproductive freedom, destroys the functioning of the family structure, and targets certain classes and races of people for destruction. It does all this while seeking to establish a master race which is intended to dominate the world.

The plans of eugenicists closely follow the principles Darwins theory of evolution, which tells us that the strongest and fittest should overcome and replace the weak and inferior. Eugenicists have determined that they are the fittest and most able people for managing society and it is their responsibility as the superior beings to actively purge the weak and inferior from society. They believed that defective people need to be prevented from reproducing so that the number of defectives in the world will dwindle and fade away, while they, the fittest group of people, are allowed to survive and flourish.

American Inventor and Eugenicist Alexander Graham Bell. Image source.

Historically, the goals of the eugenics movement were to eliminate poverty, disability, numerous chronic illnesses, and human suffering. These lofty goals were designed to provide the greatest amount of happiness to society. On the surface, this sounds good to most people. These goals led many prominent Americans to support the eugenics agenda.

People such as Nobel laureate George Bernard Shaw, author H. G. Wells, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, among many others, were very involved in promoting eugenics. Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, was one of the most zealous participants in the American Eugenics Movement. [7]

College professors were prominent among both the officers and members of various eugenics societies which sprang up in the United States and Europe in the early 20th century. In virtually every college and university, professors were inspired by the new creed of eugenics, and most of the major colleges had credit courses on eugenics. These classes were typically well attended and their content was generally accepted as part of proven science. [8]

Eugenicists believed that the primary determinant of mankinds behavioral nature was genetic, and various environmental reforms designed to improve living conditions, for example, were largely useless. Further, the eugenics movement believed that those who were at the bottom of the social ladder in society, such as the Black race, were in this position not because of social injustice or discrimination, but as a result of their own inferiority. [9]

Carrie Buck sits with her mother, Emma Buck, on the grounds of the Virginia State Colony of Epileptics and Feeble-Minded in Madison Heights, near Lynchburg. This photograph was taken in November 1924 by Arthur H. Estabrook, a eugenics researcher who interviewed the two women before testifying in a legal case that resulted in the forced sterilization of Carrie Buck. Source.

In the early 1900s, eugenicists began to use persuasion to gain voluntary cooperation with their new way of thinking about human reproduction. In the United States, the strategy of persuasion was eventually replaced by a strategy of coercion and compulsion.

In 1927, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the State of Virginias sterilization plan in Buck Versus Bell, which affirmed that it had the right to sterilize mentally deficient residents to prevent them from producing more of their kind. This decision opened the door to forced sterilization in many U.S. states.

At that time, eugenicists believed that human character and behavior was almost completely determined by the germplasm. In contemporary language, we would say everything is determined by ones genes. Eugenicists believed that every negative trait they observed in a person could be passed on to their descendants. For example, a person living in poverty is poor because of his genes, and unless sterilization is pursued, that person will create children who are destined for poverty. They admitted that sometimes defective germplasm might not be seen in every child conceived by defectives, but if it was present in one generation, then it will be permanently present in all succeeding generations, and will eventually reappear.

In the Buck vs. Bell decision of May 2, 1927, the United States Supreme Court upheld a Virginia statute that provided for the sterilization of people considered to be genetically unfit. The Courts decision, delivered by Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., included the infamous phrase Three generations of imbeciles are enough. Upholding Virginias sterilization statute provided the green light for similar laws in 30 states, under which an estimated 65,000 Americans were sterilized without their own consent or that of a family member. [10]

A broken and twisted mound of emaciated corpses lay strewn in one of three open burial pits at the liberation of Belsen on 15 April 1945. British troops were faced with over 10 000 dead inmates who required immediate burial to halt the spread of typhus and other diseases. Belsen, one of many Nazi concentration camps of the German Third Reich, was used as an instrument of genocide against Jews and those of other nationalities and categories. Image source.

The belief that the state had the right to control human reproduction was taken to the extreme in Nazi Germany in the late 1930s and early 1940s. The Third Reich of Germany extinguished the lives of 6 million Jews, and 5 million other people who were deemed undesirable. Undesirables included Jews (from all levels of society), and people from various other groups. The other groups included outspoken Christians and their pastors who would not submit to Nazi ideology. Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally ill persons, people with low mental functioning, and people who were deaf, blind, crippled, and epileptics were all targeted for extermination. The list of inferiors included all people of Polish ethnicity, people in interracial marriages, and people with dark/African skin color. [11]

For the sake of expediency, extermination of defectives and inferior people was the final solution chosen by Hitler. Forced sterilization of eleven million people was not practical, and it would not remove the influence of such people from society. Extermination, however, would immediately stop reproduction of these people and also would allow their personal resources to be confiscated for the German war effort.

Of course, eugenic programs of the past and genetic programs of the present do not begin with mass scale slaughter of unwanted people as happened in Germany. They are marketed as benevolent programs that are designed to help people be happy and prosperous. They subtly condition people to believe that the Statehas a right to control every aspect of their reproduction for the sake of personal happiness.

This belief is then gradually expanded to show that the government has a similar right to control human reproduction for the sake of creating a happy and prosperous society. It progresses from voluntary programs to involuntary programs from cooperation to mandatory compliance. The techniques of the eugenics movement involve sterilization and death. The objective of preventing reproduction by undesirables was achieved by all means possible.

Each step in the implementation of an eugenics program desensitizes people to the value of human life. It leads people to accept the idea that some people are inferior and others are superior, because of their genetic makeup. It teaches people to give honor to certain people and to submit to a small group of super people who are considered to be the model race. It teaches people to accept sterilization and the killing of the minority to support the needs and goals of the majority. The proposed killing of children up to the age of 5 years old, for example, is an outgrowth of eugenic thinking, because in that mindset there is no hope for the defective children, and the best thing we can do for everyone is to simply eliminate them before they begin to drain society of its precious resources.

First the weakest and most helpless are targeted by eugenicists, and then certain undesirable people, who have bad genes, are marked for destruction. This type of population reduction is called systematic depopulation. Depopulation is also called genocide, which is the killing of large groups of people who share a common trait such as ethnic background or religious affiliation.

Eugenicists also will seek to destroy the family structure in order to accomplish their goals. The value and functioning of the family unit consisting of a husband/father, wife/mother and numerous children will be attacked on every front.

This is necessary to break the emotional bonds that tie family members together, and replace it with zealous allegiance to the state. Commitment to the power of the state must be stronger than love and commitment to family members so that defectives in the family can be sterilized or removed without a struggle.

The End Referring to the end of Catholic influence in the US. Klansmen: Guardians of Liberty 1926. Image Source.

There must also be a breaking of affection and commitment to God. Eugenics is incompatible with true religion. Eugenics and the power of the state must rule over people and not the God of the Bible.

Eugenicists understand that one can only serve one master, and their master must be the god and religion of Darwinian Evolution. The moral absolutes of conservative biblical Christianity stand in direct opposition to Darwins theory of evolution and the full implementation of eugenic techniques.

The belief that life is a gift from God, and should be cherished and preserved, is incompatible with the outworking of eugenics, which seeks to put life under the authority of a superior class of people and under the authority of the state.

Specifically, these are some of the methods that have been used to implement eugenics programs over the past hundred years. Please note how they start with encouragement and voluntary participation, and end up with involuntary means to control and reduce the population.

1. Convince superior human beings to produce more children. The fruit of this strategy would result in a rapid increase in the number of superior people and strengthen the superior bloodline. In Nazi Germany, breeding centers were established to produce large numbers of superior blond blue-eyed children. Most of these children were conceived outside of marriage and fathered by Nazi officers. [12]

2. Encourage inferior human beings to have fewer children, or discourage them from having children altogether. This would shrink undesirable bloodlines and weaken the possible influence on the superior bloodline.

3. Prevent people with certain inferior qualities from marrying superior people. This means to forbid inter-racial marriage, marriage between disabled and non-disabled people, and marriage of superior people with those of undesirable ethnic, religious, or economic position, because they would weaken the bloodline of the superior group.

4. Physically isolate severely deficient people from the greater society by institutionalizing them in the name of providing compassionate care or simply put them into containment camps. This will prevent them from marrying and reproducing.

5. Impose forced sterilization on feebleminded people, criminals, and on other incurable defectives such as alcoholics and paupers, so they cannot pass on their undesirable flaws to another generation.

6. Give people a low cost or no cost opportunity to use contraceptives and/or to choose pre-birth abortion to prevent the birth of disabled children and to prevent babies from being born into poverty.

7. Terminate the lives of defective children and defective elderly adults who are not able to contribute to the greater good of society, or who threaten the economic status of those who have been declared the superior race. Use genetic screening for babies in the womb and abort those who have defective genes.

8. Implement programs that will weaken the reproductive capacity of the population. Vaccines, pesticides, GMO food, highly processed food, antibiotics and other drugs, etc. all are known to have a negative influence on fertility. [13] (Those who are aware of these influences can avoid exposure and protect their fertility.)

9. Implement economic programs that will decrease the buying power of low-income persons, which will place increasing financial pressure on low-income working families, so that they will choose to limit the number of children they produce. [14]

10. Contain or exterminate anyone who resists the use of eugenics and who would threaten the development of the superior human bloodline.

War Crimes Tribunal at Nuremberg. Adolf Hitlers personal physician, 43-year old Karl Brandt. Brandt was also Reich Commissar for Health and Sanitation, and was indicted by the U.S. prosecution with 22 other Nazi doctors. Brandt was found guilty of participating in and consenting to using concentration camp inmates as guinea pigs in horrible medical experiments, supposedly for the benefit of the armed forces. He was sentenced to death by hanging. Image Source.

This question is the key to understanding eugenics. It is also the key for uncovering the deceptions and lies that are used to justify eugenics as a socially advanced way of managing society.

Adolf Hitler and his colleagues decided that it was the Nordic or Aryan bloodlines that were superior to all other bloodlines on the Earth. Thus, Adolf Hitler and others like him were to become the superior bloodline. Those with similar physical characteristics/appearance, emotional functioning, and mental capacities, and those who possessed certain ideological convictions were to become archetypes of humanity. They were to be raised up above all other people and others were to be brought into subjection to them.

Hitler found that the most efficient method of preventing reproduction and discontinuing the negative influence on the Aryan bloodline was to terminate the lives of undesirables. These were the people who threatened the racial superiority of the leaders of the German Third Reich and threatened their economic prosperity and social happiness. Eugenicists always seek to protect their own race, their own ethnic group, their own religion (which is now called Social Darwinism), and their own economic prosperity regardless of the country where they live.

In the view of the German leaders of the Third Reich, even inferiors in their own Aryan race needed to be purged from the bloodline. They saw the Darwinian struggle for survival of the fittest in the context of the German war effort. War was a positive force for bloodline purification, not only because it eliminated the weaker races which they were attacking, but also because it weeded out the weaker members of their own Aryan race. Hitler was convinced that the strongest people would survive. Nazi Germany, partly for this reason, openly glorified war because it was an important means of eliminating the less fit of the highest race, a step necessary to upgrade the Aryan race. [16]

U.S. Battleships in Pearl Harbor bombed by Japanese Aircraft. Image source.

While Hitlers eugenic program was in full force, a similar program was underway in Japan. The Japanese were actively involved in building up and maintaining a pure Japanese bloodline. They were influenced by American eugenicists and used many of the same techniques that were being used by Hitler. They were trying to keep the Japanese bloodline pure for the same reasons other eugenicists named. [17]

The eugenics programs of Germany and Japan shared several similarities. Both believed that there was a superior race (bloodline) and that bloodline must be preserved to strengthen the power of the state and to preserve the prosperity of society.

Of course, the Germans and the Japanese differed on the matter of which race was to be superior. They both believed that their respective race deserved, and was destined, to dominate the world. They were in agreement that active steps must be taken by government to purify the population, and to prevent superior pure-blooded people from intermarrying with inferior people groups. However, they obviously were in disagreement about which bloodline was superior. Should it be Oriental/Japanese blood or Caucasian/German blood?

The massive extermination of human life by the Third Reich of Germany cast a dark shadow over eugenics, and people tried to distance themselves from the word eugenics. However, the movement did not die with the death of Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich. Neither did the eugenics movement die when the word eugenics became unfashionable.

There were several decades of transition during which the language of eugenics was transformed into the new language of human genetics.

After the horrors of Hitlers eugenics program were brought to light, eugenicists realized that they needed to change their tactics. In 1947 the remnant board of directors of the American Eugenics Society (AES) unanimously agreed, The time was not right for aggressive eugenic propaganda. Instead, the AES continued quietly soliciting financial grants from such organizations as the Dodge Foundation, the Rockefeller-funded Population Council, and the Draper Fund for the purpose of proliferating genetics as a legitimate study of human heredity. [18]

In 1959, the leaders of the American Eugenics Society understood that reestablishing eugenics was an uphill battle. A draft address written by the president of the American Eugenics Society, Frederick Osborn, confirmed this when he prepared to speak to his Board of Directors. He outlined the future of eugenics, which included an ambitious campaign of behind-the-scenes genetic counseling, birth control, and university-based medical genetic programs. At the same time, President Osborn conceded that the movements history was too scurrilous to gain public support. [19]

Read more from the original source:

Eugenics in the United States Today: Are We on the Same ...