G-20 summit

90% of the worlds GNP, are represented by the respective heads of their governments today, hosted in London.

There are plenty of protests from a less capitalistic European culture.

A thought came about: If i was blazed, there would be no way i could handle meeting so many people of that magnitude, and socialize in a way that would not embarrass myself and my country.

Just like i cannot give important speeches blazed (wouldn't even try), i could not socialize on a first time basis with people who expect a great deal of discourse.

I would however, have a few cognac's during dinner, and hop on a train to Holland following the nights conclusion (my reward for keeping a level head). Through the use of an "out of the box substance" could the real talent conceive of a truly innovate strategy to help bring an end of this economic crisis.

2009 G-20 London summit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

so you want to have some booze, solve the world's economic problem then go get stoned in amsterdam and come up with some more crazy shit?

you would rather have a G13 summit:stoned::stoned::stoned:

I would go blazed with sunglasses on, find a good chair ans sit and take a nap.:jointsmile:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zihowie

so you want to have some booze, solve the world's economic problem then go get stoned in amsterdam and come up with some more crazy shit?

---

Cannabis is not an aggressive inducing drug, it simply lacks that property. In talks such as these, a keen sense of aggressiveness is paramount to alleviating status quo.

Nobody will take the person, who is speaking softly and allowing their opposition to assume consequents/antecedents unchecked, seriously. So having a drink or two or three (whatever your size:D) can be beneficial. I say can, because coming off as a sloshed prick will get you nowhere.

While blazed, i came up with a system (although a bit chaotic at this stage) to allow mark to market accounting standards to lax during times of deflation, and to a certain extent, recessions/depressions. You peg the mark to market resultant through a two (early idea so more will need to be encompassed) variable function dependent on inflation and real change in monthly GDP.

Meaning, when times are bad, a greater proportion of your "assets" can be weighted in mark to model practices, while the majority is kept to market (assuming inflation/deflation does not exceed 50%). This creates a two fold consequence. It alleviates pain during times of recession or eventual recession, while limiting (reducing) asset value in accordance to times of great expansion. During periods of "high return" (no pun intended), risk aversion practices actually diminish when it is important to note that profit taking could trigger a price drop (investment instruments) at any time.

Going back to post WWII, the majority of all people do what is exactly counterproductive, when investing. When prices fall, people sell out (to avoid further loss) and when prices are high (seeing other make money) people buy in.

Therefore an exponentially compounding correction eventually takes place, as debt is issued at a higher proportion during price peaks. Reducing the potential loan based assets "mark" during higher prices also reduces the proportional amount of margin allowed. Deleveraging would not be nearly as painful.

Of course, this greatly reduces the power of hedge funds and ultra high asset classes to manipulate the market (short selling in hordes).

None of that made an ounce of sense to me. Could you maybe create a weed metaphor for it? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luciddreamer

None of that made an ounce of sense to me. Could you maybe create a weed metaphor for it? :D

---

Not a problem.

Imagine smoking the dankest dank ever. Then imagine already being blazed off the dankest dank, and only smoking that dank. Eventually, you will just fall asleep. This is the same as the current economic situation. People were making a shit ton of money. Instead of cutting back on your risks as these gains were realizing, they went way overboard. They took even greater risks to receive the same gains as they were in years past, and when this happened, the system locked up eventually.

So, the weed prescription is simple. You have different levels of potency, to smoke at different stages of your highness. If you are not at all blazed, even a little bit of super is going to give you a super high. But if you truly want to smoke more weed, smoke a strain that is less potent as your highness increases. That way, you wont pass out and get your head buzzed, and find pictures of yourself getting tea-bagged on /b/.

Make sense?

Shit, not getting e-mails anymore to say there's a reply.
Yep makes sense now, thanks! haha :rastasmoke: