Dustin, Tom and Cassie

Dustin, Tom and Cassie

In 1984, Tom Cruise was eating with his younger sister Cass in a New York restaurant when she spotted Dustin Hoffman ordering takeout and demanded that her brother introduce himself.

Cruise refused. He was filming “Legend” (1985), but fame still felt new enough that approaching an Oscar-winning actor seemed more humiliating than exciting.

Cass would not let the moment disappear. Cruise remembered her warning. “If you don’t go up and say hello to him, I’m going to say hello to him, and I was like, ’Oh my god.’” He finally crossed the restaurant, apologized for interrupting, and addressed him as Mr. Hoffman. Then Hoffman looked up and called out Cruise’s surname. The young actor had expected blank confusion. Instead, one of his heroes already knew his name.

Hoffman was appearing in the Broadway revival of “Death of a Salesman” (1984), and he invited Cruise and Cass to attend. Backstage, he gave Cruise another surprise. Cruise recalled, “As I was leaving, he said, ’I want to make a movie with you.’ I was like, ’That’d be nice.’” Cruise answered with the manners he had learned growing up, never expecting the promise to become real. Around two years later, Hoffman sent him the screenplay that became “Rain Man” (1988).

The script placed Cruise far outside the swagger audiences associated with him. Charlie Babbitt was a furious, selfish car dealer who discovers that his late father’s $3 million estate has been left in trust for Raymond, an autistic older brother Charlie never knew existed. Cruise said the role had originally been written as a 57-year-old man. Reworking Charlie for a performer in his twenties gave the character a younger anger. Cruise later called it the best role of his career at that point and said each film was giving him greater confidence to try scenes in different ways.

Getting the film made was almost as difficult as that first restaurant approach. Cruise said he and Hoffman spent more than two years developing it and passed through four directors before Barry Levinson took control. Martin Brest, Steven Spielberg, and Sydney Pollack had all been involved at different stages. Levinson arrived only eight weeks before filming and stripped away gangsters, FBI agents, storms, and other plot machinery. He trusted that two difficult brothers, a 1949 Buick, and a tense cross-country journey could hold an audience.

Hoffman’s confidence also cracked. After watching footage from his first day, he believed his portrayal had failed and suggested Richard Dreyfuss replace him. Three weeks into filming, a scene about Raymond’s missing Hanes underwear unlocked the character. Hoffman explained, “And I suddenly realized that I was playing off myself because I know something about obsession and I’m comfortable being obsessive.” Raymond existed completely in the present, and Hoffman’s own obsessive nature became more useful than the pages of research filling his dressing room.

Hoffman built Raymond through intensive study, consulting specialists and learning from autistic men including Joseph Sullivan. He borrowed real behaviors, such as eating cheese balls with a toothpick, memorizing phone numbers, and reacting intensely to alarms. Hoffman explained his goal with unusual tenderness. “I tried very hard to be myself in this film. But I hope what emerged was Joe’s spirit, because that’s what moved me.” Cruise, meanwhile, made Charlie’s gradual change believable without turning it into a sudden miracle.

The film earned $172.8 million in the United States and Canada, won four Academy Awards including Best Picture, and gave Hoffman his second Best Actor Oscar. It also introduced millions of viewers to autism, while its rare combination of autism and extraordinary savant skills later became an overused stereotype. For Cruise, the deeper reward was learning beside Hoffman. He said their two-year collaboration taught him how carefully scenes could be shaped around another performer’s strengths, a lesson he carried into later work with young actors. Cass pushed Cruise across one restaurant, and Hollywood history followed him.

Classes of Assets

I saw a post that listed 15 assets and one positive feature of each. One can quibble about aspects of it but it is interesting starting point for a discussion with your kids.
1 Stocks = Compound wealth
2 ETFs = Simple investing
3 Land = Long-term appreciation
4 Business = Financial leverage
5 Skills – Lifetime income
6 Books = Better decisions
7 Digital products = Passive income
8 Rental property = Cash flow
9 Brand = Trust and influence
10 Health = Long-term performance
11 Audience = Opportunity access
12 Networking = Hidden wealth
13 Technology = Faster productivity
14 Knowledge = Competitive advantage
15 Time = Greatest asset

Isaac Asimov

Isaac Asimov

Isaac Asimov looked 50 years into the future in 1964—and some of his predictions became so accurate that they’re still cited today.

The year was 1964

There was no internet.

No personal computers.

No smartphones.

Humans had never walked on the Moon.

Artificial intelligence existed only in science fiction.

Then **Isaac Asimov** was asked a remarkable question by **The New York Times**:

**What would the world look like 50 years from now?**

Most people guessed.

Asimov reasoned.

His answers would become one of the most astonishing prediction lists of the twentieth century.

He wrote that people would carry devices allowing them to **see and speak to anyone anywhere in the world**.

He predicted **portable screens** that could display documents, photographs, books, and news.

He believed routine work would increasingly be performed by **machines and automation**, forcing society to rethink employment.

He foresaw **electronic education**, where students could learn from computers without sitting in a traditional classroom.

He warned that rapid population growth would create enormous pressure on cities and resources.

He even predicted that humanity would become increasingly dependent on technology, creating a future where learning to live alongside intelligent machines would become one of civilization’s greatest challenges.

Remember…

He wrote this in **1964**.

Five years before the first Moon landing.

More than a decade before the personal computer.

Nearly thirty years before the World Wide Web.

Over forty years before the smartphone.

The remarkable part?

Isaac Asimov wasn’t an engineer building these technologies.

He wasn’t running a laboratory.

He was a science-fiction writer using logic, scientific trends, and human behavior to imagine where the world was heading.

That ability had already made him one of the most influential authors of his generation.

His **Foundation** novels imagined civilizations rising and falling through mathematical prediction.

His **I, Robot** stories introduced the **Three Laws of Robotics**, concepts that continue to influence discussions about robot safety and AI ethics even though they were written for fiction.

Across his lifetime, Asimov wrote or edited **more than 500 books**, making him one of the most prolific authors in modern history.

But perhaps his greatest achievement wasn’t the number of books he produced.

It was showing that science fiction could be more than entertainment.

It could become a blueprint for asking the right questions about the future.

Think about the contradiction.

Millions of people dismissed his ideas as fantasy because the technology didn’t exist.

Half a century later, many of those same ideas had become part of everyday life.

The image that lingers isn’t Isaac Asimov typing another novel.

It’s Isaac Asimov sitting in 1964, staring 50 years into a future no one else could yet imagine—and getting enough of it right that the world is still reading those predictions decades later.

Population Decline – Not Just Europe

Population Decline - Not Just Europe

On birth rates, educating the fairer sex and economic slavery

For decades, the Arab Muslim world was seen as a region of unstoppable population growth. Today, that assumption is being turned upside down as birth rates fall across the Middle East and North Africa, reshaping economies, societies, and the future of the region.

Click to view the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iP93kvPhQZo

For decades, the Arab Muslim world was seen as a region of unstoppable population growth. Today, that assumption is being turned upside down as birth rates fall across the Middle East and North Africa, reshaping economies, societies, and the future of the region.

(Tom: The authors of this presentation observe that in an agrarian society the children of farming parents contribute significantly to the economic viability of the family whereas the children of an urban society family are a significant financial burden to the parents, making having children a larger cost than may can afford.

They further note that despite the various efforts of governments to subsidize parents for having children, those subsidies have not yielded the desired increase in birth rate. The net result is that if the present trend is not greatly altered then the civilization is potentially headed for extinction.

They either fail to extrapolate the logical result or leave it to us to come to that conclusion on our own.

That conclusion is that if the government subsidies offered had been inadequate to reverse the trend, then the subsidies do not adequately reverse the financial disadvantage and need to be increased to the point where they do so.

Of course some will argue that the cost of doing so would be too great for the country to bear.

The very easy counter to that is that extinction is a far greater cost! Pick your price!

My second point is that of more educated women right around the world choosing to defer having children or eschew having them in favour of a career.

As the script writer observes, take a woman who in many of these countries may have married at 17 and immediately started a family and keep her at university for 3 or 5 more years and you instantly remove the potential for one or two children from her child-bearing years. Then if she wants to gain experience in her chosen field, slice another 3 to 5 years from her progenating time line and all of a sudden she is now closer to 27 years old. Fast approaching what my younger daughter tells me is now regarded as ‘geriatric pregnancy’ age!

That is purely the age mechanics. Now let us consider with what data she inculcated at university. My guess is that like most areas in life, to a greater or lesser degree an attitude of ‘we are good, they are less good’, ‘what we are doing is superior to what they are doing’ and ‘we are the educated elite, they are uneducated breeders’ prevails. A ‘baby bonus’ is not going to alter that attitude.

And lest you jump to the erroneous view that I am against educating women, I hold the opposite view. You’ve probably heard the old saying, “The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.” Well in my humble opinion the head that rules that hand needs to be as wise as possible because we are presently facing enormous challenges globally that result from very unwise leadership.

No, I think we need to figure out how to enable women to do both – to attain a higher level of wisdom with which to raise a more aware, intelligent, capable, competent and ethical next generation and not discourage or disincentivise doing so.

My third point is related to the economic slavery towards which the man in the street, all over the world, is being relentlessly pushed.

There is a famous quote often attributed to President Franklin D. Roosevelt: “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.”

Some might argue that global trends supersede country governments and are not the result of central planning. I would argue that those men do not have enough data to hand. I have read the writings of men and women with access to more data than I and an above average ability to connect dots and see patterns and their conclusion is that President Roosevelt’s observation apply equally on the global stage as they do to a country.

As an example of which most of us alive are able to bear witness, the November 2019 Event Pandemic 201 conference convened just after the Covid outbreak was reported which proposed the aligned government response to a key set of strategies that not only failed to promote but actively suppressed proven natural remedies like Vitamin D supplementation and repurposed drugs like Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine in favour of waiting for an unproven and novel mRNA technology that turned out to be a bioweapon designed at the University of Carolina, Chapel Hill and removed from office the leaders of four countries that did not follow the vaccine script.

I observe in my own country and hear it is common overseas that it is far more difficult for people currently in their 20s to purchase a home. That it costs 10-20 times their annual salary.

My late wife and I purchase our first home in 1975 for $37,750 when we each earned just over $9,000 a year, just under 25% of the purchase price. And that was in East Malvern, a relatively inner suburb of Melbourne, not out in the sticks!

Back then we did not consider it easy to save for a 25% deposit but we did it in a year when we were 21. No wonder this generation feel hopeless, having to come up with today’s equivalent in Sydney, of about $300,000 for a 25% deposit! Not many couples I know at any age let alone age 21 have a combined income of $600,000!

Which brings me to the heart of the matter, the deliberate eradication of the middle class and the consolidation of wealth and influence into the hands of fewer people at the top of the food chain by a policy of paying wages as low as possible to staff in order to maximize the C-level salaries and the return to shareholders.

I recently watched an interesting conversation on this point at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLBsHXNEwAU

Ian Stevenson

Ian Stevenson

Ian Stevenson was a serious university doctor. He worked at the University of Virginia for 40 years.

He spent all that time studying a strange topic. He interviewed thousands of children who said they remembered past lives.

The children gave specific names, places, and ways they died. In many cases, they also had unusual birthmarks.

Stevenson documented these cases. He found birthmarks that matched wounds from the remembered past life.

A child might have a round mark where a bullet hit the other person. He published his findings in a scientific journal.

He argued it was evidence of reincarnation. His work made him famous.

It also made him very controversial. Other scientists said he ignored simpler explanations.

They said families in certain cultures could coach children. Memories could get mixed up.

A mark could be a coincidence. Stevenson never changed his mind.

He built one of the largest collections of its kind in the world. He left behind a mystery that science still cannot fully explain.

Sources: Division of Perceptual Studies, University of Virginia / Journal of Scientific Exploration

Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Orange Peel Essential Oil

Limonene

That concentration is not a coincidence — it is a chemical weapon wrapped in something that smells like Sunday morning. Limonene works by overwhelming an insect’s outer shell and nervous system at the same time. The waxy coating that protects insects from drying out? Limonene dissolves it. Once that barrier is gone, the insect cannot regulate moisture or nerve signals. It is over in hours. The orange did not develop this by accident. Limonene is part of the peel’s own defense system — a chemical barrier the fruit built to repel insects, fungi, and bacteria long before humans figured out how to bottle it. One orange produces roughly a teaspoon of essential oil in its peel. Scaled up, that is the same concentration commercial manufacturers engineer into industrial-grade sprays — except this version smells like citrus groves instead of a chemistry lab. The most powerful things often come dressed as ordinary.