[Soylentgreen4u] Monday, February 02, 2009 10:04:01 PM | |
|
"WE ARE BIGGER...AND YOU STINK WAAAAY WORSE THAN WE EVER COULD!"....AND AS MUCH AS CNN AND THE COMEDY NEWS CHANNEL KNOWN AS FOX PORTRAY US AS BEING MOSTLY FRENCH GOES,THERE'S ONLY A TINY VILLAGE ON THE SOUTHERN TIP OF BAFFIN ISLAND THAT HAS ABOUT 730 FRENCH PEOPLE IN IT!...THAT'S IT THE REST OF CANADA IS ENGLISH...'QUEBEC' TRANSLATED MEANS 'ONTARIO EAST'...WE JUST LET THEM (AND YOU YANKS) THINK OTHERWISE... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 8:52:29 PM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Dippity Doo...???? BWWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!! Oh MAN!!! Soy, apart from you, me and maybe guido, do you think anyone here even knows what that is??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!! TOO funny!!!
Anyway, NO NO NO NO NO!!!!! Wrong! WE are bigger! WE are badder and YOU stink!! Quiet or we will annex your silly country and let the French run it...HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! Pass the moose meat, please! HAAAAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!
OK, enough of this! I simply MUST get in the shower and then get some warm milk and a glass of Ensure......nighty night!! |
|
|
[Soylentgreen4u] Monday, February 02, 2009 9:12:21 PM | |
|
WARM MILK?...GLASS OF ENSURE?...MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY THAN THAT AS FAR AS YOUR CONCERNED,DON'T FORGET TO EMPTY YOUR DIAPER (EXTRA LARGE I'LL BET) ...THAT'S
RIGHT...REUSE AND RECYCLE!... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 8:52:29 PM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Dippity Doo...???? BWWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!! Oh MAN!!! Soy, apart from you, me and maybe guido, do you think anyone here even knows what that is??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!! TOO funny!!!
Anyway, NO NO NO NO NO!!!!! Wrong! WE are bigger! WE are badder and YOU stink!! Quiet or we will annex your silly country and let the French run it...HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! Pass the moose meat, please! HAAAAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!
OK, enough of this! I simply MUST get in the shower and then get some warm milk and a glass of Ensure......nighty night!! |
|
|
[spapad] Monday, February 02, 2009 9:00:15 PM | |
|
Dippity Doo? Yes I remember the disgusting crap my mother used to put in my hair to ATTEMPT to make if curl! Gross! 1964. I think I'm old enough!
As far as annexing anyones country, I think we have done that enough. I think the British still outdo us in that realm but, we are trying our best to be second runner up! LOL Good night DF! Pleasant dreams! [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 8:52:29 PM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Dippity Doo...???? BWWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!! Oh MAN!!! Soy, apart from you, me and maybe guido, do you think anyone here even knows what that is??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!! TOO funny!!!
Anyway, NO NO NO NO NO!!!!! Wrong! WE are bigger! WE are badder and YOU stink!! Quiet or we will annex your silly country and let the French run it...HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! Pass the moose meat, please! HAAAAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!
OK, enough of this! I simply MUST get in the shower and then get some warm milk and a glass of Ensure......nighty night!! |
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Monday, February 02, 2009 8:52:29 PM | |
|
Dippity Doo...???? BWWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!! Oh MAN!!! Soy, apart from you, me and maybe guido, do you think anyone here even knows what that is??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!! TOO funny!!!
Anyway, NO NO NO NO NO!!!!! Wrong! WE are bigger! WE are badder and YOU stink!! Quiet or we will annex your silly country and let the French run it...HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! Pass the moose meat, please! HAAAAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!
OK, enough of this! I simply MUST get in the shower and then get some warm milk and a glass of Ensure......nighty night!! |
|
[ron h] Monday, February 02, 2009 8:19:02 PM | |
|
...LOL...peace and love MG~ court adjourned... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by MG_Metalgoddess from Monday, February 02, 2009 8:09:31 PM) | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | LOL I agree.... here here... court ajourned... LOL
If all ours goverment would listen to us simple minded to the point people,, Maybe .. they could come up with solutions instead !!!
LOL Maybe we should all send our Goverments the Link to this site!!!!!!!!!! To get a perspective from all of Judas Priest fans...LOL ( I mean we are all pretty smart now arent we) LOL,,
Although .. we all would prob Be audited for the rest of our Lives !!!!!!!!! Bahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....
MG~
| | ronhartsell wrote: | | ...you are absolutely correct...ya know, it wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit to slash military spending, bring everyone home (whether in conflict or not) and infuse the savings back into us...I don't even want to get going on the pharmacuticals, you wanna talk about an industry in need of reform???...this is definately one arena that I wish we could clean up, it is abusrd and perposterous...oh, we have our faults, no doubt about it, but I don't think we come close to cornering the market on it!!!...hey, here's a novel idea...why don't we all learn from each other??...all of our respective countries do something right...gee, what's the worse that could happen?? | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | Yes I hear you, on the issues.. Agriculture, for some countries.. But the countries that the USA needs to stay on a even trading keel with doesnt need those services from them... Such as Canada, and now china....
Medial research is paid for by the hard working people, in the USA.. And unfortunatley alot of money is wasted, with meaningless gifts, and right offs for doctors, when your health insurance could be more affordable.. for the middle class.. ( I worked in the medical field for 15 years)
Here in Canada they do-not allow drug compies to advertise.. It is a medical decision for you and your docotor to discuss as in many other countries.. which is why people can get their medications cheaper, than in the US.
I do believe that nations should help one-another out.. ect.... For world peace sake if anything.. Money, food. ect..
But do-not ever sacrifice so much that your ownn people suffer, do to greed, and corporate driven enterprises..
MG~ | | ronhartsell wrote: | | Well, people are gonna feel how they feel...but I do take issue that America doesn't have anything to offer anymore...
...sure we do, just not in the old coventional ways...
...how about support and the many forms it comes in
-agriculture
-military/protection (how many foreign cities flourish because of our installations, and the numbers of ppl that are employed??)
-$$ for medical research
-space programs
-advanced education (in all sorts of areas)
-technology
...this is a random list off the top of my head, but in reality there are so many more...and this list is nothing to sneeze at, we're talking global ramifications if these services were no longer provided...how many small countries would be under attack if we weren't 'Big Brother'??...YES, I do believe our military is (and has been) a marketable commodity...it's HUGE business!!
...but I, as an American, more than anything, want peace, a sense of brother/sisterhood among us all...where issues like these never become issues...I don't know if that will ever happen...but I hope...
|
|
|
|
|
|
[ron h] Monday, February 02, 2009 8:16:34 PM | |
|
...I think the outsourcing is of 'labor', not the technology itself...Bill Gates is building a plant now, he's not outsourcing the technology, but the labor in creating/assembling/shipping and so on, but it's Microsoft technology...my sister-in-law is a teacher, so I know where you're coming from there, but there are a lot of variables that go into this...there are more schoolage children than ever before (8 more will be in 5 years or so...lol), teachers wages are ridiculously low (unless you're a superintendant in Chicago $400,000 per annum, in the newpaper today, front page)...and yes, we do have some of the most respected colleges/universities in the world here in America, and the students pay a heavy price for that, as professors don't come cheap...a lot of the military funding would be great in this area...no doubt, we can do better!!... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by MG_Metalgoddess from Monday, February 02, 2009 7:57:33 PM) | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | Alot of the Technology jobs are outsourced, to forgien countries...
Edcation.. they sent my cousin to Cuba,,, Yes CUBA.. to finish her masteres degree and write a full article, on their education system there.. because it is so much better than the USA's... wierd huh... who would have thought
Sacrifices,, I also meant as Teaching,,, Many schools have no money to continue on going important educational programs.. I have 5 school teachers in my family from MN, to New mexico, And they are all horror stories, on the size of how big the classrooms have gotten, and the How many students just getted pushed through the educatinal system now.. because the school dont have the money or resourses any more to help all the great minds we could have..
| | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | Yes I hear you, on the issues.. Agriculture, for some countries.. But the countries that the USA needs to stay on a even trading keel with doesnt need those services from them... Such as Canada, and now china....
Medial research is paid for by the hard working people, in the USA.. And unfortunatley alot of money is wasted, with meaningless gifts, and right offs for doctors, when your health insurance could be more affordable.. for the middle class.. ( I worked in the medical field for 15 years)
Here in Canada they do-not allow drug compies to advertise.. It is a medical decision for you and your docotor to discuss as in many other countries.. which is why people can get their medications cheaper, than in the US.
I do believe that nations should help one-another out.. ect.... For world peace sake if anything.. Money, food. ect..
But do-not ever sacrifice so much that your ownn people suffer, do to greed, and corporate driven enterprises..
MG~ | | ronhartsell wrote: | | Well, people are gonna feel how they feel...but I do take issue that America doesn't have anything to offer anymore...
...sure we do, just not in the old coventional ways...
...how about support and the many forms it comes in
-agriculture
-military/protection (how many foreign cities flourish because of our installations, and the numbers of ppl that are employed??)
-$$ for medical research
-space programs
-advanced education (in all sorts of areas)
-technology
...this is a random list off the top of my head, but in reality there are so many more...and this list is nothing to sneeze at, we're talking global ramifications if these services were no longer provided...how many small countries would be under attack if we weren't 'Big Brother'??...YES, I do believe our military is (and has been) a marketable commodity...it's HUGE business!!
...but I, as an American, more than anything, want peace, a sense of brother/sisterhood among us all...where issues like these never become issues...I don't know if that will ever happen...but I hope...
|
|
|
|
|
[~ MG_Metalgoddess~] Monday, February 02, 2009 8:09:31 PM | |
|
LOL I agree.... here here... court ajourned... LOL
If all ours goverment would listen to us simple minded to the point people,, Maybe .. they could come up with solutions instead !!!
LOL Maybe we should all send our Goverments the Link to this site!!!!!!!!!! To get a perspective from all of Judas Priest fans...LOL ( I mean we are all pretty smart now arent we) LOL,,
Although .. we all would prob Be audited for the rest of our Lives !!!!!!!!! Bahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....
MG~
[Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by ronhartsell from Monday, February 02, 2009 8:03:00 PM) | | ronhartsell wrote: | | ...you are absolutely correct...ya know, it wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit to slash military spending, bring everyone home (whether in conflict or not) and infuse the savings back into us...I don't even want to get going on the pharmacuticals, you wanna talk about an industry in need of reform???...this is definately one arena that I wish we could clean up, it is abusrd and perposterous...oh, we have our faults, no doubt about it, but I don't think we come close to cornering the market on it!!!...hey, here's a novel idea...why don't we all learn from each other??...all of our respective countries do something right...gee, what's the worse that could happen?? | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | Yes I hear you, on the issues.. Agriculture, for some countries.. But the countries that the USA needs to stay on a even trading keel with doesnt need those services from them... Such as Canada, and now china....
Medial research is paid for by the hard working people, in the USA.. And unfortunatley alot of money is wasted, with meaningless gifts, and right offs for doctors, when your health insurance could be more affordable.. for the middle class.. ( I worked in the medical field for 15 years)
Here in Canada they do-not allow drug compies to advertise.. It is a medical decision for you and your docotor to discuss as in many other countries.. which is why people can get their medications cheaper, than in the US.
I do believe that nations should help one-another out.. ect.... For world peace sake if anything.. Money, food. ect..
But do-not ever sacrifice so much that your ownn people suffer, do to greed, and corporate driven enterprises..
MG~ | | ronhartsell wrote: | | Well, people are gonna feel how they feel...but I do take issue that America doesn't have anything to offer anymore...
...sure we do, just not in the old coventional ways...
...how about support and the many forms it comes in
-agriculture
-military/protection (how many foreign cities flourish because of our installations, and the numbers of ppl that are employed??)
-$$ for medical research
-space programs
-advanced education (in all sorts of areas)
-technology
...this is a random list off the top of my head, but in reality there are so many more...and this list is nothing to sneeze at, we're talking global ramifications if these services were no longer provided...how many small countries would be under attack if we weren't 'Big Brother'??...YES, I do believe our military is (and has been) a marketable commodity...it's HUGE business!!
...but I, as an American, more than anything, want peace, a sense of brother/sisterhood among us all...where issues like these never become issues...I don't know if that will ever happen...but I hope...
|
|
|
|
|
[ron h] Monday, February 02, 2009 8:03:00 PM | |
|
...you are absolutely correct...ya know, it wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit to slash military spending, bring everyone home (whether in conflict or not) and infuse the savings back into us...I don't even want to get going on the pharmacuticals, you wanna talk about an industry in need of reform???...this is definately one arena that I wish we could clean up, it is abusrd and perposterous...oh, we have our faults, no doubt about it, but I don't think we come close to cornering the market on it!!!...hey, here's a novel idea...why don't we all learn from each other??...all of our respective countries do something right...gee, what's the worse that could happen?? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by MG_Metalgoddess from Monday, February 02, 2009 7:51:55 PM) | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | Yes I hear you, on the issues.. Agriculture, for some countries.. But the countries that the USA needs to stay on a even trading keel with doesnt need those services from them... Such as Canada, and now china....
Medial research is paid for by the hard working people, in the USA.. And unfortunatley alot of money is wasted, with meaningless gifts, and right offs for doctors, when your health insurance could be more affordable.. for the middle class.. ( I worked in the medical field for 15 years)
Here in Canada they do-not allow drug compies to advertise.. It is a medical decision for you and your docotor to discuss as in many other countries.. which is why people can get their medications cheaper, than in the US.
I do believe that nations should help one-another out.. ect.... For world peace sake if anything.. Money, food. ect..
But do-not ever sacrifice so much that your ownn people suffer, do to greed, and corporate driven enterprises..
MG~ | | ronhartsell wrote: | | Well, people are gonna feel how they feel...but I do take issue that America doesn't have anything to offer anymore...
...sure we do, just not in the old coventional ways...
...how about support and the many forms it comes in
-agriculture
-military/protection (how many foreign cities flourish because of our installations, and the numbers of ppl that are employed??)
-$$ for medical research
-space programs
-advanced education (in all sorts of areas)
-technology
...this is a random list off the top of my head, but in reality there are so many more...and this list is nothing to sneeze at, we're talking global ramifications if these services were no longer provided...how many small countries would be under attack if we weren't 'Big Brother'??...YES, I do believe our military is (and has been) a marketable commodity...it's HUGE business!!
...but I, as an American, more than anything, want peace, a sense of brother/sisterhood among us all...where issues like these never become issues...I don't know if that will ever happen...but I hope...
|
|
|
|
[~ MG_Metalgoddess~] Monday, February 02, 2009 7:57:33 PM | |
|
Alot of the Technology jobs are outsourced, to forgien countries...
Edcation.. they sent my cousin to Cuba,,, Yes CUBA.. to finish her masteres degree and write a full article, on their education system there.. because it is so much better than the USA's... wierd huh... who would have thought
Sacrifices,, I also meant as Teaching,,, Many schools have no money to continue on going important educational programs.. I have 5 school teachers in my family from MN, to New mexico, And they are all horror stories, on the size of how big the classrooms have gotten, and the How many students just getted pushed through the educatinal system now.. because the school dont have the money or resourses any more to help all the great minds we could have..
[Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by MG_Metalgoddess from Monday, February 02, 2009 7:51:55 PM) | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | Yes I hear you, on the issues.. Agriculture, for some countries.. But the countries that the USA needs to stay on a even trading keel with doesnt need those services from them... Such as Canada, and now china....
Medial research is paid for by the hard working people, in the USA.. And unfortunatley alot of money is wasted, with meaningless gifts, and right offs for doctors, when your health insurance could be more affordable.. for the middle class.. ( I worked in the medical field for 15 years)
Here in Canada they do-not allow drug compies to advertise.. It is a medical decision for you and your docotor to discuss as in many other countries.. which is why people can get their medications cheaper, than in the US.
I do believe that nations should help one-another out.. ect.... For world peace sake if anything.. Money, food. ect..
But do-not ever sacrifice so much that your ownn people suffer, do to greed, and corporate driven enterprises..
MG~ | | ronhartsell wrote: | | Well, people are gonna feel how they feel...but I do take issue that America doesn't have anything to offer anymore...
...sure we do, just not in the old coventional ways...
...how about support and the many forms it comes in
-agriculture
-military/protection (how many foreign cities flourish because of our installations, and the numbers of ppl that are employed??)
-$$ for medical research
-space programs
-advanced education (in all sorts of areas)
-technology
...this is a random list off the top of my head, but in reality there are so many more...and this list is nothing to sneeze at, we're talking global ramifications if these services were no longer provided...how many small countries would be under attack if we weren't 'Big Brother'??...YES, I do believe our military is (and has been) a marketable commodity...it's HUGE business!!
...but I, as an American, more than anything, want peace, a sense of brother/sisterhood among us all...where issues like these never become issues...I don't know if that will ever happen...but I hope...
|
|
|
|
[ron h] Monday, February 02, 2009 7:51:55 PM | |
|
[Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Soylentgreen4u a.k.a. theWOLFMAN from Monday, February 02, 2009 7:48:23 PM) | | Soylentgreen4u a.k.a. theWOLFMAN wrote: | | ACTUALLY REAGAN WAS SOMEWHAT OK I SUPPOSE...NOW NO MORE OF YOUR MINDLESS SPEWING!...SEE WHAT HAPPENS?...START TAKING YOUR HAPPY PILLS ON TIME...AND STOP USING OIL-BASED DIPPITY-DOOO ON YOUR EXCEEDINGLY,RECEDINGLY HAIRLINE!...LISTEN TO UNCLE SOY AND STOP THE NONSENSICAL YAMMERING THAT YOU EXCEL AT...BEGONE NOW!...
EEEEEENOUGH ALREADY!!!...AND REMEMBER..."I AM CANADIAN"......
AND WE'RE BIGGER THAN YOU....SO KNOCK IT OFF OR WE'LL SIT ON YOU!.... | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | ....and my Ronald Reagan comforter......HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! By the way, how did you know about my pj's??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!!! Damn cannnnnnucks! HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh my! Time for bed!!! | | Soylentgreen4u a.k.a. theWOLFMAN wrote: | | FOR ONE THING THIS IS VERY ANTI-CANADIAN OF YOU...HOW DARE YOU NOT HANG OUR FLAG UPSIDE DOWN,LIKE YAWL NORMALLY DO? ...DON'T MAKE US COME DOWN THERE WITH OUR COONSKIN HATS AND MUSKETS,AS LONG AS WE CANNNNNUCKS CAN GET BY THAT POLE-LOOOO-SHUN THAT DEEP (FRIED) FREEZER IS SPEWING ON HERE!....HURRY UP OLD MAN,GET THAT WALL BUILT TO SHUT OUT THE REST OF THE WORLD BEFORE IT'S TOOO LATE!...WEEEEZA COMIN',WEEEEZA COMIN'...NOW SOMEBODY GET SOME FABRIC SOFTENER FOR HIS DUBYA PJ'S AND SEND HIM TO BED EARLY! ...HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! | | guidogodoy wrote: | | Ah, senility is a sad thing. Especially when you see it unfold before your eyes.....
Just looking around the room, I can't tell you a single specific THING that was produced here in the United States. China, India, Thailand, Mexico...
We USED to dominate the auto industry. Not anymore. The only major constant that has been a true "American product" has been grains (food) and intellect. Namely, because we have always sought out the best from ALL countries and incorporated them into our own thereby turning them into "American products." Software and Silicone Valley are good examples.
Now then, I'll bow out with just one last comment. PLEASE don't strike, Canada!!! We'll do whatever you want Stephen Aboutment! LOL!!!!
www.southparkzone.com/episodes/1204/Canada-on-Strike.html
| | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
[~ MG_Metalgoddess~] Monday, February 02, 2009 7:51:55 PM | |
|
Yes I hear you, on the issues.. Agriculture, for some countries.. But the countries that the USA needs to stay on a even trading keel with doesnt need those services from them... Such as Canada, and now china....
Medial research is paid for by the hard working people, in the USA.. And unfortunatley alot of money is wasted, with meaningless gifts, and right offs for doctors, when your health insurance could be more affordable.. for the middle class.. ( I worked in the medical field for 15 years)
Here in Canada they do-not allow drug compies to advertise.. It is a medical decision for you and your docotor to discuss as in many other countries.. which is why people can get their medications cheaper, than in the US.
I do believe that nations should help one-another out.. ect.... For world peace sake if anything.. Money, food. ect..
But do-not ever sacrifice so much that your ownn people suffer, do to greed, and corporate driven enterprises..
MG~ [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by ronhartsell from Monday, February 02, 2009 7:43:03 PM) | | ronhartsell wrote: | | Well, people are gonna feel how they feel...but I do take issue that America doesn't have anything to offer anymore...
...sure we do, just not in the old coventional ways...
...how about support and the many forms it comes in
-agriculture
-military/protection (how many foreign cities flourish because of our installations, and the numbers of ppl that are employed??)
-$$ for medical research
-space programs
-advanced education (in all sorts of areas)
-technology
...this is a random list off the top of my head, but in reality there are so many more...and this list is nothing to sneeze at, we're talking global ramifications if these services were no longer provided...how many small countries would be under attack if we weren't 'Big Brother'??...YES, I do believe our military is (and has been) a marketable commodity...it's HUGE business!!
...but I, as an American, more than anything, want peace, a sense of brother/sisterhood among us all...where issues like these never become issues...I don't know if that will ever happen...but I hope...
|
|
|
[Soylentgreen4u] Monday, February 02, 2009 7:48:23 PM | |
|
ACTUALLY REAGAN WAS SOMEWHAT OK I SUPPOSE...NOW NO MORE OF YOUR MINDLESS SPEWING!...SEE WHAT HAPPENS?...START TAKING YOUR HAPPY PILLS ON TIME...AND STOP USING OIL-BASED DIPPITY-DOOO ON YOUR EXCEEDINGLY,RECEDINGLY HAIRLINE!...LISTEN TO UNCLE SOY AND STOP THE NONSENSICAL YAMMERING THAT YOU EXCEL AT...BEGONE NOW!...
EEEEEENOUGH ALREADY!!!...AND REMEMBER..."I AM CANADIAN"......
AND WE'RE BIGGER THAN YOU....SO KNOCK IT OFF OR WE'LL SIT ON YOU!.... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 6:54:07 PM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | ....and my Ronald Reagan comforter......HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! By the way, how did you know about my pj's??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!!! Damn cannnnnnucks! HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh my! Time for bed!!! | | Soylentgreen4u a.k.a. theWOLFMAN wrote: | | FOR ONE THING THIS IS VERY ANTI-CANADIAN OF YOU...HOW DARE YOU NOT HANG OUR FLAG UPSIDE DOWN,LIKE YAWL NORMALLY DO? ...DON'T MAKE US COME DOWN THERE WITH OUR COONSKIN HATS AND MUSKETS,AS LONG AS WE CANNNNNUCKS CAN GET BY THAT POLE-LOOOO-SHUN THAT DEEP (FRIED) FREEZER IS SPEWING ON HERE!....HURRY UP OLD MAN,GET THAT WALL BUILT TO SHUT OUT THE REST OF THE WORLD BEFORE IT'S TOOO LATE!...WEEEEZA COMIN',WEEEEZA COMIN'...NOW SOMEBODY GET SOME FABRIC SOFTENER FOR HIS DUBYA PJ'S AND SEND HIM TO BED EARLY! ...HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! | | guidogodoy wrote: | | Ah, senility is a sad thing. Especially when you see it unfold before your eyes.....
Just looking around the room, I can't tell you a single specific THING that was produced here in the United States. China, India, Thailand, Mexico...
We USED to dominate the auto industry. Not anymore. The only major constant that has been a true "American product" has been grains (food) and intellect. Namely, because we have always sought out the best from ALL countries and incorporated them into our own thereby turning them into "American products." Software and Silicone Valley are good examples.
Now then, I'll bow out with just one last comment. PLEASE don't strike, Canada!!! We'll do whatever you want Stephen Aboutment! LOL!!!!
www.southparkzone.com/episodes/1204/Canada-on-Strike.html
| | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
|
|
|
[ron h] Monday, February 02, 2009 7:43:03 PM | |
|
Well, people are gonna feel how they feel...but I do take issue that America doesn't have anything to offer anymore...
...sure we do, just not in the old coventional ways...
...how about support and the many forms it comes in
-agriculture
-military/protection (how many foreign cities flourish because of our installations, and the numbers of ppl that are employed??)
-$$ for medical research
-space programs
-advanced education (in all sorts of areas)
-technology
...this is a random list off the top of my head, but in reality there are so many more...and this list is nothing to sneeze at, we're talking global ramifications if these services were no longer provided...how many small countries would be under attack if we weren't 'Big Brother'??...YES, I do believe our military is (and has been) a marketable commodity...it's HUGE business!!
...but I, as an American, more than anything, want peace, a sense of brother/sisterhood among us all...where issues like these never become issues...I don't know if that will ever happen...but I hope...
|
|
[Head banger] Monday, February 02, 2009 7:04:17 PM | |
|
well, the tarp bill made me think about protectionism. that was the real issue. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by ronhartsell from Monday, February 02, 2009 6:20:46 PM) | | ronhartsell wrote: | | Head banger...see what you started??
Wow...
All this over the TARP bill...that was the issue, correct??
DF...I kind'a like this side of you...and I'm really amazed at how passionate some of you are on these issues...whether we agree or not, I've gained a lot of respect for you all!!!
|
|
|
[~ MG_Metalgoddess~] Monday, February 02, 2009 7:01:51 PM | |
|
LMAO .... You guys crack me up.......
Canada is self suff also... Unfort the USA has outsourced many job, and shut down factories, that could have made and provided alot more trade with other countries... and these jobs will never be brought back.. Nor will the products they provided.. Hence part of the trading problem the USA doesnt have anything to offer anymore..
I said this way back when along debate ago on this thread... china owns the USA.. I was laughed at... Didnt bother me because I knew the truth would eventually prove itself.... And now it has.
If all these other countries Like Canada and China blew the USA off.. it would deff collapse.. Which we all hope will never happen..
Anywase... Have a great nite..
MG~ [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 6:54:07 PM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | ....and my Ronald Reagan comforter......HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! By the way, how did you know about my pj's??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!!! Damn cannnnnnucks! HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh my! Time for bed!!! | | Soylentgreen4u a.k.a. theWOLFMAN wrote: | | FOR ONE THING THIS IS VERY ANTI-CANADIAN OF YOU...HOW DARE YOU NOT HANG OUR FLAG UPSIDE DOWN,LIKE YAWL NORMALLY DO? ...DON'T MAKE US COME DOWN THERE WITH OUR COONSKIN HATS AND MUSKETS,AS LONG AS WE CANNNNNUCKS CAN GET BY THAT POLE-LOOOO-SHUN THAT DEEP (FRIED) FREEZER IS SPEWING ON HERE!....HURRY UP OLD MAN,GET THAT WALL BUILT TO SHUT OUT THE REST OF THE WORLD BEFORE IT'S TOOO LATE!...WEEEEZA COMIN',WEEEEZA COMIN'...NOW SOMEBODY GET SOME FABRIC SOFTENER FOR HIS DUBYA PJ'S AND SEND HIM TO BED EARLY! ...HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! | | guidogodoy wrote: | | Ah, senility is a sad thing. Especially when you see it unfold before your eyes.....
Just looking around the room, I can't tell you a single specific THING that was produced here in the United States. China, India, Thailand, Mexico...
We USED to dominate the auto industry. Not anymore. The only major constant that has been a true "American product" has been grains (food) and intellect. Namely, because we have always sought out the best from ALL countries and incorporated them into our own thereby turning them into "American products." Software and Silicone Valley are good examples.
Now then, I'll bow out with just one last comment. PLEASE don't strike, Canada!!! We'll do whatever you want Stephen Aboutment! LOL!!!!
www.southparkzone.com/episodes/1204/Canada-on-Strike.html
| | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
|
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Monday, February 02, 2009 6:54:07 PM | |
|
....and my Ronald Reagan comforter......HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! By the way, how did you know about my pj's??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!!! Damn cannnnnnucks! HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh my! Time for bed!!! [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Soylentgreen4u a.k.a. theWOLFMAN from Monday, February 02, 2009 6:46:27 PM) | | Soylentgreen4u a.k.a. theWOLFMAN wrote: | | FOR ONE THING THIS IS VERY ANTI-CANADIAN OF YOU...HOW DARE YOU NOT HANG OUR FLAG UPSIDE DOWN,LIKE YAWL NORMALLY DO? ...DON'T MAKE US COME DOWN THERE WITH OUR COONSKIN HATS AND MUSKETS,AS LONG AS WE CANNNNNUCKS CAN GET BY THAT POLE-LOOOO-SHUN THAT DEEP (FRIED) FREEZER IS SPEWING ON HERE!....HURRY UP OLD MAN,GET THAT WALL BUILT TO SHUT OUT THE REST OF THE WORLD BEFORE IT'S TOOO LATE!...WEEEEZA COMIN',WEEEEZA COMIN'...NOW SOMEBODY GET SOME FABRIC SOFTENER FOR HIS DUBYA PJ'S AND SEND HIM TO BED EARLY! ...HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! | | guidogodoy wrote: | | Ah, senility is a sad thing. Especially when you see it unfold before your eyes.....
Just looking around the room, I can't tell you a single specific THING that was produced here in the United States. China, India, Thailand, Mexico...
We USED to dominate the auto industry. Not anymore. The only major constant that has been a true "American product" has been grains (food) and intellect. Namely, because we have always sought out the best from ALL countries and incorporated them into our own thereby turning them into "American products." Software and Silicone Valley are good examples.
Now then, I'll bow out with just one last comment. PLEASE don't strike, Canada!!! We'll do whatever you want Stephen Aboutment! LOL!!!!
www.southparkzone.com/episodes/1204/Canada-on-Strike.html
| | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
|
|
[Soylentgreen4u] Monday, February 02, 2009 6:46:27 PM | |
|
FOR ONE THING THIS IS VERY ANTI-CANADIAN OF YOU...HOW DARE YOU NOT HANG OUR FLAG UPSIDE DOWN,LIKE YAWL NORMALLY DO? ...DON'T MAKE US COME DOWN THERE WITH OUR COONSKIN HATS AND MUSKETS,AS LONG AS WE CANNNNNUCKS CAN GET BY THAT POLE-LOOOO-SHUN THAT DEEP (FRIED) FREEZER IS SPEWING ON HERE!....HURRY UP OLD MAN,GET THAT WALL BUILT TO SHUT OUT THE REST OF THE WORLD BEFORE IT'S TOOO LATE!...WEEEEZA COMIN',WEEEEZA COMIN'...NOW SOMEBODY GET SOME FABRIC SOFTENER FOR HIS DUBYA PJ'S AND SEND HIM TO BED EARLY! ...HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by guidogodoy from Monday, February 02, 2009 6:14:40 PM) | | guidogodoy wrote: | | Ah, senility is a sad thing. Especially when you see it unfold before your eyes.....
Just looking around the room, I can't tell you a single specific THING that was produced here in the United States. China, India, Thailand, Mexico...
We USED to dominate the auto industry. Not anymore. The only major constant that has been a true "American product" has been grains (food) and intellect. Namely, because we have always sought out the best from ALL countries and incorporated them into our own thereby turning them into "American products." Software and Silicone Valley are good examples.
Now then, I'll bow out with just one last comment. PLEASE don't strike, Canada!!! We'll do whatever you want Stephen Aboutment! LOL!!!!
www.southparkzone.com/episodes/1204/Canada-on-Strike.html
| | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
|
[ron h] Monday, February 02, 2009 6:20:46 PM | |
|
Head banger...see what you started??
Wow...
All this over the TARP bill...that was the issue, correct??
DF...I kind'a like this side of you...and I'm really amazed at how passionate some of you are on these issues...whether we agree or not, I've gained a lot of respect for you all!!!
|
|
[guidogodoy] Monday, February 02, 2009 6:14:40 PM | |
|
Ah, senility is a sad thing. Especially when you see it unfold before your eyes.....
Just looking around the room, I can't tell you a single specific THING that was produced here in the United States. China, India, Thailand, Mexico...
We USED to dominate the auto industry. Not anymore. The only major constant that has been a true "American product" has been grains (food) and intellect. Namely, because we have always sought out the best from ALL countries and incorporated them into our own thereby turning them into "American products." Software and Silicone Valley are good examples.
Now then, I'll bow out with just one last comment. PLEASE don't strike, Canada!!! We'll do whatever you want Stephen Aboutment! LOL!!!!
www.southparkzone.com/episodes/1204/Canada-on-Strike.html
[Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 10:56:09 AM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
[spapad] Monday, February 02, 2009 5:59:45 PM | |
|
The main point of this whole dialog seems to be the United States' crappy foreign policy. I myself did not know about it until I went abroad a few times and saw what others in the world thought of our foreign policy and some things we don't hear about or are spun differently back here. Now don't ask me to go into specifics because it was many years ago and I can't remember the specifics, but I can tell you we do leave a big foot print wherever we go and it is not always friendly and fair. I can also say it was the first time I was embarassed about what our country does at times. These are countries we have good ties with, so imagine what we do to countries we don't.
Not pointing fingers, just telling it from the "other persons" point of view.
Please don't stone me! LOL [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 5:50:46 PM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Well my dear, the US gives out BILLIONS in aid to other countries every year. It is a big source of contention here since there are many here who feel we should "take care of our own" rather than help other countries. I do not have exact figures (dollars) for you because that is really not the point.
As for oil, we buy it so that we can keep ours in reserve and we have evironmentalists that scream about drilling. That in itself is somewhat confusing and I do not have answers to everything. I can only say that IF we had to, we could survive without oil from other countries. THAT was really the point.
I think I should re-phrase my "hater" comment. I am not saying that ANY of you (my friends) are American Haters!!! I wish I had not used that phrase!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I do not expect you guys to "like" our policies or politics. I would not ask that you do!! I am trying to say that we are still the biggest, baddest gorilla in the jungle and , despite our current financial condition, we will remain so. | | adrianaec_88 wrote: | | Ok I thought of not saying nothing at all about your comments Freeze but I couldn't help it....
"We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people" .... "This country has AMPLE resources. We could survive just fine without the rest of the world and that includes OIL! We have plenty"ok then why are you Venezuela's main oil buyer?.... and btw why did USA started the war against Iraq if you had plenty of it? ....oh right.... to remove Saddam Husein from the government and give freedom to the Iraq people??? Yes, that's right they sure live much better now... yep, no way I'll buy that...
I have to make this clear I'm not an "american hater" as you say, if you don't like it's foreign policy doesn't mean that you hate american people or it's culture or nothing like that ok?
And Freeze before saying anything about it coulld you explain me this?" America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact" charuty? You're really refering to that?
(Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 5:07:00 PM)
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I knew it!! I knew I could count on you!! HAHAHAHAA!!! OK, debate, you say? That will be fine.
I do not refer to you personally as a "hater". In fact, I would be quite surprised if you actually "hate" anyone. You are too smart a fellow for that nonsense (you too, Soy!) .As for "arguments", I have no need for any as I am not looking to argue my feelings. There is NO debate. If you carry a personal distaste for politicians, I really cannot see how that is anything special. It is oh so fashionable to declare one's distaste for politicians. I see them as a functioning part of our world. They are what they are and I certainly cannot change that. Neither can you. For what it is worth, I do not personally know any politicians so I have no particular affinity for them, either.
As for you saying anything regarding business and trade, you are entitled to your opinion. I never said I have a problem with YOU. That would be silly. I speak of this ridiculous notion (promoted by a small but vocal group) that the US is somehow taking advantage of unsuspecting, Third World nations and forcing our evil products and policies upon them. Yeah, Yeah..OK. As you so eloquently pointed out, markets are open. FREE trade! Making money is NOT a bad thing, man! If we turn a profit, that is GREAT! That is the WHOLE idea! If we see a market wherein we can make a profit, we target that market. Smart business, I say. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Simple enough. Global colonization?!?!? HA!!!! Yeah, OK.
As for charity, you can deny it if you wish but the US sends aid to many, many "poor" countries. It is what we do and not just when a friggin tidal wave hits. We are one of the most "giving" nations on the planet. As for war..well, it is what it is. Yes, we bomb enemies. And we do it well. I believe we are 12 and 1...or is it 11 and 2?? ...not bad. HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (sorry)
As for "envy". I do not recall saying that. I am sure there are a lot of countries with a GREAT economy and lifestyle. Equally, there are a lot of poor countries and they get HAND OUTS. I do know this, if there was a way for the US to be "shut out" of the trade world, YES! It would initially have an effect on our economy..AND me. What I meant by my comments was, this country has AMPLE resources. We could survive just fine without the rest of the world and that includes OIL! We have plenty.
(Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, February 02, 2009 4:44:29 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok,... Im going to assume that you were serious... In which case I suggest that you sit back, read what you wrote and think. You are not dumb. I dont know how you can come to such conclusions as you did, but lets clear up certain things. (Oh, Im going to put my text in red, and the quoted in white - just to avoid confusion).
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash
You might as well say that that refers to me. Everyone knows it does. In any case, lets clear up this "America-Hater" bullshit, since I see that it is very popular with American conservatives, when they are out of arguments. You oppose American policies - you hate America.
What would I hate about America? The land? The mountains, forests, coasts, soil... Why? The people? Why? Most of them havent done anything to me. That means that I would have to hate Tim, Guido, Darth, Bev... You! I dont, you know that! Now, American policies, and the people that make and carry out those policies... Politicians... That would be closer to the truth. Businessmen? The big ones? Certainly.
Point: you cannot think of a country as you would think of an individual person. There is so much more to it.
forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s!
I never said or claimed that your politicians or businessmen somehow force us into trading with you. Markets are open. Companies trade. It is the way of capitalism. And it benefits you guys much more than it does us. Or, at least, it benefits your corporations. I can hardly Imagine that you personaly have any direct gain from it. Lets get another thing straight: the US companies are not trading with us because of charity or solidarity. They found a new market, and nations that are not used to living in capitalism. And they made billions. They sell their products to us. Sell, not give. And they dont sell at a loss, no way. They sell because they make profit of us. Ok. Thats the way of it, and it seems that there isnt a thing we can do right now to rectify it.
Do not for one minute think that we cant do without you, however. "We" meaning the rest of the world here. If tomorow all American products disapear from our markets... We will buy others. What will you do? What will your companies do, when they will run out of money? Remember... The worlds population is 6 billion. The American is about 300 milion. Think how the market would shrink for your companies. You (and this time I mean "you" as you, the individual) would feel it. You would feel it a lot. Because even tho it is the richest, the USA is still just one country, among hundreds of others. And you do need the rest of the world. If you want to keep up with your current lifestyle, at least. America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact.
Now, that, and the "handout" thingy. I dont know for many other countries, but we never recieved ANY handouts from the US. Yet we trade with you. We buy American stuff. Right now I have Lewis jeans on me (made in Croatia - but the profit went to the USA). And I dont actualy mind it all that much. Sure, they are not the best jeans that money can buy, but I like them well enough. Even tho the profit made from those jeans went to the USA. You see... I bought them, paid for them, and because of that, a certain amount of money went to the USA, where a certain amount of tax was paid to your government, that used that tax on something that may just well be for you. Now... Can you say "thank you"? And, knowing what wages are like in Croatia, Id say that quite a large part of the money I paid for the jeans went to the USA. Thats how it goes. And there are literary billions of euros made that way, all around the world from people who buy American goods.
And lets be clear on another thing as well - bombing a country does NOT count as a gift of weapons! And no matter how much America helps other countries - people who have suffered from American foreign policy have every right in the world to hate whatever they percieve as the USA. And please... PLEASE... What handouts? Aid when theres an earthquake somewhere? How does that equal out the economic colonisation of the rest of the world?
And please, explain... Why in the world do you think we envy you?!?! Envy you what? Your freedom? I actualy believe that I have more freedom here than you do there.
Infact, this attitude in your post is childish. "I dont need you! I dont need ANYONE!!!" Well, guess what... You do.
In any case, I went on about it.. And I think I have all points covered. Im sure that I will hear more from you... Just remember: no need to pop blood vessels, and Im not upset or anything. Just debate.
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there.
|
|
Edited at: Monday, February 02, 2009 5:09:30 PM Edited at: Monday, February 02, 2009 5:15:31 PM |
Edited at: Monday, February 02, 2009 5:33:53 PM |
|
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Monday, February 02, 2009 5:50:46 PM | |
|
Well my dear, the US gives out BILLIONS in aid to other countries every year. It is a big source of contention here since there are many here who feel we should "take care of our own" rather than help other countries. I do not have exact figures (dollars) for you because that is really not the point.
As for oil, we buy it so that we can keep ours in reserve and we have evironmentalists that scream about drilling. That in itself is somewhat confusing and I do not have answers to everything. I can only say that IF we had to, we could survive without oil from other countries. THAT was really the point.
I think I should re-phrase my "hater" comment. I am not saying that ANY of you (my friends) are American Haters!!! I wish I had not used that phrase!! HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I do not expect you guys to "like" our policies or politics. I would not ask that you do!! I am trying to say that we are still the biggest, baddest gorilla in the jungle and , despite our current financial condition, we will remain so. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by adrianaec_88 from Monday, February 02, 2009 5:31:18 PM) | | adrianaec_88 wrote: | | Ok I thought of not saying nothing at all about your comments Freeze but I couldn't help it....
"We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people" .... "This country has AMPLE resources. We could survive just fine without the rest of the world and that includes OIL! We have plenty"ok then why are you Venezuela's main oil buyer?.... and btw why did USA started the war against Iraq if you had plenty of it? ....oh right.... to remove Saddam Husein from the government and give freedom to the Iraq people??? Yes, that's right they sure live much better now... yep, no way I'll buy that...
I have to make this clear I'm not an "american hater" as you say, if you don't like it's foreign policy doesn't mean that you hate american people or it's culture or nothing like that ok?
And Freeze before saying anything about it coulld you explain me this?" America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact" charuty? You're really refering to that?
(Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 5:07:00 PM)
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I knew it!! I knew I could count on you!! HAHAHAHAA!!! OK, debate, you say? That will be fine.
I do not refer to you personally as a "hater". In fact, I would be quite surprised if you actually "hate" anyone. You are too smart a fellow for that nonsense (you too, Soy!) .As for "arguments", I have no need for any as I am not looking to argue my feelings. There is NO debate. If you carry a personal distaste for politicians, I really cannot see how that is anything special. It is oh so fashionable to declare one's distaste for politicians. I see them as a functioning part of our world. They are what they are and I certainly cannot change that. Neither can you. For what it is worth, I do not personally know any politicians so I have no particular affinity for them, either.
As for you saying anything regarding business and trade, you are entitled to your opinion. I never said I have a problem with YOU. That would be silly. I speak of this ridiculous notion (promoted by a small but vocal group) that the US is somehow taking advantage of unsuspecting, Third World nations and forcing our evil products and policies upon them. Yeah, Yeah..OK. As you so eloquently pointed out, markets are open. FREE trade! Making money is NOT a bad thing, man! If we turn a profit, that is GREAT! That is the WHOLE idea! If we see a market wherein we can make a profit, we target that market. Smart business, I say. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Simple enough. Global colonization?!?!? HA!!!! Yeah, OK.
As for charity, you can deny it if you wish but the US sends aid to many, many "poor" countries. It is what we do and not just when a friggin tidal wave hits. We are one of the most "giving" nations on the planet. As for war..well, it is what it is. Yes, we bomb enemies. And we do it well. I believe we are 12 and 1...or is it 11 and 2?? ...not bad. HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (sorry)
As for "envy". I do not recall saying that. I am sure there are a lot of countries with a GREAT economy and lifestyle. Equally, there are a lot of poor countries and they get HAND OUTS. I do know this, if there was a way for the US to be "shut out" of the trade world, YES! It would initially have an effect on our economy..AND me. What I meant by my comments was, this country has AMPLE resources. We could survive just fine without the rest of the world and that includes OIL! We have plenty.
(Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, February 02, 2009 4:44:29 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok,... Im going to assume that you were serious... In which case I suggest that you sit back, read what you wrote and think. You are not dumb. I dont know how you can come to such conclusions as you did, but lets clear up certain things. (Oh, Im going to put my text in red, and the quoted in white - just to avoid confusion).
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash
You might as well say that that refers to me. Everyone knows it does. In any case, lets clear up this "America-Hater" bullshit, since I see that it is very popular with American conservatives, when they are out of arguments. You oppose American policies - you hate America.
What would I hate about America? The land? The mountains, forests, coasts, soil... Why? The people? Why? Most of them havent done anything to me. That means that I would have to hate Tim, Guido, Darth, Bev... You! I dont, you know that! Now, American policies, and the people that make and carry out those policies... Politicians... That would be closer to the truth. Businessmen? The big ones? Certainly.
Point: you cannot think of a country as you would think of an individual person. There is so much more to it.
forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s!
I never said or claimed that your politicians or businessmen somehow force us into trading with you. Markets are open. Companies trade. It is the way of capitalism. And it benefits you guys much more than it does us. Or, at least, it benefits your corporations. I can hardly Imagine that you personaly have any direct gain from it. Lets get another thing straight: the US companies are not trading with us because of charity or solidarity. They found a new market, and nations that are not used to living in capitalism. And they made billions. They sell their products to us. Sell, not give. And they dont sell at a loss, no way. They sell because they make profit of us. Ok. Thats the way of it, and it seems that there isnt a thing we can do right now to rectify it.
Do not for one minute think that we cant do without you, however. "We" meaning the rest of the world here. If tomorow all American products disapear from our markets... We will buy others. What will you do? What will your companies do, when they will run out of money? Remember... The worlds population is 6 billion. The American is about 300 milion. Think how the market would shrink for your companies. You (and this time I mean "you" as you, the individual) would feel it. You would feel it a lot. Because even tho it is the richest, the USA is still just one country, among hundreds of others. And you do need the rest of the world. If you want to keep up with your current lifestyle, at least. America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact.
Now, that, and the "handout" thingy. I dont know for many other countries, but we never recieved ANY handouts from the US. Yet we trade with you. We buy American stuff. Right now I have Lewis jeans on me (made in Croatia - but the profit went to the USA). And I dont actualy mind it all that much. Sure, they are not the best jeans that money can buy, but I like them well enough. Even tho the profit made from those jeans went to the USA. You see... I bought them, paid for them, and because of that, a certain amount of money went to the USA, where a certain amount of tax was paid to your government, that used that tax on something that may just well be for you. Now... Can you say "thank you"? And, knowing what wages are like in Croatia, Id say that quite a large part of the money I paid for the jeans went to the USA. Thats how it goes. And there are literary billions of euros made that way, all around the world from people who buy American goods.
And lets be clear on another thing as well - bombing a country does NOT count as a gift of weapons! And no matter how much America helps other countries - people who have suffered from American foreign policy have every right in the world to hate whatever they percieve as the USA. And please... PLEASE... What handouts? Aid when theres an earthquake somewhere? How does that equal out the economic colonisation of the rest of the world?
And please, explain... Why in the world do you think we envy you?!?! Envy you what? Your freedom? I actualy believe that I have more freedom here than you do there.
Infact, this attitude in your post is childish. "I dont need you! I dont need ANYONE!!!" Well, guess what... You do.
In any case, I went on about it.. And I think I have all points covered. Im sure that I will hear more from you... Just remember: no need to pop blood vessels, and Im not upset or anything. Just debate.
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there.
|
|
Edited at: Monday, February 02, 2009 5:09:30 PM Edited at: Monday, February 02, 2009 5:15:31 PM |
Edited at: Monday, February 02, 2009 5:33:53 PM |
|
|
[adrianaec_88] Monday, February 02, 2009 5:31:18 PM | |
|
Ok I thought of not saying nothing at all about your comments Freeze but I couldn't help it....
"We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people" .... "This country has AMPLE resources. We could survive just fine without the rest of the world and that includes OIL! We have plenty"ok then why are you Venezuela's main oil buyer?.... and btw why did USA started the war against Iraq if you had plenty of it? ....oh right.... to remove Saddam Husein from the government and give freedom to the Iraq people??? Yes, that's right they sure live much better now... yep, no way I'll buy that...
I have to make this clear I'm not an "american hater" as you say, if you don't like it's foreign policy doesn't mean that you hate american people or it's culture or nothing like that ok?
And Freeze before saying anything about it coulld you explain me this?" America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact" charuty? You're really refering to that?
[Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 5:07:00 PM)
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I knew it!! I knew I could count on you!! HAHAHAHAA!!! OK, debate, you say? That will be fine.
I do not refer to you personally as a "hater". In fact, I would be quite surprised if you actually "hate" anyone. You are too smart a fellow for that nonsense (you too, Soy!) .As for "arguments", I have no need for any as I am not looking to argue my feelings. There is NO debate. If you carry a personal distaste for politicians, I really cannot see how that is anything special. It is oh so fashionable to declare one's distaste for politicians. I see them as a functioning part of our world. They are what they are and I certainly cannot change that. Neither can you. For what it is worth, I do not personally know any politicians so I have no particular affinity for them, either.
As for you saying anything regarding business and trade, you are entitled to your opinion. I never said I have a problem with YOU. That would be silly. I speak of this ridiculous notion (promoted by a small but vocal group) that the US is somehow taking advantage of unsuspecting, Third World nations and forcing our evil products and policies upon them. Yeah, Yeah..OK. As you so eloquently pointed out, markets are open. FREE trade! Making money is NOT a bad thing, man! If we turn a profit, that is GREAT! That is the WHOLE idea! If we see a market wherein we can make a profit, we target that market. Smart business, I say. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Simple enough. Global colonization?!?!? HA!!!! Yeah, OK.
As for charity, you can deny it if you wish but the US sends aid to many, many "poor" countries. It is what we do and not just when a friggin tidal wave hits. We are one of the most "giving" nations on the planet. As for war..well, it is what it is. Yes, we bomb enemies. And we do it well. I believe we are 12 and 1...or is it 11 and 2?? ...not bad. HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (sorry)
As for "envy". I do not recall saying that. I am sure there are a lot of countries with a GREAT economy and lifestyle. Equally, there are a lot of poor countries and they get HAND OUTS. I do know this, if there was a way for the US to be "shut out" of the trade world, YES! It would initially have an effect on our economy..AND me. What I meant by my comments was, this country has AMPLE resources. We could survive just fine without the rest of the world and that includes OIL! We have plenty.
(Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, February 02, 2009 4:44:29 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok,... Im going to assume that you were serious... In which case I suggest that you sit back, read what you wrote and think. You are not dumb. I dont know how you can come to such conclusions as you did, but lets clear up certain things. (Oh, Im going to put my text in red, and the quoted in white - just to avoid confusion).
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash
You might as well say that that refers to me. Everyone knows it does. In any case, lets clear up this "America-Hater" bullshit, since I see that it is very popular with American conservatives, when they are out of arguments. You oppose American policies - you hate America.
What would I hate about America? The land? The mountains, forests, coasts, soil... Why? The people? Why? Most of them havent done anything to me. That means that I would have to hate Tim, Guido, Darth, Bev... You! I dont, you know that! Now, American policies, and the people that make and carry out those policies... Politicians... That would be closer to the truth. Businessmen? The big ones? Certainly.
Point: you cannot think of a country as you would think of an individual person. There is so much more to it.
forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s!
I never said or claimed that your politicians or businessmen somehow force us into trading with you. Markets are open. Companies trade. It is the way of capitalism. And it benefits you guys much more than it does us. Or, at least, it benefits your corporations. I can hardly Imagine that you personaly have any direct gain from it. Lets get another thing straight: the US companies are not trading with us because of charity or solidarity. They found a new market, and nations that are not used to living in capitalism. And they made billions. They sell their products to us. Sell, not give. And they dont sell at a loss, no way. They sell because they make profit of us. Ok. Thats the way of it, and it seems that there isnt a thing we can do right now to rectify it.
Do not for one minute think that we cant do without you, however. "We" meaning the rest of the world here. If tomorow all American products disapear from our markets... We will buy others. What will you do? What will your companies do, when they will run out of money? Remember... The worlds population is 6 billion. The American is about 300 milion. Think how the market would shrink for your companies. You (and this time I mean "you" as you, the individual) would feel it. You would feel it a lot. Because even tho it is the richest, the USA is still just one country, among hundreds of others. And you do need the rest of the world. If you want to keep up with your current lifestyle, at least. America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact.
Now, that, and the "handout" thingy. I dont know for many other countries, but we never recieved ANY handouts from the US. Yet we trade with you. We buy American stuff. Right now I have Lewis jeans on me (made in Croatia - but the profit went to the USA). And I dont actualy mind it all that much. Sure, they are not the best jeans that money can buy, but I like them well enough. Even tho the profit made from those jeans went to the USA. You see... I bought them, paid for them, and because of that, a certain amount of money went to the USA, where a certain amount of tax was paid to your government, that used that tax on something that may just well be for you. Now... Can you say "thank you"? And, knowing what wages are like in Croatia, Id say that quite a large part of the money I paid for the jeans went to the USA. Thats how it goes. And there are literary billions of euros made that way, all around the world from people who buy American goods.
And lets be clear on another thing as well - bombing a country does NOT count as a gift of weapons! And no matter how much America helps other countries - people who have suffered from American foreign policy have every right in the world to hate whatever they percieve as the USA. And please... PLEASE... What handouts? Aid when theres an earthquake somewhere? How does that equal out the economic colonisation of the rest of the world?
And please, explain... Why in the world do you think we envy you?!?! Envy you what? Your freedom? I actualy believe that I have more freedom here than you do there.
Infact, this attitude in your post is childish. "I dont need you! I dont need ANYONE!!!" Well, guess what... You do.
In any case, I went on about it.. And I think I have all points covered. Im sure that I will hear more from you... Just remember: no need to pop blood vessels, and Im not upset or anything. Just debate.
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there.
|
|
Edited at: Monday, February 02, 2009 5:09:30 PM Edited at: Monday, February 02, 2009 5:15:31 PM |
Edited at: Monday, February 02, 2009 5:33:53 PM |
|
[Head banger] Monday, February 02, 2009 5:24:18 PM | |
|
I think they were returning a gift, with interest, but lets leave that one for later. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, February 02, 2009 5:00:15 PM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | In that case, Israel is the most generous country in the world. Dont even think to compare the two. | | Head banger wrote: | | And lets be clear on another thing as well - bombing a country does NOT count as a gift of weapons!
realy? darn, must rethink that policy. perhaps that is the issue between hamas and isreal, hama's gifts are not welcomed as they should be. | | _strat_ wrote: | |
Ok,... Im going to assume that you were serious... In which case I suggest that you sit back, read what you wrote and think. You are not dumb. I dont know how you can come to such conclusions as you did, but lets clear up certain things. (Oh, Im going to put my text in red, and the quoted in white - just to avoid confusion).
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash
You might as well say that that refers to me. Everyone knows it does. In any case, lets clear up this "America-Hater" bullshit, since I see that it is very popular with American conservatives, when they are out of arguments. You oppose American policies - you hate America.
What would I hate about America? The land? The mountains, forests, coasts, soil... Why? The people? Why? Most of them havent done anything to me. That means that I would have to hate Tim, Guido, Darth, Bev... You! I dont, you know that! Now, American policies, and the people that make and carry out those policies... Politicians... That would be closer to the truth. Businessmen? The big ones? Certainly.
Point: you cannot think of a country as you would think of an individual person. There is so much more to it.
forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s!
I never said or claimed that your politicians or businessmen somehow force us into trading with you. Markets are open. Companies trade. It is the way of capitalism. And it benefits you guys much more than it does us. Or, at least, it benefits your corporations. I can hardly Imagine that you personaly have any direct gain from it. Lets get another thing straight: the US companies are not trading with us because of charity or solidarity. They found a new market, and nations that are not used to living in capitalism. And they made billions. They sell their products to us. Sell, not give. And they dont sell at a loss, no way. They sell because they make profit of us. Ok. Thats the way of it, and it seems that there isnt a thing we can do right now to rectify it.
Do not for one minute think that we cant do without you, however. "We" meaning the rest of the world here. If tomorow all American products disapear from our markets... We will buy others. What will you do? What will your companies do, when they will run out of money? Remember... The worlds population is 6 billion. The American is about 300 milion. Think how the market would shrink for your companies. You (and this time I mean "you" as you, the individual) would feel it. You would feel it a lot. Because even tho it is the richest, the USA is still just one country, among hundreds of others. And you do need the rest of the world. If you want to keep up with your current lifestyle, at least.
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact.
Now, that, and the "handout" thingy. I dont know for many other countries, but we never recieved ANY handouts from the US. Yet we trade with you. We buy American stuff. Right now I have Lewis jeans on me (made in Croatia - but the profit went to the USA). And I dont actualy mind it all that much. Sure, they are not the best jeans that money can buy, but I like them well enough. Even tho the profit made from those jeans went to the USA. You see... I bought them, paid for them, and because of that, a certain amount of money went to the USA, where a certain amount of tax was paid to your government, that used that tax on something that may just well be for you. Now... Can you say "thank you"? And, knowing what wages are like in Croatia, Id say that quite a large part of the money I paid for the jeans went to the USA. Thats how it goes. And there are literary billions of euros made that way, all around the world from people who buy American goods.
And lets be clear on another thing as well - bombing a country does NOT count as a gift of weapons! And no matter how much America helps other countries - people who have suffered from American foreign policy have every right in the world to hate whatever they percieve as the USA. And please... PLEASE... What handouts? Aid when theres an earthquake somewhere? How does that equal out the economic colonisation of the rest of the world?
And please, explain... Why in the world do you think we envy you?!?! Envy you what? Your freedom? I actualy believe that I have more freedom here than you do there.
Infact, this attitude in your post is childish. "I dont need you! I dont need ANYONE!!!" Well, guess what... You do.
In any case, I went on about it.. And I think I have all points covered. Im sure that I will hear more from you... Just remember: no need to pop blood vessels, and Im not upset or anything. Just debate. | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
|
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Monday, February 02, 2009 5:07:00 PM | |
|
HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I knew it!! I knew I could count on you!! HAHAHAHAA!!! OK, debate, you say? That will be fine.
I do not refer to you personally as a "hater". In fact, I would be quite surprised if you actually "hate" anyone. You are too smart a fellow for that nonsense (you too, Soy!) .As for "arguments", I have no need for any as I am not looking to argue my feelings. There is NO debate. If you carry a personal distaste for politicians, I really cannot see how that is anything special. It is oh so fashionable to declare one's distaste for politicians. I see them as a functioning part of our world. They are what they are and I certainly cannot change that. Neither can you. For what it is worth, I do not personally know any politicians so I have no particular affinity for them, either.
As for you saying anything regarding business and trade, you are entitled to your opinion. I never said I have a problem with YOU. That would be silly. I speak of this ridiculous notion (promoted by a small but vocal group) that the US is somehow taking advantage of unsuspecting, Third World nations and forcing our evil products and policies upon them. Yeah, Yeah..OK. As you so eloquently pointed out, markets are open. FREE trade! Making money is NOT a bad thing, man! If we turn a profit, that is GREAT! That is the WHOLE idea! If we see a market wherein we can make a profit, we target that market. Smart business, I say. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Simple enough. Global colonization?!?!? HA!!!! Yeah, OK.
As for charity, you can deny it if you wish but the US sends aid to many, many "poor" countries. It is what we do and not just when a friggin tidal wave hits. We are one of the most "giving" nations on the planet. As for war..well, it is what it is. Yes, we bomb enemies. And we do it well. I believe we are 12 and 1...or is it 11 and 2?? ...not bad. HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (sorry)
As for "envy". I do not recall saying that. I am sure there are a lot of countries with a GREAT economy and lifestyle. Equally, there are a lot of poor countries and they get HAND OUTS. I do know this, if there was a way for the US to be "shut out" of the trade world, YES! It would initially have an effect on our economy..AND me. What I meant by my comments was, this country has AMPLE resources. We could survive just fine without the rest of the world and that includes OIL! We have plenty.
[Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, February 02, 2009 4:44:29 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok,... Im going to assume that you were serious... In which case I suggest that you sit back, read what you wrote and think. You are not dumb. I dont know how you can come to such conclusions as you did, but lets clear up certain things. (Oh, Im going to put my text in red, and the quoted in white - just to avoid confusion).
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash
You might as well say that that refers to me. Everyone knows it does. In any case, lets clear up this "America-Hater" bullshit, since I see that it is very popular with American conservatives, when they are out of arguments. You oppose American policies - you hate America.
What would I hate about America? The land? The mountains, forests, coasts, soil... Why? The people? Why? Most of them havent done anything to me. That means that I would have to hate Tim, Guido, Darth, Bev... You! I dont, you know that! Now, American policies, and the people that make and carry out those policies... Politicians... That would be closer to the truth. Businessmen? The big ones? Certainly.
Point: you cannot think of a country as you would think of an individual person. There is so much more to it.
forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s!
I never said or claimed that your politicians or businessmen somehow force us into trading with you. Markets are open. Companies trade. It is the way of capitalism. And it benefits you guys much more than it does us. Or, at least, it benefits your corporations. I can hardly Imagine that you personaly have any direct gain from it. Lets get another thing straight: the US companies are not trading with us because of charity or solidarity. They found a new market, and nations that are not used to living in capitalism. And they made billions. They sell their products to us. Sell, not give. And they dont sell at a loss, no way. They sell because they make profit of us. Ok. Thats the way of it, and it seems that there isnt a thing we can do right now to rectify it.
Do not for one minute think that we cant do without you, however. "We" meaning the rest of the world here. If tomorow all American products disapear from our markets... We will buy others. What will you do? What will your companies do, when they will run out of money? Remember... The worlds population is 6 billion. The American is about 300 milion. Think how the market would shrink for your companies. You (and this time I mean "you" as you, the individual) would feel it. You would feel it a lot. Because even tho it is the richest, the USA is still just one country, among hundreds of others. And you do need the rest of the world. If you want to keep up with your current lifestyle, at least. America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact.
Now, that, and the "handout" thingy. I dont know for many other countries, but we never recieved ANY handouts from the US. Yet we trade with you. We buy American stuff. Right now I have Lewis jeans on me (made in Croatia - but the profit went to the USA). And I dont actualy mind it all that much. Sure, they are not the best jeans that money can buy, but I like them well enough. Even tho the profit made from those jeans went to the USA. You see... I bought them, paid for them, and because of that, a certain amount of money went to the USA, where a certain amount of tax was paid to your government, that used that tax on something that may just well be for you. Now... Can you say "thank you"? And, knowing what wages are like in Croatia, Id say that quite a large part of the money I paid for the jeans went to the USA. Thats how it goes. And there are literary billions of euros made that way, all around the world from people who buy American goods.
And lets be clear on another thing as well - bombing a country does NOT count as a gift of weapons! And no matter how much America helps other countries - people who have suffered from American foreign policy have every right in the world to hate whatever they percieve as the USA. And please... PLEASE... What handouts? Aid when theres an earthquake somewhere? How does that equal out the economic colonisation of the rest of the world?
And please, explain... Why in the world do you think we envy you?!?! Envy you what? Your freedom? I actualy believe that I have more freedom here than you do there.
Infact, this attitude in your post is childish. "I dont need you! I dont need ANYONE!!!" Well, guess what... You do.
In any case, I went on about it.. And I think I have all points covered. Im sure that I will hear more from you... Just remember: no need to pop blood vessels, and Im not upset or anything. Just debate.
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there.
|
|
Edited at: Monday, February 02, 2009 5:09:30 PM Edited at: Monday, February 02, 2009 5:15:31 PM |
|
[Soylentgreen4u] Monday, February 02, 2009 5:06:10 PM | |
|
NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT THEY DON'T NEED TO TRADE WITH ANY OTHER COUNTRY...
...WOW!!!!!! ...IF CANADA (I'M REASONABLY SURE WE ARE STILL YOUR LARGEST TRADING PARTNER) AND CHINA...SHUT THE TRADING DOORS,YOU'D BE EATING EACH OTHER WITHIN 30 DAYS!...OH,AND BEFORE IT GETS SHOUTED OUT HERE,TRUST ME I'M WELL AWARE OF THE REVERSE...MAYBE IT'S JUST THE REFORM-MINDED OBAMA SYNDROME GETTING TO HIM,I'M NOT SPEAKING FOR HIM,JUST A THOUGHT!......I MEAN HOLY CRAP,THERE WAS PANIC IN THE STREETS WHEN THE 3 AUTO MAKERS FLEW TO D.C (IN CORPORATE JETS I MIGHT ADD) TO
BEG FOR MONEY TO BAIL THERE CORRUPT ASSES OUT,NOW THIS WAS ISSUE WITHIN YOUR OWN BORDERS...SO YA' MAYBE IT'S TRUE THEY DON'T NEED ANYBODY TO TRADE WITH ...
PLEASE FORGIVE MY STUPIDITY....... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, February 02, 2009 4:44:29 PM) | | _strat_ wrote: | |
Ok,... Im going to assume that you were serious... In which case I suggest that you sit back, read what you wrote and think. You are not dumb. I dont know how you can come to such conclusions as you did, but lets clear up certain things. (Oh, Im going to put my text in red, and the quoted in white - just to avoid confusion).
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash
You might as well say that that refers to me. Everyone knows it does. In any case, lets clear up this "America-Hater" bullshit, since I see that it is very popular with American conservatives, when they are out of arguments. You oppose American policies - you hate America.
What would I hate about America? The land? The mountains, forests, coasts, soil... Why? The people? Why? Most of them havent done anything to me. That means that I would have to hate Tim, Guido, Darth, Bev... You! I dont, you know that! Now, American policies, and the people that make and carry out those policies... Politicians... That would be closer to the truth. Businessmen? The big ones? Certainly.
Point: you cannot think of a country as you would think of an individual person. There is so much more to it.
forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s!
I never said or claimed that your politicians or businessmen somehow force us into trading with you. Markets are open. Companies trade. It is the way of capitalism. And it benefits you guys much more than it does us. Or, at least, it benefits your corporations. I can hardly Imagine that you personaly have any direct gain from it. Lets get another thing straight: the US companies are not trading with us because of charity or solidarity. They found a new market, and nations that are not used to living in capitalism. And they made billions. They sell their products to us. Sell, not give. And they dont sell at a loss, no way. They sell because they make profit of us. Ok. Thats the way of it, and it seems that there isnt a thing we can do right now to rectify it.
Do not for one minute think that we cant do without you, however. "We" meaning the rest of the world here. If tomorow all American products disapear from our markets... We will buy others. What will you do? What will your companies do, when they will run out of money? Remember... The worlds population is 6 billion. The American is about 300 milion. Think how the market would shrink for your companies. You (and this time I mean "you" as you, the individual) would feel it. You would feel it a lot. Because even tho it is the richest, the USA is still just one country, among hundreds of others. And you do need the rest of the world. If you want to keep up with your current lifestyle, at least.
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact.
Now, that, and the "handout" thingy. I dont know for many other countries, but we never recieved ANY handouts from the US. Yet we trade with you. We buy American stuff. Right now I have Lewis jeans on me (made in Croatia - but the profit went to the USA). And I dont actualy mind it all that much. Sure, they are not the best jeans that money can buy, but I like them well enough. Even tho the profit made from those jeans went to the USA. You see... I bought them, paid for them, and because of that, a certain amount of money went to the USA, where a certain amount of tax was paid to your government, that used that tax on something that may just well be for you. Now... Can you say "thank you"? And, knowing what wages are like in Croatia, Id say that quite a large part of the money I paid for the jeans went to the USA. Thats how it goes. And there are literary billions of euros made that way, all around the world from people who buy American goods.
And lets be clear on another thing as well - bombing a country does NOT count as a gift of weapons! And no matter how much America helps other countries - people who have suffered from American foreign policy have every right in the world to hate whatever they percieve as the USA. And please... PLEASE... What handouts? Aid when theres an earthquake somewhere? How does that equal out the economic colonisation of the rest of the world?
And please, explain... Why in the world do you think we envy you?!?! Envy you what? Your freedom? I actualy believe that I have more freedom here than you do there.
Infact, this attitude in your post is childish. "I dont need you! I dont need ANYONE!!!" Well, guess what... You do.
In any case, I went on about it.. And I think I have all points covered. Im sure that I will hear more from you... Just remember: no need to pop blood vessels, and Im not upset or anything. Just debate. | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
|
[_strat_] Monday, February 02, 2009 5:00:15 PM | |
|
In that case, Israel is the most generous country in the world. Dont even think to compare the two. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Head banger from Monday, February 02, 2009 4:55:49 PM) | | Head banger wrote: | | And lets be clear on another thing as well - bombing a country does NOT count as a gift of weapons!
realy? darn, must rethink that policy. perhaps that is the issue between hamas and isreal, hama's gifts are not welcomed as they should be. | | _strat_ wrote: | |
Ok,... Im going to assume that you were serious... In which case I suggest that you sit back, read what you wrote and think. You are not dumb. I dont know how you can come to such conclusions as you did, but lets clear up certain things. (Oh, Im going to put my text in red, and the quoted in white - just to avoid confusion).
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash
You might as well say that that refers to me. Everyone knows it does. In any case, lets clear up this "America-Hater" bullshit, since I see that it is very popular with American conservatives, when they are out of arguments. You oppose American policies - you hate America.
What would I hate about America? The land? The mountains, forests, coasts, soil... Why? The people? Why? Most of them havent done anything to me. That means that I would have to hate Tim, Guido, Darth, Bev... You! I dont, you know that! Now, American policies, and the people that make and carry out those policies... Politicians... That would be closer to the truth. Businessmen? The big ones? Certainly.
Point: you cannot think of a country as you would think of an individual person. There is so much more to it.
forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s!
I never said or claimed that your politicians or businessmen somehow force us into trading with you. Markets are open. Companies trade. It is the way of capitalism. And it benefits you guys much more than it does us. Or, at least, it benefits your corporations. I can hardly Imagine that you personaly have any direct gain from it. Lets get another thing straight: the US companies are not trading with us because of charity or solidarity. They found a new market, and nations that are not used to living in capitalism. And they made billions. They sell their products to us. Sell, not give. And they dont sell at a loss, no way. They sell because they make profit of us. Ok. Thats the way of it, and it seems that there isnt a thing we can do right now to rectify it.
Do not for one minute think that we cant do without you, however. "We" meaning the rest of the world here. If tomorow all American products disapear from our markets... We will buy others. What will you do? What will your companies do, when they will run out of money? Remember... The worlds population is 6 billion. The American is about 300 milion. Think how the market would shrink for your companies. You (and this time I mean "you" as you, the individual) would feel it. You would feel it a lot. Because even tho it is the richest, the USA is still just one country, among hundreds of others. And you do need the rest of the world. If you want to keep up with your current lifestyle, at least.
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact.
Now, that, and the "handout" thingy. I dont know for many other countries, but we never recieved ANY handouts from the US. Yet we trade with you. We buy American stuff. Right now I have Lewis jeans on me (made in Croatia - but the profit went to the USA). And I dont actualy mind it all that much. Sure, they are not the best jeans that money can buy, but I like them well enough. Even tho the profit made from those jeans went to the USA. You see... I bought them, paid for them, and because of that, a certain amount of money went to the USA, where a certain amount of tax was paid to your government, that used that tax on something that may just well be for you. Now... Can you say "thank you"? And, knowing what wages are like in Croatia, Id say that quite a large part of the money I paid for the jeans went to the USA. Thats how it goes. And there are literary billions of euros made that way, all around the world from people who buy American goods.
And lets be clear on another thing as well - bombing a country does NOT count as a gift of weapons! And no matter how much America helps other countries - people who have suffered from American foreign policy have every right in the world to hate whatever they percieve as the USA. And please... PLEASE... What handouts? Aid when theres an earthquake somewhere? How does that equal out the economic colonisation of the rest of the world?
And please, explain... Why in the world do you think we envy you?!?! Envy you what? Your freedom? I actualy believe that I have more freedom here than you do there.
Infact, this attitude in your post is childish. "I dont need you! I dont need ANYONE!!!" Well, guess what... You do.
In any case, I went on about it.. And I think I have all points covered. Im sure that I will hear more from you... Just remember: no need to pop blood vessels, and Im not upset or anything. Just debate. | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
|
|
[Head banger] Monday, February 02, 2009 4:55:49 PM | |
|
And lets be clear on another thing as well - bombing a country does NOT count as a gift of weapons!
realy? darn, must rethink that policy. perhaps that is the issue between hamas and isreal, hama's gifts are not welcomed as they should be. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, February 02, 2009 4:44:29 PM) | | _strat_ wrote: | |
Ok,... Im going to assume that you were serious... In which case I suggest that you sit back, read what you wrote and think. You are not dumb. I dont know how you can come to such conclusions as you did, but lets clear up certain things. (Oh, Im going to put my text in red, and the quoted in white - just to avoid confusion).
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash
You might as well say that that refers to me. Everyone knows it does. In any case, lets clear up this "America-Hater" bullshit, since I see that it is very popular with American conservatives, when they are out of arguments. You oppose American policies - you hate America.
What would I hate about America? The land? The mountains, forests, coasts, soil... Why? The people? Why? Most of them havent done anything to me. That means that I would have to hate Tim, Guido, Darth, Bev... You! I dont, you know that! Now, American policies, and the people that make and carry out those policies... Politicians... That would be closer to the truth. Businessmen? The big ones? Certainly.
Point: you cannot think of a country as you would think of an individual person. There is so much more to it.
forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s!
I never said or claimed that your politicians or businessmen somehow force us into trading with you. Markets are open. Companies trade. It is the way of capitalism. And it benefits you guys much more than it does us. Or, at least, it benefits your corporations. I can hardly Imagine that you personaly have any direct gain from it. Lets get another thing straight: the US companies are not trading with us because of charity or solidarity. They found a new market, and nations that are not used to living in capitalism. And they made billions. They sell their products to us. Sell, not give. And they dont sell at a loss, no way. They sell because they make profit of us. Ok. Thats the way of it, and it seems that there isnt a thing we can do right now to rectify it.
Do not for one minute think that we cant do without you, however. "We" meaning the rest of the world here. If tomorow all American products disapear from our markets... We will buy others. What will you do? What will your companies do, when they will run out of money? Remember... The worlds population is 6 billion. The American is about 300 milion. Think how the market would shrink for your companies. You (and this time I mean "you" as you, the individual) would feel it. You would feel it a lot. Because even tho it is the richest, the USA is still just one country, among hundreds of others. And you do need the rest of the world. If you want to keep up with your current lifestyle, at least.
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact.
Now, that, and the "handout" thingy. I dont know for many other countries, but we never recieved ANY handouts from the US. Yet we trade with you. We buy American stuff. Right now I have Lewis jeans on me (made in Croatia - but the profit went to the USA). And I dont actualy mind it all that much. Sure, they are not the best jeans that money can buy, but I like them well enough. Even tho the profit made from those jeans went to the USA. You see... I bought them, paid for them, and because of that, a certain amount of money went to the USA, where a certain amount of tax was paid to your government, that used that tax on something that may just well be for you. Now... Can you say "thank you"? And, knowing what wages are like in Croatia, Id say that quite a large part of the money I paid for the jeans went to the USA. Thats how it goes. And there are literary billions of euros made that way, all around the world from people who buy American goods.
And lets be clear on another thing as well - bombing a country does NOT count as a gift of weapons! And no matter how much America helps other countries - people who have suffered from American foreign policy have every right in the world to hate whatever they percieve as the USA. And please... PLEASE... What handouts? Aid when theres an earthquake somewhere? How does that equal out the economic colonisation of the rest of the world?
And please, explain... Why in the world do you think we envy you?!?! Envy you what? Your freedom? I actualy believe that I have more freedom here than you do there.
Infact, this attitude in your post is childish. "I dont need you! I dont need ANYONE!!!" Well, guess what... You do.
In any case, I went on about it.. And I think I have all points covered. Im sure that I will hear more from you... Just remember: no need to pop blood vessels, and Im not upset or anything. Just debate. | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
|
[_strat_] Monday, February 02, 2009 4:45:24 PM | |
|
Oh, ffs... Couldnt you post that half an hour earlier? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 4:18:55 PM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Ah strat! I knew I could count on you to get your feathers ruffled! Hack away, my friend for I am dead serious. I am fully aware that I have opened myself to a lambasting of sorts, but I really don't care. I will never apologize for being an American citizen AND, I am damn proud of it. As for my rather "coarse" language, I guess I could tone that down a bit...HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And 'Toast, my friend, if you want the latest on Obama, simply open a tabloid. There are as many, if not more, articles about his choice of socks as there are Brittney Spears reports! | | _strat_ wrote: | | First of all, I want to know if that is serious or are you just fooling around. If its the latter, ok. If its the former... You will get disemboweled. | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Monday, February 02, 2009 4:44:29 PM | |
|
Ok,... Im going to assume that you were serious... In which case I suggest that you sit back, read what you wrote and think. You are not dumb. I dont know how you can come to such conclusions as you did, but lets clear up certain things. (Oh, Im going to put my text in red, and the quoted in white - just to avoid confusion).
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash
You might as well say that that refers to me. Everyone knows it does. In any case, lets clear up this "America-Hater" bullshit, since I see that it is very popular with American conservatives, when they are out of arguments. You oppose American policies - you hate America.
What would I hate about America? The land? The mountains, forests, coasts, soil... Why? The people? Why? Most of them havent done anything to me. That means that I would have to hate Tim, Guido, Darth, Bev... You! I dont, you know that! Now, American policies, and the people that make and carry out those policies... Politicians... That would be closer to the truth. Businessmen? The big ones? Certainly.
Point: you cannot think of a country as you would think of an individual person. There is so much more to it.
forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s!
I never said or claimed that your politicians or businessmen somehow force us into trading with you. Markets are open. Companies trade. It is the way of capitalism. And it benefits you guys much more than it does us. Or, at least, it benefits your corporations. I can hardly Imagine that you personaly have any direct gain from it. Lets get another thing straight: the US companies are not trading with us because of charity or solidarity. They found a new market, and nations that are not used to living in capitalism. And they made billions. They sell their products to us. Sell, not give. And they dont sell at a loss, no way. They sell because they make profit of us. Ok. Thats the way of it, and it seems that there isnt a thing we can do right now to rectify it.
Do not for one minute think that we cant do without you, however. "We" meaning the rest of the world here. If tomorow all American products disapear from our markets... We will buy others. What will you do? What will your companies do, when they will run out of money? Remember... The worlds population is 6 billion. The American is about 300 milion. Think how the market would shrink for your companies. You (and this time I mean "you" as you, the individual) would feel it. You would feel it a lot. Because even tho it is the richest, the USA is still just one country, among hundreds of others. And you do need the rest of the world. If you want to keep up with your current lifestyle, at least.
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact.
Now, that, and the "handout" thingy. I dont know for many other countries, but we never recieved ANY handouts from the US. Yet we trade with you. We buy American stuff. Right now I have Lewis jeans on me (made in Croatia - but the profit went to the USA). And I dont actualy mind it all that much. Sure, they are not the best jeans that money can buy, but I like them well enough. Even tho the profit made from those jeans went to the USA. You see... I bought them, paid for them, and because of that, a certain amount of money went to the USA, where a certain amount of tax was paid to your government, that used that tax on something that may just well be for you. Now... Can you say "thank you"? And, knowing what wages are like in Croatia, Id say that quite a large part of the money I paid for the jeans went to the USA. Thats how it goes. And there are literary billions of euros made that way, all around the world from people who buy American goods.
And lets be clear on another thing as well - bombing a country does NOT count as a gift of weapons! And no matter how much America helps other countries - people who have suffered from American foreign policy have every right in the world to hate whatever they percieve as the USA. And please... PLEASE... What handouts? Aid when theres an earthquake somewhere? How does that equal out the economic colonisation of the rest of the world?
And please, explain... Why in the world do you think we envy you?!?! Envy you what? Your freedom? I actualy believe that I have more freedom here than you do there.
Infact, this attitude in your post is childish. "I dont need you! I dont need ANYONE!!!" Well, guess what... You do.
In any case, I went on about it.. And I think I have all points covered. Im sure that I will hear more from you... Just remember: no need to pop blood vessels, and Im not upset or anything. Just debate. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 10:56:09 AM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
[Soylentgreen4u] Monday, February 02, 2009 4:29:54 PM | |
|
....NOW THERE'S THAT WORLD RENOWNED DOGMA WE ALL SING ABOUT AROUND THE CAMPFIRE.... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 10:56:09 AM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Monday, February 02, 2009 4:18:55 PM | |
|
Ah strat! I knew I could count on you to get your feathers ruffled! Hack away, my friend for I am dead serious. I am fully aware that I have opened myself to a lambasting of sorts, but I really don't care. I will never apologize for being an American citizen AND, I am damn proud of it. As for my rather "coarse" language, I guess I could tone that down a bit...HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And 'Toast, my friend, if you want the latest on Obama, simply open a tabloid. There are as many, if not more, articles about his choice of socks as there are Brittney Spears reports! [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, February 02, 2009 12:46:03 PM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | First of all, I want to know if that is serious or are you just fooling around. If its the latter, ok. If its the former... You will get disemboweled. | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
|
[Head banger] Monday, February 02, 2009 3:09:06 PM | |
|
yes, well it inspired my thoughts on protectionist policies. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Bev from Monday, February 02, 2009 12:52:41 PM) | | Bev wrote: | | you were pointing out the "use domestic steel only" clause? | | Head banger wrote: | | in a perfect world there would be no trade bariers, but in this instance, many of the trade partners have none. I dont think that any trade bariers strengthen either side. in this case, I think it affects some countries with trade issues, and some under nafta where there are no trade bariers either way, in effect becoming a trade barier. in general though, I think any efforts like this are doomed to fail. |
|
|
|
[Bev] Monday, February 02, 2009 12:58:31 PM | |
|
Are we even sure that is the real cyber-Deep Freeze. This guy came dangerously close to using foul language , d'oh! forgot the Edited at: Monday, February 02, 2009 1:17:04 PM |
|
[Bev] Monday, February 02, 2009 12:52:41 PM | |
|
you were pointing out the "use domestic steel only" clause? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Head banger from Monday, February 02, 2009 7:31:31 AM) | | Head banger wrote: | | in a perfect world there would be no trade bariers, but in this instance, many of the trade partners have none. I dont think that any trade bariers strengthen either side. in this case, I think it affects some countries with trade issues, and some under nafta where there are no trade bariers either way, in effect becoming a trade barier. in general though, I think any efforts like this are doomed to fail. |
|
|
[Locked _and _Loaded [Banned]] Monday, February 02, 2009 12:49:17 PM | |
|
Right on my fellow American!
Say, any latest news on the Obama's? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 10:56:09 AM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
[_strat_] Monday, February 02, 2009 12:46:03 PM | |
|
First of all, I want to know if that is serious or are you just fooling around. If its the latter, ok. If its the former... You will get disemboweled. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Monday, February 02, 2009 10:56:09 AM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Monday, February 02, 2009 10:56:09 AM | |
|
OK. I am going to take a chance and assume that I have enough "friends" here to say somethings without being cyber-disemboweled...
I am SO sick of all the "America-Haters" talking trash about how the big, bad United States is SO mean and forces all these poor, unsuspecting countries to trade with us and genuflect and all this other b.s! WHATEVER!! Let's get something straight right here and now; we don't NEED anyone else!! NO ONE! We can survive quite nicely without the trade of ANY other country. We are kind enough to ship good and services and AID to others and accept some of the same in return. This imaginary (yes I said imaginary) belief that we would crumble without the "rest of the world" or that we somehow "man handle" these poor little countires into accepting our "inferior" products is just plain BULLSH%$ !!!!!!!!
America helps FAR more than she hurts and that is a fact. We would have NO problem slamming our doors to the rest of the world and moving along just fine but for the fact that the REST of the WORLD needs US!!!!!!! That's right! I said it!! We are the RICHEST, most POWERFUL nation on earth and that just galls some people. Well, too fu%&@$% bad!!!!!!!! I have yet to see one of these poor, oppressed and disadvantaged countries refuse an American hand out! And they won't. because they NEED us........ Just like they NEED our trade. The American worker puts out a quality product and we can compete with ANYONE, ANYWHERE! So there. |
|
[Head banger] Monday, February 02, 2009 7:31:31 AM | |
|
in a perfect world there would be no trade bariers, but in this instance, many of the trade partners have none. I dont think that any trade bariers strengthen either side. in this case, I think it affects some countries with trade issues, and some under nafta where there are no trade bariers either way, in effect becoming a trade barier. in general though, I think any efforts like this are doomed to fail. |
|
[Bev] Monday, February 02, 2009 6:49:43 AM | |
|
Strat, you have a point. Playing devil's advocate here: If the US is not more careful on the global playing field, not only with countries begin implementing stricter trade rules, the Aisian countries that own our debt may call in some notes. Another depression is looming. Yeah, we are quick to rush to military aid but that aid carries with it a cost for protection (i.e., open trade agreements). There is a lot to consider with respect to foreign relations. Definitely not a one size fits all, by any stretch. |
|
[_strat_] Monday, February 02, 2009 3:38:33 AM | |
|
Well, I just have to comment on that. While it is true that there are customs imposed on US products (and at the meantime there are no customs imposed on products from other EU countries), the US products still reign supreme on our shelves. Ok, maybe not cars, being that US cars are way too thirsty and not at all suited for our needs, but the rest is in full force. From small stuff like Coke or Pepsi, down to the really expensive like computers, software and the like. Sure, they compete with other products from Japan, China and the Asian tigers, but the US companies (at least in the European market) have a firm grip, and wont let it go, even tho there may be products that are made in the EU that could take their place, but cannot, simply because the US companies have an established grip on the markets and wont let anyone near. I wonder how that qualifies as uneven playing field for the US. Customs or no customs. Not to mention the cultural influence in anything from movies, music, clothes (Lewis shops can be found in full force here, and they are selling very expensive stuff, even tho the quality is not always the best), computer games... The fact of the matter is, that if the EU and the rest of the worlds powers would shut the US out (with really high customs or otherwise), you guys would have such a depression, that 1930s would pale in comparison. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by TIMBONI from Sunday, February 01, 2009 11:01:34 PM) | | TIMBONI wrote: | | I have to admit that I am not up to date on the current situation, but if the past serves to represent the present , the comparison is really not on equal footing. If the U.S. imposed the same tariffs on imported products as other countries imposed on our products exported to them we would probably be ok, but that never seems to be the case. The U.S. is always expected to compete on an uneven playing field and just shut up and play. |
|
|
[ron h] Sunday, February 01, 2009 11:06:42 PM | |
|
If memory serves me correctly, that's why we eliminated the import tax on steel in the first place, basically to keep peace in the international community...then came the mini-mills all over the place...argh...countries like China and Germany wanted sanctions applied against us because of that...you're absolutely correct, we do play on an un-even playing field...and it has cost us dearly... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by TIMBONI from Sunday, February 01, 2009 11:01:34 PM) | | TIMBONI wrote: | | I have to admit that I am not up to date on the current situation, but if the past serves to represent the present , the comparison is really not on equal footing. If the U.S. imposed the same tariffs on imported products as other countries imposed on our products exported to them we would probably be ok, but that never seems to be the case. The U.S. is always expected to compete on an uneven playing field and just shut up and play. |
|
|
[TIMBONI] Sunday, February 01, 2009 11:01:34 PM | |
|
I have to admit that I am not up to date on the current situation, but if the past serves to represent the present , the comparison is really not on equal footing. If the U.S. imposed the same tariffs on imported products as other countries imposed on our products exported to them we would probably be ok, but that never seems to be the case. The U.S. is always expected to compete on an uneven playing field and just shut up and play. |
|
[Head banger] Sunday, February 01, 2009 10:56:22 PM | |
|
there is actualy a clause that says that if domestic steel of suficient quality is not available or costs 25% more than imports then the imported may be used. so the price cant realy skyrocket. the thing is, sooner or later tarp ends and then, can the american mills compete. I say that protectionism actualy weekens the industry its designed to protect. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by ronhartsell from Sunday, February 01, 2009 10:52:22 PM) | | ronhartsell wrote: | | It's all about costs for me, Head banger...if domestic steel is more expensive than imported steel, then you're get less steel for the dollar, which is wasteful spending...I'm all in favor of 'Buy American' as I am American, and others should do the same respectively no matter where they live...support your own local economy...but to have no choice in making purchases (of steel or whatever) seems a little overboard...maybe if there were a 'fixed' cost involved, that would make me feel better about it, or say it has to be within 'x' % of the next guy, even that would be different...but once an industry has a corner locked up, bad things usually happen... | | Head banger wrote: | | sure it can lead to tax payer money being spent faster than nessesary, but long term, does buy american rules help whatever industry they are applied to? | | ronhartsell wrote: | | Darth Painkiller lead me back here, and now you're keeping me here Head banger...just kidding, I'm gonna respond to this because I live in a steel producing area...we're not Pittsburg or Germany, but the Gary, IN area and other cities on the Lake Michigan shore line are literally lined with steel mills. Most of the families in Lake County, IN have currently working or retired mill workers in their families.
Congressman Pete Visclosky (IN-1) is my representative, and he has always been a "Buy American" guy, even to a fault at times. He is one of the hardest working politicians I have ever known. He is one who will actually write you a response if you mail him and he will call you on the phone if need be.
He is the one who introduced an ammendment that requires all steel bought with money from the bill must be made in America. The ammendment passed.
If you go to TradeReform.org there is a good read of an e-mail where he talks about this.
Aside from all this, I'm not sure it's that great of an idea because (I'm assuming here) steel prices are never locked at a fixed cost, and if that's the case, tax payer money may have to be spent (via the bill) on steel that may be baught at a cheaper cost else where. So, yes it does support the "Buy American" agenda, but is it good economics?? | | Head banger wrote: | | so, the new draft of the TARP act contains language that says that to qualify for federal funds any project must only use american steel, with a few exceptions.
is this sort of protectionism a good idea in the short term, and is it good in the long term
discuss among yoursleves, I am gone for the weekend. |
|
|
|
|
|
[ron h] Sunday, February 01, 2009 10:52:22 PM | |
|
It's all about costs for me, Head banger...if domestic steel is more expensive than imported steel, then you're get less steel for the dollar, which is wasteful spending...I'm all in favor of 'Buy American' as I am American, and others should do the same respectively no matter where they live...support your own local economy...but to have no choice in making purchases (of steel or whatever) seems a little overboard...maybe if there were a 'fixed' cost involved, that would make me feel better about it, or say it has to be within 'x' % of the next guy, even that would be different...but once an industry has a corner locked up, bad things usually happen... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Head banger from Sunday, February 01, 2009 10:38:31 PM) | | Head banger wrote: | | sure it can lead to tax payer money being spent faster than nessesary, but long term, does buy american rules help whatever industry they are applied to? | | ronhartsell wrote: | | Darth Painkiller lead me back here, and now you're keeping me here Head banger...just kidding, I'm gonna respond to this because I live in a steel producing area...we're not Pittsburg or Germany, but the Gary, IN area and other cities on the Lake Michigan shore line are literally lined with steel mills. Most of the families in Lake County, IN have currently working or retired mill workers in their families.
Congressman Pete Visclosky (IN-1) is my representative, and he has always been a "Buy American" guy, even to a fault at times. He is one of the hardest working politicians I have ever known. He is one who will actually write you a response if you mail him and he will call you on the phone if need be.
He is the one who introduced an ammendment that requires all steel bought with money from the bill must be made in America. The ammendment passed.
If you go to TradeReform.org there is a good read of an e-mail where he talks about this.
Aside from all this, I'm not sure it's that great of an idea because (I'm assuming here) steel prices are never locked at a fixed cost, and if that's the case, tax payer money may have to be spent (via the bill) on steel that may be baught at a cheaper cost else where. So, yes it does support the "Buy American" agenda, but is it good economics?? | | Head banger wrote: | | so, the new draft of the TARP act contains language that says that to qualify for federal funds any project must only use american steel, with a few exceptions.
is this sort of protectionism a good idea in the short term, and is it good in the long term
discuss among yoursleves, I am gone for the weekend. |
|
|
|
|
[Head banger] Sunday, February 01, 2009 10:38:31 PM | |
|
sure it can lead to tax payer money being spent faster than nessesary, but long term, does buy american rules help whatever industry they are applied to? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by ronhartsell from Saturday, January 31, 2009 1:16:03 PM) | | ronhartsell wrote: | | Darth Painkiller lead me back here, and now you're keeping me here Head banger...just kidding, I'm gonna respond to this because I live in a steel producing area...we're not Pittsburg or Germany, but the Gary, IN area and other cities on the Lake Michigan shore line are literally lined with steel mills. Most of the families in Lake County, IN have currently working or retired mill workers in their families.
Congressman Pete Visclosky (IN-1) is my representative, and he has always been a "Buy American" guy, even to a fault at times. He is one of the hardest working politicians I have ever known. He is one who will actually write you a response if you mail him and he will call you on the phone if need be.
He is the one who introduced an ammendment that requires all steel bought with money from the bill must be made in America. The ammendment passed.
If you go to TradeReform.org there is a good read of an e-mail where he talks about this.
Aside from all this, I'm not sure it's that great of an idea because (I'm assuming here) steel prices are never locked at a fixed cost, and if that's the case, tax payer money may have to be spent (via the bill) on steel that may be baught at a cheaper cost else where. So, yes it does support the "Buy American" agenda, but is it good economics?? | | Head banger wrote: | | so, the new draft of the TARP act contains language that says that to qualify for federal funds any project must only use american steel, with a few exceptions.
is this sort of protectionism a good idea in the short term, and is it good in the long term
discuss among yoursleves, I am gone for the weekend. |
|
|
|
[ron h] Saturday, January 31, 2009 1:16:03 PM | |
|
Darth Painkiller lead me back here, and now you're keeping me here Head banger...just kidding, I'm gonna respond to this because I live in a steel producing area...we're not Pittsburg or Germany, but the Gary, IN area and other cities on the Lake Michigan shore line are literally lined with steel mills. Most of the families in Lake County, IN have currently working or retired mill workers in their families.
Congressman Pete Visclosky (IN-1) is my representative, and he has always been a "Buy American" guy, even to a fault at times. He is one of the hardest working politicians I have ever known. He is one who will actually write you a response if you mail him and he will call you on the phone if need be.
He is the one who introduced an ammendment that requires all steel bought with money from the bill must be made in America. The ammendment passed.
If you go to TradeReform.org there is a good read of an e-mail where he talks about this.
Aside from all this, I'm not sure it's that great of an idea because (I'm assuming here) steel prices are never locked at a fixed cost, and if that's the case, tax payer money may have to be spent (via the bill) on steel that may be baught at a cheaper cost else where. So, yes it does support the "Buy American" agenda, but is it good economics?? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Head banger from Friday, January 30, 2009 5:05:23 PM) | | Head banger wrote: | | so, the new draft of the TARP act contains language that says that to qualify for federal funds any project must only use american steel, with a few exceptions.
is this sort of protectionism a good idea in the short term, and is it good in the long term
discuss among yoursleves, I am gone for the weekend. |
|
|
[Head banger] Friday, January 30, 2009 5:05:23 PM | |
|
so, the new draft of the TARP act contains language that says that to qualify for federal funds any project must only use american steel, with a few exceptions.
is this sort of protectionism a good idea in the short term, and is it good in the long term
discuss among yoursleves, I am gone for the weekend. |
|
[ron h] Friday, January 30, 2009 8:13:00 AM | |
|
I also believe that Local and State Government can do a much better job than what they do...I think they rely too heavily on Federal Government to find soloutions to their problems...City, County, and State Governments need to work more closely together for common goals (let alone have have the SAME goals), and I believe it's in this area that the everyday people can have more of an impact...our Reps on Capitol Hill rely too heavily on information provided TO them by 'other' Reps from 'home' States (what I like to call the 'middlemen/women), and if 'they' don't have a finger on the pulse of the ppl, then things get really out of perspective...which is why we as citizens need to have regular dialouge with our local Councilmembers, as they are the ones that go to our State Capitols with our 'issues' before it goes to Washington...to me there's a lot of room for 'issues' to get lost in translation, or perhaps a single individual to misreprestent!! |
|
[Head banger] Friday, January 30, 2009 7:26:22 AM | |
|
Thats the root of the matter, the reps vote on party lines, no mater what they or their constituants feel is right. that being the case, most of them are wasted in office. save the money and have 1 rep for every 5 states. you get the same result. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Darth_Painkiller_0870 from Friday, January 30, 2009 7:23:34 AM) | | Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: | | I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment, Ron! I've never understood why just because someone is a member of Party "A", they can't agree or vote for someone from Party "B" if they feel that person is the better candidate to represent them. It should be noted the 4 Congresspeople from the districts covered by the local newspaper my ex-wife subscribes to, voted along party lines for/against the stimulus package. | | ronhartsell wrote: | | I've always wondered why the voting public has to conform to Party lines...I believe that there are good ideas from both sides of the fence...but aren't our elected public servants suppose to mirror (and vote) according to what the people they represent want instead of the idea of 'you voted me in, now I'm gonna do it my way' or, 'because you elected a Republican/Democrat, this is the way We do it, therefore you (the voting public) must conform to us?? We elect ppl to represent US so that we don't have to go to the Polls every other day to cast a ballot on something...if there is to be a time of reflection, they should be reflecting on what WE think WE need, NOT what THEY think WE need...maybe I'm off the mark (I swore I wasn't gonna get involved in this anymore, but I sometimes can't help myself, sorry!!) but I think that when Politicians get to Washington, away from their home States, they somehow lose touch with 'our' needs, get caught up in the 'machine' so to speak...they need to go 'home' and seriously check the pulse of their 'jurisdictions' to seek out the problems and find soloutions that work!! And this goes for both sides!!! | | Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: | | I just found the following article on cnn.com. It's basically the usually savvy opinion of U.S. Republican Party Congressman and House Minority Leader Mitch McConnell from Kentucky.
I happen to agree with the man. I am a member of this political party, as I am a fan of less government and my principles tend to lean to the right (conservative) on a number of issues (stem-cell research not being one of them). Any thoughts?
(CNN) – Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell painted a downright dismal view of the state of his party Thursday afternoon, telling Republican National Committee members the GOP is in grave danger of being marginalized to a regional party.
"We’re all concerned about the fact that the very wealthy and the very poor, the most and least educated, and a majority of minority voters, seem to have more or less stopped paying attention to us," the Kentucky Republican said on the second day of the four-day gathering.
"And we should be concerned that, as a result of all this, the Republican Party seems to be slipping into a position of being more of a regional party than a national one.
"In politics there's a name for a regional party, it's called a minority party," said McConnell.
The sobering remarks came one day before the 168 members of the RNC are set to elect a chairman tasked with steering the party out of its beleaguered status, and win back some of the voting blocs virtually abandoned the party last November, including minority and younger voters.
"My concern is that unless we do something to adapt, our status as a minority party may become too pronounced for an easy recovery," McConnell also said.
McConnell also laid some blame at the feet of former President Bush, whom he described a "man of principle," but one who did "not win any popularity contests."
"History shows that unpopular presidents are usually a drag on everybody else who wears their political label," he said. "It happened with Truman. It happened with Johnson. It happened with Nixon. It happened with Clinton in ‘94. And it happened in ‘06 and ‘08 with President Bush."
He said particular effort needs to be applied to attracting African American and Hispanic voters. Black voters have historically voted heavily Democratic, while Hispanic voters were significantly more Democratic than they had been in previous presidential elections.
"Too often we’ve let others define us," McConnell said. "And the image they’ve painted isn’t very pretty. Ask most people what Republicans think about immigrants, and they’ll say we fear them. Ask most people what we think about the environment, and they’ll say we don’t care about it. Ask most people what we think about the family, and they’ll tell you we don’t — until about a month before Election Day."
But McConnell addressed a a group deeply divided on where the Party should head in the next four years, a tension that has played out in the unexpectedly cut-throat race for the party's chairmanship.
The Senate Minority Leader, who faced an unexpectedly competitive race last year to retain his seat, told the Republican gathering it's not too late for the party to rebuild itself. But he warned the GOP cannot change its fundamental values in the course of trying to appeal to a wider cross-section of the country.
"You don’t get them back by pretending to be something else," he said. “And you certainly don’t gain voters by running away from the ones that are most loyal. But it’s clear our message isn’t getting out to nearly as many people as it should."
"…We should avoid the false choice of being a party of moderates or conservatives," he said. "America is diverse. The two major parties should be too. But this doesn’t mean turning our backs on commonsense conservatism, or tailoring our positions to suit particular groups. Our principles are universal. They apply to everyone."
|
|
|
|
|
[Return_of_Darth_Painkiller_0870] Friday, January 30, 2009 7:23:34 AM | |
|
I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment, Ron! I've never understood why just because someone is a member of Party "A", they can't agree or vote for someone from Party "B" if they feel that person is the better candidate to represent them. It should be noted the 4 Congresspeople from the districts covered by the local newspaper my ex-wife subscribes to, voted along party lines for/against the stimulus package. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by ronhartsell from Friday, January 30, 2009 6:51:14 AM) | | ronhartsell wrote: | | I've always wondered why the voting public has to conform to Party lines...I believe that there are good ideas from both sides of the fence...but aren't our elected public servants suppose to mirror (and vote) according to what the people they represent want instead of the idea of 'you voted me in, now I'm gonna do it my way' or, 'because you elected a Republican/Democrat, this is the way We do it, therefore you (the voting public) must conform to us?? We elect ppl to represent US so that we don't have to go to the Polls every other day to cast a ballot on something...if there is to be a time of reflection, they should be reflecting on what WE think WE need, NOT what THEY think WE need...maybe I'm off the mark (I swore I wasn't gonna get involved in this anymore, but I sometimes can't help myself, sorry!!) but I think that when Politicians get to Washington, away from their home States, they somehow lose touch with 'our' needs, get caught up in the 'machine' so to speak...they need to go 'home' and seriously check the pulse of their 'jurisdictions' to seek out the problems and find soloutions that work!! And this goes for both sides!!! | | Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: | | I just found the following article on cnn.com. It's basically the usually savvy opinion of U.S. Republican Party Congressman and House Minority Leader Mitch McConnell from Kentucky.
I happen to agree with the man. I am a member of this political party, as I am a fan of less government and my principles tend to lean to the right (conservative) on a number of issues (stem-cell research not being one of them). Any thoughts?
(CNN) – Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell painted a downright dismal view of the state of his party Thursday afternoon, telling Republican National Committee members the GOP is in grave danger of being marginalized to a regional party.
"We’re all concerned about the fact that the very wealthy and the very poor, the most and least educated, and a majority of minority voters, seem to have more or less stopped paying attention to us," the Kentucky Republican said on the second day of the four-day gathering.
"And we should be concerned that, as a result of all this, the Republican Party seems to be slipping into a position of being more of a regional party than a national one.
"In politics there's a name for a regional party, it's called a minority party," said McConnell.
The sobering remarks came one day before the 168 members of the RNC are set to elect a chairman tasked with steering the party out of its beleaguered status, and win back some of the voting blocs virtually abandoned the party last November, including minority and younger voters.
"My concern is that unless we do something to adapt, our status as a minority party may become too pronounced for an easy recovery," McConnell also said.
McConnell also laid some blame at the feet of former President Bush, whom he described a "man of principle," but one who did "not win any popularity contests."
"History shows that unpopular presidents are usually a drag on everybody else who wears their political label," he said. "It happened with Truman. It happened with Johnson. It happened with Nixon. It happened with Clinton in ‘94. And it happened in ‘06 and ‘08 with President Bush."
He said particular effort needs to be applied to attracting African American and Hispanic voters. Black voters have historically voted heavily Democratic, while Hispanic voters were significantly more Democratic than they had been in previous presidential elections.
"Too often we’ve let others define us," McConnell said. "And the image they’ve painted isn’t very pretty. Ask most people what Republicans think about immigrants, and they’ll say we fear them. Ask most people what we think about the environment, and they’ll say we don’t care about it. Ask most people what we think about the family, and they’ll tell you we don’t — until about a month before Election Day."
But McConnell addressed a a group deeply divided on where the Party should head in the next four years, a tension that has played out in the unexpectedly cut-throat race for the party's chairmanship.
The Senate Minority Leader, who faced an unexpectedly competitive race last year to retain his seat, told the Republican gathering it's not too late for the party to rebuild itself. But he warned the GOP cannot change its fundamental values in the course of trying to appeal to a wider cross-section of the country.
"You don’t get them back by pretending to be something else," he said. “And you certainly don’t gain voters by running away from the ones that are most loyal. But it’s clear our message isn’t getting out to nearly as many people as it should."
"…We should avoid the false choice of being a party of moderates or conservatives," he said. "America is diverse. The two major parties should be too. But this doesn’t mean turning our backs on commonsense conservatism, or tailoring our positions to suit particular groups. Our principles are universal. They apply to everyone."
|
|
|
|
[ron h] Friday, January 30, 2009 6:51:14 AM | |
|
I've always wondered why the voting public has to conform to Party lines...I believe that there are good ideas from both sides of the fence...but aren't our elected public servants suppose to mirror (and vote) according to what the people they represent want instead of the idea of 'you voted me in, now I'm gonna do it my way' or, 'because you elected a Republican/Democrat, this is the way We do it, therefore you (the voting public) must conform to us?? We elect ppl to represent US so that we don't have to go to the Polls every other day to cast a ballot on something...if there is to be a time of reflection, they should be reflecting on what WE think WE need, NOT what THEY think WE need...maybe I'm off the mark (I swore I wasn't gonna get involved in this anymore, but I sometimes can't help myself, sorry!!) but I think that when Politicians get to Washington, away from their home States, they somehow lose touch with 'our' needs, get caught up in the 'machine' so to speak...they need to go 'home' and seriously check the pulse of their 'jurisdictions' to seek out the problems and find soloutions that work!! And this goes for both sides!!! [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Darth_Painkiller_0870 from Friday, January 30, 2009 5:01:51 AM) | | Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: | | I just found the following article on cnn.com. It's basically the usually savvy opinion of U.S. Republican Party Congressman and House Minority Leader Mitch McConnell from Kentucky.
I happen to agree with the man. I am a member of this political party, as I am a fan of less government and my principles tend to lean to the right (conservative) on a number of issues (stem-cell research not being one of them). Any thoughts?
(CNN) – Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell painted a downright dismal view of the state of his party Thursday afternoon, telling Republican National Committee members the GOP is in grave danger of being marginalized to a regional party.
"We’re all concerned about the fact that the very wealthy and the very poor, the most and least educated, and a majority of minority voters, seem to have more or less stopped paying attention to us," the Kentucky Republican said on the second day of the four-day gathering.
"And we should be concerned that, as a result of all this, the Republican Party seems to be slipping into a position of being more of a regional party than a national one.
"In politics there's a name for a regional party, it's called a minority party," said McConnell.
The sobering remarks came one day before the 168 members of the RNC are set to elect a chairman tasked with steering the party out of its beleaguered status, and win back some of the voting blocs virtually abandoned the party last November, including minority and younger voters.
"My concern is that unless we do something to adapt, our status as a minority party may become too pronounced for an easy recovery," McConnell also said.
McConnell also laid some blame at the feet of former President Bush, whom he described a "man of principle," but one who did "not win any popularity contests."
"History shows that unpopular presidents are usually a drag on everybody else who wears their political label," he said. "It happened with Truman. It happened with Johnson. It happened with Nixon. It happened with Clinton in ‘94. And it happened in ‘06 and ‘08 with President Bush."
He said particular effort needs to be applied to attracting African American and Hispanic voters. Black voters have historically voted heavily Democratic, while Hispanic voters were significantly more Democratic than they had been in previous presidential elections.
"Too often we’ve let others define us," McConnell said. "And the image they’ve painted isn’t very pretty. Ask most people what Republicans think about immigrants, and they’ll say we fear them. Ask most people what we think about the environment, and they’ll say we don’t care about it. Ask most people what we think about the family, and they’ll tell you we don’t — until about a month before Election Day."
But McConnell addressed a a group deeply divided on where the Party should head in the next four years, a tension that has played out in the unexpectedly cut-throat race for the party's chairmanship.
The Senate Minority Leader, who faced an unexpectedly competitive race last year to retain his seat, told the Republican gathering it's not too late for the party to rebuild itself. But he warned the GOP cannot change its fundamental values in the course of trying to appeal to a wider cross-section of the country.
"You don’t get them back by pretending to be something else," he said. “And you certainly don’t gain voters by running away from the ones that are most loyal. But it’s clear our message isn’t getting out to nearly as many people as it should."
"…We should avoid the false choice of being a party of moderates or conservatives," he said. "America is diverse. The two major parties should be too. But this doesn’t mean turning our backs on commonsense conservatism, or tailoring our positions to suit particular groups. Our principles are universal. They apply to everyone."
|
|
|
[Return_of_Darth_Painkiller_0870] Friday, January 30, 2009 5:01:51 AM | |
|
I just found the following article on cnn.com. It's basically the usually savvy opinion of U.S. Republican Party Congressman and House Minority Leader Mitch McConnell from Kentucky.
I happen to agree with the man. I am a member of this political party, as I am a fan of less government and my principles tend to lean to the right (conservative) on a number of issues (stem-cell research not being one of them). Any thoughts?
(CNN) – Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell painted a downright dismal view of the state of his party Thursday afternoon, telling Republican National Committee members the GOP is in grave danger of being marginalized to a regional party.
"We’re all concerned about the fact that the very wealthy and the very poor, the most and least educated, and a majority of minority voters, seem to have more or less stopped paying attention to us," the Kentucky Republican said on the second day of the four-day gathering.
"And we should be concerned that, as a result of all this, the Republican Party seems to be slipping into a position of being more of a regional party than a national one.
"In politics there's a name for a regional party, it's called a minority party," said McConnell.
The sobering remarks came one day before the 168 members of the RNC are set to elect a chairman tasked with steering the party out of its beleaguered status, and win back some of the voting blocs virtually abandoned the party last November, including minority and younger voters.
"My concern is that unless we do something to adapt, our status as a minority party may become too pronounced for an easy recovery," McConnell also said.
McConnell also laid some blame at the feet of former President Bush, whom he described a "man of principle," but one who did "not win any popularity contests."
"History shows that unpopular presidents are usually a drag on everybody else who wears their political label," he said. "It happened with Truman. It happened with Johnson. It happened with Nixon. It happened with Clinton in ‘94. And it happened in ‘06 and ‘08 with President Bush."
He said particular effort needs to be applied to attracting African American and Hispanic voters. Black voters have historically voted heavily Democratic, while Hispanic voters were significantly more Democratic than they had been in previous presidential elections.
"Too often we’ve let others define us," McConnell said. "And the image they’ve painted isn’t very pretty. Ask most people what Republicans think about immigrants, and they’ll say we fear them. Ask most people what we think about the environment, and they’ll say we don’t care about it. Ask most people what we think about the family, and they’ll tell you we don’t — until about a month before Election Day."
But McConnell addressed a a group deeply divided on where the Party should head in the next four years, a tension that has played out in the unexpectedly cut-throat race for the party's chairmanship.
The Senate Minority Leader, who faced an unexpectedly competitive race last year to retain his seat, told the Republican gathering it's not too late for the party to rebuild itself. But he warned the GOP cannot change its fundamental values in the course of trying to appeal to a wider cross-section of the country.
"You don’t get them back by pretending to be something else," he said. “And you certainly don’t gain voters by running away from the ones that are most loyal. But it’s clear our message isn’t getting out to nearly as many people as it should."
"…We should avoid the false choice of being a party of moderates or conservatives," he said. "America is diverse. The two major parties should be too. But this doesn’t mean turning our backs on commonsense conservatism, or tailoring our positions to suit particular groups. Our principles are universal. They apply to everyone."
|
|
[_strat_] Sunday, January 18, 2009 4:25:22 PM | |
|
Anyone that gets within shouting distance of those brats is a hero, not a coward. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Head banger from Saturday, January 17, 2009 11:42:40 AM) | | Head banger wrote: | | well, there is something to be said for that, but the cowards would hide behind them.... | | _strat_ wrote: | | Nah, Ive got a better solution. I just watched one of them "Nanny reality shows" on TV. We should just get one of them big intercontinental bombers, load it up with kids, and drop them over Gaza. I guarantee you, the shit would be over in less than a day. | | Head banger wrote: | | yep. 47 this could have been diferent, but today, its not fixable. probably the most humane thing to do is nuke the whole area, but thats kind of dificult to sell. kill a few million now, end all the BS for a thousand years. nah. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Yeah, thats pretty much it. Mindless nationalism and religious extremism at its best.
I guess that the creation of Israel back in 1947 was the original sinn... But that was long ago, letting it get destroyed today wont set that wrong aright. | | Head banger wrote: | | sure blame is plentifull, solutions not so.
the problem with one side eliminating the other is both can be replenished from kids overseas. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, Hamas are freaks, that is true, but Israel cannot be completely absolved of guilt either. Gaza has been a prison for 1,5 million Palestinians for decades, and even in the best of times they had shortages of basic neccesities. Not to mention that Israels army is one of the most technologicaly advanced in the world. Im sure that if they would give a shit they wouldnt cause so many civilian casualties. Infact, they may deliberatly be causing so much, to scare Hamas into submission.
In any case, I think that the only solution would be to physicaly separate them. A NATO or an UN mission, whatever, with serious numbers, weapons and authorisation, that would keep them apart for long enugh (which would be decades) to cool them off. Failing that, pull everything out, and wait till one side eliminates the other. | | Head banger wrote: | | this shit will keep going on, untill either the world ends, all sids give up religion, or isreal moves and colonizes a new star system.
I see no hope, the hamas terorists will keep this up, and dont care if they or the kids they hide behind die. Isreal will fight back. it goes on. if, anyone was serious about a ceasefire that was meaningfull, they could agree to share that area, but the hate runs too deep. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Head banger] Saturday, January 17, 2009 11:42:40 AM | |
|
well, there is something to be said for that, but the cowards would hide behind them.... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, January 17, 2009 9:16:33 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | Nah, Ive got a better solution. I just watched one of them "Nanny reality shows" on TV. We should just get one of them big intercontinental bombers, load it up with kids, and drop them over Gaza. I guarantee you, the shit would be over in less than a day. | | Head banger wrote: | | yep. 47 this could have been diferent, but today, its not fixable. probably the most humane thing to do is nuke the whole area, but thats kind of dificult to sell. kill a few million now, end all the BS for a thousand years. nah. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Yeah, thats pretty much it. Mindless nationalism and religious extremism at its best.
I guess that the creation of Israel back in 1947 was the original sinn... But that was long ago, letting it get destroyed today wont set that wrong aright. | | Head banger wrote: | | sure blame is plentifull, solutions not so.
the problem with one side eliminating the other is both can be replenished from kids overseas. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, Hamas are freaks, that is true, but Israel cannot be completely absolved of guilt either. Gaza has been a prison for 1,5 million Palestinians for decades, and even in the best of times they had shortages of basic neccesities. Not to mention that Israels army is one of the most technologicaly advanced in the world. Im sure that if they would give a shit they wouldnt cause so many civilian casualties. Infact, they may deliberatly be causing so much, to scare Hamas into submission.
In any case, I think that the only solution would be to physicaly separate them. A NATO or an UN mission, whatever, with serious numbers, weapons and authorisation, that would keep them apart for long enugh (which would be decades) to cool them off. Failing that, pull everything out, and wait till one side eliminates the other. | | Head banger wrote: | | this shit will keep going on, untill either the world ends, all sids give up religion, or isreal moves and colonizes a new star system.
I see no hope, the hamas terorists will keep this up, and dont care if they or the kids they hide behind die. Isreal will fight back. it goes on. if, anyone was serious about a ceasefire that was meaningfull, they could agree to share that area, but the hate runs too deep. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Saturday, January 17, 2009 9:16:33 AM | |
|
Nah, Ive got a better solution. I just watched one of them "Nanny reality shows" on TV. We should just get one of them big intercontinental bombers, load it up with kids, and drop them over Gaza. I guarantee you, the shit would be over in less than a day. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Head banger from Friday, January 16, 2009 7:17:42 AM) | | Head banger wrote: | | yep. 47 this could have been diferent, but today, its not fixable. probably the most humane thing to do is nuke the whole area, but thats kind of dificult to sell. kill a few million now, end all the BS for a thousand years. nah. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Yeah, thats pretty much it. Mindless nationalism and religious extremism at its best.
I guess that the creation of Israel back in 1947 was the original sinn... But that was long ago, letting it get destroyed today wont set that wrong aright. | | Head banger wrote: | | sure blame is plentifull, solutions not so.
the problem with one side eliminating the other is both can be replenished from kids overseas. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, Hamas are freaks, that is true, but Israel cannot be completely absolved of guilt either. Gaza has been a prison for 1,5 million Palestinians for decades, and even in the best of times they had shortages of basic neccesities. Not to mention that Israels army is one of the most technologicaly advanced in the world. Im sure that if they would give a shit they wouldnt cause so many civilian casualties. Infact, they may deliberatly be causing so much, to scare Hamas into submission.
In any case, I think that the only solution would be to physicaly separate them. A NATO or an UN mission, whatever, with serious numbers, weapons and authorisation, that would keep them apart for long enugh (which would be decades) to cool them off. Failing that, pull everything out, and wait till one side eliminates the other. | | Head banger wrote: | | this shit will keep going on, untill either the world ends, all sids give up religion, or isreal moves and colonizes a new star system.
I see no hope, the hamas terorists will keep this up, and dont care if they or the kids they hide behind die. Isreal will fight back. it goes on. if, anyone was serious about a ceasefire that was meaningfull, they could agree to share that area, but the hate runs too deep. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Head banger] Friday, January 16, 2009 7:17:42 AM | |
|
yep. 47 this could have been diferent, but today, its not fixable. probably the most humane thing to do is nuke the whole area, but thats kind of dificult to sell. kill a few million now, end all the BS for a thousand years. nah. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Friday, January 16, 2009 4:34:01 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | Yeah, thats pretty much it. Mindless nationalism and religious extremism at its best.
I guess that the creation of Israel back in 1947 was the original sinn... But that was long ago, letting it get destroyed today wont set that wrong aright. | | Head banger wrote: | | sure blame is plentifull, solutions not so.
the problem with one side eliminating the other is both can be replenished from kids overseas. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, Hamas are freaks, that is true, but Israel cannot be completely absolved of guilt either. Gaza has been a prison for 1,5 million Palestinians for decades, and even in the best of times they had shortages of basic neccesities. Not to mention that Israels army is one of the most technologicaly advanced in the world. Im sure that if they would give a shit they wouldnt cause so many civilian casualties. Infact, they may deliberatly be causing so much, to scare Hamas into submission.
In any case, I think that the only solution would be to physicaly separate them. A NATO or an UN mission, whatever, with serious numbers, weapons and authorisation, that would keep them apart for long enugh (which would be decades) to cool them off. Failing that, pull everything out, and wait till one side eliminates the other. | | Head banger wrote: | | this shit will keep going on, untill either the world ends, all sids give up religion, or isreal moves and colonizes a new star system.
I see no hope, the hamas terorists will keep this up, and dont care if they or the kids they hide behind die. Isreal will fight back. it goes on. if, anyone was serious about a ceasefire that was meaningfull, they could agree to share that area, but the hate runs too deep. |
|
|
|
|
|
[MaMbO] Friday, January 16, 2009 6:34:31 AM | |
|
Fuck you howard!!! getting that honours medal from bush. bush claims he is a true friend of the US but really hes a true friend of bush!! he should never have received that award!!! |
|
[_strat_] Friday, January 16, 2009 4:34:01 AM | |
|
Yeah, thats pretty much it. Mindless nationalism and religious extremism at its best.
I guess that the creation of Israel back in 1947 was the original sinn... But that was long ago, letting it get destroyed today wont set that wrong aright. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Head banger from Thursday, January 15, 2009 9:47:05 AM) | | Head banger wrote: | | sure blame is plentifull, solutions not so.
the problem with one side eliminating the other is both can be replenished from kids overseas. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, Hamas are freaks, that is true, but Israel cannot be completely absolved of guilt either. Gaza has been a prison for 1,5 million Palestinians for decades, and even in the best of times they had shortages of basic neccesities. Not to mention that Israels army is one of the most technologicaly advanced in the world. Im sure that if they would give a shit they wouldnt cause so many civilian casualties. Infact, they may deliberatly be causing so much, to scare Hamas into submission.
In any case, I think that the only solution would be to physicaly separate them. A NATO or an UN mission, whatever, with serious numbers, weapons and authorisation, that would keep them apart for long enugh (which would be decades) to cool them off. Failing that, pull everything out, and wait till one side eliminates the other. | | Head banger wrote: | | this shit will keep going on, untill either the world ends, all sids give up religion, or isreal moves and colonizes a new star system.
I see no hope, the hamas terorists will keep this up, and dont care if they or the kids they hide behind die. Isreal will fight back. it goes on. if, anyone was serious about a ceasefire that was meaningfull, they could agree to share that area, but the hate runs too deep. |
|
|
|
|
[spapad] Thursday, January 15, 2009 7:29:23 PM | |
|
Last "State of the Union" speech from Dubbah!!!!! How sweet it is! |
|
[Head banger] Thursday, January 15, 2009 9:47:05 AM | |
|
sure blame is plentifull, solutions not so.
the problem with one side eliminating the other is both can be replenished from kids overseas. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Thursday, January 15, 2009 7:00:06 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, Hamas are freaks, that is true, but Israel cannot be completely absolved of guilt either. Gaza has been a prison for 1,5 million Palestinians for decades, and even in the best of times they had shortages of basic neccesities. Not to mention that Israels army is one of the most technologicaly advanced in the world. Im sure that if they would give a shit they wouldnt cause so many civilian casualties. Infact, they may deliberatly be causing so much, to scare Hamas into submission.
In any case, I think that the only solution would be to physicaly separate them. A NATO or an UN mission, whatever, with serious numbers, weapons and authorisation, that would keep them apart for long enugh (which would be decades) to cool them off. Failing that, pull everything out, and wait till one side eliminates the other. | | Head banger wrote: | | this shit will keep going on, untill either the world ends, all sids give up religion, or isreal moves and colonizes a new star system.
I see no hope, the hamas terorists will keep this up, and dont care if they or the kids they hide behind die. Isreal will fight back. it goes on. if, anyone was serious about a ceasefire that was meaningfull, they could agree to share that area, but the hate runs too deep. |
|
|
|
[_strat_] Thursday, January 15, 2009 7:00:06 AM | |
|
Well, Hamas are freaks, that is true, but Israel cannot be completely absolved of guilt either. Gaza has been a prison for 1,5 million Palestinians for decades, and even in the best of times they had shortages of basic neccesities. Not to mention that Israels army is one of the most technologicaly advanced in the world. Im sure that if they would give a shit they wouldnt cause so many civilian casualties. Infact, they may deliberatly be causing so much, to scare Hamas into submission.
In any case, I think that the only solution would be to physicaly separate them. A NATO or an UN mission, whatever, with serious numbers, weapons and authorisation, that would keep them apart for long enugh (which would be decades) to cool them off. Failing that, pull everything out, and wait till one side eliminates the other. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Head banger from Thursday, January 15, 2009 6:40:03 AM) | | Head banger wrote: | | this shit will keep going on, untill either the world ends, all sids give up religion, or isreal moves and colonizes a new star system.
I see no hope, the hamas terorists will keep this up, and dont care if they or the kids they hide behind die. Isreal will fight back. it goes on. if, anyone was serious about a ceasefire that was meaningfull, they could agree to share that area, but the hate runs too deep. |
|
|
[Head banger] Thursday, January 15, 2009 6:40:03 AM | |
|
this shit will keep going on, untill either the world ends, all sids give up religion, or isreal moves and colonizes a new star system.
I see no hope, the hamas terorists will keep this up, and dont care if they or the kids they hide behind die. Isreal will fight back. it goes on. if, anyone was serious about a ceasefire that was meaningfull, they could agree to share that area, but the hate runs too deep. |
|
[_strat_] Thursday, January 15, 2009 2:55:50 AM | |
|
Ok, has anyone been following the latest Gaza shit? As far as Im concerned, there really isnt a matter where I could "take sides" or so to speak... Israel went in and started killing everything that breathes in a city that has been under siege from Israel for decades... On the other hand, Hamas did start this one, and they are religious freaks as well (Mohammad freaks?). |
|
[_strat_] Wednesday, January 14, 2009 2:11:40 PM | |
|
|
[SkyRideR] Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:57:17 PM | |
|
|
[Bev] Friday, January 02, 2009 7:41:49 PM | |
|
Fascinating outcome in the recent Bangladesh elections.
How is it that one of the largest powers in the world (USA) cannot come to such a consensus? |
|
[_strat_] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 11:28:24 AM | |
|
I think so. Tho what would be even better is internationalism. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Head banger from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 11:21:30 AM)
|
|
Head banger wrote: |
|
perhaps global isolationalism would be beter?
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Exactly.
|
|
Head banger wrote: |
|
so, the US suported a dictator who killed people, then the soviets suported an uprising which put in castro, a dictator who killed people.
as for forign policy, I guess they all need work then.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Wheter Cuba is better of now makes no difference to my argument. Batista was a dictator, and the US supported him.
As for Russia and the former Soviet Union... I say they were the same as NATO when it came to foreign policy. I wouldnt dream of defending the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
|
|
Head banger wrote: |
|
is cuba beter off now? what about all the people the comunists murdered taking over?
how many countries did russia invade?
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
I did say something about the heritage of colonialism. Now, sure Africa and certain parts of Asia were colonized a long time ago, but it wasnt until the mid 20th century that the era of colonialism ended. And it left its heritage in the systems, economy, industry, ect. I dont think that India was asking to get invaded and colonialised. So much about the European colonial powers. They did in fact start most of the shit, or are at the least indirectly responsible for it. Granted, tho... The USA wasnt among those powers.
Moving on... The thing that you see on TV is the military part of the issue. Countries invaded, regimes toppled... But what happens after? I can say for Bosnia, that they are in deep shit economicaly speaking. Since the war nothing has improved, and to a large extent because practicly their entire economy is controlled by western businesses, that take all the profits and leave only enough for the basics. Not to mention that the war in Bosnia was fought mainly by the armies of the ethnic groups of Bosnia. The foreign force was more or less there to protect civilians, and failed miserably. The only foreign achievement that is notable in that war was diplomatic.
I wont lose words on Somalia. We know how succesfull THAT was.
Taiwan at present does not require any military assistance, nor has it, as far as I know.
Phillipines, ill leave that, because I dont know enough about them.
But lets get a bit farther from that... How about Chile, where the US has supported a military junta for years? How about pre-socialist Cuba with president-dictator Batista? How about Panama? Loads of examples there. And if it really was all about help, I asked before. Why arent you guys all over Africa? There is PLENTY of conflict going on there, and the only one that gets any attention whatsoever is that in Darfur and Chad.
As I said, interests. Thats the only thing that will bring the superpowers to war. Compassion my ass.
|
|
Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: |
|
Strat, what BSE means is that whenever countries ask for American or British help, we jump in and assist. Be it Taiwan, Philippines, Bosnia, Somalia, etc...And no, we don't provide aid whenever it purely suits our interests. We provide aid when there are people in trouble. That's what America and Great Britain do.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, even if all this moronic patriotism about "the blood of our nation" was true, it would still hardly be a compensation for the legacy of centuires of colonialism and modern day neo-colonialism. And it would definatly not be a good enough excuse for the corporate exploitation of the workforce in east Asia.
As for "whenever you are in need"... I do not know who this "you" refers to, but the fact is that the majority of the conflicts that are going on around the world never appear on our (and I suppose your) news and newspapers. If it really was about solidarity with the third world, then I guess Africa would be full of NATO troops. It isnt, tho. Western powers only interfere when their interests are in question, that is the fact of the matter.
|
|
BLOOD SUCKER Esquire wrote: |
|
Very good answer. The 3rd world thinks that we here in the UK and you in America contribute little to the world's suffering. That's we don't give you enough from our own pockets. That we don't share the spoils of our labour. That we don't contribute enough to assist you in your wars. That our Imperialism has done little good in the plight of the poor. For heaven's sake.....we give you the most precious posession and gift we have. Our blood. The blood of our nation whenever you're in need. And then you have the odacity to condemn us? Shame us into guilt? Belittle and betray us? What more do you want from us? Thank you. a. Hammerstein
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Or better said, hated by those that find out that freedom comes with a price tag. We paid for it with the lives of our own. If you can't get it done yourself, then you owe the people that gave their lives for your freedom. I'll say it again because it bears repeating . . . . NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE !
|
|
spapad wrote: |
|
While that is true, we can not cut ourselves off. We are like the comic book hero. Feared by many, hated only by those who know we are comming for them. (Quoting Message by TIMBONI from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:54:02 PM)
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out.
|
|
spapad wrote: |
|
A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 8:15:31 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 11:29:12 AM |
|
[Head banger] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 11:21:30 AM | |
|
perhaps global isolationalism would be beter? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 11:13:27 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | Exactly. | | Head banger wrote: | | so, the US suported a dictator who killed people, then the soviets suported an uprising which put in castro, a dictator who killed people.
as for forign policy, I guess they all need work then. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Wheter Cuba is better of now makes no difference to my argument. Batista was a dictator, and the US supported him.
As for Russia and the former Soviet Union... I say they were the same as NATO when it came to foreign policy. I wouldnt dream of defending the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. | | Head banger wrote: | | is cuba beter off now? what about all the people the comunists murdered taking over?
how many countries did russia invade? | | _strat_ wrote: | | I did say something about the heritage of colonialism. Now, sure Africa and certain parts of Asia were colonized a long time ago, but it wasnt until the mid 20th century that the era of colonialism ended. And it left its heritage in the systems, economy, industry, ect. I dont think that India was asking to get invaded and colonialised. So much about the European colonial powers. They did in fact start most of the shit, or are at the least indirectly responsible for it. Granted, tho... The USA wasnt among those powers.
Moving on... The thing that you see on TV is the military part of the issue. Countries invaded, regimes toppled... But what happens after? I can say for Bosnia, that they are in deep shit economicaly speaking. Since the war nothing has improved, and to a large extent because practicly their entire economy is controlled by western businesses, that take all the profits and leave only enough for the basics. Not to mention that the war in Bosnia was fought mainly by the armies of the ethnic groups of Bosnia. The foreign force was more or less there to protect civilians, and failed miserably. The only foreign achievement that is notable in that war was diplomatic.
I wont lose words on Somalia. We know how succesfull THAT was.
Taiwan at present does not require any military assistance, nor has it, as far as I know.
Phillipines, ill leave that, because I dont know enough about them.
But lets get a bit farther from that... How about Chile, where the US has supported a military junta for years? How about pre-socialist Cuba with president-dictator Batista? How about Panama? Loads of examples there. And if it really was all about help, I asked before. Why arent you guys all over Africa? There is PLENTY of conflict going on there, and the only one that gets any attention whatsoever is that in Darfur and Chad.
As I said, interests. Thats the only thing that will bring the superpowers to war. Compassion my ass. | | Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: | | Strat, what BSE means is that whenever countries ask for American or British help, we jump in and assist. Be it Taiwan, Philippines, Bosnia, Somalia, etc...And no, we don't provide aid whenever it purely suits our interests. We provide aid when there are people in trouble. That's what America and Great Britain do. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, even if all this moronic patriotism about "the blood of our nation" was true, it would still hardly be a compensation for the legacy of centuires of colonialism and modern day neo-colonialism. And it would definatly not be a good enough excuse for the corporate exploitation of the workforce in east Asia.
As for "whenever you are in need"... I do not know who this "you" refers to, but the fact is that the majority of the conflicts that are going on around the world never appear on our (and I suppose your) news and newspapers. If it really was about solidarity with the third world, then I guess Africa would be full of NATO troops. It isnt, tho. Western powers only interfere when their interests are in question, that is the fact of the matter. | | BLOOD SUCKER Esquire wrote: | | Very good answer. The 3rd world thinks that we here in the UK and you in America contribute little to the world's suffering. That's we don't give you enough from our own pockets. That we don't share the spoils of our labour. That we don't contribute enough to assist you in your wars. That our Imperialism has done little good in the plight of the poor. For heaven's sake.....we give you the most precious posession and gift we have. Our blood. The blood of our nation whenever you're in need. And then you have the odacity to condemn us? Shame us into guilt? Belittle and betray us? What more do you want from us? Thank you. a. Hammerstein | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Or better said, hated by those that find out that freedom comes with a price tag. We paid for it with the lives of our own. If you can't get it done yourself, then you owe the people that gave their lives for your freedom. I'll say it again because it bears repeating . . . . NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! | | spapad wrote: | | While that is true, we can not cut ourselves off. We are like the comic book hero. Feared by many, hated only by those who know we are comming for them. (Quoting Message by TIMBONI from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:54:02 PM)
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out.
|
|
spapad wrote: |
|
A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 8:15:31 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 11:13:27 AM | |
|
Exactly. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Head banger from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 11:03:04 AM) | | Head banger wrote: | | so, the US suported a dictator who killed people, then the soviets suported an uprising which put in castro, a dictator who killed people.
as for forign policy, I guess they all need work then. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Wheter Cuba is better of now makes no difference to my argument. Batista was a dictator, and the US supported him.
As for Russia and the former Soviet Union... I say they were the same as NATO when it came to foreign policy. I wouldnt dream of defending the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. | | Head banger wrote: | | is cuba beter off now? what about all the people the comunists murdered taking over?
how many countries did russia invade? | | _strat_ wrote: | | I did say something about the heritage of colonialism. Now, sure Africa and certain parts of Asia were colonized a long time ago, but it wasnt until the mid 20th century that the era of colonialism ended. And it left its heritage in the systems, economy, industry, ect. I dont think that India was asking to get invaded and colonialised. So much about the European colonial powers. They did in fact start most of the shit, or are at the least indirectly responsible for it. Granted, tho... The USA wasnt among those powers.
Moving on... The thing that you see on TV is the military part of the issue. Countries invaded, regimes toppled... But what happens after? I can say for Bosnia, that they are in deep shit economicaly speaking. Since the war nothing has improved, and to a large extent because practicly their entire economy is controlled by western businesses, that take all the profits and leave only enough for the basics. Not to mention that the war in Bosnia was fought mainly by the armies of the ethnic groups of Bosnia. The foreign force was more or less there to protect civilians, and failed miserably. The only foreign achievement that is notable in that war was diplomatic.
I wont lose words on Somalia. We know how succesfull THAT was.
Taiwan at present does not require any military assistance, nor has it, as far as I know.
Phillipines, ill leave that, because I dont know enough about them.
But lets get a bit farther from that... How about Chile, where the US has supported a military junta for years? How about pre-socialist Cuba with president-dictator Batista? How about Panama? Loads of examples there. And if it really was all about help, I asked before. Why arent you guys all over Africa? There is PLENTY of conflict going on there, and the only one that gets any attention whatsoever is that in Darfur and Chad.
As I said, interests. Thats the only thing that will bring the superpowers to war. Compassion my ass. | | Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: | | Strat, what BSE means is that whenever countries ask for American or British help, we jump in and assist. Be it Taiwan, Philippines, Bosnia, Somalia, etc...And no, we don't provide aid whenever it purely suits our interests. We provide aid when there are people in trouble. That's what America and Great Britain do. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, even if all this moronic patriotism about "the blood of our nation" was true, it would still hardly be a compensation for the legacy of centuires of colonialism and modern day neo-colonialism. And it would definatly not be a good enough excuse for the corporate exploitation of the workforce in east Asia.
As for "whenever you are in need"... I do not know who this "you" refers to, but the fact is that the majority of the conflicts that are going on around the world never appear on our (and I suppose your) news and newspapers. If it really was about solidarity with the third world, then I guess Africa would be full of NATO troops. It isnt, tho. Western powers only interfere when their interests are in question, that is the fact of the matter. | | BLOOD SUCKER Esquire wrote: | | Very good answer. The 3rd world thinks that we here in the UK and you in America contribute little to the world's suffering. That's we don't give you enough from our own pockets. That we don't share the spoils of our labour. That we don't contribute enough to assist you in your wars. That our Imperialism has done little good in the plight of the poor. For heaven's sake.....we give you the most precious posession and gift we have. Our blood. The blood of our nation whenever you're in need. And then you have the odacity to condemn us? Shame us into guilt? Belittle and betray us? What more do you want from us? Thank you. a. Hammerstein | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Or better said, hated by those that find out that freedom comes with a price tag. We paid for it with the lives of our own. If you can't get it done yourself, then you owe the people that gave their lives for your freedom. I'll say it again because it bears repeating . . . . NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! | | spapad wrote: | | While that is true, we can not cut ourselves off. We are like the comic book hero. Feared by many, hated only by those who know we are comming for them. (Quoting Message by TIMBONI from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:54:02 PM)
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out.
|
|
spapad wrote: |
|
A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 8:15:31 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Head banger] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 11:03:04 AM | |
|
so, the US suported a dictator who killed people, then the soviets suported an uprising which put in castro, a dictator who killed people.
as for forign policy, I guess they all need work then. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:19:20 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | Wheter Cuba is better of now makes no difference to my argument. Batista was a dictator, and the US supported him.
As for Russia and the former Soviet Union... I say they were the same as NATO when it came to foreign policy. I wouldnt dream of defending the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. | | Head banger wrote: | | is cuba beter off now? what about all the people the comunists murdered taking over?
how many countries did russia invade? | | _strat_ wrote: | | I did say something about the heritage of colonialism. Now, sure Africa and certain parts of Asia were colonized a long time ago, but it wasnt until the mid 20th century that the era of colonialism ended. And it left its heritage in the systems, economy, industry, ect. I dont think that India was asking to get invaded and colonialised. So much about the European colonial powers. They did in fact start most of the shit, or are at the least indirectly responsible for it. Granted, tho... The USA wasnt among those powers.
Moving on... The thing that you see on TV is the military part of the issue. Countries invaded, regimes toppled... But what happens after? I can say for Bosnia, that they are in deep shit economicaly speaking. Since the war nothing has improved, and to a large extent because practicly their entire economy is controlled by western businesses, that take all the profits and leave only enough for the basics. Not to mention that the war in Bosnia was fought mainly by the armies of the ethnic groups of Bosnia. The foreign force was more or less there to protect civilians, and failed miserably. The only foreign achievement that is notable in that war was diplomatic.
I wont lose words on Somalia. We know how succesfull THAT was.
Taiwan at present does not require any military assistance, nor has it, as far as I know.
Phillipines, ill leave that, because I dont know enough about them.
But lets get a bit farther from that... How about Chile, where the US has supported a military junta for years? How about pre-socialist Cuba with president-dictator Batista? How about Panama? Loads of examples there. And if it really was all about help, I asked before. Why arent you guys all over Africa? There is PLENTY of conflict going on there, and the only one that gets any attention whatsoever is that in Darfur and Chad.
As I said, interests. Thats the only thing that will bring the superpowers to war. Compassion my ass. | | Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: | | Strat, what BSE means is that whenever countries ask for American or British help, we jump in and assist. Be it Taiwan, Philippines, Bosnia, Somalia, etc...And no, we don't provide aid whenever it purely suits our interests. We provide aid when there are people in trouble. That's what America and Great Britain do. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, even if all this moronic patriotism about "the blood of our nation" was true, it would still hardly be a compensation for the legacy of centuires of colonialism and modern day neo-colonialism. And it would definatly not be a good enough excuse for the corporate exploitation of the workforce in east Asia.
As for "whenever you are in need"... I do not know who this "you" refers to, but the fact is that the majority of the conflicts that are going on around the world never appear on our (and I suppose your) news and newspapers. If it really was about solidarity with the third world, then I guess Africa would be full of NATO troops. It isnt, tho. Western powers only interfere when their interests are in question, that is the fact of the matter. | | BLOOD SUCKER Esquire wrote: | | Very good answer. The 3rd world thinks that we here in the UK and you in America contribute little to the world's suffering. That's we don't give you enough from our own pockets. That we don't share the spoils of our labour. That we don't contribute enough to assist you in your wars. That our Imperialism has done little good in the plight of the poor. For heaven's sake.....we give you the most precious posession and gift we have. Our blood. The blood of our nation whenever you're in need. And then you have the odacity to condemn us? Shame us into guilt? Belittle and betray us? What more do you want from us? Thank you. a. Hammerstein | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Or better said, hated by those that find out that freedom comes with a price tag. We paid for it with the lives of our own. If you can't get it done yourself, then you owe the people that gave their lives for your freedom. I'll say it again because it bears repeating . . . . NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! | | spapad wrote: | | While that is true, we can not cut ourselves off. We are like the comic book hero. Feared by many, hated only by those who know we are comming for them. (Quoting Message by TIMBONI from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:54:02 PM)
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out.
|
|
spapad wrote: |
|
A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 8:15:31 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 8:10:04 AM | |
|
Billy Ray?? King of the "One Hit Wonders"...? HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Darth_Painkiller_0870 from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:54:48 AM) | | Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: | | Hey! There's NOTHING wrong with being a redneck! Because I are one!
Besides, we don't consider Miley Cyrus or her pussy-ass pappy rednecks either. | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Something like that, I guess. | | _strat_ wrote: | | ? Is that the redneck way of hitting on someone? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well, you do have a purdy mouff......HAAAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | LOL!!! Apology accepted. Just keep your Rednecks to yourselves, ok? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | BWWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!! I apologize in the name of America!! Actually, she has made even me consider "defecting"....HAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Please, do not insult the pigs. They are rather charming, smart and tasty animals.
In any case... Before yesterday, I was only against the US foreign policy. Now, I believe I hate the lot of you. You know why? Well, yesterday afternoon... I turn on the TV, to see whats on, and I see an American TV show. I cant remember the title right now, but I saw in the opening credits that the actor with the lead role is... Well, guess who? MILEY CYRUS!! And I wathc to see what this shit is all about... And within ten minutes I had a feeling like my brains are melting away and running out through my nose.
That, sir, is imperialism. We join NATO, we send troops to help you out... AND ALL YOU GIVE US IS THAT LITTLE BITCH?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Imperialst pig........... | | _strat_ wrote: | | No. No, no, no, no. You sir are an imperialist. Be gone with you! | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Return_of_Darth_Painkiller_0870] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:54:48 AM | |
|
Hey! There's NOTHING wrong with being a redneck! Because I are one!
Besides, we don't consider Miley Cyrus or her pussy-ass pappy rednecks either. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:48:32 AM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Something like that, I guess. | | _strat_ wrote: | | ? Is that the redneck way of hitting on someone? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well, you do have a purdy mouff......HAAAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | LOL!!! Apology accepted. Just keep your Rednecks to yourselves, ok? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | BWWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!! I apologize in the name of America!! Actually, she has made even me consider "defecting"....HAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Please, do not insult the pigs. They are rather charming, smart and tasty animals.
In any case... Before yesterday, I was only against the US foreign policy. Now, I believe I hate the lot of you. You know why? Well, yesterday afternoon... I turn on the TV, to see whats on, and I see an American TV show. I cant remember the title right now, but I saw in the opening credits that the actor with the lead role is... Well, guess who? MILEY CYRUS!! And I wathc to see what this shit is all about... And within ten minutes I had a feeling like my brains are melting away and running out through my nose.
That, sir, is imperialism. We join NATO, we send troops to help you out... AND ALL YOU GIVE US IS THAT LITTLE BITCH?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Imperialst pig........... | | _strat_ wrote: | | No. No, no, no, no. You sir are an imperialist. Be gone with you! | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:51:29 AM | |
|
Good Day, strat. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:50:49 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | In that case, be gone with you, and Im serious this time!!
And I have to go in any case... See you in the evening. | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Something like that, I guess. | | _strat_ wrote: | | ? Is that the redneck way of hitting on someone? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well, you do have a purdy mouff......HAAAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | LOL!!! Apology accepted. Just keep your Rednecks to yourselves, ok? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | BWWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!! I apologize in the name of America!! Actually, she has made even me consider "defecting"....HAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Please, do not insult the pigs. They are rather charming, smart and tasty animals.
In any case... Before yesterday, I was only against the US foreign policy. Now, I believe I hate the lot of you. You know why? Well, yesterday afternoon... I turn on the TV, to see whats on, and I see an American TV show. I cant remember the title right now, but I saw in the opening credits that the actor with the lead role is... Well, guess who? MILEY CYRUS!! And I wathc to see what this shit is all about... And within ten minutes I had a feeling like my brains are melting away and running out through my nose.
That, sir, is imperialism. We join NATO, we send troops to help you out... AND ALL YOU GIVE US IS THAT LITTLE BITCH?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Imperialst pig........... | | _strat_ wrote: | | No. No, no, no, no. You sir are an imperialist. Be gone with you! | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:50:49 AM | |
|
In that case, be gone with you, and Im serious this time!!
And I have to go in any case... See you in the evening. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:48:32 AM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Something like that, I guess. | | _strat_ wrote: | | ? Is that the redneck way of hitting on someone? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well, you do have a purdy mouff......HAAAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | LOL!!! Apology accepted. Just keep your Rednecks to yourselves, ok? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | BWWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!! I apologize in the name of America!! Actually, she has made even me consider "defecting"....HAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Please, do not insult the pigs. They are rather charming, smart and tasty animals.
In any case... Before yesterday, I was only against the US foreign policy. Now, I believe I hate the lot of you. You know why? Well, yesterday afternoon... I turn on the TV, to see whats on, and I see an American TV show. I cant remember the title right now, but I saw in the opening credits that the actor with the lead role is... Well, guess who? MILEY CYRUS!! And I wathc to see what this shit is all about... And within ten minutes I had a feeling like my brains are melting away and running out through my nose.
That, sir, is imperialism. We join NATO, we send troops to help you out... AND ALL YOU GIVE US IS THAT LITTLE BITCH?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Imperialst pig........... | | _strat_ wrote: | | No. No, no, no, no. You sir are an imperialist. Be gone with you! | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:48:32 AM | |
|
HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Something like that, I guess. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:46:37 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | ? Is that the redneck way of hitting on someone? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well, you do have a purdy mouff......HAAAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | LOL!!! Apology accepted. Just keep your Rednecks to yourselves, ok? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | BWWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!! I apologize in the name of America!! Actually, she has made even me consider "defecting"....HAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Please, do not insult the pigs. They are rather charming, smart and tasty animals.
In any case... Before yesterday, I was only against the US foreign policy. Now, I believe I hate the lot of you. You know why? Well, yesterday afternoon... I turn on the TV, to see whats on, and I see an American TV show. I cant remember the title right now, but I saw in the opening credits that the actor with the lead role is... Well, guess who? MILEY CYRUS!! And I wathc to see what this shit is all about... And within ten minutes I had a feeling like my brains are melting away and running out through my nose.
That, sir, is imperialism. We join NATO, we send troops to help you out... AND ALL YOU GIVE US IS THAT LITTLE BITCH?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Imperialst pig........... | | _strat_ wrote: | | No. No, no, no, no. You sir are an imperialist. Be gone with you! | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:46:37 AM | |
|
? Is that the redneck way of hitting on someone? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:45:23 AM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well, you do have a purdy mouff......HAAAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | LOL!!! Apology accepted. Just keep your Rednecks to yourselves, ok? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | BWWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!! I apologize in the name of America!! Actually, she has made even me consider "defecting"....HAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Please, do not insult the pigs. They are rather charming, smart and tasty animals.
In any case... Before yesterday, I was only against the US foreign policy. Now, I believe I hate the lot of you. You know why? Well, yesterday afternoon... I turn on the TV, to see whats on, and I see an American TV show. I cant remember the title right now, but I saw in the opening credits that the actor with the lead role is... Well, guess who? MILEY CYRUS!! And I wathc to see what this shit is all about... And within ten minutes I had a feeling like my brains are melting away and running out through my nose.
That, sir, is imperialism. We join NATO, we send troops to help you out... AND ALL YOU GIVE US IS THAT LITTLE BITCH?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Imperialst pig........... | | _strat_ wrote: | | No. No, no, no, no. You sir are an imperialist. Be gone with you! | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:45:23 AM | |
|
HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well, you do have a purdy mouff......HAAAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!!!!!!!! [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:44:12 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | LOL!!! Apology accepted. Just keep your Rednecks to yourselves, ok? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | BWWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!! I apologize in the name of America!! Actually, she has made even me consider "defecting"....HAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Please, do not insult the pigs. They are rather charming, smart and tasty animals.
In any case... Before yesterday, I was only against the US foreign policy. Now, I believe I hate the lot of you. You know why? Well, yesterday afternoon... I turn on the TV, to see whats on, and I see an American TV show. I cant remember the title right now, but I saw in the opening credits that the actor with the lead role is... Well, guess who? MILEY CYRUS!! And I wathc to see what this shit is all about... And within ten minutes I had a feeling like my brains are melting away and running out through my nose.
That, sir, is imperialism. We join NATO, we send troops to help you out... AND ALL YOU GIVE US IS THAT LITTLE BITCH?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Imperialst pig........... | | _strat_ wrote: | | No. No, no, no, no. You sir are an imperialist. Be gone with you! | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:44:12 AM | |
|
LOL!!! Apology accepted. Just keep your Rednecks to yourselves, ok? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:42:26 AM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | BWWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!! I apologize in the name of America!! Actually, she has made even me consider "defecting"....HAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Please, do not insult the pigs. They are rather charming, smart and tasty animals.
In any case... Before yesterday, I was only against the US foreign policy. Now, I believe I hate the lot of you. You know why? Well, yesterday afternoon... I turn on the TV, to see whats on, and I see an American TV show. I cant remember the title right now, but I saw in the opening credits that the actor with the lead role is... Well, guess who? MILEY CYRUS!! And I wathc to see what this shit is all about... And within ten minutes I had a feeling like my brains are melting away and running out through my nose.
That, sir, is imperialism. We join NATO, we send troops to help you out... AND ALL YOU GIVE US IS THAT LITTLE BITCH?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Imperialst pig........... | | _strat_ wrote: | | No. No, no, no, no. You sir are an imperialist. Be gone with you! | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:42:26 AM | |
|
BWWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!! I apologize in the name of America!! Actually, she has made even me consider "defecting"....HAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:39:39 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | Please, do not insult the pigs. They are rather charming, smart and tasty animals.
In any case... Before yesterday, I was only against the US foreign policy. Now, I believe I hate the lot of you. You know why? Well, yesterday afternoon... I turn on the TV, to see whats on, and I see an American TV show. I cant remember the title right now, but I saw in the opening credits that the actor with the lead role is... Well, guess who? MILEY CYRUS!! And I wathc to see what this shit is all about... And within ten minutes I had a feeling like my brains are melting away and running out through my nose.
That, sir, is imperialism. We join NATO, we send troops to help you out... AND ALL YOU GIVE US IS THAT LITTLE BITCH?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Imperialst pig........... | | _strat_ wrote: | | No. No, no, no, no. You sir are an imperialist. Be gone with you! | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:40:57 AM | |
|
Well, I believe that you are right. Russias "military" was tied to Russias "military". Or you meant something else? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Darth_Painkiller_0870 from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:39:07 AM) | | Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: | | America and Russia always played 'cat & mouse' during the Cold War. Russia's military was directly tied to it's military for the most part. Why do you think they dissolved into near chaos at the end of the Cold War-era? | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, what the Soviet and American fighters had going on over the North Pole, I dont know. I do know what socialism is in practice, and I do know that it is nothing like what is suggested so many times by people who only associate it with the Red Army parades in Moscow. And just for the record, we were not only flown over by "communist" aircraft, they actually did air raids on us back in 91. Granted, I was to young to remember it, but I still think that if we only take the military into consideration, I would have a much better reason to hate socialism than you. I dont, because the military doesnt have the slightest connection with the economic system that is socialism. | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Believe me, I am not fool enough to believe that all that the U.S. does outside it's borders are "good". Many times it is directly tied to profit, which would support your argument.
As for my views of Communism, yes some would be a result of "propaganda". The other portion of it came from F-16's screaming over my house to meet the Bear bombers coming over the North Pole and escort them down to the Carolina's. The next morning there would be a picture on the front page of the paper with the bomber and it's fighter escort. This happened a couple of time a month. I always knew what was happening. Normally, the fighters flew a circular pattern around the neighborhood for exercises. When it was time for business, they screamed right over the house and it shook like an earthquake. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, I guess we could squeeze in a word or two about the US supported juntas and totalitarian regimes as well. Not everything that the US does outside its borders is good. | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out. | | spapad wrote: | | A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:39:39 AM | |
|
Please, do not insult the pigs. They are rather charming, smart and tasty animals.
In any case... Before yesterday, I was only against the US foreign policy. Now, I believe I hate the lot of you. You know why? Well, yesterday afternoon... I turn on the TV, to see whats on, and I see an American TV show. I cant remember the title right now, but I saw in the opening credits that the actor with the lead role is... Well, guess who? MILEY CYRUS!! And I wathc to see what this shit is all about... And within ten minutes I had a feeling like my brains are melting away and running out through my nose.
That, sir, is imperialism. We join NATO, we send troops to help you out... AND ALL YOU GIVE US IS THAT LITTLE BITCH?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:32:46 AM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | Imperialst pig........... | | _strat_ wrote: | | No. No, no, no, no. You sir are an imperialist. Be gone with you! | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Return_of_Darth_Painkiller_0870] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:39:07 AM | |
|
America and Russia always played 'cat & mouse' during the Cold War. Russia's military was directly tied to it's military for the most part. Why do you think they dissolved into near chaos at the end of the Cold War-era? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:17:14 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, what the Soviet and American fighters had going on over the North Pole, I dont know. I do know what socialism is in practice, and I do know that it is nothing like what is suggested so many times by people who only associate it with the Red Army parades in Moscow. And just for the record, we were not only flown over by "communist" aircraft, they actually did air raids on us back in 91. Granted, I was to young to remember it, but I still think that if we only take the military into consideration, I would have a much better reason to hate socialism than you. I dont, because the military doesnt have the slightest connection with the economic system that is socialism. | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Believe me, I am not fool enough to believe that all that the U.S. does outside it's borders are "good". Many times it is directly tied to profit, which would support your argument.
As for my views of Communism, yes some would be a result of "propaganda". The other portion of it came from F-16's screaming over my house to meet the Bear bombers coming over the North Pole and escort them down to the Carolina's. The next morning there would be a picture on the front page of the paper with the bomber and it's fighter escort. This happened a couple of time a month. I always knew what was happening. Normally, the fighters flew a circular pattern around the neighborhood for exercises. When it was time for business, they screamed right over the house and it shook like an earthquake. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, I guess we could squeeze in a word or two about the US supported juntas and totalitarian regimes as well. Not everything that the US does outside its borders is good. | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out. | | spapad wrote: | | A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:32:46 AM | |
|
Imperialst pig........... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:31:13 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | No. No, no, no, no. You sir are an imperialist. Be gone with you! | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:31:13 AM | |
|
No. No, no, no, no. You sir are an imperialist. Be gone with you! [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Deep Freeze from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:27:59 AM) | | Deep Freeze wrote: | | I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Deep Freeze] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:27:59 AM | |
|
I never tire of that debate BUT you and I agree and that makes for a boring repartee....HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:21:37 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:21:37 AM | |
|
Agreed :)
Well, I guess that people here had enough debating about religion. It was really big a couple of months (or maybe a year) ago. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Tuesday, December 30, 2008 12:04:21 AM) | | jimmyjames wrote: | | I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:19:20 AM | |
|
Wheter Cuba is better of now makes no difference to my argument. Batista was a dictator, and the US supported him.
As for Russia and the former Soviet Union... I say they were the same as NATO when it came to foreign policy. I wouldnt dream of defending the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Head banger from Monday, December 29, 2008 7:45:22 PM) | | Head banger wrote: | | is cuba beter off now? what about all the people the comunists murdered taking over?
how many countries did russia invade? | | _strat_ wrote: | | I did say something about the heritage of colonialism. Now, sure Africa and certain parts of Asia were colonized a long time ago, but it wasnt until the mid 20th century that the era of colonialism ended. And it left its heritage in the systems, economy, industry, ect. I dont think that India was asking to get invaded and colonialised. So much about the European colonial powers. They did in fact start most of the shit, or are at the least indirectly responsible for it. Granted, tho... The USA wasnt among those powers.
Moving on... The thing that you see on TV is the military part of the issue. Countries invaded, regimes toppled... But what happens after? I can say for Bosnia, that they are in deep shit economicaly speaking. Since the war nothing has improved, and to a large extent because practicly their entire economy is controlled by western businesses, that take all the profits and leave only enough for the basics. Not to mention that the war in Bosnia was fought mainly by the armies of the ethnic groups of Bosnia. The foreign force was more or less there to protect civilians, and failed miserably. The only foreign achievement that is notable in that war was diplomatic.
I wont lose words on Somalia. We know how succesfull THAT was.
Taiwan at present does not require any military assistance, nor has it, as far as I know.
Phillipines, ill leave that, because I dont know enough about them.
But lets get a bit farther from that... How about Chile, where the US has supported a military junta for years? How about pre-socialist Cuba with president-dictator Batista? How about Panama? Loads of examples there. And if it really was all about help, I asked before. Why arent you guys all over Africa? There is PLENTY of conflict going on there, and the only one that gets any attention whatsoever is that in Darfur and Chad.
As I said, interests. Thats the only thing that will bring the superpowers to war. Compassion my ass. | | Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: | | Strat, what BSE means is that whenever countries ask for American or British help, we jump in and assist. Be it Taiwan, Philippines, Bosnia, Somalia, etc...And no, we don't provide aid whenever it purely suits our interests. We provide aid when there are people in trouble. That's what America and Great Britain do. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, even if all this moronic patriotism about "the blood of our nation" was true, it would still hardly be a compensation for the legacy of centuires of colonialism and modern day neo-colonialism. And it would definatly not be a good enough excuse for the corporate exploitation of the workforce in east Asia.
As for "whenever you are in need"... I do not know who this "you" refers to, but the fact is that the majority of the conflicts that are going on around the world never appear on our (and I suppose your) news and newspapers. If it really was about solidarity with the third world, then I guess Africa would be full of NATO troops. It isnt, tho. Western powers only interfere when their interests are in question, that is the fact of the matter. | | BLOOD SUCKER Esquire wrote: | | Very good answer. The 3rd world thinks that we here in the UK and you in America contribute little to the world's suffering. That's we don't give you enough from our own pockets. That we don't share the spoils of our labour. That we don't contribute enough to assist you in your wars. That our Imperialism has done little good in the plight of the poor. For heaven's sake.....we give you the most precious posession and gift we have. Our blood. The blood of our nation whenever you're in need. And then you have the odacity to condemn us? Shame us into guilt? Belittle and betray us? What more do you want from us? Thank you. a. Hammerstein | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Or better said, hated by those that find out that freedom comes with a price tag. We paid for it with the lives of our own. If you can't get it done yourself, then you owe the people that gave their lives for your freedom. I'll say it again because it bears repeating . . . . NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! | | spapad wrote: | | While that is true, we can not cut ourselves off. We are like the comic book hero. Feared by many, hated only by those who know we are comming for them. (Quoting Message by TIMBONI from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:54:02 PM)
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out.
|
|
spapad wrote: |
|
A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 8:15:31 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:17:14 AM | |
|
Well, what the Soviet and American fighters had going on over the North Pole, I dont know. I do know what socialism is in practice, and I do know that it is nothing like what is suggested so many times by people who only associate it with the Red Army parades in Moscow. And just for the record, we were not only flown over by "communist" aircraft, they actually did air raids on us back in 91. Granted, I was to young to remember it, but I still think that if we only take the military into consideration, I would have a much better reason to hate socialism than you. I dont, because the military doesnt have the slightest connection with the economic system that is socialism. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by TIMBONI from Monday, December 29, 2008 11:31:46 PM) | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Believe me, I am not fool enough to believe that all that the U.S. does outside it's borders are "good". Many times it is directly tied to profit, which would support your argument.
As for my views of Communism, yes some would be a result of "propaganda". The other portion of it came from F-16's screaming over my house to meet the Bear bombers coming over the North Pole and escort them down to the Carolina's. The next morning there would be a picture on the front page of the paper with the bomber and it's fighter escort. This happened a couple of time a month. I always knew what was happening. Normally, the fighters flew a circular pattern around the neighborhood for exercises. When it was time for business, they screamed right over the house and it shook like an earthquake. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, I guess we could squeeze in a word or two about the US supported juntas and totalitarian regimes as well. Not everything that the US does outside its borders is good. | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out. | | spapad wrote: | | A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
[jimmyjames] Tuesday, December 30, 2008 12:04:21 AM | |
|
I know what you mean bro. As a rule I don't usually involve myself in anything to do with religion or politics. I just thought I'd throw that out there to see what happened. Kind of figured if it did start anything it wouldn't be that difficult to deal with as the people I'd be arguing with would be semi-deluded anyway. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, December 29, 2008 5:35:12 PM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
[TIMBONI] Monday, December 29, 2008 11:31:46 PM | |
|
Believe me, I am not fool enough to believe that all that the U.S. does outside it's borders are "good". Many times it is directly tied to profit, which would support your argument.
As for my views of Communism, yes some would be a result of "propaganda". The other portion of it came from F-16's screaming over my house to meet the Bear bombers coming over the North Pole and escort them down to the Carolina's. The next morning there would be a picture on the front page of the paper with the bomber and it's fighter escort. This happened a couple of time a month. I always knew what was happening. Normally, the fighters flew a circular pattern around the neighborhood for exercises. When it was time for business, they screamed right over the house and it shook like an earthquake. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Sunday, December 28, 2008 7:29:26 AM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, I guess we could squeeze in a word or two about the US supported juntas and totalitarian regimes as well. Not everything that the US does outside its borders is good. | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out. | | spapad wrote: | | A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
|
|
|
[Head banger] Monday, December 29, 2008 7:46:18 PM | |
|
see, people put their selfs first, its natural
your right, africa would be about compasion, but sometimes, its more compasionate to remove life suport. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, December 29, 2008 5:36:51 PM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, we used to have 10% abroad, but not so much, because the public is against it.
Anyway, I used Africa as an example that its about interests, not compassion. | | Head banger wrote: | | Well, first of all, even our vast countries have limited resources. fact is, there are troops in africa, central america, asia, etc. but, like I said we (combined rich nations) only have so many troops. Canada, has 1/3 of its troops overseas, be it afganistan, cyprus, or wherever. are there places that need more help, sure. we do the best we can. Africa though, quite frankly most of that is beynd help IMO | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, even if all this moronic patriotism about "the blood of our nation" was true, it would still hardly be a compensation for the legacy of centuires of colonialism and modern day neo-colonialism. And it would definatly not be a good enough excuse for the corporate exploitation of the workforce in east Asia.
As for "whenever you are in need"... I do not know who this "you" refers to, but the fact is that the majority of the conflicts that are going on around the world never appear on our (and I suppose your) news and newspapers. If it really was about solidarity with the third world, then I guess Africa would be full of NATO troops. It isnt, tho. Western powers only interfere when their interests are in question, that is the fact of the matter. | | BLOOD SUCKER Esquire wrote: | | Very good answer. The 3rd world thinks that we here in the UK and you in America contribute little to the world's suffering. That's we don't give you enough from our own pockets. That we don't share the spoils of our labour. That we don't contribute enough to assist you in your wars. That our Imperialism has done little good in the plight of the poor. For heaven's sake.....we give you the most precious posession and gift we have. Our blood. The blood of our nation whenever you're in need. And then you have the odacity to condemn us? Shame us into guilt? Belittle and betray us? What more do you want from us? Thank you. a. Hammerstein | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Or better said, hated by those that find out that freedom comes with a price tag. We paid for it with the lives of our own. If you can't get it done yourself, then you owe the people that gave their lives for your freedom. I'll say it again because it bears repeating . . . . NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! | | spapad wrote: | | While that is true, we can not cut ourselves off. We are like the comic book hero. Feared by many, hated only by those who know we are comming for them. (Quoting Message by TIMBONI from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:54:02 PM)
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out.
|
|
spapad wrote: |
|
A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 8:15:31 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Head banger] Monday, December 29, 2008 7:45:22 PM | |
|
is cuba beter off now? what about all the people the comunists murdered taking over?
how many countries did russia invade? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, December 29, 2008 5:33:14 PM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | I did say something about the heritage of colonialism. Now, sure Africa and certain parts of Asia were colonized a long time ago, but it wasnt until the mid 20th century that the era of colonialism ended. And it left its heritage in the systems, economy, industry, ect. I dont think that India was asking to get invaded and colonialised. So much about the European colonial powers. They did in fact start most of the shit, or are at the least indirectly responsible for it. Granted, tho... The USA wasnt among those powers.
Moving on... The thing that you see on TV is the military part of the issue. Countries invaded, regimes toppled... But what happens after? I can say for Bosnia, that they are in deep shit economicaly speaking. Since the war nothing has improved, and to a large extent because practicly their entire economy is controlled by western businesses, that take all the profits and leave only enough for the basics. Not to mention that the war in Bosnia was fought mainly by the armies of the ethnic groups of Bosnia. The foreign force was more or less there to protect civilians, and failed miserably. The only foreign achievement that is notable in that war was diplomatic.
I wont lose words on Somalia. We know how succesfull THAT was.
Taiwan at present does not require any military assistance, nor has it, as far as I know.
Phillipines, ill leave that, because I dont know enough about them.
But lets get a bit farther from that... How about Chile, where the US has supported a military junta for years? How about pre-socialist Cuba with president-dictator Batista? How about Panama? Loads of examples there. And if it really was all about help, I asked before. Why arent you guys all over Africa? There is PLENTY of conflict going on there, and the only one that gets any attention whatsoever is that in Darfur and Chad.
As I said, interests. Thats the only thing that will bring the superpowers to war. Compassion my ass. | | Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: | | Strat, what BSE means is that whenever countries ask for American or British help, we jump in and assist. Be it Taiwan, Philippines, Bosnia, Somalia, etc...And no, we don't provide aid whenever it purely suits our interests. We provide aid when there are people in trouble. That's what America and Great Britain do. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, even if all this moronic patriotism about "the blood of our nation" was true, it would still hardly be a compensation for the legacy of centuires of colonialism and modern day neo-colonialism. And it would definatly not be a good enough excuse for the corporate exploitation of the workforce in east Asia.
As for "whenever you are in need"... I do not know who this "you" refers to, but the fact is that the majority of the conflicts that are going on around the world never appear on our (and I suppose your) news and newspapers. If it really was about solidarity with the third world, then I guess Africa would be full of NATO troops. It isnt, tho. Western powers only interfere when their interests are in question, that is the fact of the matter. | | BLOOD SUCKER Esquire wrote: | | Very good answer. The 3rd world thinks that we here in the UK and you in America contribute little to the world's suffering. That's we don't give you enough from our own pockets. That we don't share the spoils of our labour. That we don't contribute enough to assist you in your wars. That our Imperialism has done little good in the plight of the poor. For heaven's sake.....we give you the most precious posession and gift we have. Our blood. The blood of our nation whenever you're in need. And then you have the odacity to condemn us? Shame us into guilt? Belittle and betray us? What more do you want from us? Thank you. a. Hammerstein | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Or better said, hated by those that find out that freedom comes with a price tag. We paid for it with the lives of our own. If you can't get it done yourself, then you owe the people that gave their lives for your freedom. I'll say it again because it bears repeating . . . . NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! | | spapad wrote: | | While that is true, we can not cut ourselves off. We are like the comic book hero. Feared by many, hated only by those who know we are comming for them. (Quoting Message by TIMBONI from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:54:02 PM)
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out.
|
|
spapad wrote: |
|
A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 8:15:31 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[~ MG_Metalgoddess~] Monday, December 29, 2008 6:29:56 PM | |
|
MUAHHHHHHHHHHHHH
[Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Soylentgreen4u from Monday, December 29, 2008 6:23:08 PM) | | Soylentgreen4u wrote: | | ONLY SOME OF THE BASTARDS DO!....THEY CUT ANY IN MY FOREST,THEY'LL SUFFER A FATE WORSE THAN A FATE WORSE THAN DEATH!!!...EVER SEEN HELLRAISER?... | | _strat_ wrote: | | ...I thought Canadians prefer cutting down trees to huggin them? | | Soylentgreen4u wrote: | | ATHEISM!....I DON'T BELIEVE IN THAT! ....GET IT,DON'T BELIEVE?..............
BUT HEY,I'M PART DRUID...WE LOVE OUR TREES! ....THAT'S RIGHT!,TREE HUGGERS YOU BLOODY REPUBLICANS OUT THERE!........STAY OUT OF MY FOREST,OR ELSE!... | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Monday, December 29, 2008 6:27:42 PM | |
|
Nope, havent seen Hellraiser. But I did read all the Asterix comic books, so I know pretty much what you look like:
[Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Soylentgreen4u from Monday, December 29, 2008 6:23:08 PM) | | Soylentgreen4u wrote: | | ONLY SOME OF THE BASTARDS DO!....THEY CUT ANY IN MY FOREST,THEY'LL SUFFER A FATE WORSE THAN A FATE WORSE THAN DEATH!!!...EVER SEEN HELLRAISER?... | | _strat_ wrote: | | ...I thought Canadians prefer cutting down trees to huggin them? | | Soylentgreen4u wrote: | | ATHEISM!....I DON'T BELIEVE IN THAT! ....GET IT,DON'T BELIEVE?..............
BUT HEY,I'M PART DRUID...WE LOVE OUR TREES! ....THAT'S RIGHT!,TREE HUGGERS YOU BLOODY REPUBLICANS OUT THERE!........STAY OUT OF MY FOREST,OR ELSE!... | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Soylentgreen4u] Monday, December 29, 2008 6:23:08 PM | |
|
ONLY SOME OF THE BASTARDS DO!....THEY CUT ANY IN MY FOREST,THEY'LL SUFFER A FATE WORSE THAN A FATE WORSE THAN DEATH!!!...EVER SEEN HELLRAISER?... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, December 29, 2008 6:08:51 PM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | ...I thought Canadians prefer cutting down trees to huggin them? | | Soylentgreen4u wrote: | | ATHEISM!....I DON'T BELIEVE IN THAT! ....GET IT,DON'T BELIEVE?..............
BUT HEY,I'M PART DRUID...WE LOVE OUR TREES! ....THAT'S RIGHT!,TREE HUGGERS YOU BLOODY REPUBLICANS OUT THERE!........STAY OUT OF MY FOREST,OR ELSE!... | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Monday, December 29, 2008 6:08:51 PM | |
|
...I thought Canadians prefer cutting down trees to huggin them? [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Soylentgreen4u from Monday, December 29, 2008 6:05:59 PM) | | Soylentgreen4u wrote: | | ATHEISM!....I DON'T BELIEVE IN THAT! ....GET IT,DON'T BELIEVE?..............
BUT HEY,I'M PART DRUID...WE LOVE OUR TREES! ....THAT'S RIGHT!,TREE HUGGERS YOU BLOODY REPUBLICANS OUT THERE!........STAY OUT OF MY FOREST,OR ELSE!... | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
|
[Soylentgreen4u] Monday, December 29, 2008 6:05:59 PM | |
|
ATHEISM!....I DON'T BELIEVE IN THAT! ....GET IT,DON'T BELIEVE?..............
BUT HEY,I'M PART DRUID...WE LOVE OUR TREES! ....THAT'S RIGHT!,TREE HUGGERS YOU BLOODY REPUBLICANS OUT THERE!........STAY OUT OF MY FOREST,OR ELSE!... [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Monday, December 29, 2008 5:35:12 PM) | | _strat_ wrote: | | Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Monday, December 29, 2008 5:36:51 PM | |
|
Well, we used to have 10% abroad, but not so much, because the public is against it.
Anyway, I used Africa as an example that its about interests, not compassion. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Head banger from Monday, December 29, 2008 8:01:02 AM) | | Head banger wrote: | | Well, first of all, even our vast countries have limited resources. fact is, there are troops in africa, central america, asia, etc. but, like I said we (combined rich nations) only have so many troops. Canada, has 1/3 of its troops overseas, be it afganistan, cyprus, or wherever. are there places that need more help, sure. we do the best we can. Africa though, quite frankly most of that is beynd help IMO | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, even if all this moronic patriotism about "the blood of our nation" was true, it would still hardly be a compensation for the legacy of centuires of colonialism and modern day neo-colonialism. And it would definatly not be a good enough excuse for the corporate exploitation of the workforce in east Asia.
As for "whenever you are in need"... I do not know who this "you" refers to, but the fact is that the majority of the conflicts that are going on around the world never appear on our (and I suppose your) news and newspapers. If it really was about solidarity with the third world, then I guess Africa would be full of NATO troops. It isnt, tho. Western powers only interfere when their interests are in question, that is the fact of the matter. | | BLOOD SUCKER Esquire wrote: | | Very good answer. The 3rd world thinks that we here in the UK and you in America contribute little to the world's suffering. That's we don't give you enough from our own pockets. That we don't share the spoils of our labour. That we don't contribute enough to assist you in your wars. That our Imperialism has done little good in the plight of the poor. For heaven's sake.....we give you the most precious posession and gift we have. Our blood. The blood of our nation whenever you're in need. And then you have the odacity to condemn us? Shame us into guilt? Belittle and betray us? What more do you want from us? Thank you. a. Hammerstein | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Or better said, hated by those that find out that freedom comes with a price tag. We paid for it with the lives of our own. If you can't get it done yourself, then you owe the people that gave their lives for your freedom. I'll say it again because it bears repeating . . . . NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! | | spapad wrote: | | While that is true, we can not cut ourselves off. We are like the comic book hero. Feared by many, hated only by those who know we are comming for them. (Quoting Message by TIMBONI from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:54:02 PM)
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out.
|
|
spapad wrote: |
|
A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 8:15:31 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
[_strat_] Monday, December 29, 2008 5:35:12 PM | |
|
Id be carefull with that. There are people around here (or at least there were) that would give you shit just for being an Atheist, and even more so for attacking Christianity.
But other than that, I think you hit the nail on the head. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Monday, December 29, 2008 1:06:59 PM) | | jimmyjames wrote: | | Especially when God or Gods of any type don't exist. How the hell, in this day and age, can people expect to be taken seriously when they spend their time praying to some non-existant deity. Even going to church once a week for an hour, what's that about? Crazy, meaningless rituals that are based on the fact that people can't face their own mortality. Losers. | | MG_Metalgoddess wrote: | | OMG What the HELL is going on over in LONDON !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geesh..
I wish people could just get over this entire religious thing!!!!! Who cares what religion you are!
So long as you are a kind good hearted individual, with good intentions, ... I mean its ridiculous the amount of
Violence and hardship this causes... I have meet so many people that I adore in this world.. I could care less what religion they are, that is thier personel buisness...
I think its sad, that people base the value of another person because of this.. Esp because alot of people are born, into different religions and continue to follow that religion because of thier heritage...
Anywase my Rant for the day!
MG~ |
|
|
|
[_strat_] Monday, December 29, 2008 5:33:14 PM | |
|
I did say something about the heritage of colonialism. Now, sure Africa and certain parts of Asia were colonized a long time ago, but it wasnt until the mid 20th century that the era of colonialism ended. And it left its heritage in the systems, economy, industry, ect. I dont think that India was asking to get invaded and colonialised. So much about the European colonial powers. They did in fact start most of the shit, or are at the least indirectly responsible for it. Granted, tho... The USA wasnt among those powers.
Moving on... The thing that you see on TV is the military part of the issue. Countries invaded, regimes toppled... But what happens after? I can say for Bosnia, that they are in deep shit economicaly speaking. Since the war nothing has improved, and to a large extent because practicly their entire economy is controlled by western businesses, that take all the profits and leave only enough for the basics. Not to mention that the war in Bosnia was fought mainly by the armies of the ethnic groups of Bosnia. The foreign force was more or less there to protect civilians, and failed miserably. The only foreign achievement that is notable in that war was diplomatic.
I wont lose words on Somalia. We know how succesfull THAT was.
Taiwan at present does not require any military assistance, nor has it, as far as I know.
Phillipines, ill leave that, because I dont know enough about them.
But lets get a bit farther from that... How about Chile, where the US has supported a military junta for years? How about pre-socialist Cuba with president-dictator Batista? How about Panama? Loads of examples there. And if it really was all about help, I asked before. Why arent you guys all over Africa? There is PLENTY of conflict going on there, and the only one that gets any attention whatsoever is that in Darfur and Chad.
As I said, interests. Thats the only thing that will bring the superpowers to war. Compassion my ass. [Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Darth_Painkiller_0870 from Monday, December 29, 2008 8:28:59 AM) | | Darth_Painkiller_0870 wrote: | | Strat, what BSE means is that whenever countries ask for American or British help, we jump in and assist. Be it Taiwan, Philippines, Bosnia, Somalia, etc...And no, we don't provide aid whenever it purely suits our interests. We provide aid when there are people in trouble. That's what America and Great Britain do. | | _strat_ wrote: | | Well, even if all this moronic patriotism about "the blood of our nation" was true, it would still hardly be a compensation for the legacy of centuires of colonialism and modern day neo-colonialism. And it would definatly not be a good enough excuse for the corporate exploitation of the workforce in east Asia.
As for "whenever you are in need"... I do not know who this "you" refers to, but the fact is that the majority of the conflicts that are going on around the world never appear on our (and I suppose your) news and newspapers. If it really was about solidarity with the third world, then I guess Africa would be full of NATO troops. It isnt, tho. Western powers only interfere when their interests are in question, that is the fact of the matter. | | BLOOD SUCKER Esquire wrote: | | Very good answer. The 3rd world thinks that we here in the UK and you in America contribute little to the world's suffering. That's we don't give you enough from our own pockets. That we don't share the spoils of our labour. That we don't contribute enough to assist you in your wars. That our Imperialism has done little good in the plight of the poor. For heaven's sake.....we give you the most precious posession and gift we have. Our blood. The blood of our nation whenever you're in need. And then you have the odacity to condemn us? Shame us into guilt? Belittle and betray us? What more do you want from us? Thank you. a. Hammerstein | | TIMBONI wrote: | | Or better said, hated by those that find out that freedom comes with a price tag. We paid for it with the lives of our own. If you can't get it done yourself, then you owe the people that gave their lives for your freedom. I'll say it again because it bears repeating . . . . NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! | | spapad wrote: | | While that is true, we can not cut ourselves off. We are like the comic book hero. Feared by many, hated only by those who know we are comming for them. (Quoting Message by TIMBONI from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:54:02 PM)
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Hurrah ! Another one of my pet peeves. The world seems to want to spite us, but when the "pit bull" is needed they don't hesitate to call or even blame us for not forseeing the need even if the call never came ! Protect the world, feed the world, but leave the world alone. NOBODY RIDES FOR FREE ! If the world wants to be left alone, leave the U.S. out of it and stop asking us to give "life and limb" for you and then spit on us and tell us to get out.
|
|
spapad wrote: |
|
A very interesting point of view from a place I have never been. You see, americans are dreadfuly aware that we live in a free country and we boast of it all the time, and go to other countries and generally make asses out of ourselves.
I have been abroad, like many of my friends on this site, and it is sad to find out that our aspect of us as Americans is seen so diffterent around the world becuase of our foreign policy mostly. We Americans don't know our foreign policy, we just live and watch news, that is slanted to our view.
We are also though, not to my happiness, the world's Pit Bull. ...........Something going on no one wants to get their hands dirty with but wants the job done, well, Hell Yeah~! Call the U.S. of A.!
With that said!
Yes we are blissfully ignorant about some things!
Yes we are obnoxious!
Yes we are proud even where others think we should not be!
BUT We as a collective, are a great country just like yours and any other country. I BIG PLACE built by idividuals who stand as a whole.
Love to all! (Quoting Message by _strat_ from Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:33:49 PM)
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Communism as a political ideology actualy supports full democratic decision making in regards to how busineses should be run. It is in the Manifesto, and has been advocated (although admitedly not actualy carried out as it should have been) by all socialist regimes so far.
And that was not a joke. I do not know the details for other parts of Yugoslavia (although it is a fact that the elections took place in all republics and both autonomous provinces), but in Slovenia the elections were held on the 11th November 1945. The parties were those that were on the winning side in WW2, and included the Communist Party, the Social Democrats and the Christian Socialists. Although I do not remeber the exact percentage of the vote, the Communist party won with well over 50% (come to think of it, it was higher even than that). Also, they were the first elections in our history where women were allowed to vote.
Do not think for a minute that just because you live in a so called "free country", that there is no propaganda. Infact the anti-communist propaganda in the USA is something that even Goebbels would have been proud of.
Moving on... As far as Im concerned, any minute spent on designing, manufacturing and above all using weapons is a minute wasted. Shame that the people who do it always think that they should use it as well, making us all inseczre and threatened.
And unions... Was it their idea? Did they come up with it? Not bloody likely. What I find much more likely is that the CEOs and managers didnt want to give up what would have been a small part of their spoils, and instead moved the factories to China.
And as I said, creativity can be good or bad, depending on how we use it, so I agree on the atomic energy bit.
Accordingly can be difficult to decide, I know. I like to compare it to freedom. You only get as much as you can without interfering in somebody elses. I guess this should apply to dealing the profit as well? That is something that should be thought on. Though right now not by me, because I will be going to bed shortly. So, if I am MIA, that means good night, and see you tomorrow.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
" Blue collar " is a term used to describe the working class. The "get your hands dirty" portion of the workforce.
Elections ? That's funny ! You always have that sense of humor. I think that aside from knowing our history, we need a little more realism and honesty. Communism has NEVER supported open and honest elections.
"Lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requirement for the musician to make good music" ONE HUNDRED PERCENT AGREED.
Kalashnikov's design of the AK-47 was extremely creative. A "blue collar" weapon and deserving of all the credit he has received. It's influence being positive or negative is perspective.
This is where we disagree the most. Creativity is EVERYTHING. It is ideas . . . invention . . . something from nothing ! Atomic energy was an amazing discovery that has changed the world, both for better and worse. It creates power for lighting, heat, etc. It also has the power to take lives. The idea has no contribution until the user decides how to use it.
Now to "how it is used": outsourcing. We have come full circle. UNIONS ! Unions created outsourcing. They created an atmosphere where there is no loyalty ( yes, I already know the return fire but if we are at unions we are beyond the point prior to their creation ) The pendulum swung the other direction and the employees ( unions ) became the ogre in the workplace "creating" the necessity to find a cheaper workforce in order to supply the same product at an affordable price. It's a vicious circle. The worker wants more to afford wants, the company charges more for the goods to pay the employee, the prices of goods go up and worker want more to afford them, etc . . .
Lastly, I would like to know what you consider accordingly and who decides that ? Here, the market decides. If one is willing to pay for it, it is "accordingly". If the market considers it out of line, purchases cease and the product either dies or the price is adjusted to suit the willingness of the consumer to buy.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
First of all, could you please explain "blue collar"? First time I hear of that term.
Well, the communist party had a very wide public support, that was expressed in very well documented and trasparent elections right after WW2, and with the popluar support during the war itself. But I think its better that we leave this subject behind. Im sure that we each know the history of our nations.
As for Priest, I dont exactly know how they actualy do business. I know how business is done in my area of expertise, and Im coming out of that position. Tho I will say that lavishly rewarding the musician is not a requierment for the musician to make good music.
Ok, creativity... First of all we need to make clear what creativity are we talking about. Mikhail Kalashnikov was very creative and inovative when he designed the AK-47, but that doesnt necesarily mean that his invention was a positive contribution to the humanity. Infact, it was quite the opposite, as is with practicly every weapon that was, is, or will be designed. What Im basicly trying to say is that creativity is not an inherently good thing. It entirely depends on how it is used and for what. A business example: outsourcing. I guess that when ot first came along it was creative. Move the work to somewhere where its cheaper, save money, higher profits, the CEO bags more money in rewards. Workers in developed countries lost their jobs, while workers in 3rd world countries got jobs... That are more similar to slavery than employment.
Sure creativity can be used for "good", or so to speak, but we must be carefull about what is good, for whom and why is it good. And reward it accordingly, instead of lavishly.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I have to say that this is incredibly interesting to see how the same subject is viewed from different perspectives. I understand your point about the work environment being created by and serving the community without the need for an individuals desires for greatness. It's a very "blue collar" view as we would call it.
I'm not exactly so sure that the entrance and exit of communism was as voluntary as you would like to believe and there are ALWAYS foreign governments influencing EVERYTHING. No matter what country you are in. Even here.
As for the Priest, I give them far more credit than you. I'm no expert, but I've played "the game" at the elementary level. At this point in their career, the record company had better be the ones serving them or they have done something drastically wrong. Look at Rob. He has made bold moves to gain as much control of his "product" as possible. Look at how he distributes his music, mostly via download eliminating the "middle man".
The one thing I think you are not allowing to enter the equation is creativity. This is one of the primary aspects of a capitalist economy and that is why it can be so richly rewarded.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Well, I still think that it is very much correct. The enviroment is created by all the people that work for it. A company would not be able to hire new employees, if it wasnt for the old employees making enough profit to make it possible. Now, I know that it had to start somewhere, with some guy who just started a business and employed an assistant, or something similar, but the further we go from there, the more alienated the leadership will become with the rest of the employees. My work enviroment was not created by the CEO of my company. It was created by the people that worked in a particular section of the company that decided that they need another employee to get the work done. And with my work I am repaying for it.
Now, you totaly missed the next point. We went under "communist control" as you put it, volountarily, just as we left it volountarily, in both cases with certain sacrifices and a strong popular support, without the intervention of "foreign governments". But that is beside the point, really. What I was trying to illustrate is that there are alternatives to capitalist mode of production, and we had one of it, that was working well. Most of the companies that still form the bulk of our economy today were not created in private hands. They were created in a socialist, state-planned economy. They were created not because of "one mans dream of greatness" or anything like that. They were established when and where there was need for them, and they were developed and expanded accordingly. And more importantly, they were not created by one man that would make great risks or sacrifices. They were made collectively, and served the entire society, instead of one mans pocket. Im also absolutely sure that we are not the only such example. They can be found all over the former eastern bloc, even in the "evil empire", the former USSR. Now, say what you want about communism and red scare, and stuff like that, but that aproach to economy is better than just letting the busineses to do what they want, and then throw billions at them when they are in trouble.
If anything, Judas Priest serve a corporation that is their record company, and it is exactly because of the greed of the record companies that we have to pay such ridiculously high prices for the music.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
Unfortunately, it would be the fifth time you have incorrectly pointed out that. It is NOT the poor that have created the environment in which they work. It is the "rich" or at least someone who is able to "risk" that has done that. You claim is was not the CEO that took the risk. In some instances you are correct, in others you are not. How big of a company are we speaking ? In most of the environments that you and I might earn a living, the CEO is the one that took the risk. We don't all work for IBM, GM or other such initialed companies.
There are always risks. It's just a matter of who took them. In your case, your country took them. Along with the backing of all the countries that did not want your country to come under communist control. Do not for one minute think that there was no risk. It was just not by an individual, it was by multiple governments. I agree that there are many alternatives to capitalism, but let's be clear when we speak.
By the way, I would check carefully. Although I have not checked myself, I would almost be willing to bet that Judas Priest is a corporation. I agree that, to make a point, I stretched the subject but at this point Judas Priest is not just artistic. They took a chance ( risk ) and are reaping the rewards. They had an idea and are reaping the rewards. They employ a workforce and do not necessarily share their income equally with that workforce even though they would be back in the clubs without them.
Think ! It might not be what you want to hear, but it's a perfect comparison !
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Youre not reading well, in that case. "For no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have"? I say that the poor create what the rich have. I think this has to be about the fifth time I made that point in the course of this discussion.
How does the employer judge what we earn? If anything the employer judges what we will get. There is a massive difference between the two. We can, as you say, accept it or not. But the fact is that we need jobs. And if every employer is only willing to give us so much... What power of choice do we actualy have? Only the power to pick the lesser of many evils. Thank the unions for their historic role, since its because of them and because of the two centuries worth of class struggles that there are at least some minimums that an employer has to fulfill! They cannot give us less than the minimal wage, cannot force us to work longer than the maximum work hours, and cannot fire us for looking at them the wrong way. But outside of that, its still the game of supply and demand... But with people instead of products.
Risk... Ok, someone took the risk. It can be done without it, but lets forget about that for a line or two. Was it the CEO of a big and well established corporation that took the risk to create it? No. Was it the great grandson that inherited the business? No. Sure, some people had to take risks, but then again, how do you value that risk in terms of money? Not to mention that we can do it without risks. We established our entire post-WW2 economy within the framweork of state planning. No one took big loans, no one risked his/her home, yet we developed big and succesfull companies, that are still alive and well! There are plenty alternatives to the capitalist economy, and the capitalist way of doing business.
Judas Priest are not a corporation. They are a band, and their greatness comes from skill and musicianship. You took my statement well out of context here, since I think you know perfectly well what sort of "greatness" I was refering to, since we were tlaking about economy and big corporations.
|
|
TIMBONI wrote: |
|
I really cannot believe what I am reading. If I understand you correctly, you want Robin Hood. Take from the rich and give to the poor for no other reason than that the poor want what the rich have. You state that the working class " should be getting what they earn". Who judges what they earn. I'll tell you who. The employer that hired them at a certain wage for a certain job. The employee either accepts this or not. The power is actually with the worker at this point. If the worker takes the job, DON'T COMPLAIN !
You also state that "upper clases that get rediculously more than they earn". It's not entirely about "earning". It's also about risk. I believe HB has already gone into this, but to cut to the chase it's gambling. Someone risked their money, home, savings, future, etc on an idea and they deserve the lion share of the return for that. Their willingness to risk themselves for this return created the jobs for the workers. If people did not risk, the jobs would not exist.
Now let's get to "stiffling greatness . . . why the fuck not ? ". Let's make it obvious. We are all on a Judas Priest site chatting. This site would not exist because the band would not exist. They would never, AND I DO MEAN NEVER, have gone through what they did if they were required to share it all with those that did not experience those sacrifices with them. Without the possibility of great reward, there will never be any great sacrifice. Thus we all become mediocre and plain and the world SUCKS for all of us.
|
|
_strat_ wrote: |
|
Ok, leave if you want, but I will still answer this, and maybe someone else will pick up the flag...
THAT is terribly falacious. The whole point that I was making about the subject of capitalism is that we (or you or me, whichever way you put it), should be getting what we earn. Not to share it with the upper classes that get ridicilously more than they earn, since more often than not they earn nothing at all. What "greater good"? What "plight of the struggling labourer"? Sure, both these things could be used to describe socialism, as something which aims to achieve the "greater good" of all by fighting the "plight of the struggling labourer", but its really down to we getting what we earn. The difference between the two of us here would be that you think that capitalism can give that opportunity, while I do not, and I think I listed plenty of reasons for that. "Spreading the wealth" is imo a part of this, for reasons that I have already presented as well.
"Stiffling greatness"... Why the fuck not? If the great cannot be great without the help of mediocre ( as is the case)... Should they be great at all? And of course, how do you generaly define "better"? Is someone that is prepared to take risks that endanger him/herself and tons of other people really great... Or just plain irresponsible and dumb? And, when does one accomplish greatness? Is it when one has a huge corporation? What is so great about that?
|
|
Deep Freeze wrote: |
|
Well, I believe I will jump out of this now. Does not seem to be getting anywhere and I think BS hit it right on the head. You see, I do not care about the "greater good", either! I care about me. I went to school for me. I spent twenty years in business for me. I sacrificed for me. The thing about all this talk on socialism is that it stifles greatness. Spreading the wealth is a fine sentiment but it give no incentive to the great to be great. I could not care less about the "plight of the struggling laborer". We all have our lot in life.
Now, I realize that last comment opens me up for a bunch of nastiness but I suppose I will accept that. The truly great men (and women) in the world are better. They strive to be more. To accomplish more. They strive for greatness. Some people do not have these lofty aspirations. They are content to be mediocre. Worse, there are those that would have the few be great and the mediocre be allowed to reap the benefits. No thank you. I do not care for what one person believes is "right". That makes NO difference to me. Fairness can go that way as well. If I am better, and I produce more and I accomplish greatness, I do not see why I should share that with a slug. I want more. I earned every bit. I stood above the others. I took the risk. That is how it is. If a company recognizes that and rewards me, that is just as it should be.
I do not advocate "firing" someone because I find a guy that can do his job "10 minutes faster". I advocate hiring that faster guy, too! Now I have TWO guys working and , with any luck, the slower one will find motivation in competition. If not, he can stay in his position so long as he DOES HIS JOB!! The faster guy may get promoted, who knows? I suppose it depends on how valuble time is to my company! As long as you are doing what you are paid to do, you should feel relatively safe. In difficult times, the faster guy might be more valuble? This is business not a contest to save people's feelings. Don't like that? OPEN YOUR OWN BUSINESS and do it YOUR way.
Edited at: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:32:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:50:03 PM |
|
Edited at: Saturday, December 27, 2008 8:15:31 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|