|
Post by oblivionn on Oct 28, 2007 11:31:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by oblivionn on Oct 28, 2007 19:27:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ordoabchao on Dec 11, 2007 13:45:47 GMT -5
i like guerrillanews.com lots of good music videos and multimedia stuff to watch.
Big Brother Loves You!!!!
|
|
capitalistpig
Settler
Those trying to save you from 1984 are leading you into a brave new world.
Posts: 51
|
Post by capitalistpig on Dec 15, 2007 23:54:33 GMT -5
The left will never figure out that the problems they are always trying to solve, are the problems that they are creating with their interference. For example, one of the biggest reasons that there is widespread hunger in Africa is because everybody in the world is doing their best to help. Millions of tons of food are shipped every year into places with some of the most fertile farmland on earth. Why should a Sudanese farmer plant his crop and work all year taking care of it, and then go through the expense of harvesting it, when he wont be able to sell any of it, because the UN trucks are giving it away down the street. The free market can only solve problems when the government gets out of the way.
|
|
|
Post by thegreatsatan on Dec 16, 2007 0:14:27 GMT -5
The left will never figure out that the problems they are always trying to solve, are the problems that they are creating with their interference. For example, one of the biggest reasons that there is widespread hunger in Africa is because everybody in the world is doing their best to help. Millions of tons of food are shipped every year into places with some of the most fertile farmland on earth. Why should a Sudanese farmer plant his crop and work all year taking care of it, and then go through the expense of harvesting it, when he wont be able to sell any of it, because the UN trucks are giving it away down the street. The free market can only solve problems when the government gets out of the way. I think the islams killing infedels has something to do with the suddan sucking.
|
|
|
Post by DrShot on Dec 16, 2007 5:19:41 GMT -5
The left will never figure out that the problems they are always trying to solve, are the problems that they are creating with their interference. For example, one of the biggest reasons that there is widespread hunger in Africa is because everybody in the world is doing their best to help. Millions of tons of food are shipped every year into places with some of the most fertile farmland on earth. Why should a Sudanese farmer plant his crop and work all year taking care of it, and then go through the expense of harvesting it, when he wont be able to sell any of it, because the UN trucks are giving it away down the street. The free market can only solve problems when the government gets out of the way. That was worth repeating. By and large that is correct. Crappy, poor governments locked in war/civil war play largely into this picture also. Yes, indeed there are parts of Africa that are agreed to be of the most fertile on the planet. So terrible to not use them. Sidenote. I seen recently where a few Afgani farmers have switched from poppy crops( over 90% of the world heroin supply comes from afgani poppies)to safron. Safron is the worlds most expensive spice. Safron will not get you jailled or killed for growing either. 'Opium prices in markets in Badakhsan province, not far from the border with Tajikistan, were quoted at $240 per kilogram in May -- fat earnings in a country where the annual per capita income is just $800. Prices elsewhere in Afghanistan can go as high as $605 per kilogram, according to the UNDCP. Here, a farmer sells 10 kilo bags of opium in Kandahar in southern Afghanistan, where prices range from $275 to $500 a kilogram. ' -PBS (group) hard to resist
|
|
|
Post by DrShot on Dec 16, 2007 17:32:36 GMT -5
The left will never figure out that the problems they are always trying to solve, are the problems that they are creating with their interference. For example, one of the biggest reasons that there is widespread hunger in Africa is because everybody in the world is doing their best to help. Millions of tons of food are shipped every year into places with some of the most fertile farmland on earth. Why should a Sudanese farmer plant his crop and work all year taking care of it, and then go through the expense of harvesting it, when he wont be able to sell any of it, because the UN trucks are giving it away down the street. The free market can only solve problems when the government gets out of the way. That was worth repeating. By and large that is correct. Crappy, poor governments locked in war/civil war play largely into this picture also. Yes, indeed there are parts of Africa that are agreed to be of the most fertile on the planet. So terrible to not use them. Sidenote. I seen recently where a few Afgani farmers have switched from poppy crops( over 90% of the world heroin supply comes from afgani poppies)to safron. Safron is the worlds most expensive spice. Safron will not get you jailled or killed for growing either. 'Opium prices in markets in Badakhsan province, not far from the border with Tajikistan, were quoted at $240 per kilogram in May -- fat earnings in a country where the annual per capita income is just $800. Prices elsewhere in Afghanistan can go as high as $605 per kilogram, according to the UNDCP. Here, a farmer sells 10 kilo bags of opium in Kandahar in southern Afghanistan, where prices range from $275 to $500 a kilogram. ' -PBS (group) hard to resist I was scrolling through last few posts and this occurred to me... As much as everyone hates America, for as much as everyone pans the US economy and the US dollar... Very interesting indeed that the currency of choice (world wide I imagine) is the good ole green back (US dollars). Also I think it is funny how there is one used 'twenty' on the stack of pristine $100 bills Sure, even that old twenty is a lot where the average fannual income is sub $1k
|
|
|
Post by TheBadSeed on Dec 16, 2007 20:53:16 GMT -5
The left will never figure out that the problems they are always trying to solve, are the problems that they are creating with their interference. For example, one of the biggest reasons that there is widespread hunger in Africa is because everybody in the world is doing their best to help. Millions of tons of food are shipped every year into places with some of the most fertile farmland on earth. Why should a Sudanese farmer plant his crop and work all year taking care of it, and then go through the expense of harvesting it, when he wont be able to sell any of it, because the UN trucks are giving it away down the street. The free market can only solve problems when the government gets out of the way. Well, capitalist, I think you badly miss the mark by saying that hunger is the result of people "helping". The fact is, so much of Africa has been locked in constant warfare for most of the 20th and 21st centuies. Civil wars, religious wars, genocidal wars, all of which are for the most part ignored by western culture. We ignore them because there is no economic benefit to us to get involved in them. They dont fight nicely in Africa either. When a village is attacked, if they dont outright kill or enslave the residents, they slash and burn crops that are growings, and steal the crops that are harvested. Its hard to establish crops when every other year your crops get burned by someone who doesnt want you to live. Its hard to get crops to market when it gets stolen by armed militants. In fact, the simple act of having crops growing can be an invitation for the warring factions to attack and pillage you. They want the food that is grown, and they have the guns to take it. They dont attack armed UN convoys distributing food. They dont want the rest of the world involved in their wars, which is exactly what would happen if UN convoys started being attacked the way local farmers in Africa are. The UN isnt sending food aid to African countries as a welfare service, they are sending it as a humanitarian service because its easier for them to try and keep the people fed than to try and get an international coalition together to actually stop whats happening there, and there is no economic benefit to do so. Government control is non-existent in many places in Africa. There are militias and leaders trying to gain power, and some hold it for a short time before the next militia comes along and takes over. Imagine the United States with complete governmental collapse, then, imagine that all corporate entities picked up and left America, because of lawlessness. Thats essentially whats happened over most of Africa. Most of the multinational corporations that once existed in Africa have joined the governments in collapsing, or leaving. The farmers of Africa are working small, family farms, where its just them to protect it, they dont have the backing of large corporate entities or government to organize defense. Your assumption that people in Africa are hungry because they're lazy misses completely the real picture of what's happening in Africa. You see only things in terms of cost and benefit, for many of these people, the cost of creating the means to sustain life may be their lives.
|
|
capitalistpig
Settler
Those trying to save you from 1984 are leading you into a brave new world.
Posts: 51
|
Post by capitalistpig on Dec 17, 2007 2:17:24 GMT -5
CP said: For example, one of the biggest reasons that there is widespread hunger in Africa is because everybody in the world is doing their best to help.
TBS said: Well, capitalist, I think you badly miss the mark by saying that hunger is the result of people "helping". The fact is, so much of Africa has been locked in constant warfare for most of the 20th and 21st centuies. Civil wars, religious wars, genocidal wars, all of which are for the most part ignored by western culture. We ignore them because there is no economic benefit to us to get involved in them.
Did I say that the only thing causing hunger in Africa is the generosity of the western world? I am fairly sure that is not what I said, despite your response implying that my position was just that. I believe that if you reread my post you will clearly see the words "ONE OF" therein. These two words imply that I am well aware of the fact that there is more than one root cause of starvation in Africa. I was making the point that in many cases our generosity only makes the situation worse, regardless of our intentions.
I'd also like to note that I never said African farmers were lazy, merely that they do not labor for nothing.
One last point. You attempted to defame the United States by implying that unless there is some kind of monetary gain in it for us, that we dont help people. This is of course ridiculous, and you should be ashamed for attempting to pass off such an obviously false statement as fact. I suppose bashing their country comes naturally to liberals, but seriously, you must control your base instincts if you are to be taken seriously in a debate. The United States gives more charity throughout the world than any three other nations you can name combined. We have fought many times in defense of freedom when there was no economic gain. (eg. Cuba, Korea, Vietnam) Even if what you have said about America is true, than your statement is still wrong, because Africa's natural resources are vast by any standard, and well worth fighting over, if that was the sort of thing that America did, which we clearly do not.
|
|
|
Post by TheBadSeed on Dec 17, 2007 6:03:18 GMT -5
capitalispig said:
Wow, so defensive..
capitalistpig said:
You're correct, you did say it was "one of" the biggest reasons there is widespread hunger, thereby implying that the nations coming together to offer aid are somehow at fault for the situation the African countries are in. I never tried to refute the fact that you may have considered that there are other reasons, just pointed out the fact that this is a response, not a cause. Our countries offering aid without getting involved in a war that doesnt suit certainly doesnt make us wrong, or at fault for their issues.
Please let me know where I attempted to defame the US? Is this your silly mantra? Try to find some way to paint someone as unpatriotic anywhere you go? Thats just stupid. You said "The United States gives more charity throughout the world than and three other nations combined" I certainly dont argue that figure, and Im proud of it. You also said that the same charity you're talking about contributes to starvation in the world.
Please clarify yourself.
I believe that humanitarian assistance to war-torn, starving countries is the necessary responsibility of a super-power. Even if we dont get involved politically, as its not always in the best interest in the long run. We should always be present to assist those affected inadvertantly. We would hope, at some point, a strong personality emerges, as one always does, to unite warring factions and establish peace. This is not for an outsider to do, and I would never say it was. Though, there is definitely more incentive for the US or others in the western world to get involved if there were abundant resources there that were in demand, say like OIL.
This is not a slap, its a reality. Do you think we'd have been involved in Korea, Vietnam, or Cuba if there were not an economic or protective interest in those battles? We didnt win any of those that you listed, but we got what we wanted. We got an economic powerhouse in s.e. asia with south korea and south vietnam, until China learned the system and took over in the 90's, we actually imported more from Korea than we did from China.
In Cuba, we isolated them, and prevented nukes from being deployed there. We obviously didnt really care that much about a communist system being that close, since we never really pursued much military action in Cuba. We have tolerated communist rule within 90 miles of our border for nearly 50 years now, because we never really viewed them as a threat. In return, they have (in general) treated their citizens well, and avoided pissing us off. However, if Cuba were the world's largest producer of a resource we need, (OIL) and they refused to deal with us for it, I have no doubt we would have made Cuba a province a long time ago. Fortunately for Fidel Castro, their main market is tourism and cigars, not much that we can't find elsewhere.
You seem to just love boxing people and labelling them, but that's just bs. Nations and people always act essentially in their best interest, that is not wrong. Its also not wrong to make them be honest about it. You cant take both sides by saying our assistance to them is both necessary and detrimental. Its humaitarian assistance, not a political benchark.
|
|
capitalistpig
Settler
Those trying to save you from 1984 are leading you into a brave new world.
Posts: 51
|
Post by capitalistpig on Dec 17, 2007 14:24:48 GMT -5
TBS said: You're correct, you did say it was "one of" the biggest reasons there is widespread hunger, thereby implying that the nations coming together to offer aid are somehow at fault for the situation the African countries are in. I never tried to refute the fact that you may have considered that there are other reasons, just pointed out the fact that this is a response, not a cause. Our countries offering aid without getting involved in a war that doesnt suit certainly doesnt make us wrong, or at fault for their issues.
It seems that I can answer you by repeating myself. Perhapse if you were more adept at reading comprehension, this would not be necessary. "I was making the point that in many cases our generosity only makes the situation worse, regardless of our intentions."
TBS said: Please let me know where I attempted to defame the US? Is this your silly mantra? Try to find some way to paint someone as unpatriotic anywhere you go? Thats just stupid. You said "The United States gives more charity throughout the world than and three other nations combined" I certainly dont argue that figure, and Im proud of it. You also said that the same charity you're talking about contributes to starvation in the world.
You defamed "the western world" and that most definately includes the United States.
TBS said: I believe that humanitarian assistance to war-torn, starving countries is the necessary responsibility of a super-power. Even if we dont get involved politically, as its not always in the best interest in the long run. We should always be present to assist those affected inadvertantly. We would hope, at some point, a strong personality emerges, as one always does, to unite warring factions and establish peace. This is not for an outsider to do, and I would never say it was. Though, there is definitely more incentive for the US or others in the western world to get involved if there were abundant resources there that were in demand, say like OIL.
I am not totally in disagreement here. I do believe that we should help when we can, but we need to find a way to do this that does not further damage an already devastated local economy. You are right that we are likely to get "physically" involved in a conflict if there is a specific American interest at stake (there is nothing wrong with this btw), however this has not prevented us from getting involved in many fights just because it was the right thing to do.
TBS said: This is not a slap, its a reality. Do you think we'd have been involved in Korea, Vietnam, or Cuba if there were not an economic or protective interest in those battles? We didnt win any of those that you listed, but we got what we wanted. We got an economic powerhouse in s.e. asia with south korea and south vietnam, until China learned the system and took over in the 90's, we actually imported more from Korea than we did from China. In Cuba, we isolated them, and prevented nukes from being deployed there. We obviously didnt really care that much about a communist system being that close, since we never really pursued much military action in Cuba. We have tolerated communist rule within 90 miles of our border for nearly 50 years now, because we never really viewed them as a threat. In return, they have (in general) treated their citizens well, and avoided pissing us off. However, if Cuba were the world's largest producer of a resource we need, (OIL) and they refused to deal with us for it, I have no doubt we would have made Cuba a province a long time ago. Fortunately for Fidel Castro, their main market is tourism and cigars, not much that we can't find elsewhere.
There was no economic interest for us in Korea. The fact that South Korea later developed into an economic powerhouse is unrelated. South Korea's economic strength is not a result of some strategic resource that America needs, but rather a result of capitalism. There was also no benifit for us in Vietnam beyond the defense of freedom. When I mentioned Cuba, I was referring to the Spanish American war. We became involved because we "identified" with the Cubans and Phillipinos who rebelled against imperial Spain.
TBS said: You seem to just love boxing people and labelling them, but that's just bs. Nations and people always act essentially in their best interest, that is not wrong. Its also not wrong to make them be honest about it. You cant take both sides by saying our assistance to them is both necessary and detrimental. Its humaitarian assistance, not a political benchark.
Democratic nations often act in their own interest, and yet just as often act purely out of humanitarian concerns. Communist nations and dictatorships without fail act purely out of self interest. I am not attempting to "take both sides", I stand by my statement that we generally do more harm than good when we start giving handouts in war torn areas. I think that if we decide to help, we should help by stamping out the people who are causing the problem, and allow the people to pull themselves up out of the hole they are in. I'm not against handing out food once the bad guys have been dealt with, but if you hand out food and do not kill the bad guys, than you are allowing it all to continue indefinitely. Nations just like people cannot be built up on handouts, they must be self made, or they will fall right back into the pit you just pulled them out of.
|
|
|
Post by thegreatsatan on Dec 18, 2007 12:04:30 GMT -5
give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. teach a man to fish, and he'll never go hungry again.
cap, i thought u said jesus was a dirty hippie. If he was, he woulda said...
give a man a fish, a wagon, a house, healthcare, welfare, and whatever else he demands, and he'll vote for u every election.
|
|
|
Post by zzZhenon on Dec 19, 2007 13:26:24 GMT -5
The free sh.it we give other countries is called "goodwill." It's the same strategy corporations use to improve their image to the country/world. It only helps in the immediate future; it's not a long term solution. It might only be slightly more effective than prayers.
|
|
capitalistpig
Settler
Those trying to save you from 1984 are leading you into a brave new world.
Posts: 51
|
Post by capitalistpig on Dec 20, 2007 1:22:32 GMT -5
All the libs are surprising me today and talking like nasty evil neocons. I wonder if their association with the likes of myself, DrShot, Whiplash.......... and TGS.... sorta.... is causing an IQ surge among the loopy left around here.
|
|
|
Post by thegreatsatan on Dec 20, 2007 1:52:29 GMT -5
All the libs are surprising me today and talking like nasty evil neocons. I wonder if their association with the likes of myself, DrShot, Whiplash.......... and TGS.... sorta.... is causing an IQ surge among the loopy left around here. ya, don't lump me in the IQ thing
|
|