^fo real

12/26/2006 8:01:06 PM

Quote :

"Depends on the job. Do they deserve jobs where they have to live in cardboard shacks and earn 10 cents a day? I doubt it. Or do they deserve jobs with a decent wage? I can tell you which one unregulated capitalism has gotten them."

Are you suggesting then, that mexicans are worse off now than they were years ago? That is, has the overal standard of living gone down in mexico? Sure, working a crap factory job for shit wages sucks, but at the end of it all, if it was worse than self sustained living where a freak weather pattern could literally starve you to death, do you really think they would take the job?

Quote :

"I'm sitting in Kannapolis at the moment, about 2 miles from where Cannon Mills/Pillowtex used to stand. I can personally give you the addresses of 2 families that had their SAVINGS, their motherfucking savings wiped out paying for insurance over the past couple of years. It isn't just the mills closing that fucked them, it's the insurance companies...you know, some of the ultimate capitalist...that fucked them too. "

Why did they keep paying for insurance? Seriously, you said they were paying ~4k a month in insurance. Are you seriously saying that their medical bills were so much more than $4k/month + copay/deductable that the insurance was worth while? If paying their insurance costs was draining their savings, they would have been better off not having insurance and trying to pay out of pocket. Sure an accident could bankrupt them, but according to you, they're already in the red. At least they could have saved the $4k/month.

Quote :

"You folks haven't done too much to convince me that we as people aren't inherently evil and looking out for our own interests first and foremost. "

I'm not trying to convince you that people won't look out for their own self interests. That's a natural state of being. I'm trying to convince you it isn't evil.

Quote :

"You know what's really funny in a sick way; the two most popularized (notorious) countries when it comes to pics of starving people, are Ethiopia and Somalia!!! And now they are fighting a war with weapons that could have been food, amenities, education, etc. "

As we have continued to learn. All the aid in the world is useless when it goes to the wrong people. There was an interesting article on this very fact a few weeks ago in regards to all the aid money sent to the tsunami victims that's going no where because it's in the hands of the wrong people (i.e. Red Cross as opposed to an egineering and contruction firm that can build new housing)

Quote :

"what did people ever do before capitalism. "

Spent all day fighting just to live from day to day.

Quote :

"I mean, Chinese folks in sweat shops will probably agree with you though, that capitalism is working wonders for them!!! "

Given the number of them that move specifically so that they can work at a factory, I would say it does. Remember that poverty is relative.

Quote :

"This thread teaches an important lesson about how nobody gives even the tiniest shred of a shit about Africa. We can't even get a whole page in the goddamn Soap Box to be dedicated to them."

Education. No one knows about it, so no one gives a shit. We care about midle eastern politics because for better or worse it's drilled into us by both religion and the school systems, same with our concern for european politics. By contrast, no one focuses on african politics.

12/26/2006 8:12:57 PM

Quote :

"Whether capitalism will produce the most good will be debated forever"

Sure, all things must be debated forever, such as whether we exist or if the Earth really is not flat.

Quote :

"but it is a bit telling to me that you proclaim if folks are angels it doesn't matter what system they use. It's like proving a point by arguing from the contradiction almost."

I was merely paraphrasing the federalist papers, some of the founding documents of our society. Men are not angels, therefore we must have our greed directed to produce good works, such as is done by capitalism.

So it seems I do not know what you are arguing. If all you are arguing is that any capitalist system will be ruled by evil men then I accept it as a given. None of us are angels, especially not me, so any system involving humans will be run by evil men. The only question is: do the elites spend their time squeezing the price of a paperclip to half a penny as in America or do they spend their time extorting, stealing from, and murdering others as in Ethiopia. Both activities will make them rich, but only the former will make everyone else better off at the same time (cheaper paperclips).

12/26/2006 8:59:09 PM

Quote :

"What the fuck do you want to talk about?"

The US claims that the Islamic militia is an al Qaeda ally. We're tacitly siding with the Ethiopians and we have a history with Somalia. Believe it or not, oil is not the only reason we get involved in the rest of the world.

12/26/2006 9:01:47 PM

apparently typeA is under the delusion that not only is health insurance itself a right, but CHEAP health insurance is a right.

[Edited on December 26, 2006 at 9:17 PM. Reason : *]

12/26/2006 9:17:10 PM

health care should be a right.

12/26/2006 9:49:27 PM

Well, hmm, I can understand arguing that the government should be providing you free healthcare, but making it a right? That means you will have a Right to some doctor's labor, regardless of whether he wants to provide it or not. Therefore, any doctor that wants to leave the country or drug manufacturer that wants to stop production is violating your Rights and should go to prison.

12/26/2006 9:58:36 PM

therefore, um no

12/26/2006 10:03:13 PM

Quote :

"apparently typeA is under the delusion that not only is health insurance itself a right, but CHEAP health insurance is a right."

No, not at all. I'm under the delusion that a cascading series of people wanting to make more and more money on the backs of the working man is the cause for such things as 4k month health insurance.

12/26/2006 10:35:07 PM

And if some company started offering insurance to that family for 3K a month, what would you call them? "A cascading series of people wanting to lift the load from backs of working man at the expense of their own fortunes"?

Hell no, these insurance providers are no better than the last providers, they just expect to make "more and more money" by lifting the load from people's backs. There are no angels here, if you are going to blame greed for high prices then you equally need to blame greed for low prices.

Now, in the case of health insurance you can also blame Government mis-management and perverse institutions, again falling victim to evil people, the only difference is that no one benefits from greedy bureaucrats.

Like someone said before, are the family's medical bills really over $48k a year? If so, then they are really taking advantage of the insurance company. If not, then they are idiots and should cancel their coverage and start paying out of pocket.

12/26/2006 10:49:50 PM

Quote :

"Are you suggesting then, that mexicans are worse off now than they were years ago?"

They're not much better off. 1994-2004, Mexico's real GDP per capita grew a whopping 11.43%. And the net growth from 1981-2004 is even worse.

And many African countries are actually poorer today than they were years ago. Liberia is a dramatic example of this.

Quote :

"Given the number of them that move specifically so that they can work at a factory, I would say it does. Remember that poverty is relative."

Something really is working wonders China. Chinese economic growth has been amazing, though it's come with significant environmental and social costs. Still, if they can keep it up, they'll be richer than us fairly soon.

12/26/2006 11:00:31 PM

they wont be able to keep it up without destroying their own country

12/26/2006 11:07:57 PM

Quote :

"Well, hmm, I can understand arguing that the government should be providing you free healthcare, but making it a right? That means you will have a Right to some doctor's labor, regardless of whether he wants to provide it or not. Therefore, any doctor that wants to leave the country or drug manufacturer that wants to stop production is violating your Rights and should go to prison."

where the hell do you come up with prison?

12/26/2006 11:22:21 PM

I don't know. Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, and South Korea have managed to sustain amazing growth. They're all fairly close to us in terms of standards of living.

Why shouldn't China be able to do the same?

12/26/2006 11:23:48 PM

According to the "Index of Economic Freedom" neither Mexico nor Africa have free economies:
Hong Kong 1.28
United States 1.84
Mexico 2.83
Ethiopia 3.70
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom

So, trying to suggest that economic liberty, or capitalism as you call it, has resulted in economic stagnation in these select regions is incorrect. In the same vein, many regions of China enjoy more economic freedom than Mexico and enjoy unparalleled economic growth.

Quote :

"Why shouldn't China be able to do the same?"

It can and probably will. Many Chinese Provinces have embraced economic liberty to a very strong degree, even more-so than some western nations, so it is just a matter of time until these special-administrative-zones reach and then exceed western living standards (at least one, Hong Kong, already has). The proviso is, of course, it will take decades to play out. The Chinese only started liberalizing very slowly in 1979; something South Korea started in the late fifties, Japan in the late 40s, and Hong Kong immediately after the war.

[Edited on December 26, 2006 at 11:48 PM. Reason : .,.]

12/26/2006 11:44:39 PM

just ignore the working conditions in china and mexico. the fact that huge portions of their country are in situations that make sharecropping look like fucking heaven doesnt matter at all.


back on topic, there was an article on this in the N&O today, that made it seem like some troops from Syria have been coming into Somalia in the past few months. So if Ethiopia invades it might take some recruits away from Iraq.

12/26/2006 11:51:02 PM

Quote :

"just ignore the working conditions in china and mexico"

If you wish, but I'd prefer to harp on them as examples to socialists of all stripes how only economic liberty produces lives worth living. All other systems have produced nothing but poverty and death; and their supporters should be publicly condemned for their crimes.

Quote :

"made it seem like some troops from Syria have been coming into Somalia in the past few months. So if Ethiopia invades it might take some recruits away from Iraq."

great, I guess. As long as America remembers the lesson of Iraq: pre-emptive wars are idiotic and nation building should be avoided like the plague.

Quote :

"where the hell do you come up with prison?"

Wait, so, we are no longer so to put people in prison for violating my Rights? 25 to life for violating my right to life, 20 for violating my right to self-determination, 1 to 4 for violating my right to property, 6 months for violating my right to free speech, and yet nothing for violating my right to healthcare?

I guess your point is to water down our rights with false-Rights in hopes to make it easier to take our real-Rights away later.

[Edited on December 27, 2006 at 12:12 AM. Reason : .,.]

12/26/2006 11:58:15 PM

Quote :

"Wait, so, we are no longer so to put people in prison for violating my Rights? 25 to life for violating my right to life, 20 for violating my right to self-determination, 1 to 4 for violating my right to property, 6 months for violating my right to free speech, and yet nothing for violating my right to healthcare? I guess your point is to water down our rights with false-Rights in hopes to make it easier to take our real-Rights away later."

your logical prowess astounds me

its either retarded or trolling, i guess i can give you the benefit

12/27/2006 12:18:11 AM

Did I go over the top Guth? I was trying to be sarcastic and show the absurdity of taking what is otherwise simple policy and applying the word "Right" to it.

Now, if everyone was saying "Right" as in you have a "Right to whatever the government promises you" such as your Right to a Social Security Check or your Right to be Drafted (if Congress says so) then I can see how my statements would appear retarded and I withdraw them. They were only intended for someone that wants to amend to constitution to include a Right to Healthcare.

12/27/2006 12:30:14 AM

Quote :

"Who declares war on Christmas day? wtf"

Well, now we have an actual war on Christmas.

12/27/2006 12:49:50 AM

Quote :

"If you wish, but I'd prefer to harp on them as examples to socialists of all stripes how only economic liberty produces lives worth living. All other systems have produced nothing but poverty and death; and their supporters should be publicly condemned for their crimes. "

So if you have "economic freedom" you live happy and if not you die a slow painful death?

If you want to blame the so called communists in China for all the death and destruction that is one thing. But to say that every system besides pure libertarianism has produced poverty and death and that as long as we let people live completely free and unburdended with the yoke of government we would all live happily ever after and war would cease you are a fucking moron.

Guess what, Capitalism creates poverty. Some people control capital, and others do not. Those that do not control capital must sell their labor for wages. Thus begins a cycle where the haves get more and more and the have nots get less and less. You can argue that every other system we have seen has lead to the same thing, and you would be correct. You could even argue that Capitalism has made it much easier for the have nots to get something. You would be wrong, but you could make the argument.

Now then, do a little research and find out why certain areas of the world still have what might as well be slavery. Its absolutely not due to the fact that capital is so restricted it cannot move easily and cannot be fully exploited.

12/27/2006 2:08:47 AM

Quote :

"Wait, so, we are no longer so to put people in prison for violating my Rights? 25 to life for violating my right to life, 20 for violating my right to self-determination, 1 to 4 for violating my right to property, 6 months for violating my right to free speech, and yet nothing for violating my right to healthcare?"

please tell me, where violating someone's right to self-determination results in a prison sentence. Also tell me where violating someone's right to free speach results in a prison sentence. Your logic has been so polluted by John Locke that you are just someone who completely ignores other rights and sets your rights solely on items such as life, and property.

12/27/2006 2:33:16 AM

Quote :

"just ignore the working conditions in china and mexico. the fact that huge portions of their country are in situations that make sharecropping look like fucking heaven doesnt matter at all."

"Just ignore the working conditions in the USA. The fact that huge portions of their country are in situations that make sharecropping look like fucking heaven doesn't matter at all."

-Moron Liberal...1849


When will people understand that shitty jobs and back-breaking labor for the masses is a progression that, if allowed through fruition, will result in a wealthy economy that has time to give a shit about workers' health and comfort?

12/27/2006 8:58:56 AM

Quote :

"please tell me, where violating someone's right to self-determination results in a prison sentence"

It is called kidnapping and it carries a minimum sentence of 20 years.

Quote :

"violating someone's right to free speach results in a prison sentence"

I know of only a few ways to violate someones right to free speech, the one that carries the least time is called assault. Geez, I didn't think this was that complicated a leap to make, I guess not everyone watched Law & Order growing up.

Quote :

"But to say that every system besides pure libertarianism has produced poverty and death"

You are right, I am trying to prove the impossible, I am sure there are systems that have not yet been tried. For example, a system based upon drugging the whole population in an effort to make them angels, including the leaders, might very well lead to good outcomes. I don't know, that has not yet been tried.

But I know of no other system for lifting the poor out of poverty other than rule of law, economic liberty, and secure property rights. It has worked everywhere it has been tried, and everywhere it has not been tried has produced poverty and death. Now, there are varying degrees of poverty and death, Cuba may be a wonderful place to live, death is reserved for political dissidents, but there is no doubting that consumer electronics are rare among the working classes.

Quote :

"Those that do not control capital must sell their labor for wages"

Thus gaining capital which they can use as they see fit.

Quote :

"Thus begins a cycle where the haves get more and more and the have nots get less and less"

This statement jives with neither history nor logic. Is it your assertion that the average capital-lacking American is poorer today than he was in 1900? In 1900 automobiles were luxury items reserved only for the rich. In 1995, just counting those classified as living in poverty, 41% own their own homes, 70% own at least one car, etc.

What you fail to realize is that capital must compete for scarce resources just like everything else, which includes labor. This is why wages tend towards productivity. In other-words, your living standard is dictated by the technology in use for production. All having large sums of capital in the bank gains you is idleness, earning a 10% return on a large fortune makes you rich without working, but it doesn't make everyone else poor.
http://www4.ncsu.edu/~gsparson/data/labor.gif

[Edited on December 27, 2006 at 9:37 AM. Reason : .,.]

12/27/2006 9:19:13 AM

You would first have to define what those specific rights mean to you before you can explain how they can be violated. Both you and Jason may have different views on what "freedom of speech" would be, for instance.

12/27/2006 10:44:47 AM

Quote :

"I'd prefer to harp on them as examples to socialists of all stripes how only economic liberty produces lives worth living."

Eh, modern socialists tend to look to Europe, not to China. (And certainly not to Africa.) That mix of capitalism and socialism seems to work well enough.

12/27/2006 12:49:09 PM

I'm going to talk about the actual issue at hand.

I'm all for Ethiopian victory in this case. The new UN-backed Somali gov. needs someone protecting them, and they're the best ones to do it.

Now if they'd just sell off a couple of those planes for sustainable food supplies, then the Lion of Judah can truly triumph.


[Edited on December 27, 2006 at 12:54 PM. Reason : oops, wrong pic from the clipboard]

12/27/2006 12:53:53 PM

What socialism is there in Europe? There are no price controls so prices are set by the market. All production is performed by private enterprise. While some countries do occasionally partially own the stock of certain firms (Airbus), this is very rare and nothing compared to the U.S. Postal Service which is wholly owned by Congress. Hell, "rule of law, economic liberty, and secure property rights" are more secure in most European countries than right here in America.

Check the index of economic freedom:
Ireland: 1.58
United Kingdom: 1.74
Denmark: 1.78
United States: 1.84
Switzerland: 1.89
Germany: 1.96
Sweden: 1.96
Mexico: 2.83

Now, the true difference is hidden by high tax rates driving up their scores. But if you factor out their tax regimes, most of Europe would score better than America. It is only in America that we find commodity price fixing (it is a criminal offense to sell milk at a lower price) and outdated regulations (to get certain types of cheese you must go to Canada) and draconian anti-trust laws (price gauging laws are all ours).

[Edited on December 27, 2006 at 1:16 PM. Reason : .,.]

12/27/2006 1:11:58 PM

Well, government spending is something like 53% of GDP in France. In general, government spending is a higher percentage of GDP in European countries. They tend to have more entitlement programs.

That's why people see it as a mix of socialism and capitalism.

12/27/2006 1:53:06 PM

American economic controls are more of the macro-economic scale than the micro-economic, whereas the converse appears to be true for many of the european countries.

I'll be honest, I'm all for whatever puts the most dollars in my wallet in the long term.

12/27/2006 2:00:48 PM

Quote :

"I'll be honest, I'm all for whatever puts the most dollars in my wallet in the long term."

The South Korean model, probably. Still growing fairly well, IIRC. It's interesting to note that both Taiwan and South Korea are a bit lower on the index of economic freedom.

12/27/2006 2:07:23 PM

^ true

the Asian Tiger economies seem to be good at life

12/27/2006 4:08:40 PM

haha, suckerz left it to clan

12/28/2006 2:54:36 AM

Quote :

"That's why people see it as a mix of socialism and capitalism."

Semantics is always a problem. The point of socialism was that the government could run the economy better than private enterprise, but in most of Europe the government controls almost none of the economy. All they have is the age-old adage the government can spend the people's money better than the people. I don't think we should call that socialism, it confuses people into believing Great Britain is no less socialist after Margaret Thatcher than it was before: the government spends an even higher percentage of GDP but has privatised everything and eliminated huge swaths of the regulatory aparatus.

12/28/2006 11:22:26 AM

Ethiopians have succeeded in restoring the transition government to power.

Islamists have run away. BUT, they say they will start a guerrilla war.

Which means more killings.

12/28/2006 2:59:50 PM

Quote :

"It is called kidnapping and it carries a minimum sentence of 20 years."

You need to check what self-determination means. Self-determination has nothing to do with kidnapping, unless of course the libertarians have coopted that term as well.

Quote :

"I know of only a few ways to violate someones right to free speech, the one that carries the least time is called assault. Geez, I didn't think this was that complicated a leap to make, I guess not everyone watched Law & Order growing up."

assaulting someone doesn't curtail their right to free speech. You just bounce around continuously until you arrive at a conclusion you think is appropriate when the data doesn't support you.


Beside, what the fuck is the index of econmic freedom, how is it contrived where the hell do you get those numbers.

[Edited on December 28, 2006 at 3:09 PM. Reason : .]

12/28/2006 3:08:32 PM

Quote :

"Beside, what the fuck is the index of econmic freedom, how is it contrived where the hell do you get those numbers."

Google would have answered this question quite easily. Or, you could have just followed the link I posted. Do you want it again?
http://www.freetheworld.com/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom

Hmm, self-determination is defined as "Determination of one's own fate or course of action" the only way to take that away is by applying compulsion of one form or another. Either you lie to them, and get arrested for fraud; put a gun to their head, which is either tried as assault or kidnapping.

So, nutty, tell me some how that you can violate one of the rights I recognize as Rights without facing some-sort of criminal punishment. thants!

12/28/2006 3:37:57 PM

What the fuck are you talking about. Self-determination is a concept that was developed in the 1850s in terms of a people or nations right to self-government.

So, as I said, unless the ayn randian libertarians have coopted the word and corrupted its meaning them you have posted nothing about violating someone's right to self-determination. Also, explain how assaulting someone violates their first amendment rights.

as for your indices of economic freedom, they completely ignore civil liberties. I'd rather have more civil liberties than have more "economic freedom"

[Edited on December 28, 2006 at 3:56 PM. Reason : .]

12/28/2006 3:54:07 PM

Are you trying to be irrelevant? We were not discussing what you cared about, we were discussing economics and last I checked civil liberties do not play a huge role.

Besides, that's why they also compile the indices of political freedom. Of course, the two only differ slightly, countries tend to rank about the same on the two lists with a few exceptions.

As for self-determination, I must appologize, I was relying upon the dictionary definition as I was unaware I needed to use the definition you made up.
http://www.answers.com/self-determination&r=67

So, is it your assertion that it is impossible for one person to violate another person's right to freedom of speech? If not, then tell me how they did it and why no one is going to arrest them for it.

12/28/2006 5:08:45 PM

yes, I made up a term that was used as justification for the Civil War. And of course I also made up the term as it is commonly used today.

If you wanted to talk about kidnapping, you could have just said liberty.

you cannot be arrested for violating someone's right to free speech. There is no penal aspect to it. There are civil ramifications for violating someone's right to free speech, but there is not arrest.

[Edited on December 28, 2006 at 5:19 PM. Reason : .]

12/28/2006 5:18:05 PM

You are aware a word can have more than one meaning, right? That's why they number then in the dictionary.

12/28/2006 5:55:38 PM

You realize that when using a word, one should use it in its proper context and not just thumb through the dictionary until they think they have the word they want.

12/28/2006 6:45:31 PM

You presume a lot. I used the word I thought was appropriate, imagine my shock when I checked the dictionary and it agreed with me.

12/28/2006 9:16:46 PM

Quote :

"Kenya has shut its border with Somalia and will not allow more refugees into the country, says its foreign minister. Earlier the Kenyan authorities deported more than 420 Somali refugees who had crossed the border in recent days. The UN refugee agency has condemned Kenya's actions, with aid workers expressing frustration at being unable to help Somalis fleeing conflict. There have been clashes near the Kenyan border with Islamist militias being pursued by Ethiopian and Somali troops. Kenya has deployed tanks and helicopters to enforce the border closure. The recent advance of heavily armed Ethiopian troops has ended a six-month Islamist occupation which had brought a degree of stability to large areas of formerly lawless Somalia. But the Islamists say their retreat is tactical and have threatened to launch an insurgency. Refugees Kenyan Foreign Minister Raphael Tuju told reporters in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi, that they have now asked the transitional government and Ethiopia to establish internally displaced people camps in Somalia. map Fragile peace fuels fears African press frets "We are not able to ascertain whether these people are genuine refugees or fighters and therefore its best that they remain in Somalia," said Mr Tuju. Mr Tuju also dismissed UNHCR criticism as misguided. "Kenyans are overburdened, in fact Europe and America does not give us enough aid to support these refugees and it's not a written rule that when there is fighting in Somalia that people should run to Kenya, other nations should also take the burden," he said. The Somali refugees, mainly women and children, were deported after being taken from the border transit camp at Liboi in north-east Kenya in government trucks. Earlier, UNHCR spokesperson Millicent Mutuli said the Kenyan Red Cross had been denied access to them for four days. "It's against international law to deny people access to humanitarian assistance under such circumstances," said Ms Mutuli. UNHCR head Antonio Guterres said deserving Somali civilians should be entitled to seek asylum in Kenya. Pursuit Meanwhile, Ethiopia and Somali government forces, with air support, have captured the Somali border town of Doble, where it is reported that around 4,000 refugees have been stranded. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6227083.stm

Kinda messed up.

1/3/2007 7:48:15 PM

Quote :

"Who declares war on Christmas day? wtf"

Except its not Christmas yet. christmas is on Jan. 7th. And being that they are copts....that is when they celebrate it.

1/3/2007 10:32:12 PM

I hope in the coming years they make a sequel to black hawk down based on events from this war.

1/3/2007 11:01:52 PM

Quote :

"Abdirahman Dinari told the BBC soldiers had surrounded the militia group near the Kenyan border - which has been reinforced to stop their escape. US naval forces are deployed off the Somali coast to prevent leaders of the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC) escaping. "

I guess that explains why Kenya closed their border to the dismay of Somalian refugees.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6230809.stm

1/4/2007 1:31:49 PM

Oh snap we bombed Somalia.

Quote :

"• NEW: Pentagon Source: U.S. targeted suspected al Qaeda in Somalia • NEW: AC-130 gunship flew its mission within the last 24 hours • NEW: No information on the strike's effectiveness • NEW: Alleged al Qaeda operatives, unidentified, fled Mogadishu"

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/africa/01/08/somalia.strike/index.html

1/8/2007 11:15:16 PM

BLACK HAWK DOWN

1/9/2007 2:34:27 AM

I'll play the role of salisburyboy for a second. Could this be a distraction from Bush's debut of his new plan for Iraq? Either way, it's a very intriguing situation, and hopefully a successful one.

1/9/2007 11:21:51 AM