Is it moral for our governments to impose poverty on us?
Taxation determines what poverty levels will exist within it’s demographic form. It controls the graph shown below. Governments control taxation and thus control poverty levels directly.
Imagine if you will, the real truth of that taxation, if used correctly, to move the wealth shown in this graph wherever it wants to, with minimal effect on the whole. The fact is, experts say that such a reality would be a win win for everyone.
https://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2
Not how little of a change would be needed to reach the ideal.
Wise and moral people throughout history, as well as most religious movements, put poverty as the number one enemy to man’s first priority, which is security.
For perhaps the first time in history, we have the wealth where we could end poverty quite easily, --- just with our collective loose change.
It would seem to me that governments are not acting ethically and should be chastised.
I guess that George Carlin, a wise person, was correct in what he said of what Americans cannot feel in their anal orifices. I apply the same condition to the vast majority of the world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-14SllPPLxY
If true that we are being willfully ignorant, and do not even care about each other to insure we live in a moral environment, then our owners have succeeded in cowering man’s moral nature to a state of subservience. We have given up our freedom. If we ever had any.
We have all accepted to be slaves. Shame on us all.
We do not live in a Democracy. We live in a Hypocrisy.
We can easily rid ourselves of poverty.
Should we?
Morality says yes.
Will we do the right thing?
Not till hell freezes over.
Regards
DL
I like George Carlin a lot, the things he said were very on the nose and honest about how things are day to day, some hard truths people sometimes don't want to hear, but spoken in a comedic way.
Now, he was right about capitalism and the big corporations owning you, it's true, there is very much a monopoly on society and one ever so much more obvious in wealthy nations.
But what would the alternatives be to this? Socialism? Everyone being equal? Sad fact is that just doesn't work either, and people have a poorly quality of life.
We are either slaves to corporations and the 1%, or we are starving to death potato farmers. And I'd sooner be in a capitalist society that supports free healthcare then a dead 2 year old on a straw bed.
Quote from: Munch on July 25, 2019, 04:16:54 PM
But what would the alternatives be to this? Socialism? Everyone being equal?
Hell no.
The alternative is to recognize how little of the wealth in that graph actually has to move to end poverty and do just that. No big shake up or changes in most laws other than the tax laws.
We are talking loose change to the rich.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 25, 2019, 04:23:06 PM
Hell no.
The alternative is to recognize how little of the wealth in that graph actually has to move to end poverty and do just that. No big shake up or changes in most laws other than the tax laws.
We are talking loose change to the rich.
Regards
DL
That seems fair, but the nature of humanity just wouldn't let that last. Even big world charities horde money donated to them from suckers beliving it will lead to fresh water wells for poorer countries
Saying that these charities sometimes do use that money for its intended purpose people want, and do so for a good PR stunt, so at least some people in need sometimes get help.
Quote from: Munch on July 25, 2019, 04:52:25 PM
That seems fair, but the nature of humanity just wouldn't let that last. Even big world charities horde money donated to them from suckers beliving it will lead to fresh water wells for poorer countries
Saying that these charities sometimes do use that money for its intended purpose people want, and do so for a good PR stunt, so at least some people in need sometimes get help.
I hear you, but what do you see as wrong with our natures?
I see our world and people as evolving perfection. Not flawless, but the best it can be given our past history and entropy.
The full idea is a bit long should you want to see as I see.
Let me give you a couple of links first, with the first showing how our goodness is actually baffling the experts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ADgh3yCSdM
You will need more time for the following but if you want to, skip to the end to see the great stats we are producing against evil. Better than we have ever enjoyed.
Richard Dawkins - Sex, Death and the Meaning of Life
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLulcfyqrc0
===============
I wrote this to refute the false notion that Gnostic Christians do not like matter and reality that the inquisitors propagated to justify their many murders of my religions originators. It shows that Christians should actually hate matter and not Gnostic Christians.
The Christian reality.
1 John 2:15Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
Gen 3; 17 Thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.
-----------
The Gnostic Christian reality.
Gnostic Christian Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all.
[And after they have reigned they will rest.]"
"If those who attract you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you.
If they say to you, 'It is under the earth,' then the fish of the sea will precede you.
Rather, the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you.
[Those who] become acquainted with [themselves] will find it; [and when you] become acquainted with yourselves, [you will understand that] it is you who are the sons of the living Father.
But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."
As you can see from that quote, if we see God's kingdom all around us and inside of us, we cannot think that the world is anything but evolving perfection. Most just don't see it and live in poverty. Let me try to make you see the world the way I do.
Here is a mind exercise. Tell me what you see when you look around. The best that can possibly be, given our past history, or an ugly and imperfect world?
Candide.
"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.â€
That means that we live in the best of all possible worlds, because it is the only possible world, given all the conditions at hand and the history that got us here. That is an irrefutable statement given entropy and the anthropic principle.
Regards
DL
Hey, welcome back! Richard Dawkins is even smarter than his more famous brother. Yes, primarily in Europe, "austerity" was the chosen policy by GB and EU to deal with the 2008 crisis. The US had a somewhat different policy, because of the "dollar". We bailed out both the US and Europe, with 14 trillion in credit in 2008-2009. And "quantitative easing" since 2010.
The poor we will always have .. because nobody is ever satisfied with what they have. That is a fundamental economic motivator. You can expand what is to be had, thru economic development (business) or by government fiat (treasury). Usually both. It is much easier to expand via fiat. Economic development is much slower, and the results are iffy. Government fiat is much faster, but there are long term consequences (like bar hopping).
So yes, the government thru greed and incompetence worked with business (also working thru greed and incompetence) to make the wonderful carnival ride we are on. But I really don't think any of our institutions actually do anything deliberately, though they constantly try. The economy is simply not controllable like that.
Are governments or businesses moral? Lately I must disappoint you. I have rejected morality and ethics as pink and white elephants.
Quote from: Munch on July 25, 2019, 04:16:54 PM
I like George Carlin a lot, the things he said were very on the nose and honest about how things are day to day, some hard truths people sometimes don't want to hear, but spoken in a comedic way.
Now, he was right about capitalism and the big corporations owning you, it's true, there is very much a monopoly on society and one ever so much more obvious in wealthy nations.
But what would the alternatives be to this? Socialism? Everyone being equal? Sad fact is that just doesn't work either, and people have a poorly quality of life.
We are either slaves to corporations and the 1%, or we are starving to death potato farmers. And I'd sooner be in a capitalist society that supports free healthcare then a dead 2 year old on a straw bed.
As argued now in GB. Is GB slave to EU or slave to US. Depends on if you are Remain or Leave. Nobody proposes that GB not be anyone's slave. People love slavery (see Nietzsche).
QuoteBut what would the alternatives be to this? Socialism? Everyone being equal? Sad fact is that just doesn't work either, and people have a poorly quality of life.
How about much higher taxes on the wealthy to go towards social and science programs, stricter regulations on employee wages to keep everyone working on a living salary, stricter laws on money loaning and banks gambling with peoples money, keeping housing affordable or providing affordable housing, etc.?
It worked for us before and arguably lead to the world's highest standard of living and golden age of scientific progress (we went from basic mechanics to going to the moon, for Christ's sake)... so it's safe to assume it would work again. It would at least have to work better than the borderline unregulated late-stage capitalism we have today.
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 25, 2019, 03:49:55 PM
Is it moral for our governments to impose poverty on us?
Taxation determines what poverty levels will exist within it’s demographic form. It controls the graph shown below. Governments control taxation and thus control poverty levels directly.
One of the things you omit is that some people are incapable of managing their wealth - take a look at the stats of people winning the lottery and then go bankrupt after a few years, or superstar athletes who earned millions and then go bust after a few years they stopped playing. For some people no matter how much money you throw at them, they will always be poor. Secondly, taxing the rich only pushes them to move their money to other countries. So unless you can convince some 200+ jurisdictions to have very similar laws on taxation, your plan to move money from the rich to the poor will fail. Thirdly, you need low paying jobs to do those jobs that are necessary but cannot be a large burden on the economy - garbage collection, waiting on tables, nannies, etc. You just can't pay the same salary to a garbage collector and a brain surgeon. Such economy won't last very long. At best, we can provide a minimum social safety net for those who fall into the cracks and those who are vulnerable - those afflicted with chronic or mental disease, the old and the very young who can't provide for themselves. But for the rest of us, we're on our own, as it should be.
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 25, 2019, 04:23:06 PM
Hell no.
The alternative is to recognize how little of the wealth in that graph actually has to move to end poverty and do just that. No big shake up or changes in most laws other than the tax laws.
We are talking loose change to the rich.
Regards
DL
But the financials, and thus much of the GDP ... is fake. You can end poverty, by people choosing to be happy with what they have, or we can kill the unhappy people.
Quote from: Shiranu on July 26, 2019, 07:48:43 AM
How about much higher taxes on the wealthy to go towards social and science programs, stricter regulations on employee wages to keep everyone working on a living salary, stricter laws on money loaning and banks gambling with peoples money, keeping housing affordable or providing affordable housing, etc.?
It worked for us before and arguably lead to the world's highest standard of living and golden age of scientific progress (we went from basic mechanics to going to the moon, for Christ's sake)... so it's safe to assume it would work again. It would at least have to work better than the borderline unregulated late-stage capitalism we have today.
You can. 90% marginal tax rate (minus loopholes) when I was born. We could do that. But what about 100% taxes, nationalization of all business. Then make it illegal to report the imputed per capita rate. Worked for Stalin. But tax code per 1959 would be less punitive ;-)
Do you realize why we have taxes? It is to recycle the excess money injected into the economy by government fiat (this has been a big problem since 2008 when trillions were injected). To close the loop. Otherwise you get Zimbabwe. However to use the tax code as punitive social engineering ... well we have had that for a century. The loopholes are there to favor certain people (purely discriminatory). Why not just kill the rich? Would that be punitive enough for you people? But if you destroy the imputed social contract, government and society will fall into a criminogenic anarchy. Or is that what already happened in 1776? Stalin's Russia was a criminogenic order (not anarchy).
Quote from: Baruch on July 25, 2019, 07:32:55 PM
Hey, welcome back! Richard Dawkins is even smarter than his more famous brother. Yes, primarily in Europe, "austerity" was the chosen policy by GB and EU to deal with the 2008 crisis. The US had a somewhat different policy, because of the "dollar". We bailed out both the US and Europe, with 14 trillion in credit in 2008-2009. And "quantitative easing" since 2010.
The poor we will always have .. because nobody is ever satisfied with what they have. That is a fundamental economic motivator. You can expand what is to be had, thru economic development (business) or by government fiat (treasury). Usually both. It is much easier to expand via fiat. Economic development is much slower, and the results are iffy. Government fiat is much faster, but there are long term consequences (like bar hopping).
So yes, the government thru greed and incompetence worked with business (also working thru greed and incompetence) to make the wonderful carnival ride we are on. But I really don't think any of our institutions actually do anything deliberately, though they constantly try. The economy is simply not controllable like that.
Are governments or businesses moral? Lately I must disappoint you. I have rejected morality and ethics as pink and white elephants.
I have missed your view buddy.
I have been busy getting banned from intolerant places.
On straight political posts, I like to get back to these less religious haunts.
Knowing your usual better than most moral thinking, I reject you last.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on July 25, 2019, 07:34:50 PM
As argued now in GB. Is GB slave to EU or slave to US. Depends on if you are Remain or Leave. Nobody proposes that GB not be anyone's slave. People love slavery (see Nietzsche).
Slavery may be the ultimate security and our selfish gene seems to know it.
At one time, that was true, but today it is not.
As a historian, you might not agree.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Shiranu on July 26, 2019, 07:48:43 AM
How about much higher taxes on the wealthy to go towards social and science programs, stricter regulations on employee wages to keep everyone working on a living salary, stricter laws on money loaning and banks gambling with peoples money, keeping housing affordable or providing affordable housing, etc.?
It worked for us before and arguably lead to the world's highest standard of living and golden age of scientific progress (we went from basic mechanics to going to the moon, for Christ's sake)... so it's safe to assume it would work again. It would at least have to work better than the borderline unregulated late-stage capitalism we have today.
I generally agree with your views except for your "How about much higher taxes on the wealthy"
My view of a fair tax code is that after all are pulled over the poverty line, all pay the same % of tax.
I do not see a tax law that targets the rich more than the poor to be fair.
Care to give us an argument that justifies nailing the rich more than the rest who are not as rich?
Regards
DL
Quote from: josephpalazzo on July 26, 2019, 09:52:21 AM
One of the things you omit is that some people are incapable of managing their wealth - take a look at the stats of people winning the lottery and then go bankrupt after a few years, or superstar athletes who earned millions and then go bust after a few years they stopped playing. For some people no matter how much money you throw at them, they will always be poor. Secondly, taxing the rich only pushes them to move their money to other countries. So unless you can convince some 200+ jurisdictions to have very similar laws on taxation, your plan to move money from the rich to the poor will fail. Thirdly, you need low paying jobs to do those jobs that are necessary but cannot be a large burden on the economy - garbage collection, waiting on tables, nannies, etc. You just can't pay the same salary to a garbage collector and a brain surgeon. Such economy won't last very long. At best, we can provide a minimum social safety net for those who fall into the cracks and those who are vulnerable - those afflicted with chronic or mental disease, the old and the very young who can't provide for themselves. But for the rest of us, we're on our own, as it should be.
Your first is correct, but you seem to not recognize that our system are based on waste and the incompetent money mangers spend all they have and to an economy, that is great as then the spent cash can have the value added attached to it and that is what profits the whole system.
"taxing the rich only pushes them to move their money to other countries."
Then you boycott their products and end their citizenship. No country should increase the poverty levels to keep such filth in their country. That would be putting greed ahead of morality.
"you need low paying jobs"
Sure, but not lower than about $ 15. as an economy should want to produce tax payers and not tax takers who are just make work projects for governments who just love to increase the dependence of the people on a bigger government.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on July 26, 2019, 11:15:56 AM
But the financials, and thus much of the GDP ... is fake. You can end poverty, by people choosing to be happy with what they have, or we can kill the unhappy people.
All reality is a collective hunch and fiction. It is still all we have.
To your last. If you watch the documentary --- What the Health --- you will note how the government is knowingly reducing the life expectancy rate in the U.S.
They are killing people. Just not the ones you would target.
Have you had a personally change since I left? That last does not sound like the Baruch I knew.
We are both getting older --- but still.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 26, 2019, 12:12:12 PM
Your first is correct, but you seem to not recognize that our system are based on waste and the incompetent money mangers spend all they have and to an economy, that is great as then the spent cash can have the value added attached to it and that is what profits the whole system.
"taxing the rich only pushes them to move their money to other countries."
Then you boycott their products and end their citizenship. No country should increase the poverty levels to keep such filth in their country. That would be putting greed ahead of morality.
"you need low paying jobs"
Sure, but not lower than about $ 15. as an economy should want to produce tax payers and not tax takers who are just make work projects for governments who just love to increase the dependence of the people on a bigger government.
Regards
DL
Well there is incompetence everywhere - a lot of incompetent consumers for instance. You can't make laws against incompetence. The market generally does that - personal and business bankruptcies, economic recessions, and so on. But it seems that you want to legislate that, which in MHO, is a none starter.
On a side note: the $15 minimum wage is arbitrary, not market driven, and as such, involves many negative effects that most people like to ignore.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on July 26, 2019, 12:32:38 PM
Well there is incompetence everywhere - a lot of incompetent consumers for instance. You can't make laws against incompetence. The market generally does that - personal and business bankruptcies, economic recessions, and so on. But it seems that you want to legislate that, which in MHO, is a none starter.
On a side note: the $15 minimum wage is arbitrary, not market driven, and as such, involves many negative effects that most people like to ignore.
While providing a better climate for workers which many want to ignore. Look at the benefits Washington gained from raising their minimum wage.
Incompetence will always exist and thus can be ignored as that is just people competing to be the fittest and we should not mess with that evolution and let the better and more competent rise to the top.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 26, 2019, 11:53:16 AM
I have missed your view buddy.
I have been busy getting banned from intolerant places.
On straight political posts, I like to get back to these less religious haunts.
Knowing your usual better than most moral thinking, I reject you last.
Regards
DL
My rhetoric has moved on, based on goings on. Also I am now retired and in the throws of moving. And of course while my rhetoric might be impassioned, and thus sincere, it doesn't necessarily represent my considered viewpoint ;-)
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 26, 2019, 11:57:37 AM
Slavery may be the ultimate security and our selfish gene seems to know it.
At one time, that was true, but today it is not.
As a historian, you might not agree.
Regards
DL
Recent rhetoric (not mine) convinced me. In modern society, feminism means the end of marriage and parenting. Women want the biggest and wealthiest sugar daddy. And now the government has become that. Probably started with Oswald's Russian wife having a crush on JFK (one reason why Oswald shot JFK). Ordinary men, not billionaires, can't compete with the government as UberHusband and UberFather. Not even Uber can compete with that!
So yes, women who are naturally dependent, because of biology, have shifted their dependency in a very negative way. They all want to be in the Sultan's harem. Mustafa down in the souk can't satisfy the high maintenance creatures. So yes, history is still important, particularly the last 50 years.
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 26, 2019, 01:06:18 PM
While providing a better climate for workers which many want to ignore. Look at the benefits Washington gained from raising their minimum wage.
Incompetence will always exist and thus can be ignored as that is just people competing to be the fittest and we should not mess with that evolution and let the better and more competent rise to the top.
Regards
DL
It is a conspiracy theory that CIA runs the illegal drug business. It is a conspiracy theory that the government is behind the opioid epidemic. Both of those are probably false. But one or both might be true.
Quote from: Baruch on July 26, 2019, 01:14:30 PM
My rhetoric has moved on, based on goings on. Also I am now retired and in the throws of moving. And of course while my rhetoric might be impassioned, and thus sincere, it doesn't necessarily represent my considered viewpoint.
I do not have that ability but hen I see your mind as more complicated then mine. You are a specificist while I am a generalist. You retain data while I only remember the logic and reason trail that produced the message.
I have read tons of books and kept the messages or wisdom while I have no clue as to who said what.
Nice that you have retired. I thought we were about the same age but your a duckling compared to me, age wise.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on July 26, 2019, 11:15:56 AM
But the financials, and thus much of the GDP ... is fake. You can end poverty, by people choosing to be happy with what they have, or we can kill the unhappy people.
So, we could end world hunger by just telling everyone to choose to eat, or we can kill the hungry people.
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 26, 2019, 01:25:49 PM
So, we could end world hunger by just telling everyone to choose to eat, or we can kill the hungry people.
No, kill two birds with one stone. "A Modest Proposal" outlined this 300 years ago. Breed and eat the poor. Nothing immoral about cannibalism. And maybe we are the aliens with the "cookbook".
Food doesn't grow itself. If you grow your own food, good for you. Otherwise, like me, you are just a parasite on some hardworking farmer/rancher/fisherman.
Quote from: Baruch on July 26, 2019, 01:18:47 PM
Recent rhetoric (not mine) convinced me. In modern society, feminism means the end of marriage and parenting. Women want the biggest and wealthiest sugar daddy. And now the government has become that. Probably started with Oswald's Russian wife having a crush on JFK (one reason why Oswald shot JFK). Ordinary men, not billionaires, can't compete with the government as UberHusband and UberFather. Not even Uber can compete with that!
So yes, women who are naturally dependent, because of biology, have shifted their dependency in a very negative way. They all want to be in the Sultan's harem. Mustafa down in the souk can't satisfy the high maintenance creatures. So yes, history is still important, particularly the last 50 years.
I think you blame the wrong gender for the shift to state care of single parent women.
If you watch the professor who put --- The Demise of Guys --- together, you might agree that it is us not training our boys to be men that has cause the reality that now we are living in a world where 50% of all households are manned by single women and that most deadbeat dads are jerking off to porn in their parents basements.
Talk about manhood training.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on July 26, 2019, 01:29:08 PM
No, kill two birds with one stone. "A Modest Proposal" outlined this 300 years ago. Breed and eat the poor. Nothing immoral about cannibalism. And maybe we are the aliens with the "cookbook".
Food doesn't grow itself. If you grow your own food, good for you. Otherwise, like me, you are just a parasite on some hardworking farmer/rancher/fisherman.
So, we become Moorlocks, huh?
Quote from: Baruch on July 26, 2019, 01:20:19 PM
It is a conspiracy theory that CIA runs the illegal drug business. It is a conspiracy theory that the government is behind the opioid epidemic. Both of those are probably false. But one or both might be true.
I read a RCMP report years ago when deciding and failing to have Cannabis legalized, that showed that a lot of the drug king pins were governments.
Why, for instance, is the U.S. so against legalization, while Cannabis has been California's highest paying cash crop for better than 80 years now, even while every major intellectual report has pointed to legalization as a way to reduce harm.
The dame is happening with all psychotropic drugs.
Their are too many governments, including the U.S., that want drug lords out there so that they might use them for pay off as well as dirty deeds.
Read any bio from ex drug enforcement people and see how they get impeded by state when they get too close to one of their dirty friends.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 26, 2019, 01:24:58 PM
I do not have that ability but hen I see your mind as more complicated then mine. You are a specificist while I am a generalist. You retain data while I only remember the logic and reason trail that produced the message.
I have read tons of books and kept the messages or wisdom while I have no clue as to who said what.
Nice that you have retired. I thought we were about the same age but your a duckling compared to me, age wise.
Regards
DL
I am of an age, where getting thru the day gets harder every day. Moving to where my daughter lives, Farmington NM. Will ask the native spirits to protect you. I will ask big drunk Navaho men to protect me ;-)
Nearer after the move, to Moab, where Area 51 moved too, if I meet any aliens, shall I ask them about G-d for you? ;-)) Seen the recent news of Close Encounters by the USN? Maybe they can teach me to jam. I really need more music in my life!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4PYI6TzqYk
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 26, 2019, 01:31:05 PM
I think you blame the wrong gender for the shift to state care of single parent women.
If you watch the professor who put --- The Demise of Guys --- together, you might agree that it is us not training our boys to be men that has cause the reality that now we are living in a world where 50% of all households are manned by single women and that most deadbeat dads are jerking off to porn in their parents basements.
Talk about manhood training.
Regards
DL
i agree with Jordan Peterson. But no matter what, women rule the world, and bitch endlessly about it.
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 26, 2019, 01:37:30 PM
So, we become Moorlocks, huh?
No, you and I are Eloi ... the Trumps etc are the Morlocks. Time Machine got the looks backward, the Morlocks are the beautiful people.
Two degrees of separation between myself and Carl Sagan. Attended a public Mars Exploration conference in Boulder CO, with my Ex, and the star speaker was Sagan. My Ex fell asleep during his presentation. And back then circa 1985, I was one of the first financial contributors to SETI.
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 26, 2019, 01:06:18 PM
... Look at the benefits Washington gained from raising their minimum wage...
Regards
DL
There are mixed results. Many ended up with reduced working hours. Also one cannot gauge how many new employees may or may not have been hired due to this wage increase to $15. Seattle has a thriving economy compared to the rest of the state, so in those circumstances, wage increase would have been the norm. So applying this idea to the rest of the country is an iffy proposition.
What's left out in these proposals is who will pay for these increases? We do, you and I, in the form of higher prices, which makes the rest of us poorer.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on July 26, 2019, 04:51:11 PM
There are mixed results. Many ended up with reduced working hours. Also one cannot gauge how many new employees may or may not have been hired due to this wage increase to $15. Seattle has a thriving economy compared to the rest of the state, so in those circumstances, wage increase would have been the norm. So applying this idea to the rest of the country is an iffy proposition.
What's left out in these proposals is who will pay for these increases? We do, you and I, in the form of higher prices, which makes the rest of us poorer.
That can be fixed thru Socialism. Government tells you who and how many to hire. Government tells you how to run every aspect of your business. Government orders your customers to buy from you. Don't got money? No problem, just print it like there is no mañana. Socialism works everywhere you have a majority of sociopaths.
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 26, 2019, 12:02:59 PM
I generally agree with your views except for your "How about much higher taxes on the wealthy"
My view of a fair tax code is that after all are pulled over the poverty line, all pay the same % of tax.
I do not see a tax law that targets the rich more than the poor to be fair.
Care to give us an argument that justifies nailing the rich more than the rest who are not as rich?
Regards
DL
Either way, life isn't fair; tax the rich more than they think they should be, or leave the poor to fend for themselves... either way, some one is offended.
I figure the rich can afford to lose more than the poor can, so it's simply common sense to take from those who can afford it rather than those who cant.
Quote from: Baruch on July 26, 2019, 01:51:04 PM
I am of an age, where getting thru the day gets harder every day. Moving to where my daughter lives, Farmington NM. Will ask the native spirits to protect you. I will ask big drunk Navaho men to protect me ;-)
Sounds nice for you.
My wife and I just went Vegan.
It seems to be as good for our bodies as some postulate. Energy is up and our bodies seem to like it for other, eh, bathroom reasons. The variety of foods is also adding to our culinary cooking skills.
What The Health had an older hardened farmer crying about how newer farming methods where not only inhumane but also wrecking the waterways near his farm and community.
I am a hard hearted guy myself, --- who fished and hunted and I had no problem killing even my grown for food rabbits by hand with a twist of the wrist, --- but enough is enough of the inhuman way we now raise our food stocks.
In the religious forums, I am running an O.P. suggesting that we should scrap our vile gods and turn to Gaia worship so that we do better with the environment before we drive ourselves into being one of the species that are now a part of our present major extinction event.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Shiranu on July 26, 2019, 08:05:45 PM
Either way, life isn't fair; tax the rich more than they think they should be, or leave the poor to fend for themselves... either way, some one is offended.
I figure the rich can afford to lose more than the poor can, so it's simply common sense to take from those who can afford it rather than those who cant.
They can, but that does not warrant the rest of us doing as you suggest and throwing our morals out the window.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 26, 2019, 08:40:39 PM
They can, but that does not warrant the rest of us doing as you suggest and throwing our morals out the window.
Regards
DL
The ultra-rich are not rich because of their hard work, they are rich because they exploited their way to the top and built their empires on the back of the working class.
There is nothing unethical about demanding they pay us a fair share in return. They can even stay far more rich than they have the slightest right to.
The truly moral thing would be to do as Baurch suggested and kill the rich. Letting them live and taking them a fair share from them is the next most moral option.
Quote from: Shiranu on July 26, 2019, 08:05:45 PM
Either way, life isn't fair; tax the rich more than they think they should be, or leave the poor to fend for themselves... either way, some one is offended.
I figure the rich can afford to lose more than the poor can, so it's simply common sense to take from those who can afford it rather than those who cant.
Life isn't fair. Not nice, but true. Envy and jealousy are terrible sins. You have shown your colors (from each according to their ability, to each according to their need). I hope your social media posts don't prevent you from your plans, since you haven't chosen Cuba.
QuoteLife isn't fair. Not nice, but true. Envy and jealousy are terrible sins.
I don't envy or feel jealousy of the ultra-rich, I pity and despise them.
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 26, 2019, 08:40:39 PM
They can, but that does not warrant the rest of us doing as you suggest and throwing our morals out the window.
Regards
DL
Applying morality without an understanding of economic principles will land you into an absurd position as what you are proposing is self-defeating.
Quote from: Shiranu on July 26, 2019, 08:47:09 PM
The ultra-rich are not rich because of their hard work, they are rich because they exploited their way to the top and built their empires on the back of the working class.
There is nothing unethical about demanding they pay us a fair share in return. They can even stay far more rich than they have the slightest right to.
The truly moral thing would be to do as Baurch suggested and kill the rich. Letting them live and taking them a fair share from them is the next most moral option.
Killing anyone for anything other than killing is overkill, justice wise.
Further, a country cannot be seen as venerating life when it is taking it.
You seem to want to blame the rich for the present poor tax laws that helped them get where they are, and they do deserve their share, but ultimately it is the voter like you and I who empowered the thieves.
If we are to penalize them for their greed, we also have to punish us for our stupidity and acceptance of the status quo for so long, not to mention putting Trump into office and allowing the latest cash grab by the rich.
Regards
DL
Quote from: josephpalazzo on July 27, 2019, 08:17:44 AM
Applying morality without an understanding of economic principles will land you into an absurd position as what you are proposing is self-defeating.
How so?
Would you carry that line for the past 2 hundred years or so as you see that what you call self defeating has produced so much gain for us?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 27, 2019, 09:50:01 AM
How so?
Would you carry that line for the past 2 hundred years or so as you see that what you call self defeating has produced so much gain for us?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo)
Regards
DL
First of all, your video doesn't answer my post. If you don't understand economic principles, which so far you seem to be the case, you will end up ignoring what are the consequences of your proposals. Point in case, your minimum wage proposals - that has been studied in so many ways in economic theories. There are certain benefits to minimum wages but also there are disadvantages, which you are completely ignoring.
Suppose you are the owner of a business with a staff of 15 people earning $10/hr. You are now forced to a minimum wage of $15/hr. What do you do? (1) It's possible this can force you into bankruptcy - 15 people out of a job. (2) But you can lay off 10 people so that 15 people X $10 = 10 people X$15, so that your cost is the same but still 5 people have to go home without a pay. (3) Or keep all of your staff at the higher wage and raise your prices - chances are you will decrease your revenue as people cut down on buying your products as they cannot afford them at a higher price. Those who are still buying your product have less money in their pocket and therefore must cut down on other products, which mean that other working people in other sectors of the economy will lose their jobs. So when wages are increased by force, not market driven, then any of these three possibilities will in fact occur, depending on the business, how it is managed, and how competitive the market is.
As to your video, it tries too much to trivialize a complex situation into a simple cause-and-effect case.
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 26, 2019, 08:37:19 PM
In the religious forums, I am running an O.P. suggesting that we should scrap our vile gods and turn to Gaia worship so that we do better with the environment before we drive ourselves into being one of the species that are now a part of our present major extinction event.
It's hard to convince people that Gaia even exists, that the planet's biosphere is a single living organism. It seems to be more a matter of philosophy than science for most people, because they haven't read Lovelock. So I doubt you've had many converts on those forums!
But if I were going to worship anything, and work towards converting others, it would be some sort of Gaia theology. But Gaia isn't a [G]od, just an isolated photo-chemical process that's occurring on a ball of rock flying through the void, trying to continue its existence as long as possible.
I think most of us on this thread should consider ourselves fortunate we live in countries that at least even being run by a corrupt government, that there is still opportunity, support and a system in place to at least be comfortable, as opposed to countries with corrupt governments that don't have these things in place.
QuoteKilling anyone for anything other than killing is overkill, justice wise.
Further, a country cannot be seen as venerating life when it is taking it.
I was being a tad hyperbolic.
QuoteYou seem to want to blame the rich for the present poor tax laws that helped them get where they are, and they do deserve their share, but ultimately it is the voter like you and I who empowered the thieves.
Completely disagreed.
Corrupt officials don't answer to the people who elected them; hence the reason they are called corrupt. Victim blaming solves absolutely nothing at best, and just legitimizes the corruptors at worst.
QuoteI think most of us on this thread should consider ourselves fortunate we live in countries that at least even being run by a corrupt government, that there is still opportunity, support and a system in place to at least be comfortable, as opposed to countries with corrupt governments that don't have these things in place.
Agreed, which makes it a good thing that no one seems to be taking that for granted here.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on July 27, 2019, 10:57:03 AM
Suppose you are the owner of a business with a staff of 15 people earning $10/hr. You are now forced to a minimum wage of $15/hr. What do you do?
Compete as usual, as everyone of your competitors is in the same boat.
You are correct that there are things about the economy I do not know.
You are showing that you have less of a clue than I have.
Go ahead and come up with all the thousands of minute and irrelevant details you want, while I just have to think demographically and see how little change to that graph is necessary to end the immoral practice of our governments imposing poverty on us. Loose change to the rich side.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 27, 2019, 01:39:49 PM
It's hard to convince people that Gaia even exists, that the planet's biosphere is a single living organism. It seems to be more a matter of philosophy than science for most people, because they haven't read Lovelock. So I doubt you've had many converts on those forums!
But if I were going to worship anything, and work towards converting others, it would be some sort of Gaia theology. But Gaia isn't a [G]od, just an isolated photo-chemical process that's occurring on a ball of rock flying through the void, trying to continue its existence as long as possible.
I hear you. If it was easy, someone would have already done it.
"It's hard to convince people that Gaia even exists,"
It should not be any harder than the religious lies that have people thinking that a genocidal son murdering prick of a god is somehow good.
There is more evidence, so to speak, that Gaia exists, while the supernatural pricks the religious presently idol worship based on nothing at all.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Munch on July 27, 2019, 02:16:38 PM
I think most of us on this thread should consider ourselves fortunate we live in countries that at least even being run by a corrupt government, that there is still opportunity, support and a system in place to at least be comfortable, as opposed to countries with corrupt governments that don't have these things in place.
Your government is more corrupt than most as they are knowingly dropping the age of life stats and intentionally killing off your people.
Watch the documentary What the Health to see how.
You seeing your government as less corrupt is one thing. Delusional at this point in time.
You ignoring the facts is quite another of how much better many governments are is another.
Watch Sicko and rethink.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 27, 2019, 03:35:29 PM
Your government is more corrupt than most as they are knowingly dropping the age of life stats and intentionally killing off your people.
Watch the documentary What the Health to see how.
You seeing your government as less corrupt is one thing. Delusional at this point in time.
You ignoring the facts is quite another of how much better many governments are is another.
Watch Sicko and rethink.
Regards
DL
Urm, I didn't say mine or any other western government wasn't corrupt, I'm saying despite it we still have a better system in place in these areas of the world then other regions with their own corrupt government.
Let's not pretend a slower train service or slight tax increase is the equivalent of fearing your be mugged or your house broken into every day, like Somalia or South Sudan (if you can even afford a house in those areas of the world)
Quote from: Shiranu on July 27, 2019, 01:25:42 AM
I don't envy or feel jealousy of the ultra-rich, I pity and despise them.
And that is the path the path to the Gulag. Except in Trudeau Canada.
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 27, 2019, 01:39:49 PM
It's hard to convince people that Gaia even exists, that the planet's biosphere is a single living organism. It seems to be more a matter of philosophy than science for most people, because they haven't read Lovelock. So I doubt you've had many converts on those forums!
But if I were going to worship anything, and work towards converting others, it would be some sort of Gaia theology. But Gaia isn't a [G]od, just an isolated photo-chemical process that's occurring on a ball of rock flying through the void, trying to continue its existence as long as possible.
Gaia = Green Party theology
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 27, 2019, 03:35:29 PM
Your government is more corrupt than most as they are knowingly dropping the age of life stats and intentionally killing off your people.
Watch the documentary What the Health to see how.
You seeing your government as less corrupt is one thing. Delusional at this point in time.
You ignoring the facts is quite another of how much better many governments are is another.
Watch Sicko and rethink.
Regards
DL
Agenda 21 and Club of Rome are true European socialist scripture!
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 27, 2019, 03:30:18 PM
I hear you. If it was easy, someone would have already done it.
"It's hard to convince people that Gaia even exists,"
It should not be any harder than the religious lies that have people thinking that a genocidal son murdering prick of a god is somehow good.
There is more evidence, so to speak, that Gaia exists, while the supernatural pricks the religious presently idol worship based on nothing at all.
Regards
DL
I don't know what you mean by Gaia. This is what I mean. Gaia is a word I use to indicate that all life on this planet is connected. I would call that a scientific fact. What happens to one part of Gaia impacts all other parts. The average person on the street would probably think I'm a religious nut of some sort. But how any educated, thinking person cannot see this simple fact is beyond me.
Quote from: Munch on July 27, 2019, 04:23:48 PM
Urm, I didn't say mine or any other western government wasn't corrupt, I'm saying despite it we still have a better system in place in these areas of the world then other regions with their own corrupt government.
Let's not pretend a slower train service or slight tax increase is the equivalent of fearing your be mugged or your house broken into every day, like Somalia or South Sudan (if you can even afford a house in those areas of the world)
I find the excuse that parts of the world are like Somalia or South Sudan a sorry one to excuse the corruptions of whatever Western govt. you live under. I beat my dog; my neighbor beats his dog and his wife. So, my wife should be grateful to be with me instead of my neighbor. In a just world, both me and my neighbor should be arrested and all others who beat dogs, children and wives. I grew up being taught that the USA was the moral leader of the world. We did not tolerate violence either internally or externally. That is not what my country stands for now--quite the opposite. So, I should simply shut the fuck up and be grateful that the USA isn't like Somalia? I'd rather support efforts to fix the wrongs my country is doing and hold ourselves to the highest of standards no matter what the rest of the world is doing.
QuoteLet's not pretend a slower train service or slight tax increase...
Let's not pretend that's remotely what anyone is arguing about as well.
Wealth inequality is reaching it's worst levels since the Great Depression. Taxes paid, proportionately, by the wealthy and corporations are reaching record lows. We have citizens who "don't know what to do with their money" who could literally end all hunger in this country single-handedly that instead pay less proportionate taxes than people who have to decide if they are going to put food on their table or get medical treatment they need. We have massive infrastructure repairs and renovations required and unfunded while the government spends hundreds of billions of dollars on military spending with very limited oversight. Our student debt is current in the 1.4 trillion dollar range and skyrocketing. Record number of young people are unable to afford to leave their family homes, start businesses, get married, have children, own a car, whatever because the economy hordes the wealth at the top.
That is a little bit different than complaining about slow trains.
And perhaps Scotland is some absolute utopia where literally the worst people do have to complain about is slow trains and slight tax increases, but that is not remotely the norm... not even by Western standards. And there are millions of Americans who do have to worry about being mugged or have their house broken into every day... who do have to worry about even being able to afford a house in those areas.
Someone else having it worse is not an excuse to not make things better, particularly when making it better for you also makes it better for those very same people.
Quote from: Mike Cl on July 27, 2019, 11:51:01 PM
I find the excuse that parts of the world are like Somalia or South Sudan a sorry one to excuse the corruptions of whatever Western govt. you live under. I beat my dog; my neighbor beats his dog and his wife. So, my wife should be grateful to be with me instead of my neighbor. In a just world, both me and my neighbor should be arrested and all others who beat dogs, children and wives. I grew up being taught that the USA was the moral leader of the world. We did not tolerate violence either internally or externally. That is not what my country stands for now--quite the opposite. So, I should simply shut the fuck up and be grateful that the USA isn't like Somalia? I'd rather support efforts to fix the wrongs my country is doing and hold ourselves to the highest of standards no matter what the rest of the world is doing.
Idealists say, we must all be Japanese Indians ... either we are all Gandhi, or we have to commit seppuku ;-(
Ah, global wealth inequality? Lets ship all the Chinese jobs to Zimbabwe, and see how they like it!
Quote from: Baruch on July 28, 2019, 07:54:58 AM
Idealists say, we must all be Japanese Indians ... either we are all Gandhi, or we have to commit seppuku ;-(
Ah, global wealth inequality? Lets ship all the Chinese jobs to Zimbabwe, and see how they like it!
So many days you are like Airk, full of shit and nothing of substance. Rattle on......................
Quote from: Munch on July 27, 2019, 04:23:48 PM
Urm, I didn't say mine or any other western government wasn't corrupt, I'm saying despite it we still have a better system in place in these areas of the world then other regions with their own corrupt government.
Let's not pretend a slower train service or slight tax increase is the equivalent of fearing your be mugged or your house broken into every day, like Somalia or South Sudan (if you can even afford a house in those areas of the world)
Comparing the third world to the first world is a false equivalency.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on July 27, 2019, 04:54:55 PM
Agenda 21 and Club of Rome are true European socialist scripture!
Do you really believe that they are purposely creating crises?
Regards
DL
Quote from: Mike Cl on July 27, 2019, 11:42:17 PM
I don't know what you mean by Gaia. This is what I mean. Gaia is a word I use to indicate that all life on this planet is connected. I would call that a scientific fact. What happens to one part of Gaia impacts all other parts. The average person on the street would probably think I'm a religious nut of some sort. But how any educated, thinking person cannot see this simple fact is beyond me.
I hear you again but educated does not mean a person will become a thinking person.
Especially when systems are in place to dumb down the population.
Chompskey calls the U.S. education system and indoctrination system that does not want to produce critical thinkers.
Governments are mimicking religious indoctrination methods.
Sheeple are so much easier to control than thinkers.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 28, 2019, 10:30:12 AM
Do you really believe that they are purposely creating crises?
Regards
DL
Never ascribe to malice, what is more easily explained by incompetence - Napoleon
Crises come and go, in spite of action or inaction. The rulers are not possessors of any competence. The French royalty circa 1788 for example?
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 28, 2019, 10:35:27 AM
Chompskey calls the U.S. education system and indoctrination system that does not want to produce critical thinkers.
Governments are mimicking religious indoctrination methods.
Sheeple are so much easier to control than thinkers.
Regards
DL
Can't argue with that.
Quote from: Baruch on July 28, 2019, 10:40:30 AM
Never ascribe to malice, what is more easily explained by incompetence - Napoleon
Crises come and go, in spite of action or inaction. The rulers are not possessors of any competence. The French royalty circa 1788 for example?
They did not have demographics in those days so I do not accept your reply as equivalent.
If you or I lived back then, we could not know half of what we know today.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 27, 2019, 03:25:26 PM
Compete as usual, as everyone of your competitors is in the same boat.
You are correct that there are things about the economy I do not know.
You are showing that you have less of a clue than I have.
Go ahead and come up with all the thousands of minute and irrelevant details you want, while I just have to think demographically and see how little change to that graph is necessary to end the immoral practice of our governments imposing poverty on us. Loose change to the rich side.
Regards
DL
As I wrote earlier you don't have a single clue of how the economy works and here you are making an economic proposal without considering its impact, and worse, you don't give a shit about learning what's at stakes. So this is a waste of time.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on July 28, 2019, 01:40:06 PM
As I wrote earlier you don't have a single clue of how the economy works and here you are making an economic proposal without considering its impact, and worse, you don't give a shit about learning what's at stakes. So this is a waste of time.
Correct as you do not know as much as you think you know.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 28, 2019, 10:58:45 AM
They did not have demographics in those days so I do not accept your reply as equivalent.
If you or I lived back then, we could not know half of what we know today.
Regards
DL
We know nothing. Our ancestors knew nothing. But we are equals to them in arrogance. You love idealism ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ5YN1Idvjo
What do you think of this guy? Among currently living he models a better god than the Abrahamic religions (desert war gods). But beware of the god you looks like yourself; you may be engaged in projection and self love.
I don't accept the dogma of progress. Individual life is too short for humanity to progress. Technological self destruction, I do not regard as progress.
Quote from: Baruch on July 28, 2019, 03:13:54 PM
We know nothing. Our ancestors knew nothing. But we are equals to them in arrogance. You love idealism ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ5YN1Idvjo
What do you think of this guy? Among currently living he models a better god than the Abrahamic religions (desert war gods). But beware of the god you looks like yourself; you may be engaged in projection and self love.
I don't accept the dogma of progress. Individual life is too short for humanity to progress. Technological self destruction, I do not regard as progress.
My favorite guru. He has a piece on why religions are violent and also on one where he speaks of the suicide rate and projects that in 50 years, 50% of all deaths will be suicide.
"We know nothing."
Linguistically incorrect.
You know how to write, as I do in my poor fashion.
I see scientific progress but not much in how we see ourselves. I think in that sense, we have deteriorated from the time we started reading our myths literally and began idol worshiping genocidal and infanticidal gods while calling them good.
I have not viewed that link from Sadguru but will give it a listen. Thanks for liking a guy I like. Great minds think alike so do give yourself more credit on what you know.
Regards
DL
Arik turned me on to Sadhguru. So many gurus from India have been ... cults of personality. Here is the thing he says that matches ... why morality is a mistake ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Mo1cUvwR3s
The materialists won't watch it. It goes against their virtue signaling and desire for a secular Inquisition.
Quote from: Baruch on July 28, 2019, 05:29:45 PM
Arik turned me on to Sadguru. So many gurus from India have been ... cults of personality. Here is the thing he says that matches ... why morality is a mistake ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Mo1cUvwR3s
The materialists won't watch it. It goes against their virtue signaling and desire for a secular Inquisition.
Reciprocity is fair play and a response by secular forces with their own inquisition, to fight the low level Christian and Muslim inquisition and jihads against gays and women is fair play.
How else would you suggest that secular nations show that they give full equality to all people?
Or do you suggest that they let religions continue to bring their vile and immoral prejudices to the public spaces?
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on July 28, 2019, 05:29:45 PM
... why morality is a mistake ...
.
Human morality is something we are born with. I think you have seen that baby experiment link that I use.
If morality is a mistake, you would have to blame mother nature.
If nature did not see it as useful to our evolution and life, we would likely have dropped that trait from our evolutions repertoire.
Sadguru wants us to be more human, which says that we should recognize that we all seek to live in moral societies. That is why we have given up most of our freedom for security.
BTW, surveys show that about 70% of all of us share the same basic moral tenets which begin with some form of reciprocity rule.
We talk moral in my home with 4 diverse sons. We do not usually clash or end at wildly different conclusion once we all understand the same metaphors that are used to help discussions along.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on July 27, 2019, 04:50:07 PM
And that is the path the path to the Gulag. Except in Trudeau Canada.
MAGA - Make America Gulag Archipelago
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 28, 2019, 06:04:56 PM
Human morality is something we are born with. I think you have seen that baby experiment link that I use.
If morality is a mistake, you would have to blame mother nature.
If nature did not see it as useful to our evolution and life, we would likely have dropped that trait from our evolutions repertoire.
Sadguru wants us to be more human, which says that we should recognize that we all seek to live in moral societies. That is why we have given up most of our freedom for security.
BTW, surveys show that about 70% of all of us share the same basic moral tenets which begin with some form of reciprocity rule.
We talk moral in my home with 4 diverse sons. We do not usually clash or end at wildly different conclusion once we all understand the same metaphors that are used to help discussions along.
Regards
DL
Is air a mistake? But you have to have air for a fire to burn. Reciprocity nearly means that if you let me do my robbery, I will let you do your rape. Honor among thieves. Of course this is necessary for social cohesion. Those who don't believe in social cohesion are the sociopaths. But is "not" being a sociopath, sufficient?
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 28, 2019, 06:10:31 PM
MAGA - Make America Gulag Archipelago
Make All Girls Angry ... aka Feminism at its root. Besides, gulags are a Dem thing. Death camps are the Repub thing.
Quote from: Baruch on July 28, 2019, 10:45:55 PM
Is air a mistake? But you have to have air for a fire to burn. Reciprocity nearly means that if you let me do my robbery, I will let you do your rape. Honor among thieves. Of course this is necessary for social cohesion. Those who don't believe in social cohesion are the sociopaths. But is "not" being a sociopath, sufficient?
We are instinctively tribal and seek cohesion, unless as you indicate, one has a mental problem.
I see putting that cohesive desire as harmful when one become a thoughtless sheeple who will put his moral sense aside to follow something stupid or immoral in the tribes ideology. Like talking serpents and donkeys are real and a genocidal god is somehow a good dod.
Strange that you think that thieves want to be victims of thievery.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on July 28, 2019, 10:47:44 PM
Make All Girls Angry ... aka Feminism at its root. Besides, gulags are a Dem thing. Death camps are the Repub thing.
Do girls and women have a good reason to be angry?
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 29, 2019, 09:18:59 AM
We are instinctively tribal and seek cohesion, unless as you indicate, one has a mental problem.
I see putting that cohesive desire as harmful when one become a thoughtless sheeple who will put his moral sense aside to follow something stupid or immoral in the tribes ideology. Like talking serpents and donkeys are real and a genocidal god is somehow a good dod.
Strange that you think that thieves want to be victims of thievery.
Regards
DL
You don't get the irony of the traditional saying ... "honor among thieves" ... as Admiral Yamamoto said after Pearl Harbor ... "even robbers fear walking home at night". Yes, cohesion is good, except for tribalism (a big negative). It is the sociopaths who are the heroes, but only in small doses. We can't survive a new traitor like George Washington every generation.
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 29, 2019, 09:21:31 AM
Do girls and women have a good reason to be angry?
Regards
DL
In my experience. Every 28 days. Men have reasons to be angry too. Achieving humility and equanimity are hard. We are mostly arrogant and raving.
If you didn't follow my many thousand posts .... I don't support Feminism. If men were gentlemen, the women would have no excuse, and their blame game would be up. No danger of that.
Quote from: Baruch on July 29, 2019, 12:06:22 PM
You don't get the irony of the traditional saying ... "honor among thieves" ... as Admiral Yamamoto said after Pearl Harbor ... "even robbers fear walking home at night". Yes, cohesion is good, except for tribalism (a big negative). It is the sociopaths who are the heroes, but only in small doses. We can't survive a new traitor like George Washington every generation.
Our instincts do not seem to mind us being tribal, especially since we are the weakest and most insecure animal on the planet.
I will say that we should apply our tribalism to a global tribe and not a local tribe since we are all collectively screwing up our eco system and have to ignore borders if we are to get ahead of what we are doing wrong.
Would you be alive if not tribal?
I doubt it. As Socrates asked, who will make your shoes?
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on July 29, 2019, 12:09:04 PM
In my experience. Every 28 days. Men have reasons to be angry too. Achieving humility and equanimity are hard. We are mostly arrogant and raving.
If you didn't follow my many thousand posts .... I don't support Feminism. If men were gentlemen, the women would have no excuse, and their blame game would be up. No danger of that.
I agree, and men are no longer gentlemen, if we ever were.
Real men always put women and children ahead of themselves. I do allow for a few exceptions depending on the wishes of women.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 29, 2019, 03:24:30 PM
Our instincts do not seem to mind us being tribal, especially since we are the weakest and most insecure animal on the planet.
I will say that we should apply our tribalism to a global tribe and not a local tribe since we are all collectively screwing up our eco system and have to ignore borders if we are to get ahead of what we are doing wrong.
Would you be alive if not tribal?
I doubt it. As Socrates asked, who will make your shoes?
Regards
DL
The biggest enemy of man, isn't nature ... not mineral, plant or animal. The biggest enemy is man. The tribe and mob rule (democracy) killed Socrates and destroyed Athens.
"We have met the enemy, and he is us."
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 30, 2019, 01:51:09 PM
"We have met the enemy, and he is us."
There is no human solution to this problem, other than extinction. Pogo from the 70s was talking about the Vietnam War. Nothing has changed.
I asked the hot dog vendor to make me one with everything, but he was out of mustard. Just my luck...
Quote from: Baruch on July 29, 2019, 08:27:41 PM
The biggest enemy of man, isn't nature ... not mineral, plant or animal. The biggest enemy is man. The tribe and mob rule (democracy) killed Socrates and destroyed Athens.
As the top predator on the planet, it is not surprising that we are our biggest enemy. We are basically our only enemy.
Tell us though, should the minority rule or the majority?
You do not seem to like that the majority does. Describe how a minority rule system would work. At first blush, that sounds like a tyranny. I doubt that that is what you would recommend so tell us your thoughts.
Regards
DL
In the U.S. we have a minority of wealthy people who rule, however much we like to think "the people" are in charge.
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 31, 2019, 02:26:55 PM
In the U.S. we have a minority of wealthy people who rule, however much we like to think "the people" are in charge.
Going through life willfully believing a lie is natural to a Christian nation.
Regards
DL
Yeah, the U.S. is based on the profoundly Christian principles of genocide and slavery.
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 31, 2019, 01:50:53 PM
As the top predator on the planet, it is not surprising that we are our biggest enemy. We are basically our only enemy.
Tell us though, should the minority rule or the majority?
You do not seem to like that the majority does. Describe how a minority rule system would work. At first blush, that sounds like a tyranny. I doubt that that is what you would recommend so tell us your thoughts.
Regards
DL
I am in favor of leadership not rule. If you still have French culture, I would expect you to support that. Anyone who wants me to follow them, has to convince me first and then reconvince me on an ongoing basis. Unfortunately, given that politics is too important to be done honestly and fairly, that isn't the politics we practice. For us, the end justifies the means, and the ends are grossly materialistic and egotistical. So tyranny both ways. The ancient Greek analysis was missing Machiavelli, so Plato and Aristotle are wrong.
The majority BTW is wrong almost all the time. So is the minority. When something new happens, it is supported by a minority of "one" and they are right. The mob are right to be suspicious however, in that most individual geniuses are really just maniacs. Basically a "broken clock is right twice a day" kind of thing. Occasionally the maniac happens to be right (statistics).
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 31, 2019, 02:26:55 PM
In the U.S. we have a minority of wealthy people who rule, however much we like to think "the people" are in charge.
"The people are in charge" has always been false and always will be. The way you make a society function is to get the majority deluded enough to believe that. We can't all be king. As said about Americans once upon a time ... Americans all think they are wealthy, though they may be temporarily down on their luck. We don't have the class culture of Europe or the caste culture of India.
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 31, 2019, 02:41:14 PM
Going through life willfully believing a lie is natural to a Christian nation.
Regards
DL
The same for every nation. The important thing is for the proles to not hear the snickering at Davos.
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 31, 2019, 02:50:03 PM
Yeah, the U.S. is based on the profoundly Christian principles of genocide and slavery.
Yes, so much different from Islam ;-) Jews would do the same, but there are never enough of us to deal with the "Gentile" problem.
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 31, 2019, 02:50:03 PM
Yeah, the U.S. is based on the profoundly Christian principles of genocide and slavery.
I agree.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on July 31, 2019, 03:03:51 PM
Yes, so much different from Islam ;-) Jews would do the same, but there are never enough of us to deal with the "Gentile" problem.
No more Canaanites to murder and pillage, huh?
Quote from: Baruch on July 31, 2019, 02:59:12 PM
I am in favor of leadership not rule. If you still have French culture, I would expect you to support that.
I do.
The question now becomes, how does one become a leader without the majority voting him in?
You have not gotten us away from majority rule by changing the language to majority based leadership.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 31, 2019, 03:18:14 PM
I agree.
Regards
DL
People are violent. In spite of our friendship, if we met, under different circumstances, I would drink your blood mixed with wine from a goblet made from your skull. Find your inner Conan. Worship Lord Krum. My religion or lack thereof is irrelevant.
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 31, 2019, 03:21:31 PM
No more Canaanites to murder and pillage, huh?
Original Jews were mostly Canaanites themselves. The Puritan wing of Canaan. There are still a lot of people who need a tent peg put thru their heads.
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 31, 2019, 03:22:19 PM
I do.
The question now becomes, how does one become a leader without the majority voting him in?
You have not gotten us away from majority rule by changing the language to majority based leadership.
Regards
DL
The Athenians used lots to pick many offices from a bucket of names including everyone eligible. That was real democracy, because they realized the compete BS of persuasion and greasing palms. But persuasion and greasing palms won in the end. "This is Sparta!"
That the majority ever rule is complete BS, even with uncorrupt elections. Pericles can eat my baklava. Do to unexpected events, his leadership, the greatest Athens ever had, was a complete disaster. Nemesis, a goddess, is in charge.
There are many wrong answers. Humanity has never found right answer. But I like General Sherman ... "I will not run if nominated, will not serve if elected".
Quote from: Baruch on July 31, 2019, 03:22:51 PM
People are violent. In spit of our friendship, if we met, under different circumstances, I would drink your blood mixed with wine from a goblet made from your skull. Find your inner Conan. My religion or lack thereof is irrelevant.
Conan?
Why reduce myself to a -----
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsUCRcK7QYc
Yes. It is all circumstance. Live long and prosper.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on July 31, 2019, 03:23:29 PM
Original Jews were mostly Canaanites themselves. The Puritan wing of Canaan. There are still a lot of people who need a tent peg put thru their heads.
Our oligarch owners will not let people pull that red white and blue peg out of their rears to put it in anyone's head.
Regards,
DL
Quote from: Baruch on July 31, 2019, 03:27:46 PM
The Athenians used lots to pick many offices from a bucket of names including everyone eligible. That was real democracy, because they realized the compete BS of persuasion and greasing palms. But persuasion and greasing palms won in the end. "This is Sparta!"
That the majority ever rule is complete BS, even with uncorrupt elections. Pericles can eat my baklava. Do to unexpected events, his leadership, the greatest Athens ever had, was a complete disaster. Nemesis, a goddess, is in charge.
There are many wrong answers. Humanity has never found right answer. But I like General Sherman ... "I will not run if nominated, will not serve if elected".
You see a half empty glass while I see a glass that is quite full but unfortunately complacent and that is why history takes so long.
Only a historian or demographer are likely qualified to rule the world. Step up.
Regards,
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 31, 2019, 07:59:02 PM
Our oligarch owners will not let people pull that red white and blue peg out of their rears to put it in anyone's head.
Regards,
DL
Baruch's the very model of a biblical philologist...:-P
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 31, 2019, 08:06:28 PM
You see a half empty glass while I see a glass that is quite full but unfortunately complacent and that is why history takes so long.
Only a historian or demographer are likely qualified to rule the world. Step up.
Regards,
DL
Personally I am finding myself with a more and more Platonian view of governance and leadership; democracy is the second worse form of government, only after tyranny of the corrupt.
Government should be specialized, and the leading class should be philosophers before anything else. An aristocracy where the people who rule are the people who are least interested in ruling for any reason other than duty and knowledge.
Quote from: Greatest I am on July 31, 2019, 08:06:28 PM
You see a half empty glass while I see a glass that is quite full but unfortunately complacent and that is why history takes so long.
Only a historian or demographer are likely qualified to rule the world. Step up.
Regards,
DL
Girly men ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmpBzm5RknI
Quote from: Shiranu on July 31, 2019, 10:45:17 PM
Personally I am finding myself with a more and more Platonian view of governance and leadership; democracy is the second worse form of government, only after tyranny of the corrupt.
Government should be specialized, and the leading class should be philosophers before anything else. An aristocracy where the people who rule are the people who are least interested in ruling for any reason other than duty and knowledge.
You are growing up. But it won't stop this year, it will go on and on.
Quote from: Baruch on July 31, 2019, 03:27:46 PM
The Athenians used lots to pick many offices from a bucket of names including everyone eligible. That was real democracy, because they realized the compete BS of persuasion and greasing palms.
IIRC, in Van Vogt's Null-A (Non-Aristotelian), leaders were picked at random through peoples' ID cards. Which seemed to work pretty well. But ID cards (selfs sort of) could be sold to the equivalent of Robber Barons in exchange for employment and shelter. At the end, the person who designed the system handed Gilbert Gosseyn (the protaganist and best example of Null-A he knew) the winning IDs of the next 6 leaders (so Gosseyn would remain Leader for many years to guide society to a better mode of thinking).
I'm not saying that is the way to govern, but there were some good thoughts in the books. First, that people can act independently towards a common goal. Second, that the mind interprets outside stimuli in ways that may or may not be accurate. Third, (and my favorite) that representations of reality are not themselves reality. In other words, a map is not the actual place; an image is not the thing itself.
Color is creation of our mind, for example. In physics, there are many frequencies. We humans have learned to sense some and we interpret those frequencies internally as "color". Some animals have very limited ability to do that and "see" only a couple. Some interpret higher or lower frequencies as "color" to their advantage (https://www.beeculture.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/4Eyes.png)
But Null-A offers some interesting ways to examine reality.
Quote from: Baruch on July 31, 2019, 11:10:19 PM
You are growing up. But it won't stop this year, it will go on and on.
Maybe. But I want to enjoy being young a bit longer before wandering off into the mountains to live like a hermit, which seems the only logical solution to knowing too much about how the world works.
Quote from: Shiranu on August 01, 2019, 02:32:27 AM
Maybe. But I want to enjoy being young a bit longer before wandering off into the mountains to live like a hermit, which seems the only logical solution to knowing too much about how the world works.
One doesn't have to wander off into hermithood after learning about how the world works badly and selfishly. There is room for action to change things one candidate or vote at a time. I know that may seem optimistic or simplistic, but most advancement comes from says "there is this thing I want to change" and talking to others about it. It's incremental and not showy, but daily actions matter.
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 31, 2019, 10:41:09 PM
Baruch's the very model of a biblical philologist...:-P
He is rather good sometimes.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Shiranu on July 31, 2019, 10:45:17 PM
Personally I am finding myself with a more and more Platonian view of governance and leadership; democracy is the second worse form of government, only after tyranny of the corrupt.
Government should be specialized, and the leading class should be philosophers before anything else. An aristocracy where the people who rule are the people who are least interested in ruling for any reason other than duty and knowledge.
Your thinking is Socratic and accurate.
Duty and honor more than duty and knowledge was what he said should rule.
Today, the philosopher can easily be replaced by a demographer.
We are led by ideals and ideal can be found in demographic graphs just as they can be visualized.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 31, 2019, 10:41:09 PM
Baruch's the very model of a biblical philologist...:-P
To "I Am the Very Model of a Modern Major-General" (often referred to as the "Major-General's Song" or "Modern Major-General's Song") is a patter song from Gilbert and Sullivan's 1879 comic opera The Pirates of Penzance...
"Baruch's the very model of a biblical philologist.
He has the information of the linguists and historic imagist.
He loves the Kings of England and he dates and loves the rules of it.
And also loves the Nazis who commanded positively wonderfly."
I won't continue...
Quote from: Cavebear on August 12, 2019, 04:26:23 AM
To "I Am the Very Model of a Modern Major-General" (often referred to as the "Major-General's Song" or "Modern Major-General's Song") is a patter song from Gilbert and Sullivan's 1879 comic opera The Pirates of Penzance...
"Baruch's the very model of a biblical philologist.
He has the information of the linguists and historic imagist.
He loves the Kings of England and he dates and loves the rules of it.
And also loves the Nazis who commanded positively wonderfly."
I won't continue...
Kudo
Quote from: Baruch on August 12, 2019, 06:36:09 AM
Kudo
Thanks. Give it a try yourself about me. It's fun...
Quote from: Cavebear on August 12, 2019, 10:14:41 PM
Thanks. Give it a try yourself about me. It's fun...
Alas my poetic muscles atrophied in 8th grade.
Quote from: Baruch on August 12, 2019, 11:22:07 PM
Alas my poetic muscles atrophied in 8th grade.
Well, if you don't try, you can't succeed. I would write for you of myself, but I can't help self-flattery of all my many sterling qualities and depth of knowledge of all things great and small. But I bet if I met my clone, I could do a pretty good job mocking him though. ;)
Quote from: Cavebear on August 12, 2019, 11:58:05 PM
Well, if you don't try, you can't succeed. I would write for you of myself, but I can't help self-flattery of all my many sterling qualities and depth of knowledge of all things great and small. But I bet if I met my clone, I could do a pretty good job mocking him though. ;)
See, your mania is at least amusing. Like Blackadder having given Shakespeare all his good lines.
Quote from: Baruch on August 13, 2019, 12:02:48 AM
See, your mania is at least amusing. Like Blackadder having given Shakespeare all his good lines.
Wasn't he a Dr Who character? Or was that Red Dwarf?
Quote from: Cavebear on August 13, 2019, 12:48:04 AM
Wasn't he a Dr Who character? Or was that Red Dwarf?
The actor also mocked Dr Who. But Blackadder was his own comedy of history. All of Blackadder's ancestors were spectacular cads and failures. The actor has had numerous funny parts to play. No, I don't know that he has mocked Red Dwarf. But both he and Red Dwarf were British productions.
Quote from: Baruch on August 13, 2019, 01:56:49 AM
The actor also mocked Dr Who. But Blackadder was his own comedy of history. All of Blackadder's ancestors were spectacular cads and failures. The actor has had numerous funny parts to play. No, I don't know that he has mocked Red Dwarf. But both he and Red Dwarf were British productions.
Whoa, I thought I was joking about some actual historical character. So you are saying it actually was a fictional TV one and my mock pretty much nailed it?
Quote from: Cavebear on August 13, 2019, 03:40:38 AM
Whoa, I thought I was joking about some actual historical character. So you are saying it actually was a fictional TV one and my mock pretty much nailed it?
Yes.
Quote from: Baruch on August 12, 2019, 11:22:07 PM
Alas my poetic muscles atrophied in 8th grade.
Along with your brain. That would explain a lot...
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 10, 2019, 03:08:26 PM
Your thinking is Socratic and accurate.
Duty and honor more than duty and knowledge was what he said should rule.
Today, the philosopher can easily be replaced by a demographer.
We are led by ideals and ideal can be found in demographic graphs just as they can be visualized.
Regards
DL
Ever heard of National Security Study Memorandum 200?
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on August 13, 2019, 07:44:42 AM
Ever heard of National Security Study Memorandum 200?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Study_Memorandum_200
It never happened. Club of Rome never happened ... these are not the conspiracy robots you are looking for ... Jedi Joe mind trick.
Quote from: Baruch on August 13, 2019, 10:28:36 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Study_Memorandum_200
It never happened. Club of Rome never happened ... these are not the conspiracy robots you are looking for ... Jedi Joe mind trick.
I brought it up because one of the things that was talked about was controlling the population in some of the poor rapidly expanding population countries the demographers identified as potential threats by limiting the food supplies to those countries.
That's the kind of things that might happen if you put the demographers in charge. Too many people too fast? Fuck it. Let's starve the mother fuckers to death.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on August 13, 2019, 04:15:20 PM
I brought it up because one of the things that was talked about was controlling the population in some of the poor rapidly expanding population countries the demographers identified as potential threats by limiting the food supplies to those countries.
That's the kind of things that might happen if you put the demographers in charge. Too many people too fast? Fuck it. Let's starve the mother fuckers to death.
Correct. But the conspiracy theory is to kill the Europeans, and replace them with Africans et al. Because they are easier to control. It is yet to be determined, that it will be Africans killed in Africa, to be replaced with Chinese immigrants. There are already 300,000 Chinese guest workers in Italy. They aren't there for the spaghetti.
Quote from: Baruch on August 14, 2019, 12:11:57 AM
Correct. But the conspiracy theory is to kill the Europeans, and replace them with Africans et al. Because they are easier to control. It is yet to be determined, that it will be Africans killed in Africa, to be replaced with Chinese immigrants. There are already 300,000 Chinese guest workers in Italy. They aren't there for the spaghetti.
I had to look that up, but there are infact already over 300,000 Chinese nationals in Italy, and that is depressing.
It's not that immigrants are coming in, it's from where and for why. I doubt it's much coincidence that the Chinese government is also opening 4 ports (one in my mothersland of Sicily) across Italy. Trading the Mafia for Xi. One more port of call for Xi's new Silk Road, his economic dominion of the world (that already extends from China to most of Africa and Eastern Europe).
It's been over 2300 years since Sicily was free of imperial control, of one empire or another... and it looks like that won't be changing for a few hundred more at least. They might benefit in the short-term, but I doubt the Sicilian people's best interest are in the Communist parties mind.
Quote from: Shiranu on August 14, 2019, 12:33:06 AM
I had to look that up, but there are infact already over 300,000 Chinese nationals in Italy, and that is depressing.
It's not that immigrants are coming in, it's from where and for why. I doubt it's much coincidence that the Chinese government is also opening 4 ports (one in my mothersland of Sicily) across Italy. Trading the Mafia for Xi. One more port of call for Xi's new Silk Road, his economic dominion of the world (that already extends from China to most of Africa and Eastern Europe).
It's been over 2300 years since Sicily was free of imperial control, of one empire or another... and it looks like that won't be changing for a few hundred more at least. They might benefit in the short-term, but I doubt the Sicilian people's best interest are in the Communist parties mind.
Italian government corruption. Not immigrants, but slave labor located outside Uigher territory. Think if maquiladora factories were on the Texas side of the border, and Mexican people were trafficked from Mexico to them. Yes, for money, lets move 1 million Chinese to San Francisco, build a real China Town, and expel all the non-Chinese residents ;-) As foreign laborers, no danger they will vote D party. Or would we prefer 1 million Hong Kong refugees moving to Cali.
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 31, 2019, 10:41:09 PM
Baruch's the very model of a biblical philologist...:-P
If only that would be true the quality of this forum would improve by at least 10%...
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 14, 2019, 04:14:16 AM
If only that would be true the quality of this forum would improve by at least 10%...
Outside of physics, your candle is no brighter than anyone else's. MikeCL is a good Biblical scholar too.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on August 13, 2019, 07:44:42 AM
Ever heard of National Security Study Memorandum 200?
Not particularly, but after reading on it, I see a U.N. POV that has been with us and in effect for a long time.
It's logic seems accurate.
The U.N. has universal religious programs that it is implementing world wide so a centralized governance is where we are all heading and as a universalist, I do not mind, and in fact promote a one world system, because that is what will be needed as our planet tries to have us go extinct thanks to our screwing up our own eco system.
Regards
DL
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on August 13, 2019, 04:15:20 PM
I brought it up because one of the things that was talked about was controlling the population in some of the poor rapidly expanding population countries the demographers identified as potential threats by limiting the food supplies to those countries.
That's the kind of things that might happen if you put the demographers in charge. Too many people too fast? Fuck it. Let's starve the mother fuckers to death.
That is not what a demographer would do or recommend.
He would impose a diet on all the obese nations that want to starve others.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on August 14, 2019, 08:33:56 AM
Outside of physics, your candle is no brighter than anyone else's.
Flattery won't get you anywhere.
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 08:40:38 AM
Not particularly, but after reading on it, I see a U.N. POV that has been with us and in effect for a long time.
It's logic seems accurate.
The U.N. has universal religious programs that it is implementing world wide so a centralized governance is where we are all heading and as a universalist, I do not mind, and in fact promote a one world system, because that is what will be needed as our planet tries to have us go extinct thanks to our screwing up our own eco system.
Regards
DL
Where we differ. I want the US out of the UN. I don't want to be tied to other Americans, let alone to non-Americans who's interests are opposed to mine.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 14, 2019, 09:11:42 AM
Flattery won't get you anywhere.
Sorry, all out of steam rollers ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on August 14, 2019, 01:24:04 PM
Sorry, all out of steam rollers ;-)
If you're looking to change your avatar to Saint Hitler, a google search will give you plenty...
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 14, 2019, 01:26:31 PM
If you're looking to change your avatar to Saint Hitler, a google search will give you plenty...
Some people hated Churchill before WW II. Others hated Churchill during WW II. Yet more hated Churchill after WW II, and even after he died.
The Catholic Church (of Satan) was one such group, before, during and after ... all three types. So like the movie "Telefon" with Charles Bronson, are you waiting for your trigger phrase from the Papal nuncio? (Sarc)
Quote from: Baruch on August 14, 2019, 01:50:15 PM
Some people hated Churchill before WW II. Others hated Churchill during WW II. Yet more hated Churchill after WW II, and even after he died.
He was a warmonger, wanted to restore the old British empire to its former glory, gave Stalin half of Europe. What's there to celebrate???
Quote from: Baruch on August 14, 2019, 01:23:30 PM
Where we differ. I want the US out of the UN. I don't want to be tied to other Americans, let alone to non-Americans who's interests are opposed to mine.
Check the stats. The U.S. needs help more than most nations.
As to interests, the stats also show how uniform the human race is in terms of goals.
A one world government is on the way so you may as well get used to it.
Regards
DL
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 14, 2019, 03:00:53 PM
He was a warmonger, wanted to restore the old British empire to its former glory, gave Stalin half of Europe. What's there to celebrate???
Exactly. You put yourself into the true Deplorable category. But I do that too myself too. We should have marched into the Soviet Union, exterminated the communists, then turned around and done the same thing in W Europe, N America and elsewhere (per General Patton). The 1960s would never have happened (as sponsored by the KGB).
There is nothing wrong with war. As natural as breast feeding. Pacifists however are .. psychos and cowards. Including Mahatma Gandhi (not a coward, but was a psycho).
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 03:25:54 PM
Check the stats. The U.S. needs help more than most nations.
As to interests, the stats also show how uniform the human race is in terms of goals.
A one world government is on the way so you may as well get used to it.
Regards
DL
Other nations want the US dead. I see that as no help at all. It is only by restraint, that I don't call for one-world-government, after the elimination of all non-Americans. I know how Hitler felt. That is how triggered I am by all the bath-salt politics. So fine, let everyone enslave themselves to Geneva, The Hague and Brussels. Not my problem. If it become a problem, we can ban all visas from W Europe. After WW I, WW II there is deep suspicion in the US of anything ... European.
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 03:25:54 PM
A one world government is on the way so you may as well get used to it.
IMO the best functional definition of government is the monopoly of violence. Based on that definition, recent history has increased the number of governments, not consolidated them.
Quote from: Baruch on August 14, 2019, 07:15:31 PM
Exactly. You put yourself into the true Deplorable category. But I do that too myself too. We should have marched into the Soviet Union, exterminated the communists, then turned around and done the same thing in W Europe, N America and elsewhere (per General Patton). The 1960s would never have happened (as sponsored by the KGB).
There is nothing wrong with war. As natural as breast feeding. Pacifists however are .. psychos and cowards. Including Mahatma Gandhi.
It would have taken less than that. All the allies had to do is to not supply the USSR while the Germans were invading. It might have taken 10 or more years for Stalin to turn the tide without Allies supplying with just about everything, including vital information on what was happening on the ground. Of course a lot of this was kept secret as Americans might not have approved.
Quote from: aileron on August 14, 2019, 07:26:44 PM
IMO the best functional definition of government is the monopoly of violence. Based on that definition, recent history has increased the number of governments, not consolidated them.
That is correct. And paradoxical and troubling. I am split on the dilemma between anarchism and dictatorship. Consolidating governments convert all wars to civil wars, and greatly increase bureaucracy, and thus increase inefficiency. If that worked, then the Soviet Union would have been an unbeatable success ... as would have Ming Dynasty China.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 14, 2019, 07:29:01 PM
It would have taken less than that. All the allies had to do is to not supply the USSR while the Germans were invading. It might have taken 10 or more years for Stalin to turn the tide without Allies supplying with just about everything, including vital information on what was happening on the ground. Of course a lot of this was kept secret as Americans might not have approved.
Yes, that was a choice. And that is why you hate Churchill. He couldn't stand the Germans, and was wiling to cut a deal with Stalin. A philo-German would look the other way at the problems of the Third Reich, to concentrate on the bigger problem. And that is why I consider you the most dangerous person who posts here.
Quote from: Baruch on August 14, 2019, 07:34:56 PM
Yes, that was a choice. And that is why you hate Churchill. He couldn't stand the Germans, and was wiling to cut a deal with Stalin. A philo-German would look the other way at the problems of the Third Reich, to concentrate on the bigger problem.
Yes it was a good deal for Stain - half of Europe. The Polish, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Georgians, and fifteen other nationalities would strongly disagree with you.
QuoteAnd that is why I consider you the most dangerous person who posts here.
Need I remind you that flattery won't get you anywhere...
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 14, 2019, 07:43:36 PM
Yes it was a good deal for Stain - half of Europe. The Polish, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Georgians, and fifteen other nationalities would strongly disagree with you.
Need I remind you that flattery won't get you anywhere...
Churchill didn't want Stalin occupying E Europe either. He and Patton agreed. But the US wasn't interested in another Churchill crusade (Churchill was the first to lead the anti-Bolshevik movement around 1918). But that is how one goes down the rabbit hole of alternative history.
Quote from: Baruch on August 14, 2019, 07:52:01 PM
Churchill didn't want Stalin occupying E Europe either. He and Patton agreed. But the US wasn't interested in another Churchill crusade (Churchill was the first to lead the anti-Bolshevik movement around 1918). But that is how one goes down the rabbit hole of alternative history.
Trying to apologize for your idol?! His hate for Hitler clouded his judgment. The smart thing would have been to let Hitler and Stalin fight it out. Whoever would win would be so exhausted that for the Allies it would have been a walk in the park in cleaning up any German resistance in West Europe. Very few historians are willing to admit openly that our so-called "heroes", Churchill and Roosevelt, were dumb to help Stalin, and were outplayed by Stalin at Yalta.
Quote from: Baruch on August 14, 2019, 07:18:36 PM
Other nations want the US dead.
Not really. Just changed to a moral nation.
Regards
DL
Quote from: aileron on August 14, 2019, 07:26:44 PM
IMO the best functional definition of government is the monopoly of violence. Based on that definition, recent history has increased the number of governments, not consolidated them.
Global climate change and mass immigrations and migrations will cause us to either war a lot more or unite a lot more.
I don't think the world want's to war more. Especially in the West.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 09:50:02 PM
Global climate change and mass immigrations and migrations will cause us to either war a lot more or unite a lot more.
I don't think the world want's to war more. Especially in the West.
Regards
DL
Tell that to trump/bolton.
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 09:50:02 PM
Global climate change and mass immigrations and migrations will cause us to either war a lot more or unite a lot more.
I don't think the world want's to war more. Especially in the West.
Regards
DL
There's no a priori reason trading a bigger government for two or more smaller ones leads to war. The Soviet Union went from one government to fifteen with almost no bloodshed. Czechoslovakia split peacefully with Ceaușescu and his deer in the headlights expression one of the only fatalities. Yugoslavia turned into a shit show, but some parts broke away without a shot fired, such as Slovenia.
In fact, a good case can be made that wars are more likely when governments encompass groups who simply don't get along, such as Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire leading into WWI.
Quote from: Mike Cl on August 14, 2019, 09:50:58 PM
Tell that to trump/bolton.
Trump is like a bug on a windshield.
Americans are not that bright, but they are not stupid enough to actually follow such a fool into a fight.
I am surprised your military has put up with trump this long.
His oligarch owner must also own a bunch of Generals.
Regards
DL
Quote from: aileron on August 14, 2019, 09:58:50 PM
There's no a priori reason trading a bigger government for two or more smaller ones leads to war. The Soviet Union went from one government to fifteen with almost no bloodshed. Czechoslovakia split peacefully with Ceaușescu and his deer in the headlights expression one of the only fatalities. Yugoslavia turned into a shit show, but some parts broke away without a shot fired, such as Slovenia.
In fact, a good case can be made that wars are more likely when governments encompass groups who simply don't get along, such as Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire leading into WWI.
You are thinking political and individual power bases.
In a universal system, demographics rule. Not individuals.
Universalism is smaller cheaper governance. Not bigger and more expensive governance.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 10:06:51 PM
You are thinking political and individual power bases.
In a universal system, demographics rule. Not individuals.
Universalism is smaller cheaper governance. Not bigger and more expensive governance.
Regards
DL
I really don't know what "Universalism" means as a government because the definitions have been so squishy, touchy-feely, and all over the map.
Let's move beyond semantics and go to a functional definition... Where has this form of governance been tried in the real world?
Quote from: aileron on August 14, 2019, 10:11:52 PM
I really don't know what "Universalism" means as a government because the definitions have been so squishy, touchy-feely, and all over the map.
Let's move beyond semantics and go to a functional definition... Where has this form of governance been tried in the real world?
It has not. Not yet.
We have started though, mostly through the U.N., to introduce a universal religion and harmonized government reporting to help their demographers in their work.
The G 12, Commonwealth, U. K. and Eastern block coalitions are joining up as well.
Funding to mitigate the harm from climate change and immigration will force even more countries to cooperate more.
The U.S. has been pushing for a new world order for a long time and they will get it. They just wont lead it.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 10:03:27 PM
Trump is like a bug on a windshield.
Americans are not that bright, but they are not stupid enough to actually follow such a fool into a fight.
I am surprised your military has put up with trump this long.
His oligarch owner must also own a bunch of Generals.
Regards
DL
I hope you are correct. But as it turned out, Hitler was a bug on a windshield--but before that mess was finished, he had managed to break a whole lot of windshields. And the German people were not that bright, but they were not stupid enough to follow Hitler into a fight. Right?????
Quote from: Baruch on August 13, 2019, 06:03:56 AM
Yes.
Thank you... I learn something new every day. But I bet I forget this one tomorrow. Weak neuropath for that kind of detail. I'd rather remember how to flip an omelet properly.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 14, 2019, 08:35:58 PM
Trying to apologize for your idol?! His hate for Hitler clouded his judgment. The smart thing would have been to let Hitler and Stalin fight it out. Whoever would win would be so exhausted that for the Allies it would have been a walk in the park in cleaning up any German resistance in West Europe. Very few historians are willing to admit openly that our so-called "heroes", Churchill and Roosevelt, were dumb to help Stalin, and were outplayed by Stalin at Yalta.
That was the plan, but Hitler/Stalin botched Allied plans. They were never supposed to be allies. But Hitler had a genius stroke to both ally with Stalin,and then betray him as soon as practical. Hitler betrayed Stalin, much to Stalin's surprise because of paranoia. Churchill was getting too close to Stalin. Stalin naively had no intention of fighting Germany or allying with Britain. Just nibble a few E European territories. Hitler on the other hand found it incomprehensible that the British wouldn't settle. Invading Britain was plan B, for after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 10:03:27 PM
Trump is like a bug on a windshield.
Americans are not that bright, but they are not stupid enough to actually follow such a fool into a fight.
I am surprised your military has put up with trump this long.
His oligarch owner must also own a bunch of Generals.
Regards
DL
The "ownership" of the West goes back several levels. The military of the US isn't a Latin American junta, yet. CIA/FBI does all the skullduggery. Right now, the US military is the most "typical representative" of all public institutions. The best we have to offer (because voluntary).
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 09:47:17 PM
Not really. Just changed to a moral nation.
Regards
DL
BS. Humans have no morality. That is why your POV is utopian.
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 09:50:02 PM
Global climate change and mass immigrations and migrations will cause us to either war a lot more or unite a lot more.
I don't think the world want's to war more. Especially in the West.
Regards
DL
That is the plan. Caligula ... "I wish humanity had a common neck, so I might more easily slit it". War is human nature. Pacifism is degenerate.
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 10:06:51 PM
You are thinking political and individual power bases.
In a universal system, demographics rule. Not individuals.
Universalism is smaller cheaper governance. Not bigger and more expensive governance.
Regards
DL
Like socialism/communism. Lose money on each item, but make it up on volume.
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 10:54:05 PM
It has not. Not yet.
We have started though, mostly through the U.N., to introduce a universal religion and harmonized government reporting to help their demographers in their work.
The G 12, Commonwealth, U. K. and Eastern block coalitions are joining up as well.
Funding to mitigate the harm from climate change and immigration will force even more countries to cooperate more.
The U.S. has been pushing for a new world order for a long time and they will get it. They just wont lead it.
Regards
DL
French foreign policy since Avignon. World ruled by a French Pope, who is ruled by the French monarchy.
Quote from: aileron on August 14, 2019, 10:11:52 PM
I really don't know what "Universalism" means as a government because the definitions have been so squishy, touchy-feely, and all over the map.
Let's move beyond semantics and go to a functional definition... Where has this form of governance been tried in the real world?
Sargon, Nebuchadnessar, Cyrus, Alexander, Shih Huang Di, Caesar ....
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 10:54:05 PM
It has not. Not yet.
We have started though, mostly through the U.N., to introduce a universal religion and harmonized government reporting to help their demographers in their work.
The G 12, Commonwealth, U. K. and Eastern block coalitions are joining up as well.
Funding to mitigate the harm from climate change and immigration will force even more countries to cooperate more.
The U.S. has been pushing for a new world order for a long time and they will get it. They just wont lead it.
Regards
DL
China will lead it. France will be taken over by Disneyland Paris, run by communists. All of Europe will be tourist traps for Chinse tourists.
Quote from: Baruch on August 15, 2019, 03:27:32 AM
That was the plan, but Hitler/Stalin botched Allied plans. They were never supposed to be allies. But Hitler had a genius stroke to both ally with Stalin,and then betray him as soon as practical. Hitler betrayed Stalin, much to Stalin's surprise because of paranoia. Churchill was getting too close to Stalin. Stalin naively had no intention of fighting Germany or allying with Britain. Just nibble a few E European territories. Hitler on the other hand found it incomprehensible that the British wouldn't settle. Invading Britain was plan B, for after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Are you kidding? Hitler gave a thousand speeches in which he declared he would destroy communism. Sorry you've got it wrong. Stalin knew that Hitler knew that alliance was temporary. After splitting Poland with Hitler, he moved into the Baltic region, invaded Finland, did everything to prepare Russia for the onslaught. Thanks to Allies (mainly the US), Russia got the following:
Quote
What these figures mean when broken down into specific items may be seen from the following statistics on the Soviet Union.
By the end of June 1944 the United States had sent to the Soviets under lend-lease more than 11,000 planes; over 6,000 tanks and tank destroyers; and 300,000 trucks and other military vehicles.
Many of the planes have been flown directly from the United States to the Soviet Union over the northern route via Alaska and Siberia, others were crated and shipped to the Persian Gulf, where they were assembled and flown into Russia.
We have also sent to the Soviets about 350 locomotives, 1,640 flat cars, and close to half a million tons of rails and accessories, axles, and wheels, all for the improvement of the railways feeding the Red armies on the Eastern Front. For the armies themselves we have sent miles of field telephone wire, thousands of telephones, and many thousands of tons of explosives. And we have also provided machine tools and other equipment to help the Russians manufacture their own planes, guns, shells, and bombs.
We have supplied our allies with large quantities of food. The Soviet Union alone has received some 3,000,000 tons.
https://www.historians.org/about-aha-and-membership/aha-history-and-archives/gi-roundtable-series/pamphlets/em-13-how-shall-lend-lease-accounts-be-settled-(1945)/how-much-of-what-goods-have-we-sent-to-which-allies
That kind of help was anything but insignificant.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 06:42:54 AM
Are you kidding? Hitler gave a thousand speeches in which he declared he would destroy communism. Sorry you've got it wrong. Stalin knew that Hitler knew that alliance was temporary.
You might want to be careful of that. From what I've read, Stalin was profoundly shocked when Hitler attacked his Soviet Union, and went in a deep withdrawal for several days afterwards. When he came out of it, he through Soviet armies into the German armies like wood chips into a raging fire. But enough wood can choke a fire and Stalin did.
Make no mistake about it, Stalin was a hideous bastard among the top hideous bastards in all of history. And this won't come across well, but Stalin is really the one who defeated Hitler. By sheer ferocious insanity and will, he broke the German armies.
I despise the lunatic (both of them of course), but if Hitler and Stain had maintained a mutually fearful peace, I'm not sure the Western Allies could have invaded Europe successfully without mass nuclear weapons. And even those are not very good on battlefields.
I have often thought that, without Stalin's rage and uncaring sacrifice of Soviet soldiers, the Cold War would have been between The US and The Continental Nazis. "Brexit" might have an entirely different meaning today... More like Poland leaving the Warsaw Pact.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 15, 2019, 07:05:18 AM
You might want to be careful of that. From what I've read, Stalin was profoundly shocked when Hitler attacked his Soviet Union, and went in a deep withdrawal for several days afterwards. When he came out of it, he through Soviet armies into the German armies like wood chips into a raging fire. But enough wood can choke a fire and Stalin did.
Make no mistake about it, Stalin was a hideous bastard among the top hideous bastards in all of history. And this won't come across well, but Stalin is really the one who defeated Hitler. By sheer ferocious insanity and will, he broke the German armies.
I despise the lunatic (both of them of course), but if Hitler and Stain had maintained a mutually fearful peace, I'm not sure the Western Allies could have invaded Europe successfully without mass nuclear weapons. And even those are not very good on battlefields.
I have often thought that, without Stalin's rage and uncaring sacrifice of Soviet soldiers, the Cold War would have been between The US and The Continental Nazis. "Brexit" might have an entirely different meaning today... More like Poland leaving the Warsaw Pact.
Correct. My grandfather participated in the physical lend-lease thru Iran into the Soviet Union. I hope Joe doesn't condemn him for supporting Stalin, on orders from FDR.
Quote from: Baruch on August 15, 2019, 08:07:17 AM
Correct. My grandfather participated in the physical lend-lease thru Iran into the Soviet Union. I hope Joe doesn't condemn him for supporting Stalin, on orders from FDR.
Yes I am. When Hitler took power in 1933, Stalin had already murdered over 10 millions of people in the USSR. Hitler is a monster, but Stalin is a humongous monster. That Churchill, along with Roosevelt, decided to help Stalin is a major blunder that turned into a catastrophe - half of Europe was given to Stalin. These countries had to wait another 50 years to free themselves from Russian oppression. So I don't consider Churchill to be a hero but a fumbling foolish warmonger.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 08:44:07 AM
Yes I am. When Hitler took power in 1933, Stalin had already murdered over 10 millions of people in the USSR. Hitler is a monster, but Stalin is a humongous monster. That Churchill, along with Roosevelt, decided to help Stalin is a major blunder that turned into a catastrophe - half of Europe was given to Stalin. These countries had to wait another 50 years to free themselves from Russian oppression. So I don't consider Churchill to be a hero but a fumbling foolish warmonger.
I despise Stalin as a human being. But, out of curiosity, what part of WWII do you think would have gone well without his nearly insane attacks on the Nazis?
Quote from: Cavebear on August 15, 2019, 07:05:18 AM
You might want to be careful of that. From what I've read, Stalin was profoundly shocked when Hitler attacked his Soviet Union,
Wrong conclusion. He was in a shock because his troops had buckled down under the initial invasion. Stalin had prepared for this invasion. In the aftermath of the Polish invasion, Stalin moved quickly into the Baltic forcing those countries to align themselves with Russia. Ditto with Finland, but the Finns refused and he went to war against them.
QuoteMake no mistake about it, Stalin was a hideous bastard among the top hideous bastards in all of history. And this won't come across well, but Stalin is really the one who defeated Hitler. By sheer ferocious insanity and will, he broke the German armies.
Stalin won the battle of Stalingrad because the Allies had broken German secret code and were feeding him intel. In fact, Hitler was so outraged that his convoys of supply were attacked precisely where it was at the exact time. He falsely concluded that the only way Stalin knew all of this was that some of his generals were plotting against him, which he then proceed to fire some and the others were threatened of execution if they would ever pull back. So the Germans were left to fight with hardly any reinforcement. It was just a question of time that the Russians would win by attrition.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 09:10:00 AM
Wrong conclusion. He was in a shock because his troops had buckled down under the initial invasion. Stalin had prepared for this invasion. In the aftermath of the Polish invasion, Stalin moved quickly into the Baltic forcing those countries to align themselves with Russia. Ditto with Finland, but the Finns refused and he went to war against them.
Stalin won the battle of Stalingrad because the Allies had broken German secret code and were feeding him intel. In fact, Hitler was so outraged that his convoys of supply were attacked precisely where it was at the exact time. He falsely concluded that the only way Stalin knew all of this was that some of his generals were plotting against him, which he then proceed to fire some and the others were threatened of execution if they would ever pull back. So the Germans were left to fight with hardly any reinforcement. It was just a question of time that the Russians would win by attrition.
Well, yes, the Western allies helped with intell and supplies. For our benefit. The more Nizis soldiers the Soviets killed, the fewer to attack us, right? I didn't say we did it out of glory to the Soviets.
From what I can find quickly, the Soviets killed about 2 million Nazi soldiers, and about 750,000 died fighting the Western Allies.
By official German statistics, over 75% of German army deaths appear to have occurred on the Eastern Front from 1939 to 1944.
Is that sufficient?
Quote from: Cavebear on August 15, 2019, 09:27:59 AM
Well, yes, the Western allies helped with intell and supplies. For our benefit. The more Nizis soldiers the Soviets killed, the fewer to attack us, right? I didn't say we did it out of glory to the Soviets.
From what I can find quickly, the Soviets killed about 2 million Nazi soldiers, and about 750,000 died fighting the Western Allies.
By official German statistics, over 75% of German army deaths appear to have occurred on the Eastern Front from 1939 to 1944.
Is that sufficient?
I'm not disputing those facts. My argument with Baruch is that he idolizes Churchill. My counter-point is that Churchill made a major blunder with respect to Stalin. My claim is that if the Allies had abstained in the conflict between Hitler and Stalin, the two would have fought for many more years, and by that time both Germany and Russia would have been exhausted, and the Allies would not have been in the position of ceding half of Europe to Stalin. With the huge help, in the billions of dollars, which in today's currency, trillions of dollars, Stalin repelled the Germans but also was in a strong position to demand a huge prize - half of Europe. Had you been born in one of those countries, and suffered for the next 50 years Russian oppression, you would be of a different opinion. That I know for sure.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 09:38:21 AM
I'm not disputing those facts. My argument with Baruch is that he idolizes Churchill. My counter-point is that Churchill made a major blunder with respect to Stalin. My claim is that if the Allies had abstained in the conflict between Hitler and Stalin, the two would have fought for many more years, and by that time both Germany and Russia would have been exhausted, and the Allies would not have been in the position of ceding half of Europe to Stalin. With the huge help, in the billions of dollars, which in today's currency, trillions of dollars, Stalin repelled the Germans but also was in a strong position to demand a huge prize - half of Europe. Had you been born in one of those countries, and suffered for the next 50 years Russian oppression, you would be of a different opinion. That I know for sure.
As England and France declared war on Germany after the invasion of Poland, and the initial war was among those 3, what you seem to be suggesting is they (England and France) should have actually "undeclared" war after Hitler and Stalin went apeshit at each other.
Oh but wait, France was conquered by then and Hitler was bombing English cities!
It was only June 1941 when Hitler attacked the Soviets. Your timeline is completely wrong. Please do check things before you type...
Quote from: Cavebear on August 15, 2019, 09:48:47 AM
As England and France declared war on Germany after the invasion of Poland, and the initial war was among those 3, what you seem to be suggesting is they (England and France) should have actually "undeclared" war after Hitler and Stalin went apeshit at each other.
Oh but wait, France was conquered by then and Hitler was bombing English cities!
It was only June 1941 when Hitler attacked the Soviets. Your timeline is completely wrong. Please do check things before you type...
The alliance between Hitler and Stalin was temporary. Both knew this. When they did invade Poland in 1939, it was England and France that declared war on Germany, not the other way around. The odd thing is that if they had been consistent, they should have declared war on the Soviet Union, but they didn't even though they had signed a pact with Poland that in any aggression, France and England would come to Poland's help. Now it turned out that in both France and England there was no appetite to go to war. So after the invasion of Poland, France moved a few troops on its border, England was prepared to send its troops into Europe but deferred seeing France was hesitant. In the meantime Hitler prepared his forces to attack France, which he did the following year in spring 1940. He made multiple attempts to secure a peace with England, which Churchill declined - famous speech, we will fight them everywhere, blah, blah... Hitler had no intention to invade England, just force them to sign a peace treaty, hence the bombardment of London and other cities. Churchill was stubborn, and so Hitler decided it was time to do what he had promised time and time again to his troops: invade Russia and destroy communism. So Churchill made the decision to help Stalin. But make no mistake in thousands of speech, Hitler called out for the destruction of communism. That Russians had blood on their hands with millions killed by Stalin. The real battle in Hitler's mind was not Germany versus England, but Germany versus Russia. Of course Churchill played Roosevelt to come to England's hand. At first he was unsuccessful, but Pearl Harbor changed all that. The rest is history.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 10:12:06 AM
The alliance between Hitler and Stalin was temporary. Both knew this. When they did invade Poland in 1939, it was England and France that declared war on Germany, not the other way around. The odd thing is that if they had been consistent, they should have declared war on the Soviet Union, but they didn't even though they had signed a pact with Poland that in any aggression, France and England would come to Poland's help. Now it turned out that in both France and England there was no appetite to go to war. So after the invasion of Poland, France moved a few troops on its border, England was prepared to send its troops into Europe but deferred seeing France was hesitant. In the meantime Hitler prepared his forces to attack France, which he did the following year in spring 1940. He made multiple attempts to secure a peace with England, which Churchill declined - famous speech, we will fight them everywhere, blah, blah... Hitler had no intention to invade England, just force them to sign a peace treaty, hence the bombardment of London and other cities. Churchill was stubborn, and so Hitler decided it was time to do what he had promised time and time again to his troops: invade Russia and destroy communism. So Churchill made the decision to help Stalin. But make no mistake in thousands of speech, Hitler called out for the destruction of communism. That Russians had blood on their hands with millions killed by Stalin. The real battle in Hitler's mind was not Germany versus England, but Germany versus Russia. Of course Churchill played Roosevelt to come to England's hand. At first he was unsuccessful, but Pearl Harbor changed all that. The rest is history.
I said that England and France declared war on Germany. That you suggest I didn't is inaccurate.
Hitler and the Soviets both invaded Poland in Sept 1939, but the Germans did it first, hence the declaration of war required by English and French treaties. After Hitler invaded Poland and continued into the Soviet Union, the Soviets were no longer in Poland (at the time) and hence no need to declare war about that.
And the Germans were considered the threat to peace. Bad hindsight maybe but if you get the enemy on 3 fronts, you usually win.
I agree that Churchill managed his affairs well from a weak position and he kept England independent. Kudos to him. I'm not positive that he quite guessed how the US would support him well enough when the Japanese attacked, but it was his only chance.
The rest of it is just standard war stuff...
Quote from: Cavebear on August 15, 2019, 10:43:50 AM
I said that England and France declared war on Germany. That you suggest I didn't is inaccurate.
I wasn't suggest that. I was emphasizing it to go on to the fact they didn't declare war on Russia. IMO, they should have.
QuoteHitler and the Soviets both invaded Poland in Sept 1939, but the Germans did it first, hence the declaration of war required by English and French treaties.
There were a few days apart. Germany Sept 1, Russia Sept 17.
QuoteAfter Hitler invaded Poland and continued into the Soviet Union, the Soviets were no longer in Poland (at the time) and hence no need to declare war about that.
Not exactly the same year. Germany invaded Russia in June 1941, a little less than two years after the invasion of Poland.
QuoteAnd the Germans were considered the threat to peace. Bad hindsight maybe but if you get the enemy on 3 fronts, you usually win.
More than bad insight. Hitler had been giving speeches from 1923, took power in 1933, prepared Germany for war between 1933 and 1939, but against who? His speeches give no reasons for doubt. It was communist Russia. Nobody else.
QuoteI agree that Churchill managed his affairs well from a weak position and he kept England independent. Kudos to him. I'm not positive that he quite guessed how the US would support him well enough when the Japanese attacked, but it was his only chance.
The rest of it is just standard war stuff...
That he sold out half of Europe to Stalin, a known mass murderer since the 1920's, doesn't bother you?!? That Churchill was instrumental in the course of those events should be recognized as one of the greatest blunder of all times.
I come across people who think they understand everything about WWII from time to time. Many of them focus on specific dates or battles or treaties or whatnot. What I seldom see are people who grasp a whole picture.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 15, 2019, 11:27:29 AM
I come across people who think they understand everything about WWII from time to time. Many of them focus on specific dates or battles or treaties or whatnot. What I seldom see are people who grasp a whole picture.
Most Americans know a very narrow view of WW2. Talk to people who lived in those countries, who lost everything, and after it was over, were condemned under a Soviet oppression for nearly 50 years. So indeed, most people don't have a grasp of the whole picture. It's not their concerns, who cares...
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 11:35:43 AM
Most Americans know a very narrow view of WW2. Talk to people who lived in those countries, who lost everything, and after it was over, were condemned under a Soviet oppression for nearly 50 years. So indeed, most people don't have a grasp of the whole picture. It's not their concerns, who cares...
You are confusing the direct events with the aftermath. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe was brutal and horrid almost beyond belief. I don't contest that in the least bit. What you are failing to understand is that it could have been worse (Nazi death camps from England to Siberia) and that struggling with one insane brutal dictator was better than 2 in competition for who could kill the most.
Hitler: I killed 4 million last year
Stalin: I killed 8 million
Hitler: Verdamft, how?
Stalin: Siberia and rat poison in all the food.
Hitler: Can I get a bit of Siberia?
Stalin, No, its all mine. Go melt in Germany..
Hitler: Oh I envy you so...
Stalin: You should see Mao.
Hitler: Why?
Stalin: Claimed 20 million.
Hitler: No way.
Stalin: Way, he just works them to death.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 15, 2019, 11:53:58 AM
You are confusing the direct events with the aftermath. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe was brutal and horrid almost beyond belief. I don't contest that in the least bit. What you are failing to understand is that it could have been worse (Nazi death camps from England to Siberia) and that struggling with one insane brutal dictator was better than 2 in competition for who could kill the most.
Hitler: I killed 4 million last year
Stalin: I killed 8 million
Hitler: Verdamft, how?
Stalin: Siberia and rat poison in all the food.
Hitler: Can I get a bit of Siberia?
Stalin, No, its all mine. Go melt in Germany..
Hitler: Oh I envy you so...
Stalin: You should see Mao.
Hitler: Why?
Stalin: Claimed 20 million.
Hitler: No way.
Stalin: Way, he just works them to death.
No, not possible, there was no cooperation possible. Hitler hated Stalin and considered him a vermin to be exterminated.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 12:31:08 PM
No, not possible, there was no cooperation possible. Hitler hated Stalin and considered him a vermin to be exterminated.
Dictators love each other when there are no borders. And if Hitler had been more than a talented con man talking machine and even an average General, he would have left Stalin alone and just taken all Europe. And Stalin wouldn't have bothered him then.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 08:44:07 AM
Yes I am. When Hitler took power in 1933, Stalin had already murdered over 10 millions of people in the USSR. Hitler is a monster, but Stalin is a humongous monster. That Churchill, along with Roosevelt, decided to help Stalin is a major blunder that turned into a catastrophe - half of Europe was given to Stalin. These countries had to wait another 50 years to free themselves from Russian oppression. So I don't consider Churchill to be a hero but a fumbling foolish warmonger.
Well, as the counter-intuitive one ... Hitler and Stalin didn't kill enough people. And yes, you would support Chamberlain and Lord Halifax. That much is bloody clear.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 09:38:21 AM
I'm not disputing those facts. My argument with Baruch is that he idolizes Churchill. My counter-point is that Churchill made a major blunder with respect to Stalin. My claim is that if the Allies had abstained in the conflict between Hitler and Stalin, the two would have fought for many more years, and by that time both Germany and Russia would have been exhausted, and the Allies would not have been in the position of ceding half of Europe to Stalin. With the huge help, in the billions of dollars, which in today's currency, trillions of dollars, Stalin repelled the Germans but also was in a strong position to demand a huge prize - half of Europe. Had you been born in one of those countries, and suffered for the next 50 years Russian oppression, you would be of a different opinion. That I know for sure.
As the Uber-Fuhrer of memes and avatars, you don't like my change of icon. My Churchill mows you down with his Thompson. Even if he wasn't perfect.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 15, 2019, 11:27:29 AM
I come across people who think they understand everything about WWII from time to time. Many of them focus on specific dates or battles or treaties or whatnot. What I seldom see are people who grasp a whole picture.
The problem with alternative history, is after you take back all the decisions by all sides, you are left with nothing to talk about.
If I were G-d, then that would be an alternative history, all of it. I absolutely don't want to be that. I know better than to trust my liberal virtue signaling hypocrisy.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 15, 2019, 11:53:58 AM
You are confusing the direct events with the aftermath. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe was brutal and horrid almost beyond belief. I don't contest that in the least bit. What you are failing to understand is that it could have been worse (Nazi death camps from England to Siberia) and that struggling with one insane brutal dictator was better than 2 in competition for who could kill the most.
Hitler: I killed 4 million last year
Stalin: I killed 8 million
Hitler: Verdamft, how?
Stalin: Siberia and rat poison in all the food.
Hitler: Can I get a bit of Siberia?
Stalin, No, its all mine. Go melt in Germany..
Hitler: Oh I envy you so...
Stalin: You should see Mao.
Hitler: Why?
Stalin: Claimed 20 million.
Hitler: No way.
Stalin: Way, he just works them to death.
Woke!
Quote from: Baruch on August 15, 2019, 07:56:08 PM
As the Uber-Fuhrer of memes and avatars, you don't like my change of icon. My Churchill mows you down with his Thompson. Even if he wasn't perfect.
Hmm, the guy is so fat that he's an easy target, even for someone like me who never handle a gun...
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 08:00:43 PM
Hmm, the guy is so fat that he's an easy target, even for someone like me who never handle a gun...
I was implying you use Uber services, you running dog of capitalism.
Quote from: Baruch on August 15, 2019, 08:02:38 PM
I was implying you use Uber services, you running dog of capitalism.
Uber service is over-rated. Every time I used and gave them a bad rating, they reciprocate in kind... bunch of assholes...
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 15, 2019, 08:05:55 PM
Uber service is over-rated. Every time I used and gave them a bad rating, they reciprocate in kind... bunch of assholes...
Sometimes they rob or rape their customers. You were lucky.
Quote from: Baruch on August 16, 2019, 01:16:35 AM
Sometimes they rob or rape their customers. You were lucky.
Yeah, I would like to see them try that on me...
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 16, 2019, 08:05:36 AM
Yeah, I would like to see them try that on me...
Only if you are traumatized into an out-of-body experience, while Bubba rapes you ;-(
Quote from: Baruch on August 16, 2019, 05:07:56 PM
Only if you are traumatized into an out-of-body experience, while Bubba rapes you ;-(
Your bubba will turn into a ABBA, singing Chiquitita"
Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 16, 2019, 05:43:33 PM
Your bubba will turn into a ABBA, singing Chiquitita"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05qid4p_cfw
Saw the musical in Vegas...
Quote from: Mike Cl on August 14, 2019, 11:14:25 PM
I hope you are correct. But as it turned out, Hitler was a bug on a windshield--but before that mess was finished, he had managed to break a whole lot of windshields. And the German people were not that bright, but they were not stupid enough to follow Hitler into a fight. Right?????
I see us as having better morals and ethics than in those years, except for the right wingers, who are now the minority and not the majority.
I will give you that anything could happen, but I do not see your military as that stupid.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on August 15, 2019, 03:37:34 AM
China will lead it.
This is likely true.
You do not seem to be the same guy I met back when buddy.
Your motivation for dialog may have changed.
That or perhaps just my perceptions.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 17, 2019, 04:33:46 PM
I see us as having better morals and ethics than in those years, except for the right wingers, who are now the minority and not the majority.
I will give you that anything could happen, but I do not see your military as that stupid.
Regards
DL
I really do hope you are correct. But I don't see our military as any beacon of hope. After all, they have been fighting an Afgan war that has been dragging on for over 10 years and have made no effort to stop it--and anyone who insists it is to protect this country and it's citizens is just plain stupid.
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 17, 2019, 04:33:46 PM
I see us as having better morals and ethics than in those years, except for the right wingers, who are now the minority and not the majority.
I will give you that anything could happen, but I do not see your military as that stupid.
Regards
DL
didn't your right wingers win the last presidential election?
Also thats a very black and white statement that all those on one political side is immoral and only the left are moral. what a crock of shit.
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 17, 2019, 04:33:46 PM
I see us as having better morals and ethics than in those years, except for the right wingers, who are now the minority and not the majority.
I will give you that anything could happen, but I do not see your military as that stupid.
Regards
DL
German Christians were torn as to how to respond to the rise of Hitler. Some were enthusiastic supporters, some were bound by duty to obey, others fled or resisted. Everyone gets a crisis test in life. How will you respond? Doesn't measure your morality as much as your personality.
Needless to say, had I been a German Jew at that time, I would have fled early while there was still time.
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 17, 2019, 04:42:53 PM
This is likely true.
You do not seem to be the same guy I met back when buddy.
Your motivation for dialog may have changed.
That or perhaps just my perceptions.
Regards
DL
I have matured. Or spoiled. You decide ;-) Is blue cheese good for anything?
Quote from: Mike Cl on August 17, 2019, 05:14:24 PM
I really do hope you are correct. But I don't see our military as any beacon of hope. After all, they have been fighting an Afgan war that has been dragging on for over 10 years and have made no effort to stop it--and anyone who insists it is to protect this country and it's citizens is just plain stupid.
Resistance is mutiny. To oppose Dems for being Dems or Repub for Repub .. would destroy the military. Like I said, the young people make up the military, and the officers are still a distinct middle class. Enlisted are lower class. When you have the enlisted become politically active, then it is like the Russian Army in 1917. BTW - the French Army also collapsed that year and never recovered. The German Army lasted one more year, thanks to the collapse of Russia, and the intervention of the US, and the long term blockade by GB. Army veterans in Germany were the backbone of the Nazi party, not the Socialists. It is hard to imagine similar things in the US, causing the politicizing of the military. Had the Civil War gone worse than it did, I could see Grant becoming military dictator. The Vietnam War was opposed by college students who had draft deferments. Not exactly the most dangerous group. We are generating a lot of veterans now, thanks to our permanent war since 9/11. This is not a good thing. If veterans go against college students, you already know how that will turn out.
Quote from: Mike Cl on August 17, 2019, 05:14:24 PM
I really do hope you are correct. But I don't see our military as any beacon of hope. After all, they have been fighting an Afgan war that has been dragging on for over 10 years and have made no effort to stop it--and anyone who insists it is to protect this country and it's citizens is just plain stupid.
The U.S and it's government want to be seen as the hero of the world and the killer of terrorism.
They think the head of that is in Afghanistan.
My personal feeling is that we should all get out of the M E and let the Muslims war as much as their vile hearts desire. We can live without their oil and illicit drugs, which is about all that Afghanistan produces for the West.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Munch on August 17, 2019, 08:17:25 PM
didn't your right wingers win the last presidential election?
Also thats a very black and white statement that all those on one political side is immoral and only the left are moral. what a crock of shit.
I am Canadian and have no horse in your race, but yes, most, not all, your Republicans are immoral in that they even publically held their noses and voted for Trump.
That is them putting their tribal affiliations ahead of their moral sense.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 19, 2019, 03:37:53 PM
The U.S and it's government want to be seen as the hero of the world and the killer of terrorism.
They think the head of that is in Afghanistan.
My personal feeling is that we should all get out of the M E and let the Muslims war as much as their vile hearts desire. We can live without their oil and illicit drugs, which is about all that Afghanistan produces for the West.
Regards
DL
I don't think trump or his minions (the rest of his appointees) give a rats ass about being the hero of the world. He wants to become the dictator of the US so he can spread fear and chaos around the world. Why? Because that is how he does business. He has made and will make gazillions as long as he is president. He also does not give a rip about international nor internal terrorism. Plus, war and uncertainty adds dollars to a huge number of US corporations. His main goal (besides making money for himself) is to keep the corporations happy. He cares nothing about anything else.
As for your personal feelings, I agree.
Quote from: Baruch on August 17, 2019, 11:10:07 PM
German Christians were torn as to how to respond to the rise of Hitler. Some were enthusiastic supporters, some were bound by duty to obey, others fled or resisted. Everyone gets a crisis test in life. How will you respond? Doesn't measure your morality as much as your personality.
Needless to say, had I been a German Jew at that time, I would have fled early while there was still time.
I do not think I am using the wrong term when I say that religions like Christianity are fascist.
It is not surprising then to see Hitler's fascist country use the Vatican for it's bank nor that priests helped the Eastern block kill off it's Jews. I am sure you know more about this than I do good buddy. I think it was the Jesuit branch but there is another branch that is worse but I have forgotten it's name. It is the modern inquisition, just less deadly.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on August 17, 2019, 11:11:01 PM
I have matured. Or spoiled. You decide ;-) Is blue cheese good for anything?
Not to me. I hate the taste. I do not hate you buddy.
I do not think you were immature back then.
You taught me some good things and confirmed much of what I thought.
You do not seem as focused on teaching here but you have been here a while and likely know the posters and what you have told them already. I just pop in and out and do not have the memory to get acquainted that deeply with posters.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Mike Cl on August 19, 2019, 03:45:57 PM
I don't think trump or his minions (the rest of his appointees) give a rats ass about being the hero of the world. He wants to become the dictator of the US so he can spread fear and chaos around the world. Why? Because that is how he does business. He has made and will make gazillions as long as he is president. He also does not give a rip about international nor internal terrorism. Plus, war and uncertainty adds dollars to a huge number of US corporations. His main goal (besides making money for himself) is to keep the corporations happy. He cares nothing about anything else.
As for your personal feelings, I agree.
I was not so much thinking Trump and see him as a pimple on the U.S. ass that will soon be squeezed out.
I was thinking more of the people and your Congress and Senate.
From the end of WWII, American have warred almost continually to push democracy, which is nice, but they included their toxic form of capitalism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RozOiZAK9lQ
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 19, 2019, 04:00:35 PM
I was not so much thinking Trump and see him as a pimple on the U.S. ass that will soon be squeezed out.
I was thinking more of the people and your Congress and Senate.
From the end of WWII, American have warred almost continually to push democracy, which is nice, but they included their toxic form of capitalism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RozOiZAK9lQ
Regards
DL
It seems to me that since 9-11, the US has become a country that loves being the victim and has become more cowardly. That attack could have been used for good in that something like people from 80 countries were killed--not just Americans. We could have reached out and formed an effective coalition to combat and contain those countries that were engaging in terrorism. Instead, Bush turned it into making Cheney (and himself) rich and served the needs of the corporations of the US, not the people of the US nor of the world. For about 10 yrs after the attack I became so very tired of hearing 'Aren't you afraid?!' No, I was not ever 'afraid'. But I was pissed. When Bush told us he was going after the perpetrator of the attack, I was 100% behind that action. Then he let him go and attacked Iraq, who had nothing to do with that attack--but they had oil. The corporations were happy. Then the repubs used fear and lies to lead us around by the nose.
Operation Iraqi Liberation - OIL.
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 19, 2019, 03:40:51 PM
I am Canadian and have no horse in your race, but yes, most, not all, your Republicans are immoral in that they even publically held their noses and voted for Trump.
That is them putting their tribal affiliations ahead of their moral sense.
Regards
DL
French-Canadian, right?
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 19, 2019, 03:37:53 PM
The U.S and it's government want to be seen as the hero of the world and the killer of terrorism.
They think the head of that is in Afghanistan.
My personal feeling is that we should all get out of the M E and let the Muslims war as much as their vile hearts desire. We can live without their oil and illicit drugs, which is about all that Afghanistan produces for the West.
Regards
DL
The US was damned in 1939 for not being World Policeman. So we became World Policeman. I agree that was a mistake. Let the world kill itself, it is none of our business, in 1939 nor now.
Quote from: Unbeliever on August 19, 2019, 05:58:43 PM
Operation Iraqi Liberation - OIL.
Oil for China, not the US. We are mercenaries for Arabs and their Chinese customers.
Quote from: Unbeliever on August 19, 2019, 05:58:43 PM
Operation Iraqi Liberation - OIL.
Oil wasn't the purpose. It was surrounding the opponent and limiting expansion.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 20, 2019, 02:40:00 AM
Oil wasn't the purpose. It was surrounding the opponent and limiting expansion.
In 1991 this was the case. They weren't a real threat in 2003.
Quote from: Baruch on August 19, 2019, 08:59:45 PM
French-Canadian, right?
Yep yep.
A good breed.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on August 19, 2019, 09:04:15 PM
Oil for China, not the US. We are mercenaries for Arabs and their Chinese customers.
Can a man be free in a world of slaves?
What is the first duty of a free man?
Freedom is good but not the American kind.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 24, 2019, 05:15:16 PM
Can a man be free in a world of slaves?
What is the first duty of a free man?
Freedom is good but not the American kind.
Regards
DL
Theists tend to support slavery.
The first duty of any free person is to question the authorities.
Freedom is good, and "American" has a good history even with the "original sin". And I get to say that because of my Abolitionist and Quaker ancestors.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 24, 2019, 05:21:05 PM
Theists tend to support slavery.
The first duty of any free person is to question the authorities.
Freedom is good, and "American" has a good history even with the "original sin". And I get to say that because of my Abolitionist and Quaker ancestors.
Was.
I miss the old Americans.
They were more like Canadians.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 24, 2019, 05:25:50 PM
Was.
I miss the old Americans.
They were more like Canadians.
Regards
DL
Was there a point to this?
QuoteFreedom is good, and "American" has a good history even with the "original sin".
QuoteI miss the old Americans.
They were more like Canadians.
When was this?
Quote from: Shiranu on August 24, 2019, 06:20:20 PM
When was this?
Back when the entire non-native Americans were French beaver-trappers maybe? None of those dirty English types planting tobacco and whipping slaves... They never came here, right?
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 24, 2019, 05:15:16 PM
Can a man be free in a world of slaves?
What is the first duty of a free man?
Freedom is good but not the American kind.
Regards
DL
Ancient meaning of "free" as in NT ... I can own slaves, nobody claims me as a slave. Same as it was in the US until 1863.
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 24, 2019, 05:25:50 PM
Was.
I miss the old Americans.
They were more like Canadians.
Regards
DL
US in 1950 and Canada in 1950 were similar. A long time ago. We both still oppressed the First Nations, but the Canada didn't have any African-Americans to torture.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 24, 2019, 05:21:05 PM
Theists tend to support slavery.
The first duty of any free person is to question the authorities.
Freedom is good, and "American" has a good history even with the "original sin". And I get to say that because of my Abolitionist and Quaker ancestors.
Total BS. When the whole world is theist, and has slavery, there isn't any correlation. Soviets and Mao's people weren't real atheists, so it is claimed (more BS).
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 24, 2019, 05:12:10 PM
Yep yep.
A good breed.
Regards
DL
Dead from Diabetes, eating maple syrup?
Quote from: Baruch on August 24, 2019, 10:20:48 PM
Total BS. When the whole world is theist, and has slavery, there isn't any correlation. Soviets and Mao's people weren't real atheists, so it is claimed (more BS).
I'm intrigueed you say that the Coms weren't true atheists. They weren't by most standards philophically atheist, but the whole definition really means not caring about theisms so they count.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 24, 2019, 10:28:29 PM
I'm intrigueed you say that the Coms weren't true atheists. They weren't by most standards philophically atheist, but the whole definition really means not caring about theisms so they count.
This was widely argued before, that the reason for atheism in their case was political, not French Salon philosophy, like you. BTW - how is Madame DeFarge?
So what is true X? No answer, for any of those. But we can argue based on sports team logic after the game is already over.
Only a true atheist X, Y, Z ... keep extending, and there never has been a True Scotman either.
Quote from: Baruch on August 24, 2019, 10:20:48 PM
Total BS. When the whole world is theist, and has slavery, there isn't any correlation. Soviets and Mao's people weren't real atheists, so it is claimed (more BS).
While agreeing on the "with this therefore because of this" fallacy, I would point out an important asymmetry here. Theists (most of them) claim to have divine knowledge of morality. Atheists obviously do not.
If we both agree that slavery is immoral, why did theists support it for millenia when they possessed divine knowledge of morality?
Quote from: aileron on August 24, 2019, 10:33:58 PM
While agreeing on the "with this therefore because of this" fallacy, I would point out an important asymmetry here. Theists (most of them) claim to have divine knowledge of morality. Atheists obviously do not.
If we both agree that slavery is immoral, why did theists support it for millenia when they possessed divine knowledge of morality?
Always a good point. But even an atheist COULD argue that "inferior people should be enslaved". I don't but it isn't exclusively a theist position. I've met some really crazy atheists in my life, some of whom I wouldn't even talk to in public..
Quote from: aileron on August 24, 2019, 10:33:58 PM
While agreeing on the "with this therefore because of this" fallacy, I would point out an important asymmetry here. Theists (most of them) claim to have divine knowledge of morality. Atheists obviously do not.
If we both agree that slavery is immoral, why did theists support it for millenia when they possessed divine knowledge of morality?
Atheist know what is in Plato's butt hole, buggery you know.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 24, 2019, 10:41:02 PM
Always a good point. But even an atheist COULD argue that "inferior people should be enslaved". I don't but it isn't exclusively a theist position. I've met some really crazy atheists in my life, some of whom I wouldn't even talk to in public..
Would we talk, in public?
Quote from: Baruch on August 24, 2019, 10:55:36 PM
Would we talk, in public?
Probably not. I don't even want to MEET you.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 24, 2019, 10:59:36 PM
Probably not. I don't even want to MEET you.
That is the only way we should do it in public. In the men's stall in the men's restroom is to ... intimate for a first meeting ;-))
Quote from: Baruch on August 24, 2019, 11:01:55 PM
That is the only way we should do it in public. In the men's stall in the men's restroom is to ... intimate for a first meeting ;-))
You should talk to Munch about that sort of interest...
Quote from: Cavebear on August 24, 2019, 11:04:11 PM
You should talk to Munch about that sort of interest...
That is why I like him. I don't happen to be gay. But I don't have homophobia. I am usually a furry making out with road kill on the highway ... (horror movie sounds).
Quote from: Baruch on August 24, 2019, 11:13:04 PM
That is why I like him. I don't happen to be gay. But I don't have homophobia. I am usually a furry making out with road kill on the highway ... (horror movie sounds).
I just happened upon the term for deliberately feeding vultires human corpses corpses a few days ago, but I'll be darned if I can recall it. I don't think it comes from 'Accipitridae'.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 24, 2019, 11:43:09 PM
I just happened upon the term for deliberately feeding vultires human corpses corpses a few days ago, but I'll be darned if I can recall it. I don't think it comes from 'Accipitridae'.
Zoroastrians, Parsiis, Lakota people ... all have "air sacrifice". It is thought that prehistoric Göbekli Tepe was a site for ritual exposure of corpses.
BTW - while I was chatting with y'all, I was revising (reviewing) my Sanskrit resources. I not only have other things to do, I also multitask.
Quote from: Baruch on August 25, 2019, 01:14:34 AM
Zoroastrians, Parsiis, Lakota people ... all have "air sacrifice". It is thought that prehistoric Göbekli Tepe was a site for ritual exposure of corpses.
BTW - while I was chatting with y'all, I was revising (reviewing) my Sanskrit resources. I not only have other things to do, I also multitask.
Good for you! If that means you are getting out of your couple years funk, I applaud.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 24, 2019, 05:27:46 PM
Was there a point to this?
Just showing my disappointment and pity.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Shiranu on August 24, 2019, 06:20:20 PM
When was this?
On the surface, best ideal would have been late 60s or so.
This is all subjective of course.
The best music was also in that same era.
That is not likely an accident.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Baruch on August 24, 2019, 10:18:38 PM
US in 1950 and Canada in 1950 were similar. A long time ago. We both still oppressed the First Nations, but the Canada didn't have any African-Americans to torture.
True, and that made a world of a difference.
It made us a curt above. Polite but deadly.
You just deadly.
Regards
DL
Quote from: Greatest I am on August 27, 2019, 01:24:14 PM
True, and that made a world of a difference.
It made us a curt above. Polite but deadly.
You just deadly.
Regards
DL
We could have loaned you some African-Americans, but they don't do well in cold. And taught you Jim Crow … but no ….
Quote from: Baruch on August 27, 2019, 07:13:28 PM
We could have loaned you some African-Americans, but they don't do well in cold. And taught you Jim Crow … but no ….
I sure hope that was sarcasm...
I had to consider this tripe for a while and whether to reply, but I dislike leaving such nonsense unchallenged. That how such drivel gains acceptability.
No one does well in the cold when their food is meager and the shelters barely able to retain heat and little warmth is available from lack of fuel. You can even freeze to death in Alabama, BTW.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 27, 2019, 10:09:36 PM
I sure hope that was sarcasm...
I had to consider this tripe for a while and whether to reply, but I dislike leaving such nonsense unchallenged. That how such drivel gains acceptability.
No one does well in the cold when their food is meager and the shelters barely able to retain heat and little warmth is available from lack of fuel. You can even freeze to death in Alabama, BTW.
Yes, sarcasm. Directed at holier than though Canadians.
Quote from: Baruch on August 28, 2019, 01:07:49 AM
Yes, sarcasm. Directed at holier than though Canadians.
How dare you criticize Canadians? They are admired throughout the world. In fact, the safest claim to make overseas is that you are "Canadian". If I ever traveled overseas, I would wear a T shirt that said "Don't Blame Me - I'm Canadian". And practice saying "hey" like they do.
;)
Quote from: Cavebear on August 28, 2019, 01:33:01 AM
How dare you criticize Canadians? They are admired throughout the world. In fact, the safest claim to make overseas is that you are "Canadian". If I ever traveled overseas, I would wear a T shirt that said "Don't Blame Me - I'm Canadian". And practice saying "hey" like they do.
;)
Yes. I like Canadians better than my own nation. But that is because I know Americans all too well. If the Canadians are relatively unknown to me, that is too their advantage. Eh?
Quote from: Baruch on August 28, 2019, 01:38:53 AM
Yes. I like Canadians better than my own nation. But that is because I know Americans all too well. If the Canadians are relatively unknown to me, that is too their advantage. Eh?
Breaking news! Trump just tweeted that the US should annex Canada. He said "They have all the ice and we will need that as South Africa is on fire". Apparently, that's why he wanted Greenland.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 28, 2019, 01:45:22 AM
Breaking news! Trump just tweeted that the US should annex Canada. He said "They have all the ice and we will need that as South Africa is on fire". Apparently, that's why he wanted Greenland.
Old joke from 1992. They said that about Ross Perot. Another businessman. Like most primates, uneasy lies the alpha male crown.
Quote from: Baruch on August 28, 2019, 01:49:27 AM
Old joke from 1992. They said that about Ross Perot. Another businessman. Like most primates, uneasy lies the alpha male crown.
Can you show it? I thought I made it up myself? I should give credit.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 28, 2019, 01:45:22 AM
Breaking news! Trump just tweeted that the US should annex Canada. He said "They have all the ice and we will need that as South Africa is on fire". Apparently, that's why he wanted Greenland.
Yeah, I figured maybe he wanted Greenland so he'd have some place for his "daughter" and her family to hole up once the mainland USA is a desert. Maybe that's why he wants Canada, too.
Quote from: Unbeliever on August 31, 2019, 01:35:57 PM
Yeah, I figured maybe he wanted Greenland so he'd have some place for his "daughter" and her family to hole up once the mainland USA is a desert. Maybe that's why he wants Canada, too.
As the climate warms, Canada is going to be prime agricultural territory. What happens when they tell us Americans are illegal aliens? Will that stop us any more than the Central Americans moving here today?
If I was 20, I would move to Canada (legally while I still could) and get naturalized. And wait....
Quote from: Cavebear on August 31, 2019, 01:41:11 PM
As the climate warms, Canada is going to be prime agricultural territory. What happens when they tell us Americans are illegal aliens? Will that stop us any more than the Central Americans moving here today?
If I was 20, I would move to Canada (legally while I still could) and get naturalized. And wait....
Should have gone during the Vietnam War.
Quote from: Cavebear on August 31, 2019, 01:30:48 PM
Can you show it? I thought I made it up myself? I should give credit.
It was a cartoon, by another rich hating liberal.
Quote from: Baruch on August 31, 2019, 04:35:40 PM
Should have gone during the Vietnam War.
I bet on the 1969 lottery. They were drafting 1 year's numbers from 3 years of us 18-20 year olds. I dropped my college deferment. My number came up way too high to be called. But had my number been low, I wouldn't served. It was a stupid war. Even my Republican Grandparents knew it..
Quote from: Cavebear on August 31, 2019, 06:47:23 PM
I bet on the 1969 lottery. They were drafting 1 year's numbers from 3 years of us 18-20 year olds. I dropped my college deferment. My number came up way too high to be called. But had my number been low, I wouldn't served. It was a stupid war. Even my Republican Grandparents knew it..
Lucky you. Some poor Black bastard was sent in your place. You know that is how the draft really worked. Should have sent all the White college students first.
Yes, a stupid war by an evil President.
Quote from: Baruch on September 01, 2019, 08:14:18 AM
Lucky you. Some poor Black bastard was sent in your place. You know that is how the draft really worked. Should have sent all the White college students first.
Yes, a stupid war by an evil President.
It is embarrassing to realize that you assume all Black people are illegitimate by birth. Yes I know that isn't what you meant, but you should be more careful about what you say.
As to "white college students first", the war would have been over more quickly. The military never really wanted college students. They ask awkward questions. The military then, as now, wants it basic soldiers to be willing to follow orders without questions.
They didn't even want 20 year olds. They wanted 18 year olds searching for authority figures to follow.
I had a carpool member who served in Vietnam on the front lines. He was a volunteer at 22. He didn't talk about his experiences much (few do) but he mentioned once that he cringed when getting a new 18 year old draftee They didn't last long. His best units were older than him who asked questions, he said.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 03, 2019, 01:30:06 AM
It is embarrassing to realize that you assume all Black people are illegitimate by birth. Yes I know that isn't what you meant, but you should be more careful about what you say.
As to "white college students first", the war would have been over more quickly. The military never really wanted college students. They ask awkward questions. The military then, as now, wants it basic soldiers to be willing to follow orders without questions.
They didn't even want 20 year olds. They wanted 18 year olds searching for authority figures to follow.
I had a carpool member who served in Vietnam on the front lines. He was a volunteer at 22. He didn't talk about his experiences much (few do) but he mentioned once that he cringed when getting a new 18 year old draftee They didn't last long. His best units were older than him who asked questions, he said.
What? You keep projecting from who knows what. Stop it, you hippie.
Are Black people illegitimate ... you mean, they come from broken families, thanks to LBJ welfare mess?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_family_structure
Been increasing for all American children since the 60s. Worse for African-Americans and Native Americans. Yes, LBJ war and welfare was devastating for African-American families. The problem with Native American families is older and more bi-partisan.
Don't care if you think that college students are unfit for military duty. It is a fact, in the Vietnam period, that non-college students or unemployed young men were preferred. Military is class based. College graduates (I knew some) were inducted as officers, not as enlisted. The smart college students insisted on staying in the lower ranks. 2nd Lt all went straight to Vietnam. Bullet catchers.
Quote from: Baruch on September 03, 2019, 01:54:11 AM
What? You keep projecting from who knows what. Stop it, you hippie.
Are Black people illegitimate ... you mean, they come from broken families, thanks to LBJ welfare mess?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_family_structure
Been increasing for all American children since the 60s. Worse for African-Americans and Native Americans. Yes, LBJ war and welfare was devastating for African-American families. The problem with Native American families is older and more bi-partisan.
Don't care if you think that college students are unfit for military duty. It is a fact, in the Vietnam period, that non-college students or unemployed young men were preferred. Military is class based. College graduates (I knew some) were inducted as officers, not as enlisted. The smart college students insisted on staying in the lower ranks. 2nd Lt all went straight to Vietnam. Bullet catchers.
Do you just invent everything in your mind? I didn't say college students (never mind grads) were "unfit for military duty". It worked well in WWII. But they did ask questions about orders. My older relatives said so. In Vietnam, the purpose of the fighting was so weak, the generals needed blind trainees to do as told without questions. The results were not good.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 03, 2019, 02:23:54 AM
Do you just invent everything in your mind? I didn't say college students (never mind grads) were "unfit for military duty". It worked well in WWII. But they did ask questions about orders. My older relatives said so. In Vietnam, the purpose of the fighting was so weak, the generals needed blind trainees to do as told without questions. The results were not good.
OK, talking past each other. But otherwise, yes, I do invent everything in my mind, that is what it is useful for.
Yes, there were specific morale problems in Vietnam. Godzilla can probably elucidate. Prior to WW II, the Army estimated that half their existing officers were not up to snuff. The only way to find out was to send them into combat. I have read a book on the degeneration of Army leadership from after WW II until Desert Storm. Basically by 1946, every good officer was either dead or getting out. Only the unfit stayed in, and it showed in Korea and Vietnam. And of course like in any endeavor ... looking good and going good are not the same.
Quote from: Baruch on September 03, 2019, 02:28:16 AM
OK, talking past each other. But otherwise, yes, I do invent everything in my mind, that is what it is useful for.
Yes, there were specific morale problems in Vietnam. Godzilla can probably elucidate. Prior to WW II, the Army estimated that half their existing officers were not up to snuff. The only way to find out was to send them into combat. I have read a book on the degeneration of Army leadership from after WW II until Desert Storm. Basically by 1946, every good officer was either dead or getting out. Only the unfit stayed in, and it showed in Korea and Vietnam. And of course like in any endeavor ... looking good and going good are not the same.
I still think you misunderstand the military thinking during the Vietnam war. While there were certainly many very talented officers out of the Korea War and OCTS, the idea at the time was too oriented to training 18 year olds to just follow orders and "that would be OK". It wasn't "OK".
18 year olds can't think like 25 year olds. And as best I can understand the psychology of WWII, there were a lot of soldiers older than 18 (actual adults) and their ability to question orders and think with some life experience mattered a great deal. When things got tough, having adult men around mattered. It mattered in Korea too.
But somehow, the army got the idea during Vietnam that top-down orders worked better. 18 year olds were easier to train than adults. That's why 25 year olds weren't drafted for the Vietnam War.
It was a bad idea. Adult males may be a bit more difficult to train, but they make better soldiers in the long run.
And I think that's where the difference is. You can draft 18 year old kids who are still authority-driven and they will walk through a jungle because they are told to. Or you can deal with guys a bit older and more mature and they they will think for themselves a bit and suggest "maybe we should go along that stone wall and set up there".
Quote from: Cavebear on September 03, 2019, 01:30:06 AM
It is embarrassing to realize that you assume all Black people are illegitimate by birth. Yes I know that isn't what you meant, but you should be more careful about what you say.
As to "white college students first", the war would have been over more quickly. The military never really wanted college students. They ask awkward questions. The military then, as now, wants it basic soldiers to be willing to follow orders without questions.
They didn't even want 20 year olds. They wanted 18 year olds searching for authority figures to follow.
I had a carpool member who served in Vietnam on the front lines. He was a volunteer at 22. He didn't talk about his experiences much (few do) but he mentioned once that he cringed when getting a new 18 year old draftee They didn't last long. His best units were older than him who asked questions, he said.
You are probably correct about all that, Cavebear. But two weeks after I graduated from college, Uncle Sam gave me a graduation present--drafted my white ass. I was 21 at the time and could therefore drink and kill--I was all set!
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 03, 2019, 09:19:28 AM
You are probably correct about all that, Cavebear. But two weeks after I graduated from college, Uncle Sam gave me a graduation present--drafted my white ass. I was 21 at the time and could therefore drink and kill--I was all set!
My sympathies to your white ass and the rest of you. Did you serve? I didn't know Uncle Sam drafted mature males. I had a carpool member once who was a LT in Vietnam. I never thought to ask him his age when he served. He didn't talk about his experiences and I didn't ask. But I had the impression that he was around 22-23 when drafted back in the mid 60s.
I don't remember when the draft age reached 18.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 03, 2019, 09:28:22 AM
My sympathies to your white ass and the rest of you. Did you serve? I didn't know Uncle Sam drafted mature males. I had a carpool member once who was a LT in Vietnam. I never thought to ask him his age when he served. He didn't talk about his experiences and I didn't ask. But I had the impression that he was around 22-23 when drafted back in the mid 60s.
I don't remember when the draft age reached 18.
I was drafted prior to the assigning of numbers. I was drafted in '68 (early) but begged another semester from the draft board because I had already registered for my post-graduate slate of classes. In June I was seeing green everywhere I looked (except in my wallet). I served 3 years because in that deferred semester, I joined the Army. I was going into Area Studies because of my history background. I was promised I would learn a language and then be sent somewhere where I could use it. (To set up spy rings--only they failed to mention that--and always in Cambodia, Laos, or Vietnam--they failed to mention that, as well) So, I joined to stay out of combat. Only the joke was on me, for Area Studies graduation always ended up in a combat zone somewhere. (Only they failed to mention that) Somehow, tho, in my 3 yr tour I managed to stay out of combat. I was lucky!!
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 03, 2019, 09:38:14 AM
I was drafted prior to the assigning of numbers. I was drafted in '68 (early) but begged another semester from the draft board because I had already registered for my post-graduate slate of classes. In June I was seeing green everywhere I looked (except in my wallet). I served 3 years because in that deferred semester, I joined the Army. I was going into Area Studies because of my history background. I was promised I would learn a language and then be sent somewhere where I could use it. (To set up spy rings--only they failed to mention that--and always in Cambodia, Laos, or Vietnam--they failed to mention that, as well) So, I joined to stay out of combat. Only the joke was on me, for Area Studies graduation always ended up in a combat zone somewhere. (Only they failed to mention that) Somehow, tho, in my 3 yr tour I managed to stay out of combat. I was lucky!!
I am glad you avoided combat. Though apparently, you sure came close to it.
My informant was already college graduate, and working in the Defense industry, when he was drafted at 23. With all respect for Cavebears theory that 18 year olds are stupid, I think the far more influential inhibition on combat is soldiers who are married, and if parents of young children, even more so. In the case of Vietnam, they had the additional lubrication of local MJ. But my grandfather, in WW II, told me about man-made alcohol (in Muslim lands). And my father, who was in the Navy, told me about the attractions of tattoos and European whorehouses to 19 year old sailors ;-)
Quote from: Cavebear on September 03, 2019, 09:43:53 AM
I am glad you avoided combat. Though apparently, you sure came close to it.
I came very very close. In fact, I can only explain it as pure dumb luck. After basic, I was sent to Ft. Holibird (Baltimore) for my 16 weeks of Area Studies training. I was put into the holding company as my next class would not be for another 4 months. I was then offered a chance to go to Counterintelligence training since it would kick off in the next week. I jumped at the chance because I had learned what Area Studies really was. The classes were 50 soldiers. As weeks 13/14 rolled around, duty stations became a concern--the last 7 cycles had all been sent to Nam--all 50 at a time. Once again, luck reared its head. All the people in my class who had requested Germany, got it. Only three of us picked Japan. We did not get orders with the rest--had to wait 2 weeks to get them. All three of us figured Nam was our destination. As lady luck proclaimed, tho, we all went to Hawaii. And that was as close to a combat zone I came to. Lucky, lucky, lucky!!
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 03, 2019, 12:59:25 PM
I came very very close. In fact, I can only explain it as pure dumb luck. After basic, I was sent to Ft. Holibird (Baltimore) for my 16 weeks of Area Studies training. I was put into the holding company as my next class would not be for another 4 months. I was then offered a chance to go to Counterintelligence training since it would kick off in the next week. I jumped at the chance because I had learned what Area Studies really was. The classes were 50 soldiers. As weeks 13/14 rolled around, duty stations became a concern--the last 7 cycles had all been sent to Nam--all 50 at a time. Once again, luck reared its head. All the people in my class who had requested Germany, got it. Only three of us picked Japan. We did not get orders with the rest--had to wait 2 weeks to get them. All three of us figured Nam was our destination. As lady luck proclaimed, tho, we all went to Hawaii. And that was as close to a combat zone I came to. Lucky, lucky, lucky!!
But one might note that you qualified for counter-intelligence or some skill and were not viewed as teenage cannon-fodder...
Quote from: Cavebear on September 03, 2019, 01:15:12 PM
But one might note that you qualified for counter-intelligence or some skill and were not viewed as teenage cannon-fodder...
Wrong again. The counter-intel folks got very close to VietCong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Program
I know someone, whose first husband was in the Phoenix Program. He never got over the torture and murder of Vietnamese he participated in. But it was the only successful program the US had in Vietnam.
Another guy I worked with, he was cannon fodder. Air Cavalry. He was in for a few months, on patrols, and requested transfer to Army transport instead. A month later his whole platoon was wiped out in an ambush.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 03, 2019, 01:15:12 PM
But one might note that you qualified for counter-intelligence or some skill and were not viewed as teenage cannon-fodder...
You are correct. I was not viewed as teenage cannon-fodder. I was young adult cannon fodder. I was lied to by the first agent I was interviewed by--Area Studies was training for the Phoenix Program. While in Casual Company (what they called the group waiting for schools to open up) I was used to take students in various stages of their classes from one training exercise to another. I learned what Area Studies was from that activity. Torture techniques was one of the classes taught. And how to withstand torture was another. That is why I jumped into Counterintelligence when given the chance. And make no mistake--any branch of the service could use their members in any fashion they deemed necessary. That has always been the case and always will be.
Quote from: Baruch on September 03, 2019, 11:11:30 AM
My informant was already college graduate, and working in the Defense industry, when he was drafted at 23. With all respect for Cavebears theory that 18 year olds are stupid, I think the far more influential inhibition on combat is soldiers who are married, and if parents of young children, even more so. In the case of Vietnam, they had the additional lubrication of local MJ. But my grandfather, in WW II, told me about man-made alcohol (in Muslim lands). And my father, who was in the Navy, told me about the attractions of tattoos and European whorehouses to 19 year old sailors ;-)
I didn't say 18 year's olds were stupid. I said they were not mature adults. There is a difference. And I didn't say they can't fight. But looking back, I don't think 18 year olds are completely adults.
Quote from: Baruch on September 03, 2019, 01:54:11 AM
What? You keep projecting from who knows what. Stop it, you hippie.
Are Black people illegitimate ... you mean, they come from broken families, thanks to LBJ welfare mess?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_family_structure
Been increasing for all American children since the 60s. Worse for African-Americans and Native Americans. Yes, LBJ war and welfare was devastating for African-American families. The problem with Native American families is older and more bi-partisan.
Don't care if you think that college students are unfit for military duty. It is a fact, in the Vietnam period, that non-college students or unemployed young men were preferred. Military is class based. College graduates (I knew some) were inducted as officers, not as enlisted. The smart college students insisted on staying in the lower ranks. 2nd Lt all went straight to Vietnam. Bullet catchers.
You said "bastard". I chose to take it literally. LOL!
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 03, 2019, 05:22:16 PM
You are correct. I was not viewed as teenage cannon-fodder. I was young adult cannon fodder. I was lied to by the first agent I was interviewed by--Area Studies was training for the Phoenix Program. While in Casual Company (what they called the group waiting for schools to open up) I was used to take students in various stages of their classes from one training exercise to another. I learned what Area Studies was from that activity. Torture techniques was one of the classes taught. And how to withstand torture was another. That is why I jumped into Counterintelligence when given the chance. And make no mistake--any branch of the service could use their members in any fashion they deemed necessary. That has always been the case and always will be.
Yeah, and I don't blame you at all. One of the things I understood about military service at the time (being a student of military history has consequences) was that torture and anti-torture training is routine and I am a wimp. My sense of even minor pain is immense. I nearly faint at a paper cut. I'm not proud of that, but I do recognize it.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 06, 2019, 09:07:17 PM
You said "bastard". I chose to take it literally. LOL!
In modern parlance ... "alternative parentage". Go be politically correct, you rapist of English language!
Quote from: Cavebear on September 06, 2019, 09:02:49 PM
I didn't say 18 year's olds were stupid. I said they were not mature adults. There is a difference. And I didn't say they can't fight. But looking back, I don't think 18 year olds are completely adults.
Snore ... say a lot of words, take them all back.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 06, 2019, 09:16:25 PM
Yeah, and I don't blame you at all. One of the things I understood about military service at the time (being a student of military history has consequences) was that torture and anti-torture training is routine and I am a wimp. My sense of even minor pain is immense. I nearly faint at a paper cut. I'm not proud of that, but I do recognize it.
I wouldn't volunteer for that duty either. Unless it is viciously trolling Joe during my first two years here. Not proud of that either.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 06, 2019, 09:16:25 PM
Yeah, and I don't blame you at all. One of the things I understood about military service at the time (being a student of military history has consequences) was that torture and anti-torture training is routine and I am a wimp. My sense of even minor pain is immense. I nearly faint at a paper cut. I'm not proud of that, but I do recognize it.
It was a very sobering night when I played the role of a Russian border patrol and captured an infiltrated Army agent and took him to the catacombs. Walked the length of that place (this was near a bay in Baltimore) and heard the intense questioning and the torture techniques of those that had been captured and brought there. I knew and the captured knew it was a training exercise and physical abuse was not allowed. But still quite scary--I knew then that I did not want any part of Area Studies. If I had had any guts, I would have packed up and headed for Canada. But I was young and lucky--served in the Nam era and did not see combat.
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 07, 2019, 09:38:34 AM
It was a very sobering night when I played the role of a Russian border patrol and captured an infiltrated Army agent and took him to the catacombs. Walked the length of that place (this was near a bay in Baltimore) and heard the intense questioning and the torture techniques of those that had been captured and brought there. I knew and the captured knew it was a training exercise and physical abuse was not allowed. But still quite scary--I knew then that I did not want any part of Area Studies. If I had had any guts, I would have packed up and headed for Canada. But I was young and lucky--served in the Nam era and did not see combat.
Simulations can be very enlightening sometimes. People assigned as prison guards can become very cruel to people assigned as prisoners. People assigned to provide electric shocks to people they THINK are receivibg them for "wrong answers" can be induced to provide what the equipment says are "lethal" shocks.
Human are depressingly manipulable.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 11, 2019, 02:39:40 AM
Simulations can be very enlightening sometimes. People assigned as prison guards can become very cruel to people assigned as prisoners. People assigned to provide electric shocks to people they THINK are receivibg them for "wrong answers" can be induced to provide what the equipment says are "lethal" shocks.
Human are depressingly manipulable.
I found those experiments to quite interesting. I'd like to think that I would not react in those (negative) ways--but I have not been tested in those ways, so who knows.
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 11, 2019, 09:24:15 AM
I found those experiments to quite interesting. I'd like to think that I would not react in those (negative) ways--but I have not been tested in those ways, so who knows.
I suspect that those of us who know of such experiments are slightly less subject to them. But maybe there are some people who would fall for them again and again and THOSE are the people I worry about. The people I fear are the ones who would continue to shock others on command. And they exist.
They vote for Trump...
Quote from: Cavebear on September 11, 2019, 09:40:13 AM
I suspect that those of us who know of such experiments are slightly less subject to them. But maybe there are some people who would fall for them again and again and THOSE are the people I worry about. The people I fear are the ones who would continue to shock others on command. And they exist.
They vote for Trump...
This country is full of those types. Not only do they vote for trump, they take trump as permission to act in the worst possible ways. I call them Stupid Fucking Americans--and they are legion.
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 11, 2019, 11:10:20 AM
This country is full of those types. Not only do they vote for trump, they take trump as permission to act in the worst possible ways. I call them Stupid Fucking Americans--and they are legion.
Takes one to know one. Kill all Americans (sarc).
Quote from: Mike Cl on September 11, 2019, 11:10:20 AM
This country is full of those types. Not only do they vote for trump, they take trump as permission to act in the worst possible ways. I call them Stupid Fucking Americans--and they are legion.
Yeah, I do worry about the SFAs...
I'm tending toward blaming lead in the water myself. I run the faucet each morning until I get hot water. Then I know the old house pipes are clear. Other than that I don't worry about it personally. But I'm not sure my neighbors do, LOL!
And don't worry, I don't wear a foil cap. I get my annual flu shot, and I don't think the "gummint" is spying on me....
Quote from: Cavebear on September 11, 2019, 12:46:59 PM
Yeah, I do worry about the SFAs...
I'm tending toward blaming lead in the water myself. I run the faucet each morning until I get hot water. Then I know the old house pipes are clear. Other than that I don't worry about it personally. But I'm not sure my neighbors do, LOL!
And don't worry, I don't wear a foil cap. I get my annual flu shot, and I don't think the "gummint" is spying on me....
My apartment water is terrible. Gave me kidney stones. I look forward to a new place far far away.
Quote from: Baruch on September 11, 2019, 12:51:01 PM
My apartment water is terrible. Gave me kidney stones. I look forward to a new place far far away.
This may seem really odd, but one of the reasons I can't get myself to move to a better place for gardening is that I like the taste of the water here...
Quote from: Cavebear on September 11, 2019, 12:56:31 PM
This may seem really odd, but one of the reasons I can't get myself to move to a better place for gardening is that I like the taste of the water here...
Good reason. I could have saved myself a lot of pain, had I only drank and cooked with bottled water.
Quote from: Baruch on September 11, 2019, 01:08:46 PM
Good reason. I could have saved myself a lot of pain, had I only drank and cooked with bottled water.
Well, I look around every couple years. I found one place that seemed WONDERFUL. The house was great with exposed beams everywhere and wonderful floors and the layout was really nice, the yard was perfect. The water was intolerable.
Economic pressure knowingly imposed on us is somewhat required for the reasons i do not know in detail.
Quote from: SoldierofFortune on September 20, 2019, 05:07:21 PM
Economic pressure knowingly imposed on us is somewhat required for the reasons i do not know in detail.
If you didn't have social pressure (and money is a good incentive) you would lay around all day stoned on drugs, like UC Berkeley circa 1966.
QuoteJesse discussed the NOT AT ALL RANDOM audits being conducted by the IRS as a cost-saving measure. Humphrey County Mississippi (with a median yearly household income of only $26,000) is being audited by the IRS FIFTY-ONE PERCENT more often than families in Loudoun County, Virginia where the median income is almost $130,000!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTskhApJaVU
Your tax dollars at work?
It could be argued that some poverty used to be necessary to fill out certain economic niches. Maybe. But now with automation becoming exponentially more advanced, knowingly allowing or causing poverty is going to get people killed, especially without universal healthcare and government safety nets. Hell, given some of the horror stories I've read, I think it already has.
Soon there will be very few jobs that can't be automated: driving jobs, cooking jobs, banking jobs, blue collar or white collar. What will people do then, when there are no jobs left for people to do?
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on October 07, 2019, 07:50:06 PM
It could be argued that some poverty used to be necessary to fill out certain economic niches. Maybe. But now with automation becoming exponentially more advanced, knowingly allowing or causing poverty is going to get people killed, especially without universal healthcare and government safety nets. Hell, given some of the horror stories I've read, I think it already has.
That is why alcohol is legal, MJ is being legalized, and the opiate crisis was allowed to rage. Culling the peasants.
PS, the IRS has always gone after the poor. The government never has worked for the poor.
Quote from: Unbeliever on October 07, 2019, 07:57:22 PM
Soon there will be very few jobs that can't be automated: driving jobs, cooking jobs, banking jobs, blue collar or white collar. What will people do then, when there are no jobs left for people to do?
Marx's army of the unemployed. Can't wait until the whole world is retired, like I am. Enjoy!
Really, AI and robots are as fake as Elon Musk. And nobody has really ever wanted to work for a living. Stoners, all of you ;-)
Maybe y'all can get commissar AOC to provide.
Hartmann really lays it out, here:
QuoteWhat are Republicans planning for Christmas? Thom Hartmann exposes the Frightening Plans Republicans have for Christmas that could leave you seeing double.
Will the Republican Two Santa Theory work on the America people, letting the billionaires get coal bailouts for the holidays or will the American people see through it.
Judd Wanniski's Two Santa Clause Theory has been a Republican tactic since the 1980s and it looks like they are up to their old tricks again.
Share this video with your friends to let them know about the upcoming Republican scheme to steal your social security, cut social safety nets and blame it all on the Democratic Party.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu68vZ8Hx-k
It's also called "starving the beast."
Unbeliever, so many videos. Are you the new pr126?
This is an atheist forum. You would cancel Xmas completely.
Yes, I would cancel Christmas, and replace it with Saturnalia.
Quote from: Unbeliever on November 04, 2019, 06:05:10 PM
Yes, I would cancel Christmas, and replace it with Saturnalia.
Why not both? Isn't commercial Xmas Saturnalia already? Leftist utopia ... steam powered perpetual motion industry ... every day is a holiday (without any classes), nobody has to work anymore (except Mrs Marx et al ... funny how Karl didn't liberate his wife).
Quote from: Unbeliever on November 04, 2019, 06:05:10 PM
Yes, I would cancel Christmas, and replace it with Saturnalia.
So, which orgy do you attend?
It's been a long time since I could do that! I had to give it up for Lent.
*reply to the OP*
There is a slang expression in Turkish as follows: ''Who fucks us'' meaning that ''they do not really care about us''
No matter it is moral or not for the US government or the Turkish government to make the povery a destiny for us...Actually, what they financial and at the same time intellectual elites want is this, not to educate the masses, to impose poverty on masses...thus masses cannot rebel against the superpower domination of the ultrarich...
Are you a believer in the morality or ethics of human rights? I am but they are not; it is not my job or i have no capacity to judge or debate them, their philosophy is so different from ours...at least, i've started believing that they are right to some extent to decide who will go to war and die or who will go the ivy college and has a place in much more levels... By the way, you can know you are a slave, but you cannot do anything about this. Just be a slave who know that you are slave...
Quote from: Unbeliever on November 05, 2019, 03:58:29 PM
It's been a long time since I could do that! I had to give it up for Lent.
Not Lent. Lint, in your belly button.
Yeah, somebody lent me some lint.
Quote from: Cavebear on September 11, 2019, 09:40:13 AM
there are some people who would fall for them again and again
all you need to do to answer that question, is to go on youtube and search "stupid people at walmart"; or any of your favorite stores.