Its naive to think that its advantageous to steal more of the pie for yourself, and meanwhile destroy some or most of they pie in the process. Had so much of the capital not been destroyed or spent on warfare, and we allowed a more homogeneous development in the world, we would be less likely to be facing the present Malthusian catastrophe.
"The perception that your needs are the most important, is an illusion caused by the existence of your ego." - Buddhist text I once read somewhere
By fielding politicians who promises 40 virgins in the afterlife to whomever votes for the party line, and fear mongering about the gods destruction of our society if gays are allowed to marry, its only a slight variation on what our politicians currently vote for and people can still worship Jesus.
So tell me what about the Korean war or Vietnam had anything to do with protecting our country?
Furthermore what about the countless other lives that we have ended, and the countless populations that we have stolen from, in order to live in the extravagance that we enjoy today?
That's pretty cynical. I do have great admiration for anyone who joins the military, for the simple reason they are putting their lives on the line. Granted not everything they are asked to do is worthwhile, but you can't argue that a country could do without a military. Without that we'd be an Islamic state by now - the Muslims have no qualms about attacking the undefended or wasting lives.
Respect is something that is is earned by virtue, warmongering is not something virtuous, nor is supporting those who warmonger with your life. What you said about Islamic state is the biggest load of crap whatsoever, reflecting that you know very little about history or culture, a common "brown people are scary" knee jerk reaction.
Smedley Darlington Butler[1] (July 30, 1881 – June 21, 1940) was a Major General in the U.S. Marine Corps, an outspoken critic of U.S. military adventurism, and at the time of his death the most decorated Marine in U.S. history. During his 34-year career as a Marine, he participated in military actions in the Philippines, China, in Central America and the Caribbean during the Banana Wars, and France in World War I. By the end of his career, he had received 16 medals, five for heroism. He is one of 19 men to twice receive the Medal of Honor, one of three to be awarded both the Marine Corps Brevet Medal and the Medal of Honor, and the only man to be awarded the Brevet Medal and two Medals of Honor, all for separate actions.
In his 1935 book War is a Racket, he described the workings of the military-industrial complex and, after retiring from service, became a popular speaker at meetings organized by veterans, pacifists and church groups in the 1930s.
In 1934, he became involved in a controversy known as the Business Plot when he told a congressional committee that a group of wealthy industrialists were planning a military coup to overthrow Franklin D. Roosevelt. The purported plot would have had Butler leading a mass of armed veterans in a march on Washington. The individuals identified denied the existence of a plot, and the media ridiculed the allegations. The final report of the committee stated that there was evidence that such a plot existed, but no charges were ever filed. The opinion of most historians is that while planning for a coup was not very advanced, wild schemes were discussed.
"War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes."
As you might have noticed, its almost impossible to find an american who is willing to farm, because its hard fucking work. Which tells me that the wages for farming ought to rise, instead of allowing high unemployment and immigrant labor to produce it. Perhaps then americans will stop shoveling their fat faces full of food, and we can stop wasting money subsidizing the farming companies, which will make unemployment start to fall considerably.
Just because what you do is time consumptive and requires skill, doesn't mean that your somehow special and entitled to make large sums of cash. I mean the food that you eat is inherently more important than any music you make, however people slave at near or below minimum wage to produce it for you, and somehow you presume your labor is more important? Because you have the force of government on your side to protect your interests, because you end up lobbying them with massive amounts of money to do so? The idea that you should limit a limitless resource, so that you can extract alot more value out of it, sounds alot like extortion to me. Just because that sort of extortion is propping up our economy doesn't mean that its right, its a form of non productive consumption and people would rightfully so, switch to a form of production that the market finds more valuable and scarce otherwise.
What i would give for a society that thought beyond the next quarter, or the next political cycle whatsoever. I tried to argue in my run for state congress, that we were heading over a cliff, because of peak resources in phosphate, oil, coal. Of course i wasnt the medias darling, so I got largely ignored with a single line attribution.
Freakonomics posited that the correlation was caused by abortion becoming legal, and the delayed pregnancies provided more affluent and stable offspring.
this would work if we were able to collect meaningful data, and if the constants were more constant, but human activity is not like that. People thrive on information disparities for competitive advantages, and will make logically irrational decisions all of the time, and hold pawns as hostages until they impale themselves on their own swords.
He is a nutjob, since he believes that the world could go on the gold standard for fractional reserve banking, and even be able to find enough gold to do it. That and it would limit the actual application of gold, since the price will go astronomically high. He simply doesn't get economics, because he has been listening to those austrian wackos, who dont actually believe in the scientific method in economics. I will give him credit for the fact that he is uncorruptable, and by virtue is against all corruption in government whatsoever, and is against aggressive acts of imperialism. But i wouldn't want him making complex decisions in either economics or heathcare on my behalf, nor does his personal ideology seem very practical upon examination, as laws that prevent liberties for some protect the liberties of others in many cases.
Rights are something that we imagine, I have no right to be not eaten by a hungry lion, just as I have no right to healthcare. What we do have is a set of privileges, which are conducive to the society that we live in, and liberties from individuals or groups of individuals and to do certain things.
That being said, the case could be made that universal healthcare is a national security priority. I mean if it only takes a ferret farm and a few flu samples, in order to make a super viral pandemic that could kill 50% of the world, whose to say that universal heathcare isn't a good risk avoiding strategy.
Furthermore the government does have a place paying for and charging for positive and negative externailities, and since no human being is an island and healthcare problems are ones of accruing interest, it seems like something the government ought to pay for.
I think what you are referring to are the concepts of "positive" and "negative" liberties. Which form the "introverted" and "extroverted" focus in american politics. and conversely the "communism" and "free market" ideologies. in reality there needs to be a balance, but because people dislike cognitive dissonance, they refuse to hold both contradictory beliefs simultaneously.
I remember watching george carlin say something in his "kids aren't special" tirade
"We have gone from head start, to no child left behind"
What a fucking joke, the special ed kids get so much spent on them, so they can live on welfare their whole life. Meanwhile I was stuck in what amounted to a kids jail, and was prevented in that system from reaching my full potential.
Thats not so much about the people, as it is about the process. For example I was offering this as a part of my state legislative campaign. But the caveat was that you would have to either read an article with a question on the bottom, or watch a youtube video about the topic in question, before you had the ability to provide me with your vote. This way Its actually providing the expertise along with the personal opinion of the constituency. Furthermore there is no funding requirement for spending increases for ballot initiatives in california, and there are no spending reductions required for tax breaks for the ballot initatives either, which is the most absurd way to manage a state budget because you cant have your pie and eat it too.... However if people vote that they would rather give up education, than pay for the taxes what so ever, despite the fact that they were forced to prove they read the bill text before voting on it.... I suppose they deserve what they want, for it is the consent of the governed, and perhaps an socio-economic emergency might take presidence over education.
I offered this as an actual campaign promise in my state legislative (oregon district 36) race, as well as offering complete transparency with my bank, phone, and emails, and in the end it came down to who had the most money and who had better connections with the news media. The funniest thing is that one opponent came from a wealthy family, and had a BS in economics and a JD in law, and a MD in ER medicine. However she was stumped when she had to answer actual questions IN HER FIELD OF EXPERTISE, like the benefits of and how to pay for single payer health care (she doesn't understand what externalities are) , or when I asked her about her how to accomplish her policy to "create jobs and economic growth". It signaled to me a combination of both being dumb because she has been literally handed everything in life, and also being beholden to rich special interests due to her answers and history. The newspaper refused to cover me whatsoever, hardly ever asked me any questions whatsoever, and supported the most corrupt candidate.
Its not what you know but who you know that makes you a successful politician, that or how much power your able to exert with your capital (human or real), politics makes the most raunchy sex look like good clean fun.
http://www.barberb.com (yes I know its hodgepodge and rough around the edges, im not made out of time you know, and I switched effort to working with americans elect).
Slashdot Mirror
Its naive to think that its advantageous to steal more of the pie for yourself, and meanwhile destroy some or most of they pie in the process. Had so much of the capital not been destroyed or spent on warfare, and we allowed a more homogeneous development in the world, we would be less likely to be facing the present Malthusian catastrophe.
"The perception that your needs are the most important, is an illusion caused by the existence of your ego." - Buddhist text I once read somewhere
By fielding politicians who promises 40 virgins in the afterlife to whomever votes for the party line, and fear mongering about the gods destruction of our society if gays are allowed to marry, its only a slight variation on what our politicians currently vote for and people can still worship Jesus.
I think they may have had a little more time to actually rack up that number,
So tell me what about the Korean war or Vietnam had anything to do with protecting our country?
Furthermore what about the countless other lives that we have ended, and the countless populations that we have stolen from, in order to live in the extravagance that we enjoy today?
Brainwashed!
That's pretty cynical. I do have great admiration for anyone who joins the military, for the simple reason they are putting their lives on the line. Granted not everything they are asked to do is worthwhile, but you can't argue that a country could do without a military. Without that we'd be an Islamic state by now - the Muslims have no qualms about attacking the undefended or wasting lives.
Respect is something that is is earned by virtue, warmongering is not something virtuous, nor is supporting those who warmonger with your life. What you said about Islamic state is the biggest load of crap whatsoever, reflecting that you know very little about history or culture, a common "brown people are scary" knee jerk reaction.
Smedley Darlington Butler[1] (July 30, 1881 – June 21, 1940) was a Major General in the U.S. Marine Corps, an outspoken critic of U.S. military adventurism, and at the time of his death the most decorated Marine in U.S. history.
During his 34-year career as a Marine, he participated in military actions in the Philippines, China, in Central America and the Caribbean during the Banana Wars, and France in World War I. By the end of his career, he had received 16 medals, five for heroism. He is one of 19 men to twice receive the Medal of Honor, one of three to be awarded both the Marine Corps Brevet Medal and the Medal of Honor, and the only man to be awarded the Brevet Medal and two Medals of Honor, all for separate actions.
In his 1935 book War is a Racket, he described the workings of the military-industrial complex and, after retiring from service, became a popular speaker at meetings organized by veterans, pacifists and church groups in the 1930s.
In 1934, he became involved in a controversy known as the Business Plot when he told a congressional committee that a group of wealthy industrialists were planning a military coup to overthrow Franklin D. Roosevelt. The purported plot would have had Butler leading a mass of armed veterans in a march on Washington. The individuals identified denied the existence of a plot, and the media ridiculed the allegations. The final report of the committee stated that there was evidence that such a plot existed, but no charges were ever filed. The opinion of most historians is that while planning for a coup was not very advanced, wild schemes were discussed.
"War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes."
Google has the most popular mobile operating system, and has working HUD glasses, I dont see how life is going to be difficult for them.
As you might have noticed, its almost impossible to find an american who is willing to farm, because its hard fucking work. Which tells me that the wages for farming ought to rise, instead of allowing high unemployment and immigrant labor to produce it. Perhaps then americans will stop shoveling their fat faces full of food, and we can stop wasting money subsidizing the farming companies, which will make unemployment start to fall considerably.
Just because what you do is time consumptive and requires skill, doesn't mean that your somehow special and entitled to make large sums of cash. I mean the food that you eat is inherently more important than any music you make, however people slave at near or below minimum wage to produce it for you, and somehow you presume your labor is more important? Because you have the force of government on your side to protect your interests, because you end up lobbying them with massive amounts of money to do so? The idea that you should limit a limitless resource, so that you can extract alot more value out of it, sounds alot like extortion to me. Just because that sort of extortion is propping up our economy doesn't mean that its right, its a form of non productive consumption and people would rightfully so, switch to a form of production that the market finds more valuable and scarce otherwise.
What i would give for a society that thought beyond the next quarter, or the next political cycle whatsoever. I tried to argue in my run for state congress, that we were heading over a cliff, because of peak resources in phosphate, oil, coal. Of course i wasnt the medias darling, so I got largely ignored with a single line attribution.
Freakonomics posited that the correlation was caused by abortion becoming legal, and the delayed pregnancies provided more affluent and stable offspring.
morals aren't the same as ethics.
morals are subjective to each person, whereas ethics can be quantified impartially, read some immmanuel Kant for more info.
this would work if we were able to collect meaningful data, and if the constants were more constant, but human activity is not like that. People thrive on information disparities for competitive advantages, and will make logically irrational decisions all of the time, and hold pawns as hostages until they impale themselves on their own swords.
A parent does not own a child, a parent is the "CUSTODIAN" of a child, in many cases children can choose their own guardians or emancipate.
Just as genesis was misinterperated by the christians, where it says that man was given stewardship over the earth.
He is a nutjob, since he believes that the world could go on the gold standard for fractional reserve banking, and even be able to find enough gold to do it. That and it would limit the actual application of gold, since the price will go astronomically high. He simply doesn't get economics, because he has been listening to those austrian wackos, who dont actually believe in the scientific method in economics. I will give him credit for the fact that he is uncorruptable, and by virtue is against all corruption in government whatsoever, and is against aggressive acts of imperialism. But i wouldn't want him making complex decisions in either economics or heathcare on my behalf, nor does his personal ideology seem very practical upon examination, as laws that prevent liberties for some protect the liberties of others in many cases.
Rights are something that we imagine, I have no right to be not eaten by a hungry lion, just as I have no right to healthcare. What we do have is a set of privileges, which are conducive to the society that we live in, and liberties from individuals or groups of individuals and to do certain things.
That being said, the case could be made that universal healthcare is a national security priority. I mean if it only takes a ferret farm and a few flu samples, in order to make a super viral pandemic that could kill 50% of the world, whose to say that universal heathcare isn't a good risk avoiding strategy.
Furthermore the government does have a place paying for and charging for positive and negative externailities, and since no human being is an island and healthcare problems are ones of accruing interest, it seems like something the government ought to pay for.
The cost of housing them may be $64k, but then your forgetting about the externalities, for example the lost wage they would earn on average.
so $64k + $36k (uk average) = $100k
I think what you are referring to are the concepts of "positive" and "negative" liberties. Which form the "introverted" and "extroverted" focus in american politics. and conversely the "communism" and "free market" ideologies. in reality there needs to be a balance, but because people dislike cognitive dissonance, they refuse to hold both contradictory beliefs simultaneously.
I remember watching george carlin say something in his "kids aren't special" tirade
"We have gone from head start, to no child left behind"
What a fucking joke, the special ed kids get so much spent on them, so they can live on welfare their whole life. Meanwhile I was stuck in what amounted to a kids jail, and was prevented in that system from reaching my full potential.
as i like to say :
"ill stop arguing with you, and telling you that your stupid, when you stop insisting on being wrong"
Thats not so much about the people, as it is about the process. For example I was offering this as a part of my state legislative campaign. But the caveat was that you would have to either read an article with a question on the bottom, or watch a youtube video about the topic in question, before you had the ability to provide me with your vote. This way Its actually providing the expertise along with the personal opinion of the constituency. Furthermore there is no funding requirement for spending increases for ballot initiatives in california, and there are no spending reductions required for tax breaks for the ballot initatives either, which is the most absurd way to manage a state budget because you cant have your pie and eat it too.... However if people vote that they would rather give up education, than pay for the taxes what so ever, despite the fact that they were forced to prove they read the bill text before voting on it.... I suppose they deserve what they want, for it is the consent of the governed, and perhaps an socio-economic emergency might take presidence over education.
I offered this as an actual campaign promise in my state legislative (oregon district 36) race, as well as offering complete transparency with my bank, phone, and emails, and in the end it came down to who had the most money and who had better connections with the news media. The funniest thing is that one opponent came from a wealthy family, and had a BS in economics and a JD in law, and a MD in ER medicine. However she was stumped when she had to answer actual questions IN HER FIELD OF EXPERTISE, like the benefits of and how to pay for single payer health care (she doesn't understand what externalities are) , or when I asked her about her how to accomplish her policy to "create jobs and economic growth". It signaled to me a combination of both being dumb because she has been literally handed everything in life, and also being beholden to rich special interests due to her answers and history. The newspaper refused to cover me whatsoever, hardly ever asked me any questions whatsoever, and supported the most corrupt candidate.
Its not what you know but who you know that makes you a successful politician, that or how much power your able to exert with your capital (human or real), politics makes the most raunchy sex look like good clean fun.
http://www.barberb.com (yes I know its hodgepodge and rough around the edges, im not made out of time you know, and I switched effort to working with americans elect).
to be Julian Assange, considering that he is running for Australian senate
Here's to a cashless society!
http://www.infamouskidd.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/in-time-clock.jpg
Because freedom isn't free.