As to real estate prices, people predicted the collapse of the prices. And by precedence it actually made more sense that the prices would collapse back to the old values.
What is more, that situation came from changing the rules on lending and investing in contradiction with best practices.
As to Germany developing atom bombs in WW2, this was a real concern at the time. We bombed their heavy water facilities to frustrate those efforts. That is war... winners and losers.
As to not being employable for living wages in the US, we might agree there... do you not appreciate that those standards are in part caused by your taxation system and urban planning?
Why does it cost someone in china less money to feed themselves then it does for someone in the US? Is the food better in the US? Often it is about the same. Why does it cost someone less to live in Mexico then it does in the US? Is the housing better in the US? Often not. Etc.
You've made things too expensive in the US and we could make them a good deal cheaper without reducing quality of life. It would involve making things more efficient and not concentrating population where it is not needed.
As to you not giving the issue any thought, you are only looking at the issue from one side. You look at costs and assume that to live those costs must be met. You are not considering that we could also reduce costs.
Your unwillingness to examine that point does mean you are not thinking about the issue.
All that people have to do is have costs equal revenue. Then you break even. Profits are what you have after that.
You seem to think that people only have an ability to increase revenue and that costs are fixed even though we know that costs differ from one place to the next. Companies relocated factories to asia specifically because the costs here were unreasonable. Consider that you might have to lower the cost of living in the US. It isn't impossible.
The biggest living cost in many places is rent, mortgage payments, etc. Well, prices fall if you live in other places. The masses of people that are not viable in the north east should spread out across the country into more economical living conditions. Many forms of employment can be had out there and some of the companies might even come back because the labor would be competitive with china.
It is not human labor that is obsolete... it is the old cities. Their unsubsidized prices must fall to competitive levels or they need to drain population until they do. It is the welfare system that has created this imbalance. The more money you pay people to do stupid things the worse it will get.
Not all of the factories are like the foxconn factories. Furthermore, we have cellphone assemblies in the US. Did you ever hear of the Moto X? I own one. Assembled in the US.
Your whole theory of economics is little more then a shallow and clumsy justification for communism. It doesn't make any sense and is offered in contradiction to known facts.
I would spend the time to deprogram you but I suspect you're not open to correction.
The US track record has to be put in perspective with our whole history and all our contributions. If we are to be held responsible for bad things then we must be rewarded for good things.
Every nation... especially those that have had an impact on human history is going to have bad spots. We're people just like everyone else and being people we make mistakes. We fool ourselves into thinking evil things are justified. We get caught up in things. We are occasionally ignorant or lazy. The US is guilty of this but no more so then any other power on earth. The primary contributor to our occasional evil is our power. This acts as a multiplier on the consequences. Were we largely irrelevant like many of the countries you might cite as more moral, our moral record would likely be similar.
So the evil aspect I have to say is not very credible because it is mostly that we were powerful enough to make bigger mistakes then other people.
In addition, I would point out that the US has both tried to do a lot of good, and has actually done a great deal of good. And that when compared against other powers of similar significance, it is hard to say we have a worse record. Seriously. Compare us to Soviet Russia, the British Empire, the chinese past and present, the Roman Empire, and the Mongol empire.
The US is roughly as powerful those states in their time. We project the same sort of global power. And what do we do with it compared to those powers? You can't compare the US's record to Canada or Finland or something. That is like comparing the violence of a paraplegic with an Olympic athlete. Sure... ideally neither would do violence but the paraplegic literally cannot do violence.
As to our responsibility to other countries. We have a responsibility as human beings to assist other human beings. I will admit that. However, they have a responsibility to respect that aid when it is given, be grateful for it, and not take it for granted by taking measures to avoid similar situations in the future.
THAT is all I expect.
If you show no respect, are ungrateful, and take the assistance for granted... I'm sorely tempted to let you suffer to repay the insult. I don't feel this is unreasonable.
It is a problem when countries are this incompetent. Ideally I would like them to just be more competent. I don't want power over these people. I just want them to take care of their own problems and stop needing everyone to bail them out every five seconds.
As to europeans and your gales of stupid laugher, your rather consistent bigotry has become a tedious trope of your increasingly laughable new age culture.
As to being bigoted, you have no grounds for calling us anything of the kind.
As to being ignorant, you have no grounds for calling us anything of the kind.
As to being belligerents, the europeans like to call the US such things when we attack someone. But then again you practically beg us to do it most of the time. And if we don't attack someone you come up with some other stupid insult. Remember Kosovo? We sat out of that for while while the europeans struck first. You begged us to come help you. We did. Do we endlessly bitch at you for being warmongers for that? No... we're not that stupid. What annoying about so many europeans is that they like to have it both ways. You hate us for attacking someone and you hate us for not attacking someone. You say it our responsibility to do something and then you say we have no right to do a thing. It can't be both. And really it is all your attempt to control us with concocted guilt trips. As to the world agreeing with you. That would be whom? The middle east? A collection of dictators and fanatics? Who agrees with you?
As to literacy, if education statistics don't mean anything then I'd love to hear you justify that argument that the US is ignorant. On what are you basing that statement if not education statistics? I'm assuming nothing but raw bias.
As to selecting bad presidents... Are you going to pretend you pick leaders with more care? Should I go over the last few leaders of any country in europe? Some of them haven't offended so much but then again they were so bland and irrelevant that they likely were too unimpressive to have any memorable impact. This is much the nature of europe these days. Largely irrelevant but my how you are full of yourselves. One thing that is certain with our leaders, even if we chose a good leader, bigots like yourself would still come up with a reason to hate. Bigots always do. I have no interest in attempting to get your respect or approval. You're a spiteful little weasel. Nothing more.
Remind me if that country has some sort of formal dependency contract with the US or not? If not are you attempting to float your entire position on nothing but 100 percent unadulterated white guilt? Because... I have none. That might disturb you but I assure you I am the future. The expiration date on that argument will sour roughly around the time the baby boomers drop out of political power. If you want to convince any beyond some impressionable refuges from the 60s... you'll have to show an actual grievance. Something we actually did to this country that would justify our pouring resources into them basically forever. There is no such grievance that would justify the US doing so sans a protectorate relationship in the year 2014.
Which is why the chinese never made an effort to work hard when the pay was low.
Oh wait... they worked hard anyway and look they have one of the best economies in the world.
Look, the excuses work well on people that care more about not making waves then making sense... but I don't really care... you're going to have to make sense and I don't really think that's very likely at this point.
I'm not siding with the stupid democrats and frankly I have no confidence in the republicans to be saviors either. They're both intolerant and unwilling to think about the issues in a dynamic goal oriented manner.
The only time these idiots cooperate with each other is when they are literally afraid. Short of fear nothing seems to make them be reasonable and that means our only hopes of salvation at this point come from crisis which is just as likely to destroy us in the process.
I'm personally done with it. They all disgust me. I'm going to do what is most reasonable for myself and my family and the political system can eat itself alive for all I care. If it comes looking to eat me, I'll just leave its jurisdiction. All you can do with these idiots. vote with your feet.
whatever... the point is that they're not doing nothing... they're actively undermining and sabotaging each other. They are all working very hard to see that the their rivals fail. That is the primary objective of every politician in Washington these days. To make someone else lose.
And because people only care about someone else losing they tend to create situations where no one wins. And it is THAT situation that I think you were frustrated by... and I think that most of us are frustrated by.
Now the political zealots will show up foaming at the mouth to say that everything would be just peachy if the infidels were nailed to trees or something. But that isn't going to happen. So... plan B. How about we try to find some common ground.
Short of that... the politicians are just a bit ahead of the curve and we should just start killing each other. At which point... I'll just bow out of this society and let the various factions eat each other for all I care.
Even domestically it doesn't work. Lets say the government prints lots of money. What are they spending it on? Even if they just use it to pay employees those employees will then go out into the economy and exchange those dollars for goods and services. if the currency is inflationary then the prices will creep up in proportion to the decrease in the scarcity of the dollars.
If any beggar can throw 100,000 dollars on the table then that means prices for a lot of things go up. And the faster they print money... or add zeros to bank accounts... the faster the currency inflates.
Even if you try what Roosevelt and Chavez tried with price controls, you then run into a problem with goods and dollars being valued differently in and out of the country. if these differences become extreme enough then you'll get smuggling. People will either smuggle under priced goods out of the country to make a profit or smuggle over priced items into the country to make a profit. Any big price difference or lack of legal limit on supply is going to trigger a black market. The soviets couldn't shut the black market down so... good luck trying in the western world.
As to credit, there are many types of credit and debt. We've had forms of it for tens of thousands of years at least.
As to people in poor countries not being slackers... you've clearly never visited one. I went to such a country a few months ago. People generally didn't get up until about noon. They seemed to work just hard enough to get dinner... typically fishing it out of the ocean or something... and then they went back to sleep.
You want to compare that to a Maine lobster fisher? Those guys get up before the sun rises and will often stay out all day. In some of the countries where we do a lot of industry, you will find people that make less then the average american that work very hard. However, those nations are increasing in wealth rapidly. The nations that are not improving are typically that way because of political problems... such as wars or incompetent dictators. Or their cultures are actually pretty lazy. And they do exist. Travel.
Americans are hillbillies? Do you even know what a hillbilly is? Where are you from? I am sure I could come up with something unflattering to say about your country.
The "hillbilly" refers to people living in western virginia mostly. And even if we assume you're referring to ignorant people that live in rural areas... I would point out three facts. One, the vast majority of the US population does not live in rural areas. Two, it is extremely bigoted to assume that because someone lives in a rural area that they are either ignorant or bigoted. You will find many people in rural areas that are "strange" but they're mostly strange because they don't have to conform to urban social standards. They are not however automatically ignorant or bigoted. Often they're just odd or different as anyone would be if allowed to develop their own personality without being force fed one by society. Three, if you examine US education statistics, it is not the rural population that is the most ignorant. It is and has been for a long time our urban ghettos. The US literacy rate is over 98 percent and that 2 percent that is illiterate is found almost exclusively in urban ghettos.
So good work... you ironically labeled yourself as a bigot and generally ignorant of US demographics while attempting to claim Americans were bigots and ignorant.
Anyone with a clue that reads this is now laughing at you.
as to the house plus the senate... that would technically be the legislature or the legislative branch...
And as to them doing nothing... they're deadlocked between factions as I said. They're not lazy... they just hate each other and want contradictory things.
You forgot to substantiate your insult/argument. You just said "you are wrong"... Well, maybe I am wrong... but you should offer some reason for concluding that. Simply saying I am wrong is not sufficient.
Actually, that is only a front... really it is being run by little green men from Mars that want to collapse human civilization so they can make off with our women!
I forgot... once the numbers get large enough, some people are so fucking stupid that they think they can just make the numbers up as they go along.
That sort of accounting only fools voters and asshats like yourself. The market in the end catches it and a price is paid.
Nothing is free. You fail to balance the books and something will come along to correct the accounts. That could be a market collapse... that could be a currency devaluation... that could be the collapse of a government.
It is just a question of how far you want to pull that sling shot back before releasing the stone. The longer people like you keep our society in collective denial... the farther that stone will get pulled back.
So the US is responsible for the fuck ups of every country we've ever had contact with for the rest of time?
Tell you what, if the US must pay for countries we had contact with that are doing badly... does that mean we get paid or some sort of compensation for the countries that did well? South Korea for example... do they owe us an ongoing tax for not being like north korea? Or does your little line of logic only flow in one direction? Is the US only expected to pay other people but no one has to pay us for good things or hey... why not pay the US for bad things done to it? I mean... there are countries that harm the US on occasion... can we expect a payment there?
See, you're just very comfortable with drawing on the national account because you think it is infinite money. People have a hard time with very large numbers. They tend to see them, go cross eyed, and just identify it as a number too large to be bothered with... which tends to mean that many see large numbers as infinite numbers.
Well, the US treasury is not infinite. The numbers have to be balanced at some point. So despite there being a lot of money in there, it does not mean that you can draw upon it infinitely without feeding more into it. Here again, people will say "just raise taxes"... well, okay... are YOU going to pay those taxes? Most people that say such things don't mean raise taxes on them. They mean raise it on someone else. Which is very cute. I'd be very happy with doing all sorts of things if I didn't have to pay for it. Mind if I push some policies and you pay for it while I don't? See how annoying that is?... If you're at all capable of breaking out of your cognitive dissonance then you've joined the conversation and have begun to understand. If you haven't... oh well. For some... sail boats will always be clouds on the horizon.
In regards to being hermetically sealed... Tell me which nations pay US taxes? Outside the US and some protectorates... none. So I'll tell you what... you have countries pay into an international insurance fund that is drawn upon in times of emergency and I am fine. What is more, the rates one pays into the fund should be based upon the probability of those funds being tapped and the proportions to which they will be tapped. Just like typical insurance. What is more... nations that opt not to pay into the fund should either not receive aid... or they they do, their trade can be taxed at foreign ports to make up the difference.
The point of this is not to be a cheap ass. The point is to encourage governments to not be incompetent by punishing stupid behavior and at the same time rewarding competency with a competitive advantage. This should encourage nations to not be administered exclusively by fucktards.
As to the US doing everything right, where did I reference the US? As to my impressions of the US... has been badly run for over a generation. Democrats and republicans... and the political system itself has largely failed the American people. And as a result we are increasing in incompetency at a fairly steady rate. So no... I don't think the US is doing everything right. That said, the US is light years beyond many countries in its competency. Which isn't to say the US is extremely competent except by comparison.
As to congress doing nothing, you will find that the Senate has likewise done nothing. The American political system is gridlocked right now because you have two political factions that despise each other and can't agree on anything. As a result, the system is designed to deadlock until the factions can come to common agreement. The belief by many on both sides that the solution is to defeat or overwhelm the opposition is foolish and only perpetuated by political activists that wish to gain power for their faction or the naive. The best outcome is for reconciliation between the powers, common courtesy, and bipartisan solutions. This will require significant compromises from both sides as neither side finds the other's views on many issues to be tolerable. Here you might say 'this is why my faction must defeat the other evil faction'... there are too many of them. Too many democrats and too many republicans. You can't win. All you can do is piss them off and challenge them to do something nasty. Why do that? You know they can. Both sides are more then capable of throwing wrenches in the other's works. So why call them names and challenge them to kick over your sandcastles? Here you might say "but they did it first"... and here we start to sound like feuding tribes in the middle east. I would like to think we are better then this... there is no solution short of reconciliation between the factions. If you can't do that then you are part of the problem.
As to American ex pats... they can go to their local embassy or consulate and get assistance. Next issue.
As to the tinfoil hat insult, you do appreciate that a stupid baseless insult is not actually a rebuttal right? I will have to take such statements as either null or an admission of weakness on your part. If you disagree then please offer a rational rebuttal instead of a meaningless insult.
As to growing up... I have. Your suggestion that something come for nothing and that incompetency has no price is actually what is childish here. You want daddy to take care of you because he loves you. IF you ever grow up, you'll realize that isn't how the real world has ever worked. Nothing is free. These countries getting aid will be made to pay for it by one means or another. I suspect they'll have inspectors imposed on them and possibly diplomatic and trade pressure to force compliance. Likely that means will have to be subtle because there are after all millions of halfwits like you wandering around with the laughable presumption to have opinions about issues completely beyond your scope.
I don't see any reason to talk domestic politics in this discussion. We are talking about responsibilities between nations.
The responsibilities a nation has to its citizens is distinct from the responsibility an unrelated nation has to another unrelated nation.
For example, lets say we had a world government... then one might be able to argue that as everyone is in some sort of collective government that the various groups form a common society that is mutually responsible for each other.
I say this without justifying or attacking socialism or the welfare state. That is a different discussion. I am specifically talking about the relationships between nations to provide assistance.
In an emergency, we should help... and if there is a global disaster as this might become... then we should help. But incompetent powers that endanger the entire world population might not be tolerable. I don't say this suggesting we go to war or something to impose regime change on one power or another. However, we might need to set trade policy, diplomatic policy, and visa policy to put pressure on various powers to clean up their act. Or in a worst case situation, encourage neighboring powers to absorb the incompetent powers by one means or another.
Then you're saying competent countries have a right to impose their will on less competent countries?
Or are you saying that competent countries are responsible for incompent countries despite having no control over them or say in their behavior?
Look, I get your point... it sucks to be in a bad situation. However, the lack of fortune in being born into a bad country does not obligate those living in a good country to make up the difference sans some kind of mutual understanding between them.
For example, incompetent countries could compensate competent ones. The finance world effectively set this policy up a long time ago which is why badly run economies pay a higher interest rate then better run economies. Effectively, they can still borrow but the risk of default is off set by the higher interest payments.
So we could do something like that for various incompetent states. Beyond that, you could limit the autonomy of incompetent states such that the competent powers that are responsible for them can micromanage their internal policies such that their incompetency is limited. And in return for that and possibly some sort of mutual benefit, a given power might take responsibility for an incompetent power. You get this with "protectorates"... tiny countries or territories that can't really manage or protect themselves. So they're protected by a larger power that provides them with some aid in return for having a certain amount of control over the area.
If an incompetent power is unwilling to offer anything what so ever to the competent powers then what you're asking is charity for ingrates. No.
Because why shouldn't people that manage their society's competently be punished for less competent societies failing?
Lets say your country works really hard and does everything right. They keep a reasonable budget, work hard, enact sensible policies, and generally just do a good job.
Then lets say your neighbor is full of complete fucktards that spend more money then they have, slack off doing nothing half the time, enact dumb counter productive laws, and generally make every mistake possible one after the other...
Should country A1 be punished for the incompetence of country B1? I would argue not since the people in the first country had no control over what the other country did.
Now you seem to be suggesting that all countries are responsible for all countries. That is interesting because responsibility and power/rights go hand in hand. So if I am responsible for how other countries act and perform... then I must likewise have the right to dictate policies in those countries. In effect, for your argument to make any sense, we'd have to have a global government and it would be that global government that would be responsible for everything.
No such global government exists. The UN is a diplomatic institution and not a governing body despite their aspirations. Their authority comes with the consent of member nations and is precisely limited by treaties that would be binding with or without the UN. So the UN is not a governing body.
And that means I am not responsible for the failures of other countries. Not my fault.
If they want to give up their domestic freedoms and make their nation subordinate to another... and that other nation agrees to take responsibility for them... then fine. Lacking that... obviously we are not responsible for them.
How often do I go into the fuse box that controls my home's electrical circuit breakers? Not often. But that isn't a reason to bury the damn thing under 20 feet of concrete either.
Frequency of use does not equate to obsolesce. I probably access the start menu about once a day to perhaps three times a week. I keep really common stuff on my desktop or in a folder on my desktop.
However, there are a lot of things that are best found by looking at the start menu.
MS really should just give users options. Ask them on install or on the first running of an account... "do you want it to work this way or this way?"... and that way the users can decide.
Might this confuse the hapless? They're going to be confused regardless. That is unavoidable. However, to anyone that can follow along and has a clue... you'll be providing the service they need.
The difference is that in science, unlike this discussion, there should not be axes to grind or political riviarlies. Rather it should be a detached search for the truth with no stake or interest in what the eventual outcome could be.
While I might be impartial, I am at least appologetic about it and trying to avoid my biases. While you are outright defending biases which render your claim to scientific superiority laughable.
Look, my point in posting in this thread was to point out that the politicization of the issue has rendered it non-scientific. You have "heard" my argument and I can't force you to agree if you do not, will not, or cannot agree for any reason.
I have made a good faith effort to make myself understood and beyond that I really don't see what else I can do here.
I'd love to see that too. The companies tend to argue that sans some sort of contract down the line it isn't cost effective to invest in a system when they might not ever see a return from it.
There is some validity in that especially if no company takes you offer which might be the case.
That said... I too would like it to work as you describe. On a launch by launch basis. As to cost being the primary critiera... I agree it should be a very important or even primary one. I only worry about safety etc. Yeah, the insurance costs could help manage things but the insurance industry can't predict failure rates without statistics and that requires a significant amount of data that would not exist. To that end, you would have to audit the safety and reliability of each design as best you could. Yes, they could be corrupt and say designs are bad when they're not. But the alternative is to just let everything be determined statistically which would require a significant number of failures to give you some baselines on each design.
Anyway, generally favorable... just think you'd have to be careful about it. People tend to be very intolerant to failures in this industry. Remember NASA crashed a few probes into Mars under its "better, faster, cheaper" model... and then retired that policy with the result that now they do everything very slowly and quite expensively to make sure everything is perfect. If you have too many crashes people are going to insist the damn things be better built and that will change the model back to what we have now. So... just keep that in mind.
The difference is that I have precedence on my side where as you have nothing but speculation on yours.
We have gone through serious disruptions in labor before. Again, at one point the vast majority of our labor was in agriculture. Today, less then 2 percent. That means somewhere around 60-80 percent of the labor force lost their jobs.
And yet they got jobs again.
And then the same thing happened in the factories and they got jobs again.
And as you can see in many parts of the world people are getting jobs and working despite automation.
A better question is "who" is not getting jobs and "why".
You have no interest in examining this question and because of that you will never even attempt to understand what is going on. You have a simplistic theory that is backed by nothing and an unwillingness to think dynamically about a very complex problem. This renders you incompetent to have this discussion and it is a waste of my time to try to discuss the issue with you.
I do not say this to be insulting. But it is not fair to me or anyone else actually attempting to understand the issue to be subjected to your stubborn, closed minded, and frankly lazy thought process.
The slums you are afraid of are in many cases caused by the social programs you love so dearly. They generate the slums by subsidizing them. Had you not provided the money, those people would have moved somewhere else. There are many parts of the country with job growth and affordable costs in living. The areas with the slums have neither. yet you pay people to live in parts of the country with uneconomical living conditions and poor job prospects. It is stupid. You are perpetuating the problem and making it worse.
As to your fear of the future... that merely makes me sad for you. The future holds promise. But only if it is allowed to become. Standing in the way of it will only render the US a primitive has been power that dedicates an nearly all its effort to preserving a population of zombies. Living dead. People that breath and walk around but who gave up on living long ago.
We have nothing profitable to share with each other and continuing to bother me with responses is at best an irritation.
Slashdot Mirror
As to real estate prices, people predicted the collapse of the prices. And by precedence it actually made more sense that the prices would collapse back to the old values.
What is more, that situation came from changing the rules on lending and investing in contradiction with best practices.
As to Germany developing atom bombs in WW2, this was a real concern at the time. We bombed their heavy water facilities to frustrate those efforts. That is war... winners and losers.
As to not being employable for living wages in the US, we might agree there... do you not appreciate that those standards are in part caused by your taxation system and urban planning?
Why does it cost someone in china less money to feed themselves then it does for someone in the US? Is the food better in the US? Often it is about the same. Why does it cost someone less to live in Mexico then it does in the US? Is the housing better in the US? Often not. Etc.
You've made things too expensive in the US and we could make them a good deal cheaper without reducing quality of life. It would involve making things more efficient and not concentrating population where it is not needed.
As to you not giving the issue any thought, you are only looking at the issue from one side. You look at costs and assume that to live those costs must be met. You are not considering that we could also reduce costs.
Your unwillingness to examine that point does mean you are not thinking about the issue.
All that people have to do is have costs equal revenue. Then you break even. Profits are what you have after that.
You seem to think that people only have an ability to increase revenue and that costs are fixed even though we know that costs differ from one place to the next. Companies relocated factories to asia specifically because the costs here were unreasonable. Consider that you might have to lower the cost of living in the US. It isn't impossible.
The biggest living cost in many places is rent, mortgage payments, etc. Well, prices fall if you live in other places. The masses of people that are not viable in the north east should spread out across the country into more economical living conditions. Many forms of employment can be had out there and some of the companies might even come back because the labor would be competitive with china.
It is not human labor that is obsolete... it is the old cities. Their unsubsidized prices must fall to competitive levels or they need to drain population until they do. It is the welfare system that has created this imbalance. The more money you pay people to do stupid things the worse it will get.
Not all of the factories are like the foxconn factories. Furthermore, we have cellphone assemblies in the US. Did you ever hear of the Moto X? I own one. Assembled in the US.
Your whole theory of economics is little more then a shallow and clumsy justification for communism. It doesn't make any sense and is offered in contradiction to known facts.
I would spend the time to deprogram you but I suspect you're not open to correction.
The US track record has to be put in perspective with our whole history and all our contributions. If we are to be held responsible for bad things then we must be rewarded for good things.
Every nation... especially those that have had an impact on human history is going to have bad spots. We're people just like everyone else and being people we make mistakes. We fool ourselves into thinking evil things are justified. We get caught up in things. We are occasionally ignorant or lazy. The US is guilty of this but no more so then any other power on earth. The primary contributor to our occasional evil is our power. This acts as a multiplier on the consequences. Were we largely irrelevant like many of the countries you might cite as more moral, our moral record would likely be similar.
So the evil aspect I have to say is not very credible because it is mostly that we were powerful enough to make bigger mistakes then other people.
In addition, I would point out that the US has both tried to do a lot of good, and has actually done a great deal of good. And that when compared against other powers of similar significance, it is hard to say we have a worse record. Seriously. Compare us to Soviet Russia, the British Empire, the chinese past and present, the Roman Empire, and the Mongol empire.
The US is roughly as powerful those states in their time. We project the same sort of global power. And what do we do with it compared to those powers? You can't compare the US's record to Canada or Finland or something. That is like comparing the violence of a paraplegic with an Olympic athlete. Sure... ideally neither would do violence but the paraplegic literally cannot do violence.
As to our responsibility to other countries. We have a responsibility as human beings to assist other human beings. I will admit that. However, they have a responsibility to respect that aid when it is given, be grateful for it, and not take it for granted by taking measures to avoid similar situations in the future.
THAT is all I expect.
If you show no respect, are ungrateful, and take the assistance for granted... I'm sorely tempted to let you suffer to repay the insult. I don't feel this is unreasonable.
It is a problem when countries are this incompetent. Ideally I would like them to just be more competent. I don't want power over these people. I just want them to take care of their own problems and stop needing everyone to bail them out every five seconds.
As to europeans and your gales of stupid laugher, your rather consistent bigotry has become a tedious trope of your increasingly laughable new age culture.
As to being bigoted, you have no grounds for calling us anything of the kind.
As to being ignorant, you have no grounds for calling us anything of the kind.
As to being belligerents, the europeans like to call the US such things when we attack someone. But then again you practically beg us to do it most of the time. And if we don't attack someone you come up with some other stupid insult. Remember Kosovo? We sat out of that for while while the europeans struck first. You begged us to come help you. We did. Do we endlessly bitch at you for being warmongers for that? No... we're not that stupid. What annoying about so many europeans is that they like to have it both ways. You hate us for attacking someone and you hate us for not attacking someone. You say it our responsibility to do something and then you say we have no right to do a thing. It can't be both. And really it is all your attempt to control us with concocted guilt trips. As to the world agreeing with you. That would be whom? The middle east? A collection of dictators and fanatics? Who agrees with you?
As to literacy, if education statistics don't mean anything then I'd love to hear you justify that argument that the US is ignorant. On what are you basing that statement if not education statistics? I'm assuming nothing but raw bias.
As to selecting bad presidents... Are you going to pretend you pick leaders with more care? Should I go over the last few leaders of any country in europe? Some of them haven't offended so much but then again they were so bland and irrelevant that they likely were too unimpressive to have any memorable impact. This is much the nature of europe these days. Largely irrelevant but my how you are full of yourselves. One thing that is certain with our leaders, even if we chose a good leader, bigots like yourself would still come up with a reason to hate. Bigots always do. I have no interest in attempting to get your respect or approval. You're a spiteful little weasel. Nothing more.
I am aware of the history of that country.
Remind me if that country has some sort of formal dependency contract with the US or not? If not are you attempting to float your entire position on nothing but 100 percent unadulterated white guilt? Because... I have none. That might disturb you but I assure you I am the future. The expiration date on that argument will sour roughly around the time the baby boomers drop out of political power. If you want to convince any beyond some impressionable refuges from the 60s... you'll have to show an actual grievance. Something we actually did to this country that would justify our pouring resources into them basically forever. There is no such grievance that would justify the US doing so sans a protectorate relationship in the year 2014.
Which is why the chinese never made an effort to work hard when the pay was low.
Oh wait... they worked hard anyway and look they have one of the best economies in the world.
Look, the excuses work well on people that care more about not making waves then making sense... but I don't really care... you're going to have to make sense and I don't really think that's very likely at this point.
I'm not siding with the stupid democrats and frankly I have no confidence in the republicans to be saviors either. They're both intolerant and unwilling to think about the issues in a dynamic goal oriented manner.
The only time these idiots cooperate with each other is when they are literally afraid. Short of fear nothing seems to make them be reasonable and that means our only hopes of salvation at this point come from crisis which is just as likely to destroy us in the process.
I'm personally done with it. They all disgust me. I'm going to do what is most reasonable for myself and my family and the political system can eat itself alive for all I care. If it comes looking to eat me, I'll just leave its jurisdiction. All you can do with these idiots. vote with your feet.
whatever... the point is that they're not doing nothing... they're actively undermining and sabotaging each other. They are all working very hard to see that the their rivals fail. That is the primary objective of every politician in Washington these days. To make someone else lose.
And because people only care about someone else losing they tend to create situations where no one wins. And it is THAT situation that I think you were frustrated by... and I think that most of us are frustrated by.
Now the political zealots will show up foaming at the mouth to say that everything would be just peachy if the infidels were nailed to trees or something. But that isn't going to happen. So... plan B. How about we try to find some common ground.
Short of that... the politicians are just a bit ahead of the curve and we should just start killing each other. At which point... I'll just bow out of this society and let the various factions eat each other for all I care.
Even domestically it doesn't work. Lets say the government prints lots of money. What are they spending it on? Even if they just use it to pay employees those employees will then go out into the economy and exchange those dollars for goods and services. if the currency is inflationary then the prices will creep up in proportion to the decrease in the scarcity of the dollars.
If any beggar can throw 100,000 dollars on the table then that means prices for a lot of things go up. And the faster they print money... or add zeros to bank accounts... the faster the currency inflates.
Even if you try what Roosevelt and Chavez tried with price controls, you then run into a problem with goods and dollars being valued differently in and out of the country. if these differences become extreme enough then you'll get smuggling. People will either smuggle under priced goods out of the country to make a profit or smuggle over priced items into the country to make a profit. Any big price difference or lack of legal limit on supply is going to trigger a black market. The soviets couldn't shut the black market down so ... good luck trying in the western world.
As to credit, there are many types of credit and debt. We've had forms of it for tens of thousands of years at least.
As to people in poor countries not being slackers... you've clearly never visited one. I went to such a country a few months ago. People generally didn't get up until about noon. They seemed to work just hard enough to get dinner... typically fishing it out of the ocean or something... and then they went back to sleep.
You want to compare that to a Maine lobster fisher? Those guys get up before the sun rises and will often stay out all day. In some of the countries where we do a lot of industry, you will find people that make less then the average american that work very hard. However, those nations are increasing in wealth rapidly. The nations that are not improving are typically that way because of political problems... such as wars or incompetent dictators. Or their cultures are actually pretty lazy. And they do exist. Travel.
Americans are hillbillies? Do you even know what a hillbilly is? Where are you from? I am sure I could come up with something unflattering to say about your country.
The "hillbilly" refers to people living in western virginia mostly. And even if we assume you're referring to ignorant people that live in rural areas... I would point out three facts. One, the vast majority of the US population does not live in rural areas. Two, it is extremely bigoted to assume that because someone lives in a rural area that they are either ignorant or bigoted. You will find many people in rural areas that are "strange" but they're mostly strange because they don't have to conform to urban social standards. They are not however automatically ignorant or bigoted. Often they're just odd or different as anyone would be if allowed to develop their own personality without being force fed one by society. Three, if you examine US education statistics, it is not the rural population that is the most ignorant. It is and has been for a long time our urban ghettos. The US literacy rate is over 98 percent and that 2 percent that is illiterate is found almost exclusively in urban ghettos.
So good work... you ironically labeled yourself as a bigot and generally ignorant of US demographics while attempting to claim Americans were bigots and ignorant.
Anyone with a clue that reads this is now laughing at you.
as to the house plus the senate... that would technically be the legislature or the legislative branch...
And as to them doing nothing... they're deadlocked between factions as I said. They're not lazy... they just hate each other and want contradictory things.
You forgot to substantiate your insult/argument. You just said "you are wrong"... Well, maybe I am wrong... but you should offer some reason for concluding that. Simply saying I am wrong is not sufficient.
Actually, that is only a front... really it is being run by little green men from Mars that want to collapse human civilization so they can make off with our women!
You might want to adjust your meds a bit.
I forgot... once the numbers get large enough, some people are so fucking stupid that they think they can just make the numbers up as they go along.
That sort of accounting only fools voters and asshats like yourself. The market in the end catches it and a price is paid.
Nothing is free. You fail to balance the books and something will come along to correct the accounts. That could be a market collapse... that could be a currency devaluation... that could be the collapse of a government.
It is just a question of how far you want to pull that sling shot back before releasing the stone. The longer people like you keep our society in collective denial... the farther that stone will get pulled back.
So the US is responsible for the fuck ups of every country we've ever had contact with for the rest of time?
Tell you what, if the US must pay for countries we had contact with that are doing badly... does that mean we get paid or some sort of compensation for the countries that did well? South Korea for example... do they owe us an ongoing tax for not being like north korea? Or does your little line of logic only flow in one direction? Is the US only expected to pay other people but no one has to pay us for good things or hey... why not pay the US for bad things done to it? I mean... there are countries that harm the US on occasion... can we expect a payment there?
See, you're just very comfortable with drawing on the national account because you think it is infinite money. People have a hard time with very large numbers. They tend to see them, go cross eyed, and just identify it as a number too large to be bothered with... which tends to mean that many see large numbers as infinite numbers.
Well, the US treasury is not infinite. The numbers have to be balanced at some point. So despite there being a lot of money in there, it does not mean that you can draw upon it infinitely without feeding more into it. Here again, people will say "just raise taxes"... well, okay... are YOU going to pay those taxes? Most people that say such things don't mean raise taxes on them. They mean raise it on someone else. Which is very cute. I'd be very happy with doing all sorts of things if I didn't have to pay for it. Mind if I push some policies and you pay for it while I don't? See how annoying that is?... If you're at all capable of breaking out of your cognitive dissonance then you've joined the conversation and have begun to understand. If you haven't... oh well. For some... sail boats will always be clouds on the horizon.
In regards to being hermetically sealed... Tell me which nations pay US taxes? Outside the US and some protectorates... none. So I'll tell you what... you have countries pay into an international insurance fund that is drawn upon in times of emergency and I am fine. What is more, the rates one pays into the fund should be based upon the probability of those funds being tapped and the proportions to which they will be tapped. Just like typical insurance. What is more... nations that opt not to pay into the fund should either not receive aid... or they they do, their trade can be taxed at foreign ports to make up the difference.
The point of this is not to be a cheap ass. The point is to encourage governments to not be incompetent by punishing stupid behavior and at the same time rewarding competency with a competitive advantage. This should encourage nations to not be administered exclusively by fucktards.
As to the US doing everything right, where did I reference the US? As to my impressions of the US... has been badly run for over a generation. Democrats and republicans... and the political system itself has largely failed the American people. And as a result we are increasing in incompetency at a fairly steady rate. So no... I don't think the US is doing everything right. That said, the US is light years beyond many countries in its competency. Which isn't to say the US is extremely competent except by comparison.
As to congress doing nothing, you will find that the Senate has likewise done nothing. The American political system is gridlocked right now because you have two political factions that despise each other and can't agree on anything. As a result, the system is designed to deadlock until the factions can come to common agreement. The belief by many on both sides that the solution is to defeat or overwhelm the opposition is foolish and only perpetuated by political activists that wish to gain power for their faction or the naive. The best outcome is for reconciliation between the powers, common courtesy, and bipartisan solutions. This will require significant compromises from both sides as neither side finds the other's views on many issues to be tolerable. Here you might say 'this is why my faction must defeat the other evil faction'... there are too many of them. Too many democrats and too many republicans. You can't win. All you can do is piss them off and challenge them to do something nasty. Why do that? You know they can. Both sides are more then capable of throwing wrenches in the other's works. So why call them names and challenge them to kick over your sandcastles? Here you might say "but they did it first"... and here we start to sound like feuding tribes in the middle east. I would like to think we are better then this... there is no solution short of reconciliation between the factions. If you can't do that then you are part of the problem.
As to American ex pats... they can go to their local embassy or consulate and get assistance. Next issue.
As to the tinfoil hat insult, you do appreciate that a stupid baseless insult is not actually a rebuttal right? I will have to take such statements as either null or an admission of weakness on your part. If you disagree then please offer a rational rebuttal instead of a meaningless insult.
As to growing up... I have. Your suggestion that something come for nothing and that incompetency has no price is actually what is childish here. You want daddy to take care of you because he loves you. IF you ever grow up, you'll realize that isn't how the real world has ever worked. Nothing is free. These countries getting aid will be made to pay for it by one means or another. I suspect they'll have inspectors imposed on them and possibly diplomatic and trade pressure to force compliance. Likely that means will have to be subtle because there are after all millions of halfwits like you wandering around with the laughable presumption to have opinions about issues completely beyond your scope.
Nothing is free, sport... and Sant
I don't see any reason to talk domestic politics in this discussion. We are talking about responsibilities between nations.
The responsibilities a nation has to its citizens is distinct from the responsibility an unrelated nation has to another unrelated nation.
For example, lets say we had a world government... then one might be able to argue that as everyone is in some sort of collective government that the various groups form a common society that is mutually responsible for each other.
I say this without justifying or attacking socialism or the welfare state. That is a different discussion. I am specifically talking about the relationships between nations to provide assistance.
In an emergency, we should help... and if there is a global disaster as this might become... then we should help. But incompetent powers that endanger the entire world population might not be tolerable. I don't say this suggesting we go to war or something to impose regime change on one power or another. However, we might need to set trade policy, diplomatic policy, and visa policy to put pressure on various powers to clean up their act. Or in a worst case situation, encourage neighboring powers to absorb the incompetent powers by one means or another.
Then you're saying competent countries have a right to impose their will on less competent countries?
Or are you saying that competent countries are responsible for incompent countries despite having no control over them or say in their behavior?
Look, I get your point... it sucks to be in a bad situation. However, the lack of fortune in being born into a bad country does not obligate those living in a good country to make up the difference sans some kind of mutual understanding between them.
For example, incompetent countries could compensate competent ones. The finance world effectively set this policy up a long time ago which is why badly run economies pay a higher interest rate then better run economies. Effectively, they can still borrow but the risk of default is off set by the higher interest payments.
So we could do something like that for various incompetent states. Beyond that, you could limit the autonomy of incompetent states such that the competent powers that are responsible for them can micromanage their internal policies such that their incompetency is limited. And in return for that and possibly some sort of mutual benefit, a given power might take responsibility for an incompetent power. You get this with "protectorates"... tiny countries or territories that can't really manage or protect themselves. So they're protected by a larger power that provides them with some aid in return for having a certain amount of control over the area.
If an incompetent power is unwilling to offer anything what so ever to the competent powers then what you're asking is charity for ingrates. No.
Because why shouldn't people that manage their society's competently be punished for less competent societies failing?
Lets say your country works really hard and does everything right. They keep a reasonable budget, work hard, enact sensible policies, and generally just do a good job.
Then lets say your neighbor is full of complete fucktards that spend more money then they have, slack off doing nothing half the time, enact dumb counter productive laws, and generally make every mistake possible one after the other...
Should country A1 be punished for the incompetence of country B1? I would argue not since the people in the first country had no control over what the other country did.
Now you seem to be suggesting that all countries are responsible for all countries. That is interesting because responsibility and power/rights go hand in hand. So if I am responsible for how other countries act and perform... then I must likewise have the right to dictate policies in those countries. In effect, for your argument to make any sense, we'd have to have a global government and it would be that global government that would be responsible for everything.
No such global government exists. The UN is a diplomatic institution and not a governing body despite their aspirations. Their authority comes with the consent of member nations and is precisely limited by treaties that would be binding with or without the UN. So the UN is not a governing body.
And that means I am not responsible for the failures of other countries. Not my fault.
If they want to give up their domestic freedoms and make their nation subordinate to another... and that other nation agrees to take responsibility for them... then fine. Lacking that... obviously we are not responsible for them.
How often do I go into the fuse box that controls my home's electrical circuit breakers? Not often. But that isn't a reason to bury the damn thing under 20 feet of concrete either.
Frequency of use does not equate to obsolesce. I probably access the start menu about once a day to perhaps three times a week. I keep really common stuff on my desktop or in a folder on my desktop.
However, there are a lot of things that are best found by looking at the start menu.
MS really should just give users options. Ask them on install or on the first running of an account... "do you want it to work this way or this way?"... and that way the users can decide.
Might this confuse the hapless? They're going to be confused regardless. That is unavoidable. However, to anyone that can follow along and has a clue... you'll be providing the service they need.
The difference is that in science, unlike this discussion, there should not be axes to grind or political riviarlies. Rather it should be a detached search for the truth with no stake or interest in what the eventual outcome could be.
While I might be impartial, I am at least appologetic about it and trying to avoid my biases. While you are outright defending biases which render your claim to scientific superiority laughable.
Look, my point in posting in this thread was to point out that the politicization of the issue has rendered it non-scientific. You have "heard" my argument and I can't force you to agree if you do not, will not, or cannot agree for any reason.
I have made a good faith effort to make myself understood and beyond that I really don't see what else I can do here.
Good day.
the distinction between an educated guess and a probability is zero.
In any case, you can't call your position science unless you're willing to put down the activism and just be coldly detracted about the whole thing.
That is what science demands. Detachment. You either have it or you don't.
The instant you get sucked into a cause... that goes out of the window.
I'd love to see that too. The companies tend to argue that sans some sort of contract down the line it isn't cost effective to invest in a system when they might not ever see a return from it.
There is some validity in that especially if no company takes you offer which might be the case.
That said... I too would like it to work as you describe. On a launch by launch basis. As to cost being the primary critiera... I agree it should be a very important or even primary one. I only worry about safety etc. Yeah, the insurance costs could help manage things but the insurance industry can't predict failure rates without statistics and that requires a significant amount of data that would not exist. To that end, you would have to audit the safety and reliability of each design as best you could. Yes, they could be corrupt and say designs are bad when they're not. But the alternative is to just let everything be determined statistically which would require a significant number of failures to give you some baselines on each design.
Anyway, generally favorable... just think you'd have to be careful about it. People tend to be very intolerant to failures in this industry. Remember NASA crashed a few probes into Mars under its "better, faster, cheaper" model... and then retired that policy with the result that now they do everything very slowly and quite expensively to make sure everything is perfect. If you have too many crashes people are going to insist the damn things be better built and that will change the model back to what we have now. So... just keep that in mind.
The difference is that I have precedence on my side where as you have nothing but speculation on yours.
We have gone through serious disruptions in labor before. Again, at one point the vast majority of our labor was in agriculture. Today, less then 2 percent. That means somewhere around 60-80 percent of the labor force lost their jobs.
And yet they got jobs again.
And then the same thing happened in the factories and they got jobs again.
And as you can see in many parts of the world people are getting jobs and working despite automation.
A better question is "who" is not getting jobs and "why".
You have no interest in examining this question and because of that you will never even attempt to understand what is going on. You have a simplistic theory that is backed by nothing and an unwillingness to think dynamically about a very complex problem. This renders you incompetent to have this discussion and it is a waste of my time to try to discuss the issue with you.
I do not say this to be insulting. But it is not fair to me or anyone else actually attempting to understand the issue to be subjected to your stubborn, closed minded, and frankly lazy thought process.
The slums you are afraid of are in many cases caused by the social programs you love so dearly. They generate the slums by subsidizing them. Had you not provided the money, those people would have moved somewhere else. There are many parts of the country with job growth and affordable costs in living. The areas with the slums have neither. yet you pay people to live in parts of the country with uneconomical living conditions and poor job prospects. It is stupid. You are perpetuating the problem and making it worse.
As to your fear of the future... that merely makes me sad for you. The future holds promise. But only if it is allowed to become. Standing in the way of it will only render the US a primitive has been power that dedicates an nearly all its effort to preserving a population of zombies. Living dead. People that breath and walk around but who gave up on living long ago.
We have nothing profitable to share with each other and continuing to bother me with responses is at best an irritation.
Good day.