Hm... It just occurred to me I was speaking bollocks about the vikings indeed. Having been on many a viking-line between Stockholm and Åbo/Helsinki, I could have thought of that myself.
Plus, the rape-statistics in Sweden aren't exactly encouraging either... Must be something in the way these people consume alcohol.
Difference being that life expectancy went up by about 30+ years since then. For most people, including zee Arabs.
It does suck more than ever to be African, though.
On another note, the Vikings have been domesticated... Scandinavia is now the home of confused men who are so afraid of their women that they no longer dare holding open doors for them, and it's now the world capital of neutrality and politeness (yes, Scandinavia *is* worse than Switzerland in this respect).
Somehow I miss those jolly sea-faring, mead-drinking, raping, pillaging violent Vikings.
> elite assholes than the collective will of their peers.
Once my "peers" make a buck, they will immediately turn into elite assholes. This, my friend, is human nature.
> You mean your government is run by roomfuls of arguing people with totally different agendas? Laughable!
No. As opposed to the US elections where "democracy" means having one more candidate then in Soviet Russia, the Netherlands is an actual, working *consensus* democracy. Every two or four years we get completely new parties with new agendas that sprout up. Currently the Socialist Party and some other right-wing party for "freedom" (rather fascism) swing *large* amounts of the votes at the cost of the traditional big parties. Although I don't like the racist right-wing party, I do enjoy the fact that these parties come and go with their respective agendas.
So indeed, our government is comprised of a whole bunch of people that argue and have totally different agendas. This is why the current PM Balkenende is already on his fourth government in three years time. The other cabinets fell due to arguments.
> mocking criticisms that came from European monarchs when the US formed their democratic government.
Well, history and current events are showing us that the US is indeed involved in all manner of dirty deals and power mongering against the will of many of its citizens. As Oscar Wilde so aptly remarked, it seems to be the only country that went from Barbarism to Decadence without any intervening period of civilization. Therefore, European mockery is not entirely out of place. Not because we're perfect, but just because we can.
Of course, the limited incestuous gene-pool that the Monarchies represent should be abolished too, but this is another story.
To summarize my views: I *do* believe in consensus-democracy. I *do not* believe in referendums because you're asking the ignorant to decide on matters they do not fully comprehend.
This means I do not distrust my fellow countrymen one bit. They are quite a jolly bunch, really. This goes for the Swedes and the Israeli too, as well as the Germans and Swiss and the Italians, with whom I have some experience. But it does mean I simply don't want the good people of the European streets to vote on the financial future of the EU, for example. Or policies with regards to immigration, or any other multi-faceted matter of some complexity.
Those shoes are too large for the average Joe to fill, I feel.
Do we really want that? We'd be bogged down in indecision so hard that nothing would ever get done anymore. If you have a country like Holland, with only 17 million people, you'd be looking at 17 million different opinions about things, and most of them hard to swing due to the inherent stubbornness of the owner of said opinions.
Furthermore (as I myself demonstrate here) most of us have pretty damn categorical views on things that we know absolutely nothing about. And we should all have a say? Does that include the bigots, zealots, religious mad hatters, neo-fascists and militant atheists?
If what you propose ever happens in your country, I suggest you tell me. I'll send a camera crew, because it would be entertaining to watch.
> Work is a dictatorship. > Non-hierachical collectives running things.
Employment is a business transaction. As long as my employer and I feel it is mutually beneficial to do so, my employer pays me to perform particular, documented things for a given amount of time per unit of currency. Both my employer and I can get out of this business deal if we so desire (even though this is hard for Employers in most parts of Europe).
A non-hierarchical approach to work doesn't exist. Of course, in a professional environment you can adopt laisez-faire models but in general you'd need someone to tell people what needs doing and other people executing that. Otherwise your business won't produce what it's in business for. Please see my comments above about everyone having their say.
In light of this, I am also against referendums. Let's take Sweden's referendum on the EMU as an example. People voted against because they listened to politicians' arguments. Some of which were as outrageous as "if we adopt the Euro, the pope will be determining our policies with regards to families soon" and rot like that.
85% of any given population is too dumb, uninformed, uninterested or simply lazy to make any judgment calls about any of the more complex issues that arise from trying to maintain a civilization. Therefore, we should try not to ask them.
Of course Bush is too easy a target to take up so I'll avoid a reductio ad bushium, but if you look at Sweden where only 20% of the GOVERNMENT and the PARLIAMENT have some kind of higher education (which is almost 40% lower than the Nation's 34%) you *could* argue that the population should get more picky as to who they elect and more active in joining politics even if they have some talent.
Coming back to the demonstrating aspect of this whole discussion: 99% of the demonstrations I've seen are either moot or silly, be they on internet or in the streets. It's no wonder it doesn't get covered. Which is a shame for all the meaningful demonstrations out there, but there you have it.
If you're living in Germany, you can also attach yourself to the RAF (not the Royal Air Force) and start offing district attorneys, businessmen and suchlike, but neither method guarantees you the State will listen to your viewpoints.:-D
> Think about the laptop maker, web designer, advertising agency -- all of the people who make a living off of the sale of just one of these.
I'm also thinking of the poor African kids who are forced to mine the diamonds.
Frankly, anyone who buys a laptop with a "rare, coloured diamond" is likely to be completely immoral and stupid. The diamond market has been kept expensive artificially by De Beers et al for ages now, while they still use slave labour to actually obtain the diamonds. Of course they deny this, but I don't see the love in the countries where they get 'm. On top of that, there's tech that will allow you to grow diamonds relatively efficiently in any shape and size you want, and without impurities or with impurities to fool the jewelers. Check out http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/2 6/0040204 for that.
So you pay one million dollar for something no one will ever need, with an inherently worthless piece of pressurized carbon on top that is likely to be blood stained in one way or another, and the value of the tech inside will be gone within 6 months from now. And all of that just to demonstrate how dazzlingly little you care about money.
You call that "the next best thing"? I don't mind people buying things that are luxurious, extravagant or any such thing. I don't mind "stimulating" a bit of the old economy. But precisely Diamond-studded commodity tech pisses me off at many levels.
> There are dozens of possible circumstances that could have contributed to the child acting the way they did: death, divorce, illness, criminality etc. etc.
First let me point out that if the child has just suffered death, divorce, illness or criminality in the family, maybe more care should have been taken to cater to its needs. I refer, again, to "absentee parents". If there are special circumstances that make your child psychologically vulnerable, leaving it at the school because you're too damn busy to look after it is not a very good idea, is it?
I'm not "blaming" the child. I was saying that this thing is indicative of a lack of discipline and absentee parents. The lack of discipline definitely also applies to the parents, who, in such situations, ought to see it as their duty to be there for the child so the cops *don't* get called.
By calling the cops, you invite a bunch of people that are looking at the case without comprehending the background of the child, and thus might take exactly the wrong actions. Quod Erat Demonstrandum, perhaps, by the handcuffing.
> Blaming the evil child and feckless parents in a case where you know nothing of the background is the act of a truly spectacularly ideological prick
Children can indeed be evil, and parents feckless. When I was young, I had a big mouth, but never used physical violence. I was also a straight A student, a bit fat, and had glasses since I was three. The children in my class would get together in groups of about 10-15 people and beat me up daily on my way to and fro school. Their parents didn't do a goddamn thing about it, and yes, the children were evil.
Later, it turned out that many of the bullies were having trouble at home. Trouble with absentee parents, trouble with suicides, abuse or alcoholism in the family. One of my bullies' sister offed herself due to such things when we were eighteen, and my troubles with these pricks had been over and done with for 7 years. She was a nice kid, I worked with her in the local supermarket. Her brother was destroyed with grief, but I could never muster any empathy for the fucker, if you'll excuse me my French. Like Bill Cosby once said, just because your father is on the bottle and you don't have a job doesn't mean you can go home and beat your wife silly. Kids know what is good and bad. Sometimes they choose the bad.
> your upbringing made you what you are today.
Not just that. My upbringing was splendid. However, I've seen kids being cruel, heartless and inhumane for seven years of my life. I've seen the parents of these kids not do a damn thing about that. It's the interaction with other children that scarred me, not my parents, bless them.
Don't get me wrong. I like kids. I recognize the good ones when I see them, and I enjoy hanging out with them and talking to them. Children are the future. But don't go off and try to tell me that kids and their parents are saints. They are not, and it's not necessarily so for this kid either. She could well be a little bitch on wheels, for all I know.
So before you go off on a "think of the poor kid" crusade, pay mind to the fact that some of them are indeed total monsters for whatever reason. Absolving the wonderful kid and the glorious parents from any wrong-doing automatically and on instinct in a case where you know nothing of the background is the act of a truly, spectacularly ideological and naive prick/bitch.
Tell you what though, I certainly embody the truth of my theories that my *background* made me what I am today. And you can take that to the bank, for good or bad.
The day anyone calls me my children are in serious trouble in school, and I claim I'm too busy to mind them, you can come and slap me silly.
> There are dozens of possible circumstances that could have contributed to the child acting the way they did: death, divorce, illness, criminality etc. etc.
First let me point out that if the child has just suffered death, divorce, illness or criminality in the family, maybe more care should have been taken to cater to its needs. I refer, again, to "absentee parents". If there are special circumstances that make your child psychologically vulnerable, leaving it at the school because you're too damn busy to look after it is not a very good idea, is it?
I'm not "blaming" the child. I was saying that this thing is indicative of a lack of discipline and absentee parents. The lack of discipline definitely also applies to the parents, who, in such situations, ought to see it as their duty to be there for the child so the cops *don't* get called.
By calling the cops, you invite a bunch of people that are looking at the case without comprehending the background of the child, and thus might take exactly the wrong actions. Quod Erat Demonstrandum, perhaps, by the handcuffing.
> Blaming the evil child and feckless parents in a case where you know nothing of the background is the act of a truly spectacularly ideological prick
Children can indeed be evil, and parents feckless. When I was young, I had a big mouth, but never used physical violence. I was also a straight A student, a bit fat, and had glasses since I was three. The children in my class would get together in groups of about 10-15 people and beat me up daily on my way to and fro school. Their parents didn't do a goddamn thing about it, and yes, the children were evil.
Later, it turned out that many of the bullies were having trouble at home. Trouble with absentee parents, trouble with suicides, abuse or alcoholism in the family. One of my bullies' sister offed herself due to such things when we were eighteen, and my troubles with these pricks had been over and done with for 7 years. She was a nice kid, I worked with her in the local supermarket. Her brother was destroyed with grief, but I could never muster any empathy for the fucker, if you'll excuse me my French. Like Bill Cosby once said, just because your father is on the bottle and you don't have a job doesn't mean you can go home and beat your wife silly. Kids know what is good and bad. Sometimes they choose the bad.
> your upbringing made you what you are today.
Not just that. My upbringing was splendid. However, I've seen kids being cruel, heartless and inhumane for seven years of my life. I've seen the parents of these kids not do a damn thing about that. It's the interaction with other children that scarred me, not my parents, bless them.
Don't get me wrong. I like kids. I recognize the good ones when I see them, and I enjoy hanging out with them and talking to them. Children are the future. But don't go off and try to tell me that kids and their parents are saints. They are not, and it's not necessarily so for this kid either. She could well be a little bitch on wheels, for all I know.
So before you go off on a "think of the poor kid" crusade, pay mind to the fact that some of them are indeed total monsters for whatever reason. Absolving the wonderful kid and the glorious parents from any wrong-doing automatically and on instinct in a case where you know nothing of the background is the act of a truly, spectacularly ideological and naive prick/bitch.
Tell you what though, I certainly embody the truth of my theories that my *background* made me what I am today. And you can take that to the bank, for good or bad.
The day anyone calls me my children are in serious trouble in school, and I claim I'm too busy to mind them, you can come and slap me silly.
That was exactly my point with the first reply to the original poster.
These situations don't mean that the US allows a rampant and unchecked police force deal violence and intimidation to children. They are illustrations of instances in which other authorities are failing to do their job, and the police steps in. Sometimes this is done correctly, sometimes not so correctly.
But to conclude that the US condones routine tasering, prosecuting and handcuffing of children is taking these one-off occasions a bit further than they merit.
I do believe there are forces at work in Europe which do not apply to the United States.
We're not states. We're autonomous, sovereign nations with a history that averages 2000 years of wars, development, colonialism and culture. This means that each member has a unique culture, outlook on the world, language and identity. The EU politicians are precariously navigating this minefield of opinions and tradition, and I do not believe one Charismatic Leader will ever bind all members, simply because the locals don't want to be run by a foreigner. As an illustration of this, try to persuade the French they need to be governed by Merkel (Germany) or Blair.
Last times anyone tried to create a unified Europe, we had full scale wars on our hands. Think Julius Caesar, think Napoleon Bonaparte, think Adolf Hitler. One "charismatic" leader might actually conquer the continent, but in any given country there will be millions of people that will subvert and ultimately overthrow them.
It's not going to happen. Never has, never will.
The five year old threw a tantrum, you fucking moron. The school should have dragged her ass out of there and summoned the parent over instead of calling the cops. I distinctively remember saying "absentee parents" and "lack of discipline". The latter referring to lack of respectful behaviour at school too.
Let me see what we have here: - Five year old throws tantrum. "lack of discipline", check! - School doesn't manage to calm 'r down. "lack of discipline", check! - Parent indicates he/she is too damn busy to swing by. "Absentee parents", check! - School then calls the Cops. I can't even begin to classify that moronic idea.
Ok, handcuffs might have been misguided, but "scaring" the kid a wee is a good means of ensuring she don't do it again. Back in the day, when I was caught doing shit I wasn't supposed to by the local copper, he would drag me to the car by the fucking ear and deliver me to my mother's doorstep, and then there'd be hell to pay.
If on the other hand I would get caught doing shit I wasn't supposed to by the head master, he would give me the evil eye. And let me tell you, bolder people than I have turned to stone because of that one. Then I'd be sent home to my mother, and, guess what, there'd be hell to pay.
Result? After one such experience, I didn't do shit I wasn't supposed to anymore. Instead of fucking whining about "police brutality" and "think of the kids", I would argue that I deserved what I got, and I'm a better induhvidual for it today.
Your smiley was there, I just felt obliged to mention it once again.
> Sweden doesn't use the Euro, Sweden also doesn't acknowledge the common European Law which is being setup by the European Parliament.
Er, the UK doesn't use the Euro. Neither does Denmark. As far as the European Constitution is concerned, France and the Netherlands (the latter of which I am a citizen) didn't acknowledge it either. Moreover they explicitly rejected it in a round of referendums.
> a few weeks ago a new European law was passed stating that it isn't illegal for their citizens. Its not merely a country policy anymore.
Currently, any country in the EU still has the autonomous power to put their own laws and constitution above EU law. This is the reason Sweden still has a state-monopoly on the sale of alcohol, Marijuana and prostitution are still legal in Holland, and the UK still uses the Imperial Measures:-) This also means that many European Laws still mean squat.
> I wouldn't be surprised if we'd get a USE sometimes.
Given the fact that any European country has a Veto-right in legislative matters, I sincerely doubt that for the coming years. Firstly it requires the Brits, French and zee Germans to agree on many things. Secondly, even countries that hitherto firmly believed in the principles of the EU project are seeing domestic support wane in the face of certain budgetary developments. Case in point being the Netherlands, which has clearly stated to Brussels that "we're paying too much and we want our cash back".
It may happen. But I think it's still a thing of the (distant) future.
> U.S.E. (United States of Europe;-)) > I can download whatever I want and no one can touch me.
Firstly, there is no such thing as the united states of Europe. In Sweden, you can and will be prosecuted for downloading material. In the Netherlands (last time I checked) this was indeed not illegal. My point is that this varies from country to country.
> So, in that aspect; can anyone even explain what democracy actually is these days? I'm tempted to say that the more money > someone has the more "democracy" they posses.
So, Sweden used to have a voting system where a number of votes were allotted to you depending on the amount of money you made. Switzerland got women's voting rights in 1971. Before that, it didn't. However Holland did beat the USA to voting rights for women by a year (1919 vs 1920), which is also not frightfully long ago.
Meanwhile, people with more money have either been able to swing more votes or obtain more votes through pay-offs, publicity or simple strong-arming all throughout history.
The ancient Greeks, although they had a "democracy", only had it for Greek men of independent status between one age to another, thus leaving out slaves, non-greeks, women and a whole array of citizens.
What surprises me is that you seem to thing that this is a sign of the times. I would argue that right now, we have more "democracy" than we ever had in the history of man-kind.
Now I read both FA's, and both cases cannot be attributed to a horrible justice system or a bad police force. God, if I pulled shit like that, my mom would have given me one over that makes tasering look like a walk in the park. Rightfully so, too.
Absentee parents and a lack of discipline will induce this kind of behaviour, and having the cops solve it is just a cop-out. Then turning around and trying to blame the cops for mis-handling it... well, I have nothing to say.
As a representative of Mr Bartokomous I must draw your attention to the fact that Mr Bartokomous was hurt and disappointed by that comment, and will serve you a DMCA notice pending the removal of said comment.
Furthermore, you are excluded from the dance of joy.
I very much care, and I get laid at least 4 times a week unless there are "female troubles" on the horizon. Then I don't. This is not my choice, because a good captain sails many seas including the red one, but I have to accept these things, arrr!
Either which way, I very much care about being referred to as a commoner. I'm a weird-ass mo-fo, and proud of it.
The 2004 Saab 9-3 that I had, had a small turbo-charger and fuel was already directly injected. It had a 1.9 Litre turbo-diesel engine which delivered 150 bhp and considerable amounts of torque.
That thing would drive 224 km/hour over the German Autobahn while consuming 11 litres of diesel for 100 km. "Normal" driving, a mix of long-distance at approximately 120-140 km/hr and Stockholm inner-city driving, would yield an impressive 5.8 litres of diesel per 100 km driven. All of this with a manual gearbox with 6 gears.
It would appear to me that that car was already equipped with said combination of both features. It performed very well and was extraordinarily economic. The engine, by the way, was designed by Italy's Alfa Romeo, but is on par with the Common Rail engines used by Renault and Volkswagen/Audi.
All of this simply proves that if you want a car with a lot of performance, relatively small engine that is reliable and economic, and that can take curves decently, you should never, ever, ever get a car built by Americans. On top of the above, you'll get more elegant design with European cars, even if they're 0wn3rd by GM in the background somewhere.
Therefore it's a function of both Volume and Weight. The BMI takes into account what your volume and weight should be for your age/length/gender.
Ergo, they did measure how much FAT the kids had (because FAT is lighter than muscle, so at a particular Volume the Weight varies and hence the BMI shifts).
They might actually be on to something here. Because they did, so they are.
My experience with government isn't that bad. On the other hand, my experience with Corporations is not that good.
Sure, government wastes money, but so do corporations. I've seen how my company's first model of external (SCSI connect) CD-writers had small, round rubber feet on them. They would incidentally fall off. These small rubber feet couldn't have cost more than a few dollar cents to produce, but the spare part cost around 70 dollars because of the systems and people we had to maintain to provide for this part. In that time, I had 14 layers of management above me and things haven't improved since then. I'm now talking of a fortune 500 hi-tech company that, since 1939, hasn't had one year of non-profitability. I'm sure you know who I mean.
So, ineffective behaviour is a consequence of sheer size, and to some degree cannot be avoided. The one difference between a Mega-Corporation and most governments I've dealt with is that the government is benign if not well-willing, while this is not sure of the Corporations.
As for Cuba's inhabitants, the CIA World Factbook states Cuba had a life expectancy of 77.41 in 2006. The US had 77.85 at the time. The life expectancy in Cuba is on the rise too, for that matter. Interestingly enough the US is trailing behind not only (expectedly) the European Union as a whole, and Sweden, Netherlands, Switzerland, Monaco, Norway and others, they are *also* trailing behind Bosnia-Herzegovina and Israel.
This must surely mean that Cubans, although not surrounded by Playstations and McDonalds outlets, *do* get fed, and doe have access to clean water. Your comments do not seem to be rooted in objective or statistically provable data.
Slashdot Mirror
Hm... It just occurred to me I was speaking bollocks about the vikings indeed. Having been on many a viking-line between Stockholm and Åbo/Helsinki, I could have thought of that myself.
:-D
Plus, the rape-statistics in Sweden aren't exactly encouraging either... Must be something in the way these people consume alcohol.
Pillaging is something of the past though.
Difference being that life expectancy went up by about 30+ years since then. For most people, including zee Arabs.
It does suck more than ever to be African, though.
On another note, the Vikings have been domesticated... Scandinavia is now the home of confused men who are so afraid of their women that they no longer dare holding open doors for them, and it's now the world capital of neutrality and politeness (yes, Scandinavia *is* worse than Switzerland in this respect).
Somehow I miss those jolly sea-faring, mead-drinking, raping, pillaging violent Vikings.
FireFox 2.0.0.3 on Win2003 SP2 as a VM on top of XP Pro SP2 didn't flinch. :-D Maybe windows is better equipped to handle stuff like this after all.
> elite assholes than the collective will of their peers.
Once my "peers" make a buck, they will immediately turn into elite assholes. This, my friend, is human nature.
> You mean your government is run by roomfuls of arguing people with totally different agendas? Laughable!
No. As opposed to the US elections where "democracy" means having one more candidate then in Soviet Russia, the Netherlands is an actual, working *consensus* democracy. Every two or four years we get completely new parties with new agendas that sprout up. Currently the Socialist Party and some other right-wing party for "freedom" (rather fascism) swing *large* amounts of the votes at the cost of the traditional big parties. Although I don't like the racist right-wing party, I do enjoy the fact that these parties come and go with their respective agendas.
So indeed, our government is comprised of a whole bunch of people that argue and have totally different agendas. This is why the current PM Balkenende is already on his fourth government in three years time. The other cabinets fell due to arguments.
> mocking criticisms that came from European monarchs when the US formed their democratic government.
Well, history and current events are showing us that the US is indeed involved in all manner of dirty deals and power mongering against the will of many of its citizens. As Oscar Wilde so aptly remarked, it seems to be the only country that went from Barbarism to Decadence without any intervening period of civilization. Therefore, European mockery is not entirely out of place. Not because we're perfect, but just because we can.
Of course, the limited incestuous gene-pool that the Monarchies represent should be abolished too, but this is another story.
To summarize my views:
I *do* believe in consensus-democracy.
I *do not* believe in referendums because you're asking the ignorant to decide on matters they do not fully comprehend.
This means I do not distrust my fellow countrymen one bit. They are quite a jolly bunch, really. This goes for the Swedes and the Israeli too, as well as the Germans and Swiss and the Italians, with whom I have some experience. But it does mean I simply don't want the good people of the European streets to vote on the financial future of the EU, for example. Or policies with regards to immigration, or any other multi-faceted matter of some complexity.
Those shoes are too large for the average Joe to fill, I feel.
> One where we all have a say.
Do we really want that? We'd be bogged down in indecision so hard that nothing would ever get done anymore. If you have a country like Holland, with only 17 million people, you'd be looking at 17 million different opinions about things, and most of them hard to swing due to the inherent stubbornness of the owner of said opinions.
Furthermore (as I myself demonstrate here) most of us have pretty damn categorical views on things that we know absolutely nothing about. And we should all have a say? Does that include the bigots, zealots, religious mad hatters, neo-fascists and militant atheists?
If what you propose ever happens in your country, I suggest you tell me. I'll send a camera crew, because it would be entertaining to watch.
> Work is a dictatorship.
> Non-hierachical collectives running things.
Employment is a business transaction. As long as my employer and I feel it is mutually beneficial to do so, my employer pays me to perform particular, documented things for a given amount of time per unit of currency. Both my employer and I can get out of this business deal if we so desire (even though this is hard for Employers in most parts of Europe).
A non-hierarchical approach to work doesn't exist. Of course, in a professional environment you can adopt laisez-faire models but in general you'd need someone to tell people what needs doing and other people executing that. Otherwise your business won't produce what it's in business for. Please see my comments above about everyone having their say.
In light of this, I am also against referendums. Let's take Sweden's referendum on the EMU as an example. People voted against because they listened to politicians' arguments. Some of which were as outrageous as "if we adopt the Euro, the pope will be determining our policies with regards to families soon" and rot like that.
85% of any given population is too dumb, uninformed, uninterested or simply lazy to make any judgment calls about any of the more complex issues that arise from trying to maintain a civilization. Therefore, we should try not to ask them.
Of course Bush is too easy a target to take up so I'll avoid a reductio ad bushium, but if you look at Sweden where only 20% of the GOVERNMENT and the PARLIAMENT have some kind of higher education (which is almost 40% lower than the Nation's 34%) you *could* argue that the population should get more picky as to who they elect and more active in joining politics even if they have some talent.
Coming back to the demonstrating aspect of this whole discussion: 99% of the demonstrations I've seen are either moot or silly, be they on internet or in the streets. It's no wonder it doesn't get covered. Which is a shame for all the meaningful demonstrations out there, but there you have it.
If you're living in Germany, you can also attach yourself to the RAF (not the Royal Air Force) and start offing district attorneys, businessmen and suchlike, but neither method guarantees you the State will listen to your viewpoints. :-D
Why would you?
1
-- http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/news.php?show_news=
DOSBox. I use it for my masters of orion and several other classic DOS games such as the first Doom incarnations. Works real well.
's even a GNU/Linux version available.
> Think about the laptop maker, web designer, advertising agency -- all of the people who make a living off of the sale of just one of these.
2 6/0040204 for that.
I'm also thinking of the poor African kids who are forced to mine the diamonds.
Frankly, anyone who buys a laptop with a "rare, coloured diamond" is likely to be completely immoral and stupid. The diamond market has been kept expensive artificially by De Beers et al for ages now, while they still use slave labour to actually obtain the diamonds. Of course they deny this, but I don't see the love in the countries where they get 'm. On top of that, there's tech that will allow you to grow diamonds relatively efficiently in any shape and size you want, and without impurities or with impurities to fool the jewelers. Check out http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/
So you pay one million dollar for something no one will ever need, with an inherently worthless piece of pressurized carbon on top that is likely to be blood stained in one way or another, and the value of the tech inside will be gone within 6 months from now. And all of that just to demonstrate how dazzlingly little you care about money.
You call that "the next best thing"? I don't mind people buying things that are luxurious, extravagant or any such thing. I don't mind "stimulating" a bit of the old economy. But precisely Diamond-studded commodity tech pisses me off at many levels.
This time with readable formatting:
> There are dozens of possible circumstances that could have contributed to the child acting the way they did: death, divorce, illness, criminality etc. etc.
First let me point out that if the child has just suffered death, divorce, illness or criminality in the family, maybe more care should have been taken to cater to its needs. I refer, again, to "absentee parents". If there are special circumstances that make your child psychologically vulnerable, leaving it at the school because you're too damn busy to look after it is not a very good idea, is it?
I'm not "blaming" the child. I was saying that this thing is indicative of a lack of discipline and absentee parents. The lack of discipline definitely also applies to the parents, who, in such situations, ought to see it as their duty to be there for the child so the cops *don't* get called.
By calling the cops, you invite a bunch of people that are looking at the case without comprehending the background of the child, and thus might take exactly the wrong actions. Quod Erat Demonstrandum, perhaps, by the handcuffing.
> Blaming the evil child and feckless parents in a case where you know nothing of the background is the act of a truly spectacularly ideological prick
Children can indeed be evil, and parents feckless. When I was young, I had a big mouth, but never used physical violence. I was also a straight A student, a bit fat, and had glasses since I was three. The children in my class would get together in groups of about 10-15 people and beat me up daily on my way to and fro school. Their parents didn't do a goddamn thing about it, and yes, the children were evil.
Later, it turned out that many of the bullies were having trouble at home. Trouble with absentee parents, trouble with suicides, abuse or alcoholism in the family. One of my bullies' sister offed herself due to such things when we were eighteen, and my troubles with these pricks had been over and done with for 7 years. She was a nice kid, I worked with her in the local supermarket. Her brother was destroyed with grief, but I could never muster any empathy for the fucker, if you'll excuse me my French. Like Bill Cosby once said, just because your father is on the bottle and you don't have a job doesn't mean you can go home and beat your wife silly. Kids know what is good and bad. Sometimes they choose the bad.
> your upbringing made you what you are today.
Not just that. My upbringing was splendid. However, I've seen kids being cruel, heartless and inhumane for seven years of my life. I've seen the parents of these kids not do a damn thing about that. It's the interaction with other children that scarred me, not my parents, bless them.
Don't get me wrong. I like kids. I recognize the good ones when I see them, and I enjoy hanging out with them and talking to them. Children are the future. But don't go off and try to tell me that kids and their parents are saints. They are not, and it's not necessarily so for this kid either. She could well be a little bitch on wheels, for all I know.
So before you go off on a "think of the poor kid" crusade, pay mind to the fact that some of them are indeed total monsters for whatever reason. Absolving the wonderful kid and the glorious parents from any wrong-doing automatically and on instinct in a case where you know nothing of the background is the act of a truly, spectacularly ideological and naive prick/bitch.
Tell you what though, I certainly embody the truth of my theories that my *background* made me what I am today. And you can take that to the bank, for good or bad.
The day anyone calls me my children are in serious trouble in school, and I claim I'm too busy to mind them, you can come and slap me silly.
> There are dozens of possible circumstances that could have contributed to the child acting the way they did: death, divorce, illness, criminality etc. etc. First let me point out that if the child has just suffered death, divorce, illness or criminality in the family, maybe more care should have been taken to cater to its needs. I refer, again, to "absentee parents". If there are special circumstances that make your child psychologically vulnerable, leaving it at the school because you're too damn busy to look after it is not a very good idea, is it? I'm not "blaming" the child. I was saying that this thing is indicative of a lack of discipline and absentee parents. The lack of discipline definitely also applies to the parents, who, in such situations, ought to see it as their duty to be there for the child so the cops *don't* get called. By calling the cops, you invite a bunch of people that are looking at the case without comprehending the background of the child, and thus might take exactly the wrong actions. Quod Erat Demonstrandum, perhaps, by the handcuffing. > Blaming the evil child and feckless parents in a case where you know nothing of the background is the act of a truly spectacularly ideological prick Children can indeed be evil, and parents feckless. When I was young, I had a big mouth, but never used physical violence. I was also a straight A student, a bit fat, and had glasses since I was three. The children in my class would get together in groups of about 10-15 people and beat me up daily on my way to and fro school. Their parents didn't do a goddamn thing about it, and yes, the children were evil. Later, it turned out that many of the bullies were having trouble at home. Trouble with absentee parents, trouble with suicides, abuse or alcoholism in the family. One of my bullies' sister offed herself due to such things when we were eighteen, and my troubles with these pricks had been over and done with for 7 years. She was a nice kid, I worked with her in the local supermarket. Her brother was destroyed with grief, but I could never muster any empathy for the fucker, if you'll excuse me my French. Like Bill Cosby once said, just because your father is on the bottle and you don't have a job doesn't mean you can go home and beat your wife silly. Kids know what is good and bad. Sometimes they choose the bad. > your upbringing made you what you are today. Not just that. My upbringing was splendid. However, I've seen kids being cruel, heartless and inhumane for seven years of my life. I've seen the parents of these kids not do a damn thing about that. It's the interaction with other children that scarred me, not my parents, bless them. Don't get me wrong. I like kids. I recognize the good ones when I see them, and I enjoy hanging out with them and talking to them. Children are the future. But don't go off and try to tell me that kids and their parents are saints. They are not, and it's not necessarily so for this kid either. She could well be a little bitch on wheels, for all I know. So before you go off on a "think of the poor kid" crusade, pay mind to the fact that some of them are indeed total monsters for whatever reason. Absolving the wonderful kid and the glorious parents from any wrong-doing automatically and on instinct in a case where you know nothing of the background is the act of a truly, spectacularly ideological and naive prick/bitch. Tell you what though, I certainly embody the truth of my theories that my *background* made me what I am today. And you can take that to the bank, for good or bad. The day anyone calls me my children are in serious trouble in school, and I claim I'm too busy to mind them, you can come and slap me silly.
That was exactly my point with the first reply to the original poster. These situations don't mean that the US allows a rampant and unchecked police force deal violence and intimidation to children. They are illustrations of instances in which other authorities are failing to do their job, and the police steps in. Sometimes this is done correctly, sometimes not so correctly. But to conclude that the US condones routine tasering, prosecuting and handcuffing of children is taking these one-off occasions a bit further than they merit.
I do believe there are forces at work in Europe which do not apply to the United States. We're not states. We're autonomous, sovereign nations with a history that averages 2000 years of wars, development, colonialism and culture. This means that each member has a unique culture, outlook on the world, language and identity. The EU politicians are precariously navigating this minefield of opinions and tradition, and I do not believe one Charismatic Leader will ever bind all members, simply because the locals don't want to be run by a foreigner. As an illustration of this, try to persuade the French they need to be governed by Merkel (Germany) or Blair. Last times anyone tried to create a unified Europe, we had full scale wars on our hands. Think Julius Caesar, think Napoleon Bonaparte, think Adolf Hitler. One "charismatic" leader might actually conquer the continent, but in any given country there will be millions of people that will subvert and ultimately overthrow them. It's not going to happen. Never has, never will.
The five year old threw a tantrum, you fucking moron. The school should have dragged her ass out of there and summoned the parent over instead of calling the cops. I distinctively remember saying "absentee parents" and "lack of discipline". The latter referring to lack of respectful behaviour at school too.
Let me see what we have here:
- Five year old throws tantrum. "lack of discipline", check!
- School doesn't manage to calm 'r down. "lack of discipline", check!
- Parent indicates he/she is too damn busy to swing by. "Absentee parents", check!
- School then calls the Cops. I can't even begin to classify that moronic idea.
Ok, handcuffs might have been misguided, but "scaring" the kid a wee is a good means of ensuring she don't do it again. Back in the day, when I was caught doing shit I wasn't supposed to by the local copper, he would drag me to the car by the fucking ear and deliver me to my mother's doorstep, and then there'd be hell to pay.
If on the other hand I would get caught doing shit I wasn't supposed to by the head master, he would give me the evil eye. And let me tell you, bolder people than I have turned to stone because of that one. Then I'd be sent home to my mother, and, guess what, there'd be hell to pay.
Result? After one such experience, I didn't do shit I wasn't supposed to anymore. Instead of fucking whining about "police brutality" and "think of the kids", I would argue that I deserved what I got, and I'm a better induhvidual for it today.
> Missed the smiley there I see.
:-) This also means that many European Laws still mean squat.
Your smiley was there, I just felt obliged to mention it once again.
> Sweden doesn't use the Euro, Sweden also doesn't acknowledge the common European Law which is being setup by the European Parliament.
Er, the UK doesn't use the Euro. Neither does Denmark. As far as the European Constitution is concerned, France and the Netherlands (the latter of which I am a citizen) didn't acknowledge it either. Moreover they explicitly rejected it in a round of referendums.
> a few weeks ago a new European law was passed stating that it isn't illegal for their citizens. Its not merely a country policy anymore.
Currently, any country in the EU still has the autonomous power to put their own laws and constitution above EU law. This is the reason Sweden still has a state-monopoly on the sale of alcohol, Marijuana and prostitution are still legal in Holland, and the UK still uses the Imperial Measures
> I wouldn't be surprised if we'd get a USE sometimes.
Given the fact that any European country has a Veto-right in legislative matters, I sincerely doubt that for the coming years. Firstly it requires the Brits, French and zee Germans to agree on many things. Secondly, even countries that hitherto firmly believed in the principles of the EU project are seeing domestic support wane in the face of certain budgetary developments. Case in point being the Netherlands, which has clearly stated to Brussels that "we're paying too much and we want our cash back".
It may happen. But I think it's still a thing of the (distant) future.
> U.S.E. (United States of Europe ;-))
> I can download whatever I want and no one can touch me.
Firstly, there is no such thing as the united states of Europe. In Sweden, you can and will be prosecuted for downloading material. In the Netherlands (last time I checked) this was indeed not illegal. My point is that this varies from country to country.
> So, in that aspect; can anyone even explain what democracy actually is these days? I'm tempted to say that the more money
> someone has the more "democracy" they posses.
So, Sweden used to have a voting system where a number of votes were allotted to you depending on the amount of money you made. Switzerland got women's voting rights in 1971. Before that, it didn't. However Holland did beat the USA to voting rights for women by a year (1919 vs 1920), which is also not frightfully long ago.
Meanwhile, people with more money have either been able to swing more votes or obtain more votes through pay-offs, publicity or simple strong-arming all throughout history.
The ancient Greeks, although they had a "democracy", only had it for Greek men of independent status between one age to another, thus leaving out slaves, non-greeks, women and a whole array of citizens.
What surprises me is that you seem to thing that this is a sign of the times. I would argue that right now, we have more "democracy" than we ever had in the history of man-kind.
Now I read both FA's, and both cases cannot be attributed to a horrible justice system or a bad police force. God, if I pulled shit like that, my mom would have given me one over that makes tasering look like a walk in the park. Rightfully so, too.
Absentee parents and a lack of discipline will induce this kind of behaviour, and having the cops solve it is just a cop-out. Then turning around and trying to blame the cops for mis-handling it... well, I have nothing to say.
He also mentions he has a spouse!
I wonder who he drugged for that one, and secondly I pity the man/woman/induhvidual.
As a representative of Mr Bartokomous I must draw your attention to the fact that Mr Bartokomous was hurt and disappointed by that comment, and will serve you a DMCA notice pending the removal of said comment.
Furthermore, you are excluded from the dance of joy.
Not true.
I very much care, and I get laid at least 4 times a week unless there are "female troubles" on the horizon. Then I don't. This is not my choice, because a good captain sails many seas including the red one, but I have to accept these things, arrr!
Either which way, I very much care about being referred to as a commoner. I'm a weird-ass mo-fo, and proud of it.
COMMON Definitions are for commoners. And who wants to be one of those, really?
That comment caused me to read up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_mass_index
"In physiology the term weight is used interchangeably with mass".... That is indeed a stupid, poorly named metric.
Anyone above second grade ought to know weight and mass are not interchangeable. Thanks for the correction.
Hm.
The 2004 Saab 9-3 that I had, had a small turbo-charger and fuel was already directly injected. It had a 1.9 Litre turbo-diesel engine which delivered 150 bhp and considerable amounts of torque.
That thing would drive 224 km/hour over the German Autobahn while consuming 11 litres of diesel for 100 km. "Normal" driving, a mix of long-distance at approximately 120-140 km/hr and Stockholm inner-city driving, would yield an impressive 5.8 litres of diesel per 100 km driven. All of this with a manual gearbox with 6 gears.
It would appear to me that that car was already equipped with said combination of both features. It performed very well and was extraordinarily economic. The engine, by the way, was designed by Italy's Alfa Romeo, but is on par with the Common Rail engines used by Renault and Volkswagen/Audi.
All of this simply proves that if you want a car with a lot of performance, relatively small engine that is reliable and economic, and that can take curves decently, you should never, ever, ever get a car built by Americans. On top of the above, you'll get more elegant design with European cars, even if they're 0wn3rd by GM in the background somewhere.
Body Mass Index is about the Mass of the Body.
Therefore it's a function of both Volume and Weight. The BMI takes into account what your volume and weight should be for your age/length/gender.
Ergo, they did measure how much FAT the kids had (because FAT is lighter than muscle, so at a particular Volume the Weight varies and hence the BMI shifts).
They might actually be on to something here. Because they did, so they are.
A liberal-social government can come close. Look at Sweden, Switzerland, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway et al.
:-D
Black vs White is overrated. Grey is the way, man!
Then again, the average American calls Democrats commies so we could be talking about a difference in Perspective
My experience with government isn't that bad. On the other hand, my experience with Corporations is not that good.
Sure, government wastes money, but so do corporations. I've seen how my company's first model of external (SCSI connect) CD-writers had small, round rubber feet on them. They would incidentally fall off. These small rubber feet couldn't have cost more than a few dollar cents to produce, but the spare part cost around 70 dollars because of the systems and people we had to maintain to provide for this part. In that time, I had 14 layers of management above me and things haven't improved since then. I'm now talking of a fortune 500 hi-tech company that, since 1939, hasn't had one year of non-profitability. I'm sure you know who I mean.
So, ineffective behaviour is a consequence of sheer size, and to some degree cannot be avoided. The one difference between a Mega-Corporation and most governments I've dealt with is that the government is benign if not well-willing, while this is not sure of the Corporations.
As for Cuba's inhabitants, the CIA World Factbook states Cuba had a life expectancy of 77.41 in 2006. The US had 77.85 at the time. The life expectancy in Cuba is on the rise too, for that matter. Interestingly enough the US is trailing behind not only (expectedly) the European Union as a whole, and Sweden, Netherlands, Switzerland, Monaco, Norway and others, they are *also* trailing behind Bosnia-Herzegovina and Israel.
This must surely mean that Cubans, although not surrounded by Playstations and McDonalds outlets, *do* get fed, and doe have access to clean water. Your comments do not seem to be rooted in objective or statistically provable data.