Ah, I love the smell of blind, rampaging individualism in the morning!
You may have heard about the "poverty trap". Poverty is a condition that's really hard to reverse, most people will never do it and will pass it along to their children.
With social support, many of the poor can improve their way of living. They can study, they can have their kids in school, they can have better health and education, which makes them better workers, benefiting the whole economy in the end. Yes, I mean you and me.
Of course, just throwing money at them will fix nothing, of course. That's what a populist politician would do. But social programs are not about throwing money at the poor.
Without social support, all the poor can do is fight against each other for day-to-day survival. I think it's pretty clear this doesn't bring up the best in people. Just correlate the crime rates with social protection in rich countries, and it's pretty clear.
A very small percentage, the smarter of the poor, will probably make it into the middle class. A minority will resort to crime, hurting society (yes, you and me). The vast majority will live a life of scarcity and resignation. It's not so bad if at least you can survive and have your basic needs covered. When this is not the case, it sucks big time.
Even worse, instead of the social ascension you talk about like it's so easy, I've been watching more and more middle-class raised people fall into poverty. Many with higher education have shitty jobs where they make the minimum wage or little more. And there's no way they can improve their situation because more and more companies have employees fighting between each other like dogs. Guess who wins, the competent and honest or the greedy and deceitful? Once again, the whole society loses.
The more money goes to the few richer, the more they want. The less they will want to contribute to the lower layers, and money brings power, so it gives them even more ways to shit the balance to their side. This eventually hurts the vast majority of the people. If you can't see this, you have your brain washed.
I believe life was quite Ok in the Roman Empire, not so much in the Middle Ages.
But, why should we compare to wretched times? Shouldn't we strive to be better? We shouldn't say "We're lucky we don't live like it's the Middle Ages", we should say "we should be living like it's paradise".
If the income inequality is getting bigger, then we're getting worse. This is definitely a problem and should be stopped. Comparing it to the Middle Ages serves only the purpose of conformity. It's something a millionaire would do.
It's like when the pundits on TV, with their designer suits, griffe glasses and fancy hairdo and nails say that we should deregulate the labour laws and cut salaries because we need to compete with China. Fuck, I don't want to compete with China! I don't want to eat a bowl of rice a day and work 18 hours in a shithole factory. Chinese should strive for our standard of living, not us for theirs!
The Arab countries in the North of Africa are pretty prosperous and stable. It's the sub-saharan part that's a festering shithole. And the richer the country in natural resources, the worse it gets.
We're talking about things like:
* Famine
* Military Aid to Allies
* Sending drugs to Africa to fight AIDS
* Pressuring Countries to Adopt Climate Change Legislation
* Enacting Fair Labor Laws in other Countries
I know that. Everybody knows that. The USA knew that from the beginning, when they helped him take over Iraq and murder hundreds of thousands of communists. He was a "good guy", "friend of the West" at that time.
I say you have no idea what you're talking about because you moved from Talibans to Saddam all of a sudden. It shows you can't tell Iraq from Afghanistan, Arabs from Afghans and agnostic Arab nationalists from islamist Afghan nationalists.
You also need to keep in mind, the total war, fewer people have died than what was regularly killed under Saddam's rule.
I was paying attention until I saw that one. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. Do you even remember in which country you were, if any?
No. It will help the pockets of the military-industrial complex and a few politicians and generals.
Sounds like a really great and innovative improvement for select uses but I really gotta question the 'game-changer' assertion. If I woke up tomorrow and found out that deployment of this weapon allowed the precise termination of all combatants with no civilian casualties and the war was basically over, I'd be happy for being wrong.
You can't kill all the combatants in a war which is basically against a whole population. Yes, you can exterminate the whole population, but that's really really hard and won't give you any good press.
The primary driver of jihad is the desire to subjugate the entire world to the dictates of Islamic dictatorship. Radical Muslims view the non-Muslim controlled parts of the globe as the world they are at war with, and the war they are waging is to impose their religion on all non-Muslims.
That's also true to every religious fundamentalist.
Let me ask you a few questions:
Who armed, financed and trained a bunch of crazy fanatics to go to Afghanistan fight the Soviets?
Who did overthrow Saddam Hussein that, in spite of being a hateful monster, lead an agnostic government that kept the fanatic scum out of Iraq?
Who did overthrow Mossadegh, the elected leader of Iran and erected in his place a scumbag dictator, giving the fanatics the excuse they needed to make the Islamic Revolution?
And so on...
Every time you put your paws on some country because of some "trouble", you only make it worse. Your foreign policy is reckless and childish.
Great, then a meltdown of the financial system can never happen because banks and insurance companies are all private and extremely competitive. What about the oil industry? You can't go any more hardcore capitalist than that. That's why they never ever fuck up.
Ah, nothing like handing a huge shitload of money to the military-industrial complex to protect us from imaginary threats while it's so badly missed in many important areas.
I'm buying myself a laser gun to protect from the swarm of unicorns and elves that are coming to attack Europe next year. It must be true, it was on TV.
Dude, you don't need to go al libertarian on this. Some governments fuck up really bad, some are better, some work really well. It's just like any organisation made by man, be it public or private.
Strangely, it's the Anglo-Saxon countries, those of "small goverment", "individualism", "self-initiative", etc. that have the most control-freak, paranoid and incompetent governments in the developed world.
I don't give a fuck what they do to my body when I'm dead. But the UK government should ask for permission. This is a very sensitive issue to a lot of people.
I wonder what's wrong with the UK. I'm used to see the Brits as very smug for having such an organised and productive society based on merit. But your government and private organisations seem to completely fuck up in a regular basis like it's some 3rd world country. WTF?
My college uses a simple method. All disciplines have a discussion in the end of the semester. In that discussion the students are supposed to explain their assignments' written reports. If you know what you did, you can explain it. Catching a cheater is extremely simple, and the teachers are heavily trained on that.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, I love the smell of blind, rampaging individualism in the morning!
You may have heard about the "poverty trap". Poverty is a condition that's really hard to reverse, most people will never do it and will pass it along to their children.
With social support, many of the poor can improve their way of living. They can study, they can have their kids in school, they can have better health and education, which makes them better workers, benefiting the whole economy in the end. Yes, I mean you and me.
Of course, just throwing money at them will fix nothing, of course. That's what a populist politician would do. But social programs are not about throwing money at the poor.
Without social support, all the poor can do is fight against each other for day-to-day survival. I think it's pretty clear this doesn't bring up the best in people. Just correlate the crime rates with social protection in rich countries, and it's pretty clear.
A very small percentage, the smarter of the poor, will probably make it into the middle class. A minority will resort to crime, hurting society (yes, you and me). The vast majority will live a life of scarcity and resignation. It's not so bad if at least you can survive and have your basic needs covered. When this is not the case, it sucks big time.
Even worse, instead of the social ascension you talk about like it's so easy, I've been watching more and more middle-class raised people fall into poverty. Many with higher education have shitty jobs where they make the minimum wage or little more. And there's no way they can improve their situation because more and more companies have employees fighting between each other like dogs. Guess who wins, the competent and honest or the greedy and deceitful? Once again, the whole society loses.
The more money goes to the few richer, the more they want. The less they will want to contribute to the lower layers, and money brings power, so it gives them even more ways to shit the balance to their side. This eventually hurts the vast majority of the people. If you can't see this, you have your brain washed.
I believe life was quite Ok in the Roman Empire, not so much in the Middle Ages.
But, why should we compare to wretched times? Shouldn't we strive to be better? We shouldn't say "We're lucky we don't live like it's the Middle Ages", we should say "we should be living like it's paradise".
If the income inequality is getting bigger, then we're getting worse. This is definitely a problem and should be stopped. Comparing it to the Middle Ages serves only the purpose of conformity. It's something a millionaire would do.
It's like when the pundits on TV, with their designer suits, griffe glasses and fancy hairdo and nails say that we should deregulate the labour laws and cut salaries because we need to compete with China. Fuck, I don't want to compete with China! I don't want to eat a bowl of rice a day and work 18 hours in a shithole factory. Chinese should strive for our standard of living, not us for theirs!
You assume he gives a fuck about a bunch of "brown skinned atheist pagans".
Or, if Assange is in Europe, about a bunch of "wussy, nanny-state, freedom-hating, pot-smoking, abortionist lesbian, smelly hippie commies".
Well, last time I heard, progress was a good thing. What do you propose as alternative? Being regressive? No, thanks.
The Arab countries in the North of Africa are pretty prosperous and stable. It's the sub-saharan part that's a festering shithole. And the richer the country in natural resources, the worse it gets.
We're talking about things like: * Famine * Military Aid to Allies * Sending drugs to Africa to fight AIDS * Pressuring Countries to Adopt Climate Change Legislation * Enacting Fair Labor Laws in other Countries
etc.
There where you live, are unicorns pink or blue?
Easy. I have a motorcycle. My commute time is extremely predictable.
I know that. Everybody knows that. The USA knew that from the beginning, when they helped him take over Iraq and murder hundreds of thousands of communists. He was a "good guy", "friend of the West" at that time.
I say you have no idea what you're talking about because you moved from Talibans to Saddam all of a sudden. It shows you can't tell Iraq from Afghanistan, Arabs from Afghans and agnostic Arab nationalists from islamist Afghan nationalists.
You also need to keep in mind, the total war, fewer people have died than what was regularly killed under Saddam's rule.
I was paying attention until I saw that one. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. Do you even remember in which country you were, if any?
Hope It Helps End the Fighting
No. It will help the pockets of the military-industrial complex and a few politicians and generals.
Sounds like a really great and innovative improvement for select uses but I really gotta question the 'game-changer' assertion. If I woke up tomorrow and found out that deployment of this weapon allowed the precise termination of all combatants with no civilian casualties and the war was basically over, I'd be happy for being wrong.
You can't kill all the combatants in a war which is basically against a whole population. Yes, you can exterminate the whole population, but that's really really hard and won't give you any good press.
Finally, a decent use for drones. Instead of killing people, they save rhinos.
So, how will they manage to divert attention every time a political scandal happens in the US or UK?
The primary driver of jihad is the desire to subjugate the entire world to the dictates of Islamic dictatorship. Radical Muslims view the non-Muslim controlled parts of the globe as the world they are at war with, and the war they are waging is to impose their religion on all non-Muslims.
That's also true to every religious fundamentalist.
Let me ask you a few questions:
Every time you put your paws on some country because of some "trouble", you only make it worse. Your foreign policy is reckless and childish.
I only see one problem. How can you embargo yourselves???
What you say makes perfect sense. We all know that in Afghanistan, where everybody carries AK47s, there aren't any terrorists or criminals.
My dad always says: Computers are great machines. If shit goes in, shit comes out.
Great, then a meltdown of the financial system can never happen because banks and insurance companies are all private and extremely competitive. What about the oil industry? You can't go any more hardcore capitalist than that. That's why they never ever fuck up.
I feel so much safer now.
You must be new here...
Pumpkin Pie increases Male Sex Drive
Fuck that. Mr. Scientist, please find me something to increase female sex drive! That doesn't cost a fortune, I mean.
Ah, nothing like handing a huge shitload of money to the military-industrial complex to protect us from imaginary threats while it's so badly missed in many important areas.
I'm buying myself a laser gun to protect from the swarm of unicorns and elves that are coming to attack Europe next year. It must be true, it was on TV.
The thief/scientist that initiated and carried out most of the autopsies is long since dead.
And his organs were harvested without his consent.
Dude, you don't need to go al libertarian on this. Some governments fuck up really bad, some are better, some work really well. It's just like any organisation made by man, be it public or private.
Strangely, it's the Anglo-Saxon countries, those of "small goverment", "individualism", "self-initiative", etc. that have the most control-freak, paranoid and incompetent governments in the developed world.
I don't give a fuck what they do to my body when I'm dead. But the UK government should ask for permission. This is a very sensitive issue to a lot of people.
I wonder what's wrong with the UK. I'm used to see the Brits as very smug for having such an organised and productive society based on merit. But your government and private organisations seem to completely fuck up in a regular basis like it's some 3rd world country. WTF?
My college uses a simple method. All disciplines have a discussion in the end of the semester. In that discussion the students are supposed to explain their assignments' written reports. If you know what you did, you can explain it. Catching a cheater is extremely simple, and the teachers are heavily trained on that.
is as stupid and short sighted as can possibly be.
No problem. It's just US foreign policy as usual.