We need mega-engineering to shape the global climate of this planet to meet our needs, otherwise we're soon to be extinct. For one such as yourself, I suggest Carbon Credits.
Well, I am American, so I've probably got redcoat history wrong too. But they weren't British packs. Quite wrong. The Act of Union created the United Kingdom. Britain and Britons predated, by quite some time (like by 2000 years), the creation of the United Kingdom.
Well, scary enough is the resident of the home heard the commotion, thought it was an intruder, and went into his backyard with a kitchen knife in hand to defend his family.
That could have escalated into a hard take down very quickly. And by a hard take down, we're talking a burst from the MP5 in the guy's chest. Have to commend the SWAT team on this one for not immediately escalating to deadly force.
Sure. We're talking about scale here. Performance increases on graphics cards are being pushed by the high-end gaming market, not by guys like you. The high end gaming market has folks that buy 2 SLI enabled 8800 GTXs one year (at $1100), and go out and turn around and do the same thing on next year's cards. And there are a whole lot more of them then there are of CAD guys buying Quadro FX5500's at $1400 a pop every 3 years. The bleeding edge technology is naturally going to seek the money. Eventually it will percolate down to less profitable niche markets. 5 years ago, you guys were the pointy tip of the sword when it came to the market with respect to money and the need. That's no longer the case.
And now all the graphics cards are focusing on the DirectX and neglecting OpenGL Because that's where the money is. NVidia isn't a philantropic support organization (and, it goes with out saying, neither is Microsoft).
These cards cost hundreds of dollars but they can't handle an assembly with 100 parts in a CAD model simply because they barely have any OpenGL hardware in them. Because there's very little money there.
I know I'm an idealist but I really don't like the "Yeah, we're committing acts of evil but they're not as evil as China," argument. I like the bar set a bit higher. You might be an idealist when it comes to stuff like that, but I'm afraid your down here in purgatory with the rest of us when it comes to argumentive etiquette. The problem is, no one was defending the US by point out the faults of China. Rather, people were defending China by pointing out the faults of the United States. To which I replied, our faults, as significant and serious though they are, pale in comparison to China's, and by no means absolve China from criticism and in of themselves. If you want to complain about the US, there's usually two or three threads on/. a day regarding that without having to sandbag on a complain about China thread too.
So if the US is not quite as evil as China, that's okay? Pretty much. Governments, countries, states, bureaucracies, people are not perfect nor are they perfectable. All states, even little old Andorra, do evil things from time to time. Very few institutionalize evil on the scale of depravity similar to Nazi Germany or Stalin's Russia. Communist China is one of those states that has done so, and continues to do so.
People don't like that 200 or so Jihadis are being held in Gitmo without a trial. Yeah, I get it. It still pales in significant to the prison factory archipelago that is being run in China. And while libs like to pat themselves on the back every time they call Bush a fascist, China really is an emerging fascist state. The idea that we can't criticize China because we aren't perfect ourselves is stupid. Really, really stupid.
Although involuntary organ donations are illegal under Chinese law, critics say Beijing does not enforce the policy. In 2001, a Chinese doctor applying for political asylum revealed that he had removed organs from executed prisoners for the transplant market under the auspices of the People's Liberation Army. He claimed that he had operated to remove skin and corneas from executed criminals, and that other doctors sometimes took organs from bodies while their hearts were still beating.[79]
On 9 March 2006, allegations were made of organ harvesting on living Falun Gong practitioners at the China Traditional Medicine Thrombosis Treatment Center, Sujiatun in Shenyang, a joint-venture with Malaysian healthcare company Country Heights Health Sanctuary and subject to oversight in Liaoning province.
According to two witnesses interviewed by The Epoch Times, internal organs of living Falun Gong practitioners have been harvested and sold to the black market, and the bodies were cremated in the hospital's boiler room. They also claim some six thousand practitioners have been held captive at the hospital since 2001, two-thirds of whom have died to date. Removed organs include hearts, kidneys, livers and cornea. The witnesses alleged nobody came out alive.
The Chinese Government accused Falun Gong of fabricating the "Sujiatun concentration camp" issue, reiterating that as a WHO Member State, China resolutely abides by the WHO 1991 Guiding Principles on Human Organ Transplants and strictly forbids the sale of human organs. It added that Sujiatun District government carried out an investigation at the hospital and invited local and foreign media, including NHK and Phoenix Satellite Network; and two visits were paid by US consular personnel, who confirmed that the hospital was completely incapable of housing more than 6,000 persons; there was no basement for incarcerating practitioners; there was simply no way to cremate corpses in secret, continuously, and in large volumes in the hospital's boiler/furnace room.
In July 2006, human rights lawyers David Kilgour and David Matas, concluded an investigation in response to a request by the Coalition to Investigate the Persecution of the Falun Gong in China (CIPFG), a U.S.-based, front organization of the Falun Dafa Association.[80] Their 69-page report[81] gave credence to the allegations of China's harvesting organs from live Falun Gong practitioners.[82][19]The Christian Science Monitor states that the report's evidence is circumstantial, but persuasive.[83] Kilgour said. "Our findings are shocking. To us, this is a form of evil we have yet to see on this planet."[19]
Might want to take up the insane exaggeration argument with the CSM, not me.
A couple of hundred people forcibly detained at gitmo hardly compares with what goes on in China on a daily basis. We're talking about a country that doesn't like people who stretch in public, so they execute them and then harvest their organs. And that's just one of a myriad of evils the Chinese regime commits.
In actuality the "nanny-state" you refer to in California is far less than what the Europeans with their gang busters economy which is starting to look way way way better than ours since Bush took office. Uh, Europe doesn't have a "gang busters" economy. They have a gang busters currency which is NOT the same thing. The problem with the US economy has very little to do with Bush. The problem is one of debt. The US taxpayer is has too much debt, US corporations have too much debt, and the US government has too much debt. In turn, no one is in position to really bail out anyone else if they start to falter. Sooner or later something is going to kick the house of cards down. The real problem, from the perspective of the rest of the world, is we'll probably take everyone down with them. European and Asian growth projections are heavily dependent on exports to the United States.
Now, regarding that shit for brains currently in office, his influence over the economy is grossly overrated. He recommends a budget. Congress passes it (usually with lots of pork thrown in). That's it. He doesn't even control the Fed or monetary policy except by way of appointment. We aren't technically a socialist command economy (yet), but if we're in the business of blaming Bush for things he doesn't and can't control, we're going to be here a while. And anyway, Bush isn't a conservative. Especially when it comes to fiscal matters. He'd be one of the people partying down here while the crops rot in the field.
Hey, you forgot about the hairdressers, middle-management, and cellphone virus cleaners. If the rocket ship idea doesn't pan out, I'm thinking we could substitute arm bands or bar code tattoos for the undesirables to mark them out for later on.
Oh shit, I think I just violated Godwin's law again. Oh well.
I think they already tried this in California. The Earth-Mars redux would go something like this:
Day 1: launch rocket ship to Mars carrying all the Repugicans, conservatives, NRA members, NASCAR fans, and silly religious people.
Day 2: party!
Day 3: party!
Day 4: pass laws requiring gay marriage, banning gun ownership (who needs em anymore?), and legalizing recreational drugs.
Day 5: party!
Day 6: make law saying no one has to work over 8 hours a week. raise taxes on business in order to pay for educating alternative lifestyles to the world's children.
Day 65: people starving in the streets.
Day 100: rocket ship launched to Mars because Earth has turned into such a shithole.
California is in a slow crumble, so all the nanny-state do-gooders that fucked up the state are now spreading like a virus into the neighboring mountain states, in turn transforming local and state communities into the same Potempkin shitholes they are fleeing in California. Liberals are good for parties, but if you actually want to run shit and run it right, you need conservatives.
Seems to me an "All Quiet Alert" is appropriate. This could be the start of some significant global cooling.
And that could be a problem. Not to worry, I just adjusted the carbeurator setting on my car to "extra sooty", and just for good measure I ate some beans and cabbage.
The point is that even in an ideal world Ah, the crux of the problem. We don't live in an ideal world.
The reason why the interests of private property owners conflict with the care for the less fortunate is we live in a world constrained by finite resources dealing with unlimited demand. There will always be haves and have nots because there will always be lucky people, smart people, and disciplined and motivated people and their opposite counter parts.
Let me give a semi-contrived example. Bob makes $25 an hour. If he worked 40 hours a week, he'd be right at middle class at $50k a year. But Bob works 2 jobs working 80 hours a week, and pulls in $100k a year. Maybe he's trying to save some money to buy a house, or to pay off student loans, or to pay for his dad's cancer treatments. Whatever. Let's make Bob single and without kids.
Juxtapose Bob with Mary. Mary is the same age as Bob. Mary doesn't have a job. She does, however, have 3 kids and no husband or supporting SO. The state is her and her children's primary means of income.
What level of income redistribution from Bob to Mary is "equitable" and "fair". What quality of life should Bob be forced to provide for Mary? Because, at the end of the day, those taxes are collected by men (and women) that are backed up with guns that will take by force what is not "freely given". Should Bob be punished for Mary's bad luck, poor decisions, and laziness. Should Mary's children be punished by Mary's bad luck, poor poor decisions, and laziness? What is fair? These aren't just rhetorical questions. How society decides where to draw the line typically has tremendous sociological impact. Mary may conclude that there is no penalty for poor choices like having children to indigent fathers, and have several more (which the state will have to support). Bob may decide it's not worth it, and quit his second job. Veer too far on the other side, and Mary's children might become like the street kids in Brazil, little 10 year old monsters who prostitute themselves for a warm meal, and would slit your throat for a candy bar or a huff of paint.
Of course private property needs to be protected, but one should not use his own resources solely for his own benefit, but for the common good. From each according to their ability, to each according to their need, eh?
Who, exactly, gets to decide how one should be allowed to use their "own" resources?
What does it mean to "protect private property rights" when you dictate the appropriation of that "private property" for the "public good"?
I'm curious, do you have any examples of the US "playing its cards right" in any foreign policy matters? Sure, the Louisiana Purchase and the purchase of Alaska!
I'm really curious why you posted reply to my post. Maybe you didn't mean to? Or maybe you read my post and didn't understand that I think the based on previous agreements, the US position is invalid, and the WTO one is? And if you did in fact read my message and understand that that was the point, what in the hell was the point of your response?
Yeah, it's not like Carter helped broker a peace treaty between Egypt and Isreal that has lasted to this day. Only problem with that idea is Begin and Sadat had already ironed out the details prior to Jimmuh coming on board. They just needed a sucker to pay for it. Enter stage left Jimmy Carter to share the spotlight and the gullible United States of America to open up her checkbook.
Egypt was done with war against Israel. Last time they went to war in 1973, it ended up with Israeli armored columns driving towards Cairo before the Soviets stepped in and threatened to nuke Israel if they didn't withdraw. It ended in similar defeat for Egypt in 1967. Israel was more than Egypt could chew, they just wanted the Sinai back.
Slashdot Mirror
It's all Bush's fault.
Way to sneak in a totally off-comment snipe at Fox & Bush.
That could have escalated into a hard take down very quickly. And by a hard take down, we're talking a burst from the MP5 in the guy's chest. Have to commend the SWAT team on this one for not immediately escalating to deadly force.
Sure. We're talking about scale here. Performance increases on graphics cards are being pushed by the high-end gaming market, not by guys like you. The high end gaming market has folks that buy 2 SLI enabled 8800 GTXs one year (at $1100), and go out and turn around and do the same thing on next year's cards. And there are a whole lot more of them then there are of CAD guys buying Quadro FX5500's at $1400 a pop every 3 years. The bleeding edge technology is naturally going to seek the money. Eventually it will percolate down to less profitable niche markets. 5 years ago, you guys were the pointy tip of the sword when it came to the market with respect to money and the need. That's no longer the case.
People don't like that 200 or so Jihadis are being held in Gitmo without a trial. Yeah, I get it. It still pales in significant to the prison factory archipelago that is being run in China. And while libs like to pat themselves on the back every time they call Bush a fascist, China really is an emerging fascist state. The idea that we can't criticize China because we aren't perfect ourselves is stupid. Really, really stupid.
Are you talking about Gitmo hyperbole or hyperbole about the Chinese?
Although involuntary organ donations are illegal under Chinese law, critics say Beijing does not enforce the policy. In 2001, a Chinese doctor applying for political asylum revealed that he had removed organs from executed prisoners for the transplant market under the auspices of the People's Liberation Army. He claimed that he had operated to remove skin and corneas from executed criminals, and that other doctors sometimes took organs from bodies while their hearts were still beating.[79]
On 9 March 2006, allegations were made of organ harvesting on living Falun Gong practitioners at the China Traditional Medicine Thrombosis Treatment Center, Sujiatun in Shenyang, a joint-venture with Malaysian healthcare company Country Heights Health Sanctuary and subject to oversight in Liaoning province.
According to two witnesses interviewed by The Epoch Times, internal organs of living Falun Gong practitioners have been harvested and sold to the black market, and the bodies were cremated in the hospital's boiler room. They also claim some six thousand practitioners have been held captive at the hospital since 2001, two-thirds of whom have died to date. Removed organs include hearts, kidneys, livers and cornea. The witnesses alleged nobody came out alive.
The Chinese Government accused Falun Gong of fabricating the "Sujiatun concentration camp" issue, reiterating that as a WHO Member State, China resolutely abides by the WHO 1991 Guiding Principles on Human Organ Transplants and strictly forbids the sale of human organs. It added that Sujiatun District government carried out an investigation at the hospital and invited local and foreign media, including NHK and Phoenix Satellite Network; and two visits were paid by US consular personnel, who confirmed that the hospital was completely incapable of housing more than 6,000 persons; there was no basement for incarcerating practitioners; there was simply no way to cremate corpses in secret, continuously, and in large volumes in the hospital's boiler/furnace room.
In July 2006, human rights lawyers David Kilgour and David Matas, concluded an investigation in response to a request by the Coalition to Investigate the Persecution of the Falun Gong in China (CIPFG), a U.S.-based, front organization of the Falun Dafa Association.[80] Their 69-page report[81] gave credence to the allegations of China's harvesting organs from live Falun Gong practitioners.[82][19]The Christian Science Monitor states that the report's evidence is circumstantial, but persuasive.[83] Kilgour said. "Our findings are shocking. To us, this is a form of evil we have yet to see on this planet."[19]
Might want to take up the insane exaggeration argument with the CSM, not me.
A couple of hundred people forcibly detained at gitmo hardly compares with what goes on in China on a daily basis. We're talking about a country that doesn't like people who stretch in public, so they execute them and then harvest their organs. And that's just one of a myriad of evils the Chinese regime commits.
Now, regarding that shit for brains currently in office, his influence over the economy is grossly overrated. He recommends a budget. Congress passes it (usually with lots of pork thrown in). That's it. He doesn't even control the Fed or monetary policy except by way of appointment. We aren't technically a socialist command economy (yet), but if we're in the business of blaming Bush for things he doesn't and can't control, we're going to be here a while. And anyway, Bush isn't a conservative. Especially when it comes to fiscal matters. He'd be one of the people partying down here while the crops rot in the field.
Oh shit, I think I just violated Godwin's law again. Oh well.
I think they already tried this in California. The Earth-Mars redux would go something like this:
Day 1: launch rocket ship to Mars carrying all the Repugicans, conservatives, NRA members, NASCAR fans, and silly religious people.
Day 2: party!
Day 3: party!
Day 4: pass laws requiring gay marriage, banning gun ownership (who needs em anymore?), and legalizing recreational drugs.
Day 5: party!
Day 6: make law saying no one has to work over 8 hours a week. raise taxes on business in order to pay for educating alternative lifestyles to the world's children.
Day 65: people starving in the streets.
Day 100: rocket ship launched to Mars because Earth has turned into such a shithole.
California is in a slow crumble, so all the nanny-state do-gooders that fucked up the state are now spreading like a virus into the neighboring mountain states, in turn transforming local and state communities into the same Potempkin shitholes they are fleeing in California. Liberals are good for parties, but if you actually want to run shit and run it right, you need conservatives.
And that could be a problem. Not to worry, I just adjusted the carbeurator setting on my car to "extra sooty", and just for good measure I ate some beans and cabbage.
You sound like a fun guy. I bet you get invited to parties a lot.
The reason why the interests of private property owners conflict with the care for the less fortunate is we live in a world constrained by finite resources dealing with unlimited demand. There will always be haves and have nots because there will always be lucky people, smart people, and disciplined and motivated people and their opposite counter parts.
Let me give a semi-contrived example. Bob makes $25 an hour. If he worked 40 hours a week, he'd be right at middle class at $50k a year. But Bob works 2 jobs working 80 hours a week, and pulls in $100k a year. Maybe he's trying to save some money to buy a house, or to pay off student loans, or to pay for his dad's cancer treatments. Whatever. Let's make Bob single and without kids.
Juxtapose Bob with Mary. Mary is the same age as Bob. Mary doesn't have a job. She does, however, have 3 kids and no husband or supporting SO. The state is her and her children's primary means of income.
What level of income redistribution from Bob to Mary is "equitable" and "fair". What quality of life should Bob be forced to provide for Mary? Because, at the end of the day, those taxes are collected by men (and women) that are backed up with guns that will take by force what is not "freely given". Should Bob be punished for Mary's bad luck, poor decisions, and laziness. Should Mary's children be punished by Mary's bad luck, poor poor decisions, and laziness? What is fair? These aren't just rhetorical questions. How society decides where to draw the line typically has tremendous sociological impact. Mary may conclude that there is no penalty for poor choices like having children to indigent fathers, and have several more (which the state will have to support). Bob may decide it's not worth it, and quit his second job. Veer too far on the other side, and Mary's children might become like the street kids in Brazil, little 10 year old monsters who prostitute themselves for a warm meal, and would slit your throat for a candy bar or a huff of paint.
Who, exactly, gets to decide how one should be allowed to use their "own" resources?
What does it mean to "protect private property rights" when you dictate the appropriation of that "private property" for the "public good"?
My mistake then. I was confused since it seemed like we were in violent agreement.
I didn't forget him, I just screwed up the formatting. I did, however, forget about Kissinger & Le Duc Tho.
I'm really curious why you posted reply to my post. Maybe you didn't mean to? Or maybe you read my post and didn't understand that I think the based on previous agreements, the US position is invalid, and the WTO one is? And if you did in fact read my message and understand that that was the point, what in the hell was the point of your response?
Egypt was done with war against Israel. Last time they went to war in 1973, it ended up with Israeli armored columns driving towards Cairo before the Soviets stepped in and threatened to nuke Israel if they didn't withdraw. It ended in similar defeat for Egypt in 1967. Israel was more than Egypt could chew, they just wanted the Sinai back.