beware when ur leaders talk about freedom all the time...it usually means they are doing the bugs bunny mind trick on us...
fuck u fag0ts?...
http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview ... 6&rel_no=1
studies show america losing freedom...
pfft, what are you talking about, our country is heading in the right direction.
http://www.alternet.org/story/27168/
http://www.alternet.org/story/27168/
The United States is now the third most unequal industrialized society after Russia and Mexico.
-
Massive Quasars
- Posts: 8696
- Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 8:00 am
I like the first comment, but I do think minimum wage should be raised. Maybe not for high school kids because they just blow it on crap anyway (I know...), but for parents.
Again, the whining about inequality ensues. Inequality is a natural state of operation for human societies because humans have different skills, willingness to take risks etc.
And inequality is positive - it is what keeps us motivated and keeps moving society further. We should not try to redistribute wealth - that would be equivalent to punishing achievement and rewarding incompetence.
The supposed negative effects of inequality are quite irrelevant. It's almost as if the authors expect that because we are an unequal society, WalMart will force Congress to abolish the Constitution.
Finally I wouldn't bash Russia... it illustrates exactly what happens when everyone starts from the same plank (and your traditional argument about nepotism and lack of social mobility vanishes). Some have brains and drive and end up at the top (Russia's wealthiest man was born homeless in Chukotka); the rest whine about inequality and the unfairness of it all.
Pathetic.
Oh and just remember... Everyone picks on the US for the same reason people write viruses for Windows and not Mac OS X. It's not because the BSD base of OS X is inherently secure, but because no one pays attention to it.
I've been reading a fascinating book called "Algeria in France: Transpolitics, Race and Nation" where the author spends some time outlining the immigration and racial attitudes in France, Germany, Switzerlan, Britain and Sweeden (you can probably guess which country's policies are the friendliest). Some European nations are worried about their rising immigrant populations and the erosion of their soverignity with rise of the EU. They're using those issues as pretexts to increase "national" (as in the politicization of ethnicity, not physical borders) security, which as we all know is a loss of "freedom".
I've been reading a fascinating book called "Algeria in France: Transpolitics, Race and Nation" where the author spends some time outlining the immigration and racial attitudes in France, Germany, Switzerlan, Britain and Sweeden (you can probably guess which country's policies are the friendliest). Some European nations are worried about their rising immigrant populations and the erosion of their soverignity with rise of the EU. They're using those issues as pretexts to increase "national" (as in the politicization of ethnicity, not physical borders) security, which as we all know is a loss of "freedom".
i don't particularly agree with the content of geoff's link, and i would say the US press is as free as anyone's could be (though the freedom is mostly latent since the range of acceptable opinion in the mainstream is pretty narrow), but whoever you're quoting on the subject of 'equality' above is pulling a fast one, since he doesn't make any distinction between *some* inequality and *much* inequality. finland may be one of the world's least unequal societies, but there is still inequality - for the reasons he gives no less.Dave wrote:I like the first comment, but I do think minimum wage should be raised. Maybe not for high school kids because they just blow it on crap anyway (I know...), but for parents.
Again, the whining about inequality ensues. Inequality is a natural state of operation for human societies because humans have different skills, willingness to take risks etc.
And inequality is positive - it is what keeps us motivated and keeps moving society further. We should not try to redistribute wealth - that would be equivalent to punishing achievement and rewarding incompetence.
The supposed negative effects of inequality are quite irrelevant. It's almost as if the authors expect that because we are an unequal society, WalMart will force Congress to abolish the Constitution.
Finally I wouldn't bash Russia... it illustrates exactly what happens when everyone starts from the same plank (and your traditional argument about nepotism and lack of social mobility vanishes). Some have brains and drive and end up at the top (Russia's wealthiest man was born homeless in Chukotka); the rest whine about inequality and the unfairness of it all.
Pathetic.
i think he's missing a point a lot of 'inequalitarians' miss when they say genuine freedom leads inevitably to inequality, which is that *too much* inequality undermines the very freedom they are espousing. all concentrations of power (i.e. wealth) are threats to freedom, and it amazes me that right-wing cato institute-style 'libertarians' can see this in respect of the state but are blind to it in respect of private wealth. i can only think they inherited this selective blindness from the von mises or rothbard school of thought
well, if bill gates sallied forth from redmond every few years to destroy the codebase of all rival OS's, and wrote viruses and trojans to hack said OS's on a regular basis, this would be a good analogyDave wrote:Oh and just remember... Everyone picks on the US for the same reason people write viruses for Windows and not Mac OS X. It's not because the BSD base of OS X is inherently secure, but because no one pays attention to it.
Completely ignoring governmental policies that increase inequality.Dave wrote:I like the first comment, but I do think minimum wage should be raised. Maybe not for high school kids because they just blow it on crap anyway (I know...), but for parents.
Again, the whining about inequality ensues. Inequality is a natural state of operation for human societies because humans have different skills, willingness to take risks etc.
And inequality is positive - it is what keeps us motivated and keeps moving society further. We should not try to redistribute wealth - that would be equivalent to punishing achievement and rewarding incompetence.
The supposed negative effects of inequality are quite irrelevant. It's almost as if the authors expect that because we are an unequal society, WalMart will force Congress to abolish the Constitution.
Finally I wouldn't bash Russia... it illustrates exactly what happens when everyone starts from the same plank (and your traditional argument about nepotism and lack of social mobility vanishes). Some have brains and drive and end up at the top (Russia's wealthiest man was born homeless in Chukotka); the rest whine about inequality and the unfairness of it all.
Pathetic.
Funny how government policy in the context of redistribution of wealth is horrible, except when they are redistributing to the people who already have money. Then it can be justified, because "Hey, we're all inequal to start with; Hey, life isn't fair;" etc.
indeed
the whole "get the government off our backs" bandwagon is a joke. if state intervention ended tomorrow, business would go bust, with no tax-funded roads to transport their goods, no tax-funded education for their workforce, no recourse to tax-funded judiciary to pursue their property erights, no use of tax-funded police or other emergency services, and especially no use of the tax-funded military to prise open new markets
externalities = free ride
the whole "get the government off our backs" bandwagon is a joke. if state intervention ended tomorrow, business would go bust, with no tax-funded roads to transport their goods, no tax-funded education for their workforce, no recourse to tax-funded judiciary to pursue their property erights, no use of tax-funded police or other emergency services, and especially no use of the tax-funded military to prise open new markets
externalities = free ride
So, who wins when business goes bust?seremtan wrote:indeed
the whole "get the government off our backs" bandwagon is a joke. if state intervention ended tomorrow, business would go bust, with no tax-funded roads to transport their goods, no tax-funded education for their workforce, no recourse to tax-funded judiciary to pursue their property erights, no use of tax-funded police or other emergency services, and especially no use of the tax-funded military to prise open new markets
externalities = free ride
You're fooling yourself if you dismiss the 2nd part of my post so easilyseremtan wrote:well, if bill gates sallied forth from redmond every few years to destroy the codebase of all rival OS's, and wrote viruses and trojans to hack said OS's on a regular basis, this would be a good analogyDave wrote:Oh and just remember... Everyone picks on the US for the same reason people write viruses for Windows and not Mac OS X. It's not because the BSD base of OS X is inherently secure, but because no one pays attention to it.
One thing the article doesn't go into, and it really should have, is the fact that the internet blog is revolutionizing journalism right under our noses. It resembles the 17th and 18th century British and American political writers and pampleteers who protested anything and everything.
Off the top of my head, blogs destroyed what was left of Dan Rather and infuriated Apple by outting their mac mini plans. If you think of HardOCP as a blog, the guy who runs that took down the phantom console maker and exposed him as a probable fraud. Two of those examples are inconsequential in the grand scheme of things and the Apple thing has yet to be decided, but it shows substantive, investigative journalism ain't dead yet.
Off the top of my head, blogs destroyed what was left of Dan Rather and infuriated Apple by outting their mac mini plans. If you think of HardOCP as a blog, the guy who runs that took down the phantom console maker and exposed him as a probable fraud. Two of those examples are inconsequential in the grand scheme of things and the Apple thing has yet to be decided, but it shows substantive, investigative journalism ain't dead yet.
Yes, it should have talked about that.
Still though, the institution we have as our national journalistic media is far from substantive, investigative journalism, and I think that is more the point.
It's the idea that if you are that kind of investigative reporter, you're not likely to get a job in our mainstream media these days. Your best bet is to start up your own independent, "conspiracy theory" website, and hope to gain recognition in an uphill battle to prove yourself as a real journalist with integrity.
Whereas, if you look nice, have a pretty voice, and instead of educating people would rather play down to their level of ignorance and are good at making someone look stupid within a 3-minute block of time, then you have a pretty darn good chance of being heard by 60% of the citizens in this country - probably 80% of voters.
Still though, the institution we have as our national journalistic media is far from substantive, investigative journalism, and I think that is more the point.
It's the idea that if you are that kind of investigative reporter, you're not likely to get a job in our mainstream media these days. Your best bet is to start up your own independent, "conspiracy theory" website, and hope to gain recognition in an uphill battle to prove yourself as a real journalist with integrity.
Whereas, if you look nice, have a pretty voice, and instead of educating people would rather play down to their level of ignorance and are good at making someone look stupid within a 3-minute block of time, then you have a pretty darn good chance of being heard by 60% of the citizens in this country - probably 80% of voters.
-
GONNAFISTYA
- Posts: 13369
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:20 pm
lolseremtan wrote:well, if bill gates sallied forth from redmond every few years to destroy the codebase of all rival OS's, and wrote viruses and trojans to hack said OS's on a regular basis, this would be a good analogyDave wrote:Oh and just remember... Everyone picks on the US for the same reason people write viruses for Windows and not Mac OS X. It's not because the BSD base of OS X is inherently secure, but because no one pays attention to it.