16,951 Forum Posts by "RedSkunk"
At 7/28/04 06:00 PM, Jlop985 wrote: I, too, am opposed to subsidies in domestic politics, but circumstances are different in devloping countries. A danger of subsidies is that they could fuse business and the state, as in Japan. Japan has the world's second largest GDP, yet it still subsidizes its businesses, not to mention their import restrictions.
Ha, the US has the largest GDP, yet we still subsidize out businesses. That is the big problem with subsidies - when and where to ditch them. The domestic corporations, of course, do not want them ditched. They often last long after they have served their usefulness. I'm currently reading a book, in which he said that subsidies were preferable over tariffs, because for one they can be removed more easily when they've served their purpose. But it's not as easy as one would think.
America suffers from the same exact thing you mentioned Japan of - the business and the state are thoroughly intertwined here (along with the military, but off-topic). And long after it's proved useful.
The point is that export subsidies work for development. They should be ditched after a certain point, because after then it just hurts the consumer and taxpayer.
I agree.......
Thanks for the invitation, but I am too much of a sincere arguer to join the DAG.
I'm not certain how much most of us DAG these days anyways, but then again, there's always the PC too ;-)
Yeah, you linked to it in the lounge awhile ago, I just signed up yesterday. Looks like a decent time waster.. Anyways -
At 7/28/04 04:55 AM, Jimsween wrote: My question is, is this actually attainable/possible?
I don't really think it'd be possible, or at least - not very possible for very long. You'd always run into problems, the least of which would be the exchange of power whenever someone became incapacitated. And while right now it might be easy to think of some fool-proof system to combat corruption - the best laid plans... *cough*. .. .. turn to crap.
At 7/28/04 03:02 AM, Jlop985 wrote: There is a way to development without protectionism. In fact, protectionism is harmful to economic growth. In South America, several countries once adopted an import substitution policy, in which they shut off imports to develop their own industries. This policy failed miserably. A few Asian countries, such as South Korea and Taiwan, promoted their exports, to the point of subsidizing them, while keeping the country open to imports. This is a better strategy for development, because it does not hit the consumer as hard.
Ah, but Jlop, subsidies are a form of protectionism. At least in my book. It has the same result of, say, tariffs - encouraging consumers to buy domestically.
And, it will hit the consumer, the general populace, in the end - the government is paying for these subsidies, of course.
And, postscript - there are some extraneous factors between Asia, and S. America..
I have problems with subsidies, but I think they are a bit better than things like tariffs. Regardless, it was good seeing your post - have you thought of joining one of the political groups here?
The threats mid-summer '01 were specific enough to get several high level administration officials to stop flying commercially, that seems to indicate to me fairly specific and credible threats.
Additionally, why were we still giving the Taliban money that summer? Hundreds of millions to fight the war on drugs - why?
At 7/28/04 01:35 AM, FatherVenom wrote: How did you not pick the hydra. That pic is choice.
Most choice than, say, this really freaky looking cat that BWS posted? scariest. cat. ever.
hehee, I only had ~170 pages to look through. It's grown so big since then.. Yikes.
At 7/28/04 12:35 AM, TheShrike wrote: The multi-headed saddam hydra was my favorite, though.
I saved that too. It was a toss-up, which to post.
Wraith - I've actually encouraged a few friends to join, but they never stay. *shrug* oh well, you def. have a point.
Well, today I went through the lounge, up until where I started posting. Went pretty quick, didn't read everything, but got a general idea of posted pics, when people came and posted, when they went on hiatus, little flame wars and the like.
Hey, it filled a block of time that I could of been staring at the wall. Which one woulda been more productive? *shrug*
One more thing I have to share. <3 <3 <3 Shrike.
No one is saying legalization of hard drugs. They are saying decriminalization. Instead of imprisonment, we put them in rehab.
At 7/27/04 03:25 PM, JackOfShadow wrote: That's why Israel won't start negotiating untill the terror stops. It doesn't stop so Israel doesn't negotiat, easy as that.
That's why I say Israel should make the first concessions. Now, today. Neither side is willing to make concessions until the other side stops. Israel is a state. It's fighting with a modern army. It has the resources to create the second wall of China. It has the ability to stop first, to end needless agression like demolitions and walls. Collective punishment.
Additionally, you can't reasonably expect Arafat, the PA, or any Palestinian governing body, to be able to control every damn Palestinian. Or foriegn Muslim fundamentalist, for that matter. There's a token few who refuse to acknowledge the possibility of an Israeli state. But if Israel is going to hold out until they stop - and indeed, create more opposition in the process - there is never going to be any resolution.
I recently read an article that said the more educated a person is, the more polarized they will be. Because, the article said, they will understand the issues more thoroughly. For instance, if you are "liberal", you will generally support the entire liberal ideology, because you understand the [liberal] reasoning behind it. And suchforth with conservatism, and various other ideologies.
It was an interesting read.
The re-routing was ordered after the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that current plans must be amended to reduce disruption to Palestinian communities.
The changes still have to be approved by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
The UN World Court says the barrier is illegal and should be dismantled where it runs across Palestinian land.
Israel has said it will ignore the advisory ruling - along with a non-binding resolution by the UN General Assembly which followed it - and that the complex of walls and fences is vital to stop attacks by Palestinian militants.
Yellow might be fun, if it's bright / obvious enough. I've done blue and green before. *shrug*
I know some classmates who were interviewed on cnn.com...
... Yeah, I got nothing.
If we had the death penalty for every crime (ignoring the improbability of it, and the impossibility of enforcing it), crime would increase.
Instead of stealing the candy bar. Someone would steal it, the money in the cash register, kill the clerk, and rape the customer.
Why not? Same penalty either way.
. . . Someone had a bad internet dating experience recently?
-
This is all unnecesary, however. Simply changing your gender in your profile will get people IM'ing you 2x as much. It's the nature of the crowd around here.
So, you mean to say; "I hate that bitch because she didn't divorce at the drop of a hat" ?
At 7/27/04 02:22 AM, Preview wrote: A clockwork orange, or any other Stanley kubrick films are wonderful movies,
Ah, I'll accept that answer. same.
You were astounded by my accurate replies, eh? With that kind of knowledge, is it any wonder that I'm one of the oldest members who still posts here? =P
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_will
^ A little bit of clearing up
CA doesn't have such provisions?
Well aren't we talking about a Living Will then? You outline whatever you wish to happen, upon incapacitation / etc. And your lawyer or executer will make sure it happens. The hospital must o-k it. The problem with the woman in Florida, is that she didn't have any legal document saying such (to my knowledge).
At 7/27/04 01:27 AM, Satanica2030 wrote: there are over a million sodiers in other countries right now, and there are at least 2 million more here, that can be sent over in place of them.
Your numbers are way off. The US does not have a 3 million man armed forces. Our reserves not out on campaigns are paltry, especially specialists.
At 7/26/04 10:50 PM, IllustriousPotentate wrote: text
Me and illustrious are on the same wave-length. A large number of current offenders in prison, are there because of drug-related crimes. It's asinine. Additionally, I think mandatory minimums and "harsh penalties" are large contributing factors here.
I don't believe the fear of a harsh punishment works very well. We need to address the real root causes of crime. Poverty, ignorance. Drug laws.
At 7/26/04 10:55 PM, Quanze13 wrote: Why did you make this topic? No offence, but it just invites relentless spaming. And it really isn't politics. Per se.
Are you kidding me? Some of these responses are some of the better stuff I've seen in months. Wait, just read the second page... Some of the replies are o-k. And who cares if it isn't politics per say.
At 7/26/04 09:51 PM, ohp-kyle wrote: text
I'm agreeing with kyle's post fully. Additionally - I can relate with the intolerance stuff. I stopped eating dairy products, and if I do anymore, I feel horrible. For all intensive purposes, I'm lactose intolerant. And real cheese on pizza tastes horrible now, for me. It overpowers the sauce, and any toppings, and is too greasy. It's interesting, because I know that's not what I thought, when I use to eat it on a daily basis.
At 7/26/04 11:10 PM, Gooie wrote: Remember, Skunky-poo, just because you're right, doesn't mean anyone cares. People need milk for a lot of products and a lot of people think soy is "gay"
And just because you post, doesn't mean you should have, or that anyone will read it. I could care less if you think soy milk is "gay". That doesn't really seem like a defendable opinion here, and will be summarily discarded, along with the rest of your post.
At 7/27/04 01:01 AM, ryoshi100 wrote: well First off, your wrong. Humnas have been consuming milk (cow, goat, etc..) for thousands of years...
But not in the amount we are today. We are suppose to drink several cups a day - according to the milk lobby. Sure, in moderation, you can eat, drink or smoke practically anything. But is there any reason to? Today?
I happen to be a person whom is unable to digest just plain milk.. I attribute that to being black and japanese mix.. 2 places where demografically milk wasn't consumed much until recently. That doesn't make it unnatural.
No, but it is perfectly natural to be lactose intolerant. Because we thereotically stop drinking it after maturing from infants.
How many "milkdeaths" do you see on the news?
How many "potdeaths" or "heroindeaths" do you see on the news? That's a superflorous question.
One point before my own - India is beginning to do very well concerning their fertility rates. They are going down, because of - in short - better living conditions.
-
I believe the main causes for the inequalities in the global system, come from the inequable history we're stemming from. Europeans came, and they enslaved - for all intensive purposes - the people of the Americas, of Africa, of Asia. The exceptions - namely America, Canada, Australia, Japan - are the minority, because of various extrenuating circumstances (in the majority of the cases - because the Europeans migrated, and created a European state).
It's a system based on racism and imperialism. Many, many third world countries (I'll use the term 'global south' from now on) have abundant natural resources. The Middle East, and oil. Africa, and diamonds, coal. South America, plentiful arable land & timber. Asia, same. This isn't even looking at the human resources these countries possess.
The problem is, in my opinion, is that the residents of the global south, aren't profiting. Take the diamond, coal and oil companies in Africa. The majority are western countries, who pay a pitance a day, and return nearly all of the profits to the global north. The structures put into place from colonialism and imperialism, are still in place today. Namely - the core states profiteering off of the peripheral states (global north and south, respectively).
The fundamental systems from hundreds of years ago, are still in place. And those systems are racist, imperialistic and domineering.
Now, with structures like the UN, the World Bank, the IMF, free trade. These organizations only reinforce the existing power structures. It is harder nowadays for a country to come from poverty, than it was several hundred years ago. The cards are stacked against the global south, because in reality, we are all profiteering from their misery.
-
What caused the European continent to dominant? A variety of factors. The main building blocks of civilization, were a variety of good crops, and of good domesticated animals. The Middle East had both, but they migrated to Europe. The migration was easy, because there was not a lot of north/south movement (which would affect the sucess of the new crops and animals, because of weather changes). Mostly east/west. Why Europe instead of the Middle East? Not sure, but do remember that the Middle East was the best place on Earth for thousands of years.
Other continents, such as the Americas, Africa, & the South Pacific, were doomed to failure / slow progression, because of continents which go north/south, or are isolated and never had good crops / animals. North/south continents, as I've said, impede the migration of crops and animals, because of dramatic weather changes. And some places, like Australia and the surrounding islands, were royally screwed, because they were isolated and had no good crops or animals.
-
If anyone reads that, thanks =P
At 7/27/04 12:44 AM, Satanica2030 wrote: B, the number of troops we have in other countries is going to go down soon because our troops will be replaced by those of other countries.
How do you figure this? The 140,000 we have in Iraq is just the tip of the iceburg - the hundreds of thousands elsewhere aren't going anywhere, as far as I know.
Are we talking about a 'living will' here? Something that you create, when you're in perfect health, concerning what you wish to happen when / if you become *on life-support* *comatose* *etc.*.
I know my mother's grandparents have living wills that dictate, if/when they are put onto life support, and, you know, it looks hopeless, they only wish to have water/ etc. And my grandmother did this.
Is this what we're talking about fli? And you're saying Cali doesn't have anything like this? Or are we just talking about letting your partner have the authority?
At 7/26/04 10:35 PM, Gooie wrote: However, sometimes you get screwed over and end up with someone like me who stopped making serious posts right after he was "accepted" here.
So.. why do you still post here?
At 7/26/04 08:04 PM, -theFUNK- wrote: I was just thinking of stopping acting like idiots, but I can understand if you're "limited" in the "not being an idiot" area.
I'd be willing to try it, but it feels weird when everyone around you is scratching their groins and picking ticks off of each other.
BURN!
*kicks whoevers standing next to him*
At 7/26/04 03:53 PM, The_Enforcer wrote: Well I can see you are an idiot. How many times has it happened in our countrys history?
Well, it happened in the last election... sooooo...
