Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
France vs. Globalization
0 views
Skip to first unread message
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 1, 2013, 12:24:11 PM1/1/13
to
While Globalization works toward making the rich richer, France is
working to tax them, a whopping 75% to make sure they really care
about France. And if they don't care about France and decide to leave?
Well, c'est la vie!
The world is watching and the struggle between rich and poor may as
well be decided in France. But in the end the rich may decide to be
part of the nation, and we all will have a happy ending.
Can you believe it Putin offered a Russian passport to Gerard
Depardieu? I'm not watching his movies anymore.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION
working to tax them, a whopping 75% to make sure they really care
about France. And if they don't care about France and decide to leave?
Well, c'est la vie!
The world is watching and the struggle between rich and poor may as
well be decided in France. But in the end the rich may decide to be
part of the nation, and we all will have a happy ending.
Can you believe it Putin offered a Russian passport to Gerard
Depardieu? I'm not watching his movies anymore.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 1, 2013, 1:07:24 PM1/1/13
to
On Jan 1, 12:54 pm, FirstPost <AIOE_posters_are_all_li...@AIOE.org>
wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 09:11:22 -0800 (PST), "TibetanMonkey, the Beach
> see.
>
> France's highest court on Saturday blocked President Francois
> Hollande's plan to tax the ultrawealthy at a 75 percent rate, saying
> it was unfair.
Well, he'll get them some other ways. This is an estimate, just like
"We are the 99%"...
The rich are the 1% and should be taxed 75%. Fair and square.
>
> In a stinging rebuke to one of Socialist Hollande's flagship campaign
> promises, the constitutional council ruled Saturday that the way the
> highly contentious tax was designed was unconstitutional. It was
> intended to hit annual incomes of more than 1 million euros, or $1.3
> million.
>
> The largely symbolic measure would have only hit a tiny number of
> taxpayers and brought in an estimated 100 million euros to 300 million
> euros - an insignificant amount in the context of France's
> multi-billion euro deficit.
>
> The court's ruling took issue not with the size of the tax, but with
> the way it discriminated between households depending on how incomes
> were distributed among its members. A household with two earners each
> making under 1 million euros would be exempt from the tax, while one
> with one earner making 1.2 million euros would have to pay.
> must be just tearing his heart apart.
> And it is Belgium. not Russia, that is welcoming him with open arms.
> You really should seek some professiional help in dealing with all of
> these delusions you appear to suffer from.
It seems you are the one that doesn't know what's going on...
"Vladimir Putin offers Gerard Depardieu a Russian passport in actor's
efforts to escape French taxes"
Read more:
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/putin-offers-french-actor-gerard-depardieu-russian-passport-article-1.1224399#ixzz2GkRpkBMb
wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 09:11:22 -0800 (PST), "TibetanMonkey, the Beach
>
> Cruiser Philosopher" <thetibetanmon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >While Globalization works toward making the rich richer, France is
> >working to tax them, a whopping 75% to make sure they really care
> >about France. And if they don't care about France and decide to leave?
> >Well, c'est la vie!
>
> >The world is watching and the struggle between rich and poor may as
> >well be decided in France. But in the end the rich may decide to be
> >part of the nation, and we all will have a happy ending.
>
> Not paying attention to what is happening in the real world again I
> Cruiser Philosopher" <thetibetanmon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >While Globalization works toward making the rich richer, France is
> >working to tax them, a whopping 75% to make sure they really care
> >about France. And if they don't care about France and decide to leave?
> >Well, c'est la vie!
>
> >The world is watching and the struggle between rich and poor may as
> >well be decided in France. But in the end the rich may decide to be
> >part of the nation, and we all will have a happy ending.
>
> see.
>
> France's highest court on Saturday blocked President Francois
> Hollande's plan to tax the ultrawealthy at a 75 percent rate, saying
> it was unfair.
Well, he'll get them some other ways. This is an estimate, just like
"We are the 99%"...
The rich are the 1% and should be taxed 75%. Fair and square.
>
> In a stinging rebuke to one of Socialist Hollande's flagship campaign
> promises, the constitutional council ruled Saturday that the way the
> highly contentious tax was designed was unconstitutional. It was
> intended to hit annual incomes of more than 1 million euros, or $1.3
> million.
>
> The largely symbolic measure would have only hit a tiny number of
> taxpayers and brought in an estimated 100 million euros to 300 million
> euros - an insignificant amount in the context of France's
> multi-billion euro deficit.
>
> The court's ruling took issue not with the size of the tax, but with
> the way it discriminated between households depending on how incomes
> were distributed among its members. A household with two earners each
> making under 1 million euros would be exempt from the tax, while one
> with one earner making 1.2 million euros would have to pay.
>
> >Can you believe it Putin offered a Russian passport to Gerard
> >Depardieu? I'm not watching his movies anymore.
>
> Oh yeah, that'll teach him. One idiot in Kansas boycotting his movies
> >Can you believe it Putin offered a Russian passport to Gerard
> >Depardieu? I'm not watching his movies anymore.
>
> must be just tearing his heart apart.
> And it is Belgium. not Russia, that is welcoming him with open arms.
> You really should seek some professiional help in dealing with all of
> these delusions you appear to suffer from.
It seems you are the one that doesn't know what's going on...
"Vladimir Putin offers Gerard Depardieu a Russian passport in actor's
efforts to escape French taxes"
Read more:
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/putin-offers-french-actor-gerard-depardieu-russian-passport-article-1.1224399#ixzz2GkRpkBMb
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 1, 2013, 6:39:00 PM1/1/13
to
On Jan 1, 1:47 pm, FirstPost <AIOE_posters_are_all_li...@AIOE.org>
wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 10:05:02 -0800 (PST), "TibetanMonkey, the Beach
> You obviously are one of those that is incapable of earning your own
> way or you wouldn't be so big on punishing those that do by forcing
> them to pay your way for you.
> How about you infrom everyone of when government taxing the living
> hell out of anyone ever resulted in non working lowlifes like yourself
> benefiting at all from it. The only benefit you'll ever see from the
> government raping the taxpayers is it bringing more people down to
> your pathetic level of income and lifestyle.
> You're nothing more than just another class envying fool that, like
> Obama and the rest of the flaming left, wants to punish success. In
> other words you want your "revenge" for them being more successful
> than your lazy ass.
It's OK to be rich, but not filthy rich. What are they going to do
with so much money? I don't think I need, say, more than 2 million.
We just want to save them from their own filth.
wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 10:05:02 -0800 (PST), "TibetanMonkey, the Beach
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Cruiser Philosopher" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 1, 12:54 pm, FirstPost <AIOE_posters_are_all_li...@AIOE.org>
> >wrote:
> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 09:11:22 -0800 (PST), "TibetanMonkey, the Beach
>
> >> Cruiser Philosopher" <thetibetanmon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >While Globalization works toward making the rich richer, France is
> >> >working to tax them, a whopping 75% to make sure they really care
> >> >about France. And if they don't care about France and decide to leave?
> >> >Well, c'est la vie!
>
> >> >The world is watching and the struggle between rich and poor may as
> >> >well be decided in France. But in the end the rich may decide to be
> >> >part of the nation, and we all will have a happy ending.
>
> >> Not paying attention to what is happening in the real world again I
> >> see.
>
> >> France's highest court on Saturday blocked President Francois
> >> Hollande's plan to tax the ultrawealthy at a 75 percent rate, saying
> >> it was unfair.
>
> >Well, he'll get them some other ways. This is an estimate, just like
> >"We are the 99%"...
>
> >The rich are the 1% and should be taxed 75%. Fair and square.
>
> Nothing fair about your hoped for thievery.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Cruiser Philosopher" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 1, 12:54 pm, FirstPost <AIOE_posters_are_all_li...@AIOE.org>
> >wrote:
> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 09:11:22 -0800 (PST), "TibetanMonkey, the Beach
>
> >> Cruiser Philosopher" <thetibetanmon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >While Globalization works toward making the rich richer, France is
> >> >working to tax them, a whopping 75% to make sure they really care
> >> >about France. And if they don't care about France and decide to leave?
> >> >Well, c'est la vie!
>
> >> >The world is watching and the struggle between rich and poor may as
> >> >well be decided in France. But in the end the rich may decide to be
> >> >part of the nation, and we all will have a happy ending.
>
> >> Not paying attention to what is happening in the real world again I
> >> see.
>
> >> France's highest court on Saturday blocked President Francois
> >> Hollande's plan to tax the ultrawealthy at a 75 percent rate, saying
> >> it was unfair.
>
> >Well, he'll get them some other ways. This is an estimate, just like
> >"We are the 99%"...
>
> >The rich are the 1% and should be taxed 75%. Fair and square.
>
> You obviously are one of those that is incapable of earning your own
> way or you wouldn't be so big on punishing those that do by forcing
> them to pay your way for you.
> How about you infrom everyone of when government taxing the living
> hell out of anyone ever resulted in non working lowlifes like yourself
> benefiting at all from it. The only benefit you'll ever see from the
> government raping the taxpayers is it bringing more people down to
> your pathetic level of income and lifestyle.
> You're nothing more than just another class envying fool that, like
> Obama and the rest of the flaming left, wants to punish success. In
> other words you want your "revenge" for them being more successful
> than your lazy ass.
It's OK to be rich, but not filthy rich. What are they going to do
with so much money? I don't think I need, say, more than 2 million.
We just want to save them from their own filth.
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 1, 2013, 6:42:49 PM1/1/13
to
On Jan 1, 2:19 pm, Old Pif <old...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 1, 12:58 pm, "TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher"
>
> <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > What's the option, pay or guillotine?
>
> It is up to the rich, basically. We have both examples in history.
>
> I hope they pay ... mass grave images make me sick ...
If history repeats itself, the revolution will start in France and
will be followed by Russia. Then the rich will be sent to reeducation
camps.
> On Jan 1, 12:58 pm, "TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher"
>
> <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > What's the option, pay or guillotine?
>
> It is up to the rich, basically. We have both examples in history.
>
> I hope they pay ... mass grave images make me sick ...
If history repeats itself, the revolution will start in France and
will be followed by Russia. Then the rich will be sent to reeducation
camps.
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 2, 2013, 1:27:26 AM1/2/13
to
On Jan 2, 1:06 am, Sanford Manley <ansa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/1/2013 10:28 PM, liaM wrote:
>
> > This is the only method I know of restoring your mental and
> > emotional clock to the right time of day. To unroot the ugly
> > consumerism that sodomizes your consciousnesses (and that goes
> > for Luke, too, since his Occupy is suffused with it, tho'
> > he doesn't seem to realise it..)
>
> But I LIKE having my consciousness sodomized. It's the closest
> thing to intimacy I get these days. Oh baby, put that big meme
> into me! Faster!
You guys are into hardcore S & M.
The question is whether ladies should be happy with one dildo or more.
Perhaps different colors? Different textures? Different sizes?
I say they let them be happy. We just don't want greed to sodomize
your conscience.
> On 1/1/2013 10:28 PM, liaM wrote:
>
> > This is the only method I know of restoring your mental and
> > emotional clock to the right time of day. To unroot the ugly
> > consumerism that sodomizes your consciousnesses (and that goes
> > for Luke, too, since his Occupy is suffused with it, tho'
> > he doesn't seem to realise it..)
>
> But I LIKE having my consciousness sodomized. It's the closest
> thing to intimacy I get these days. Oh baby, put that big meme
> into me! Faster!
You guys are into hardcore S & M.
The question is whether ladies should be happy with one dildo or more.
Perhaps different colors? Different textures? Different sizes?
I say they let them be happy. We just don't want greed to sodomize
your conscience.
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 2, 2013, 10:50:05 AM1/2/13
to
On Jan 2, 10:03 am, Julian <Julianlz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 02/01/2013 04:28, liaM wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Le 1/2/2013 12:38 AM, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher a
> > écrit :
> > Let the rich alone. Old Luke thinks they gotta to be taxed.
> > Me, I recommend the opposite tack.
>
> http://order-order.com/2012/12/31/world-exclusive-jean-michel-jarre-s...
Who wants French rock anyway? Mind you, they got good jazz. Probably
the Culture Ministry promotes it as well. Yeah, they take art
seriously. They promoted the very movies where Depardieu worked and
got rich.
I'm telling you, the rich don't care.
> On 02/01/2013 04:28, liaM wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Le 1/2/2013 12:38 AM, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher a
> > écrit :
> >> On Jan 1, 1:47 pm, FirstPost <AIOE_posters_are_all_li...@AIOE.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 10:05:02 -0800 (PST), "TibetanMonkey, the Beach
> >> wrote:
> > Me, I recommend the opposite tack.
>
> http://order-order.com/2012/12/31/world-exclusive-jean-michel-jarre-s...
Who wants French rock anyway? Mind you, they got good jazz. Probably
the Culture Ministry promotes it as well. Yeah, they take art
seriously. They promoted the very movies where Depardieu worked and
got rich.
I'm telling you, the rich don't care.
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 2, 2013, 11:22:29 AM1/2/13
to
> have stashed away - including bikes, if you have more than one.
> Leave home with a backpack, one change of clothes, start hitching
> cross-country. See where that leads you.
Do I need to say that our public transportation sucks? May I remind
you that hitching a ride is deemed dangerous? Do you know that bike
lanes don't connect anywhere? Are you aware that our trains are
considered museum pieces by European standards?
I don't think the rich are aware of this, but that's reality in the
jungle.
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 3, 2013, 9:50:01 PM1/3/13
to
On Jan 3, 5:57 pm, BeamMeUpScotty
<ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
> On 1/3/2013 5:30 PM, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher wrote:
>
> > On Jan 3, 12:42 pm, "the E V I L Prophet Muhammud fucked
> > teenage gril 's cunt , was a DIRTY Human Scum"
> > <mohamedholy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> there are lots of daring robberies of jewellery shops in
> >> France daily
>
> >> French poors are getting money for themselves by force
>
> >> rich French are opting to get Foreign passports
>
> > Sorry, we are #1...
>
> > #1 The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world
> > and the largest total prison population on the entire globe.
>
> The Government in the USA has the most people in Prison, I would release
> the NON violent and put an ankle bracelet on NON violent criminals. The
> IRS and family courts should be disbanded and shut down.
>
> > #2 According to NationMaster.com, the United States has the highest
> > percentage of obese people in the world.
>
> Obese as in FAT AND HAPPY?
>
>
>
> > #3 The United States has the highest divorce rate on the globe by a
> > wide margin.
>
> Thanks to government micromanaging our lives.
>
>
>
> > #4 The United States is tied with the U.K. for the most hours of
> > television watched per person each week.
>
> ignorance is bliss.
>
>
>
> > #5 The United States has the highest rate of illegal drug use on the
> > entire planet.
>
> Good for the U.S.
>
> Russia just limited the hours that Vodka can be sold because they have
> such an alcoholic problem from all the years of feudalism under the
> communists/Socialists system.
>
>
>
> > #6 There are more car thefts in the United States each year than
> > anywhere else in the world by far.
>
> More cars too....
>
>
>
> > #7 There are more reported rapes in the United States each year than
> > anywhere else in the world.
>
> Reported rapes?
>
> > #8 There are more reported murders in the United States each year than
> > anywhere else in the world.
>
> NOT true, Stalin murdered 25 million....
>
> Mao murdered about 40 million.
>
> Pol pot murdered in a million in the killing fields
>
> Hitler murdered more than 6 million.
>
> > #9 There are more total crimes in the United States each year than
> > anywhere else in the world.
>
> Mexico murdered 30,000 in 1 year just in the drug wars.
> Syria has murdered 60,000 in their last year.
>
> Bosnia and Kosovo had a civil war that killed thousands and thousands
> and many in mass graves.
>
> > #10 The United States also has more police officers than anywhere else
> > in the world.
>
> That is bad...
>
>
>
> >http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/number-one-20-not-so-good...
>
> > And #4 above would explain why the UK is #2 in crime. I'm sure the
> > French enjoy more the outdoors than TV.
>
> So gun and no guns are number 1 and 2 on the list? Sort of says guns
> aren't the problem.
Guns are not the solution, but they aren't the problem either. I think
the problem is cultural. For some reason we have come to hate each
other, perhaps the consequence of living in isolation.
We need to clean our parks and our streets, while we make sure the bad
guys know we are watching them (via cameras).
Again, the cameras have a big role to play but the enforcement must
take care of the problem despite all the bullshit that the homeless
have rights etc. Gated communities have the effect of isolating the
very people who can fix the problem. The poor can not solve the
problem except by revolution.
<ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
> On 1/3/2013 5:30 PM, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher wrote:
>
> > On Jan 3, 12:42 pm, "the E V I L Prophet Muhammud fucked
> > teenage gril 's cunt , was a DIRTY Human Scum"
> > <mohamedholy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> there are lots of daring robberies of jewellery shops in
> >> France daily
>
> >> French poors are getting money for themselves by force
>
> >> rich French are opting to get Foreign passports
>
> > Sorry, we are #1...
>
> > #1 The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world
> > and the largest total prison population on the entire globe.
>
> The Government in the USA has the most people in Prison, I would release
> the NON violent and put an ankle bracelet on NON violent criminals. The
> IRS and family courts should be disbanded and shut down.
>
> > #2 According to NationMaster.com, the United States has the highest
> > percentage of obese people in the world.
>
> Obese as in FAT AND HAPPY?
>
>
>
> > #3 The United States has the highest divorce rate on the globe by a
> > wide margin.
>
> Thanks to government micromanaging our lives.
>
>
>
> > #4 The United States is tied with the U.K. for the most hours of
> > television watched per person each week.
>
> ignorance is bliss.
>
>
>
> > #5 The United States has the highest rate of illegal drug use on the
> > entire planet.
>
> Good for the U.S.
>
> Russia just limited the hours that Vodka can be sold because they have
> such an alcoholic problem from all the years of feudalism under the
> communists/Socialists system.
>
>
>
> > #6 There are more car thefts in the United States each year than
> > anywhere else in the world by far.
>
> More cars too....
>
>
>
> > #7 There are more reported rapes in the United States each year than
> > anywhere else in the world.
>
> Reported rapes?
>
> > #8 There are more reported murders in the United States each year than
> > anywhere else in the world.
>
> NOT true, Stalin murdered 25 million....
>
> Mao murdered about 40 million.
>
> Pol pot murdered in a million in the killing fields
>
> Hitler murdered more than 6 million.
>
> > #9 There are more total crimes in the United States each year than
> > anywhere else in the world.
>
> Mexico murdered 30,000 in 1 year just in the drug wars.
> Syria has murdered 60,000 in their last year.
>
> Bosnia and Kosovo had a civil war that killed thousands and thousands
> and many in mass graves.
>
> > #10 The United States also has more police officers than anywhere else
> > in the world.
>
> That is bad...
>
>
>
> >http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/number-one-20-not-so-good...
>
> > And #4 above would explain why the UK is #2 in crime. I'm sure the
> > French enjoy more the outdoors than TV.
>
> So gun and no guns are number 1 and 2 on the list? Sort of says guns
> aren't the problem.
Guns are not the solution, but they aren't the problem either. I think
the problem is cultural. For some reason we have come to hate each
other, perhaps the consequence of living in isolation.
We need to clean our parks and our streets, while we make sure the bad
guys know we are watching them (via cameras).
Again, the cameras have a big role to play but the enforcement must
take care of the problem despite all the bullshit that the homeless
have rights etc. Gated communities have the effect of isolating the
very people who can fix the problem. The poor can not solve the
problem except by revolution.
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 4, 2013, 9:42:57 AM1/4/13
to
On Jan 3, 10:34 pm, liaM <cud...@mindless.com> wrote:
> Le 1/4/2013 3:43 AM, awaken21 a écrit :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thursday, January 3, 2013 12:44:40 PM UTC-5, liaM wrote:
> >> Le 1/3/2013 6:27 PM, awaken21 a écrit :
>
> >>> On Thursday, January 3, 2013 12:17:01 PM UTC-5, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher wrote:
>
> >>>> On Jan 3, 5:50 am, Brian Drummond <br...@shapes.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 19:44:16 -0500, Wilson wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On 1/2/2013 6:26 PM, liaM wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> France is one of the few places on earth where people know how to live
>
> >>>>>>> Over 50% of the french are civil servants guaranteed a job for life.
>
> >>>>>> And in France as much of Europe, it's all a fairyland dream. The French
>
> >>>>>> economy is set to implode within 36 months. They simply cannot pay for
>
> >>>>>> everything they have promised. But they will blame the banks and blame
>
> >>>>>> the greedy rich, and blame everyone but themselves. They are
>
> >>>>>> delusional, as are we here. It's just getting there first.
>
> >>>>> The French Economy has been set to implode within 36 months ever since
>
> >>>>> they elected a Socialist ... Francois Mitterrand.
>
> >>>> Face it, the only economy going up is China. So just learn Chinese and
>
> >>>> blame Globalization.
>
> >>> Only a short term solution. They have the same problem with Oligarchs everyone else does so when their market is saturated everyone who learned Chinese is back to square one.
>
> >> The long term solution is ... Metta.
>
> > I'm a big fan of Metta, however imposing religiously based solutions isn't one.
>
> Who knows? A new Muhammad Ali may burst on the public scene like the
> first one did, but have political genius as well and convince the
> Congress to adapt the US COnstitution to fit Shariah Law. Just like it
> is foretold that one day soon, Islam's flag will flap over Parliament in
> the U.K.
>
> Have you read rge Shariah? No usury. No banks. A universal flat tax of
> about 12% on all income to benefit the destitute. Criminal laws strictly
> enforced. Complete tolerance of all religions and social groups under
> the Shariah.
>
> It's enough to make the Occupy drool with envy, no?
Sorry the Law of the Jungle (Talion's Law) that I humbly propose is
much better:
1- Discredit but not ban usury. Try not to borrow from banks because
that's how the hungry lion eats you.
2- We won't pay the destitute to do nothing. "DO NOT FEED THE
WILDLIFE." Make them work and pick up the litter where they live.
3- Criminal laws strictly enforced, though marijuana and other drugs
are decriminalized but controlled by the government.
4- Let science rule over the land but spirituality --dancing to the
didgeridoo under a full moon-- is encouraged. Organized religions lose
their nonprofit status. They are big business anyway.
5- Guarantee safety for women to do whatever they want, including
cycling. They are encouraged to turn in their drivers licence on the
other hand. The revolution will not be motorized.
> Le 1/4/2013 3:43 AM, awaken21 a écrit :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thursday, January 3, 2013 12:44:40 PM UTC-5, liaM wrote:
> >> Le 1/3/2013 6:27 PM, awaken21 a écrit :
>
> >>> On Thursday, January 3, 2013 12:17:01 PM UTC-5, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher wrote:
>
> >>>> On Jan 3, 5:50 am, Brian Drummond <br...@shapes.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 19:44:16 -0500, Wilson wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On 1/2/2013 6:26 PM, liaM wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> France is one of the few places on earth where people know how to live
>
> >>>>>>> Over 50% of the french are civil servants guaranteed a job for life.
>
> >>>>>> And in France as much of Europe, it's all a fairyland dream. The French
>
> >>>>>> economy is set to implode within 36 months. They simply cannot pay for
>
> >>>>>> everything they have promised. But they will blame the banks and blame
>
> >>>>>> the greedy rich, and blame everyone but themselves. They are
>
> >>>>>> delusional, as are we here. It's just getting there first.
>
> >>>>> The French Economy has been set to implode within 36 months ever since
>
> >>>>> they elected a Socialist ... Francois Mitterrand.
>
> >>>> Face it, the only economy going up is China. So just learn Chinese and
>
> >>>> blame Globalization.
>
> >>> Only a short term solution. They have the same problem with Oligarchs everyone else does so when their market is saturated everyone who learned Chinese is back to square one.
>
> >> The long term solution is ... Metta.
>
> > I'm a big fan of Metta, however imposing religiously based solutions isn't one.
>
> Who knows? A new Muhammad Ali may burst on the public scene like the
> first one did, but have political genius as well and convince the
> Congress to adapt the US COnstitution to fit Shariah Law. Just like it
> is foretold that one day soon, Islam's flag will flap over Parliament in
> the U.K.
>
> Have you read rge Shariah? No usury. No banks. A universal flat tax of
> about 12% on all income to benefit the destitute. Criminal laws strictly
> enforced. Complete tolerance of all religions and social groups under
> the Shariah.
>
> It's enough to make the Occupy drool with envy, no?
Sorry the Law of the Jungle (Talion's Law) that I humbly propose is
much better:
1- Discredit but not ban usury. Try not to borrow from banks because
that's how the hungry lion eats you.
2- We won't pay the destitute to do nothing. "DO NOT FEED THE
WILDLIFE." Make them work and pick up the litter where they live.
3- Criminal laws strictly enforced, though marijuana and other drugs
are decriminalized but controlled by the government.
4- Let science rule over the land but spirituality --dancing to the
didgeridoo under a full moon-- is encouraged. Organized religions lose
their nonprofit status. They are big business anyway.
5- Guarantee safety for women to do whatever they want, including
cycling. They are encouraged to turn in their drivers licence on the
other hand. The revolution will not be motorized.
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 4, 2013, 9:53:44 AM1/4/13
to
On Jan 3, 11:21 pm, BeamMeUpScotty
<ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
> I don't hate people, I do think some of them are pitiful, I wouldn't do
> them harm or hate them I just pity them.
>
> People that can't construct a congruent and logical thought must be a
> pitiful mess trying to function in society. If they think getting rid
> of guns will make them safe then they have a real problem with their
> thinking and logic.
Under the revolution we could strike a compromise. You keep your guns,
but you give us the cameras and strict laws. Smart laws --no more "war
on drugs." And we must clean up the "homeless population" while
encouraging people to come out.
Switzerland has a lot of guns and there's little crime. Incidentally,
there was a shooting the other day.
<ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
> them harm or hate them I just pity them.
>
> People that can't construct a congruent and logical thought must be a
> pitiful mess trying to function in society. If they think getting rid
> of guns will make them safe then they have a real problem with their
> thinking and logic.
Under the revolution we could strike a compromise. You keep your guns,
but you give us the cameras and strict laws. Smart laws --no more "war
on drugs." And we must clean up the "homeless population" while
encouraging people to come out.
Switzerland has a lot of guns and there's little crime. Incidentally,
there was a shooting the other day.
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 5, 2013, 11:46:49 AM1/5/13
to
On Jan 5, 12:05 am, Old Pif <old...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 4, 10:36 am, "TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher"
>
> > > I suspect the rest of your list is of the same quality.
>
> > France is 4 times safer than America, according to that list. Actually
> > the rate for the UK is pretty low. It's not the same the murder rate
> > as the crime rate. Somalia is very low. It seems the law of the jungle
> > works. Egypt is much safer than America, but I'm comparing apples and
> > pears.
>
> Your claim has been:
> meanings.
>
> > You must compare apples with apples,
>
> Please do.
Go back to the list and tell me what country has a higher murder rate
than America. Russia?
That's hardly a fair comparison. Eastern European countries have a
higher murder rate but Western Europe is all safer. How about if we
picked road rage? I doubt any other country has as much road rage.
Wait, it's not America, though I doubt the UK could be that bad...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-192223/UK-retains-road-rage-title.html
In America you use your gun to settle who was right and wrong. But I
may be wrong.
> On Jan 4, 10:36 am, "TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher"
>
> <thetibetanmon...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > #8 There are more reported murders in the United States each year than
> > > > anywhere else in the world.
>
> > > Not according to Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicid...
> <thetibetanmon...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > #8 There are more reported murders in the United States each year than
> > > > anywhere else in the world.
>
>
> > > I suspect the rest of your list is of the same quality.
>
> > France is 4 times safer than America, according to that list. Actually
> > the rate for the UK is pretty low. It's not the same the murder rate
> > as the crime rate. Somalia is very low. It seems the law of the jungle
> > works. Egypt is much safer than America, but I'm comparing apples and
> > pears.
>
> Your claim has been:
>
> > > > #8 There are more reported murders in the United States each year than
> > > > anywhere else in the world.
>
> and the Wiki article disproves that in any possible twists of
> > > > #8 There are more reported murders in the United States each year than
> > > > anywhere else in the world.
>
> meanings.
>
> > You must compare apples with apples,
>
> Please do.
Go back to the list and tell me what country has a higher murder rate
than America. Russia?
That's hardly a fair comparison. Eastern European countries have a
higher murder rate but Western Europe is all safer. How about if we
picked road rage? I doubt any other country has as much road rage.
Wait, it's not America, though I doubt the UK could be that bad...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-192223/UK-retains-road-rage-title.html
In America you use your gun to settle who was right and wrong. But I
may be wrong.
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 7, 2013, 10:38:09 AM1/7/13
to
On Jan 5, 1:21 pm, BeamMeUpScotty
<ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 5, 11:45 am, "TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher"
> weapons? You seem to believe that if you make it more work to murder
> that there will be fewer murders because people are inherently lazy?
>
> You can place all manner of weapons in a building with a bunch of Monks
> and it's more likely they wouldn't be used.....
>
> SO when you blame the weapons you are glossing over and ignoring the
> root problem that is the people and the life style.
>
> But will you force everyone to become a Monk just to attain what *YOU*
> deem to be an acceptable murder rate? And would it even work. You might
> end up with a Nation of murderous Monks instead.
The Shaolin Monks would probably have used the guns to avoid long
years of martial arts training, but the Wise Man knows guns are just
unnecessary.
And if they are necessary they are meant to protect lonesome cyclists
on the road.
<ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 5, 11:45 am, "TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher"
> > <thetibetanmon...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Go back to the list and tell me what country has a higher murder rate
> >> than America. Russia?
>
> Isn't the murder rate fueled by the society rather than the available
>
> >> Go back to the list and tell me what country has a higher murder rate
> >> than America. Russia?
>
> weapons? You seem to believe that if you make it more work to murder
> that there will be fewer murders because people are inherently lazy?
>
> You can place all manner of weapons in a building with a bunch of Monks
> and it's more likely they wouldn't be used.....
>
> SO when you blame the weapons you are glossing over and ignoring the
> root problem that is the people and the life style.
>
> But will you force everyone to become a Monk just to attain what *YOU*
> deem to be an acceptable murder rate? And would it even work. You might
> end up with a Nation of murderous Monks instead.
The Shaolin Monks would probably have used the guns to avoid long
years of martial arts training, but the Wise Man knows guns are just
unnecessary.
And if they are necessary they are meant to protect lonesome cyclists
on the road.
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 13, 2013, 11:47:06 AM1/13/13
to
On Jan 11, 5:18 pm, Uncle Steve <stevet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 02:02:34PM -0800, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
> > On Jan 11, 4:26 pm, Uncle Steve <stevet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 01:23:21PM -0800, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
> > > > On Jan 11, 12:22 pm, Gunner <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 07:23:58 -0800 (PST), "TibetanMonkey, the Beach
>
> > > > > Cruiser Philosopher" <thetibetanmon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >On Jan 10, 6:23 pm, Gunner <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:21:10 -0800 (PST), "TibetanMonkey, the Beach
>
> > > > > >> Cruiser Philosopher" <thetibetanmon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> >On Jan 10, 3:01 pm, Gunner <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> >> On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 07:19:16 -0800, Klaus Schadenfreude
>
> > > > > >> >> <klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> >> >>"TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns:
>
> > > > > >> >> >>Guns,trucksand Jesus are all part of the American psyche.
>
> > > > > >> >> >>What can we do about it?
>
> > > > > >> >> >Grab your gun, get in your truck and get your ass to church.
>
> > > > > >> >> I wonder how the poor bastard deals with the fairly large number of
> > > > > >> >> folks like me...armed, have pickuptrucks..and arent Christians.
>
> > > > > >> >> Im Buddhist, I have a number of similar friends who are Wiccans and
> > > > > >> >> so forth.
>
> > > > > >> >> It must simply drive the poor bastard batty.
>
> > > > > >> >Your Darwinism shows, but at least you are making sense.
>
> > > > > >> >But Darwinism --"dog eat dog" world-- doesn't explain why dogs still
> > > > > >> >want to play and have fun.
>
> > > > > >> Darwin ism? You mean :"the strong survive"?
>
> > > > > >Yes, that's only part of the picture. Kropotkin was another prince --
> > > > > >like Buddha-- that gave up wealth to help humanity and noticed that
> > > > > >Nature favors cooperation:
>
> > > > > >"Kropotkin's most famous book, Mutual Aid, maintains that cooperation
> > > > > >within a species has been an historical factor in the development of
> > > > > >social institutions, and in fact, that the avoidance of competition
> > > > > >greatly increases the chances of survival and raises the quality of
> > > > > >life. He contended that mutual aid is a factor that is both biological
> > > > > >and voluntary in nature, and is an enabler of progressive evolution.
> > > > > >Without it, life as we know it could not exist. This can be also seen
> > > > > >in the animal kingdom. Horses and deer unite to protect each from
> > > > > >their foe, wolves and lions gather to hunt, while bees and ants work
> > > > > >together in many different ways. Kropotkin said that mutual support is
> > > > > >an established fact within the feathered world, with eagles, pelicans,
> > > > > >vultures, sparrows, and other fowl, collectively searching for and
> > > > > >sharing food. Some species of birds even gather together at the end of
> > > > > >the day to sleep."
>
> > > > > >http://www.moyak.com/papers/peter-kropotkin.html
>
> > > > > >> >I'm still lost about your Buddhism though.
>
> > > > > >> What part of it do you not understand? What..you think all Buddhist
> > > > > >> are guys who walk around in saffron robes with a begging bowl?
>
> > > > > >> Really?
>
> > > > > >> Blink blink..you do..dont you?
>
> > > > > >You seem to be to Buddhism what Republicans are to Christianity. But
> > > > > >that's only my humble opinion.
>
> > > > > Its strongly suggest you do a little learning on the subject. So
> > > > > far..what little you know makes you look frankly stupid.
>
> > > > >http://www.wildmind.org/blogs/on-practice/the-buddha-as-warrior
>
> > > > > other terms to google are Shaolin, Rensi Buddhist and Buddhist
> > > > > Warriors
>
> > > > > Gunner
>
> > > > Religion and politics shouldn't mix. The Shaolin Temple was razed by
> > > > troops from Qing Dynasty because the Temple monks were harbouring
> > > > rebels from the remnant of the previous Ming Dynasty to try to
> > > > overthrow Qing Dynasty.
>
> > > Religion is politics. The myth that religion is in some way distinct
> > > from political considerations is little more than a gambit to
> > > segregate religious belief from rational political considerations.
>
> > > > Separation of Church and States has its advantages. The Vatican
> > > > survived more than a thousand years because it caters to both the good
> > > > guys and the bad guys. Don't you know Mafia are all Catholics?
>
> > > Rather unfortunate that the bad guys are in charge, eh?
>
> > > Regards,
>
> > > Uncle Steve
>
> > Picking winners and losers is bad for business in religion. If you
> > want to survive a thousand years you have to go with the flow. That is
> > why Pope Pius XII was accused of being a Nazi collaborator, but he was
> > only doing his job not to pick winners and losers.
>
> That isn't the only possible interpretation of the Church's success
> throughout the ages. I prefer to think that the church panders to the
> worst human impulses in such a way that it is both institutionalized
> and hidden behind otherwise quasi-reasonable doctrine. Religion is
> first and foremost about population control. It is no surprise that
> evil people would support a political system that hands them control
> over others, and who would work for the stability of the institution
> as a condition of their involvement.
>
> I think it is a well-established fact that the Church has fought
> reality and the reasoned advance of the human species for its entire
> existence. Someone will bring up so called "good works", such as
> ministrations to the poor, but it should be noted that Christians
> never work to support the independence of those in their care. Rather
> they invariably channel their charges towards dependency
> relationships that never end. They fake "miracles" to fool the
> sheeple, and in general entirely fail to practice what they preach.
I think it's pretty obvious by now what's the relationship between
GUNS, TRUCKS AND JESUS...
IT'S ALL ABOUT POWER.
They subdued whole populations in the Americas and Africa with the
magic pill: Jesus.
The gun was only used if they refused.
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 02:02:34PM -0800, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
> > On Jan 11, 4:26 pm, Uncle Steve <stevet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 01:23:21PM -0800, Mighty Wannabe wrote:
> > > > On Jan 11, 12:22 pm, Gunner <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 07:23:58 -0800 (PST), "TibetanMonkey, the Beach
>
> > > > > Cruiser Philosopher" <thetibetanmon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >On Jan 10, 6:23 pm, Gunner <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:21:10 -0800 (PST), "TibetanMonkey, the Beach
>
> > > > > >> Cruiser Philosopher" <thetibetanmon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> >On Jan 10, 3:01 pm, Gunner <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> >> On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 07:19:16 -0800, Klaus Schadenfreude
>
> > > > > >> >> <klausschadenfre...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> >> >>"TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns:
>
> > > > > >> >> >>Guns,trucksand Jesus are all part of the American psyche.
>
> > > > > >> >> >>What can we do about it?
>
> > > > > >> >> >Grab your gun, get in your truck and get your ass to church.
>
> > > > > >> >> I wonder how the poor bastard deals with the fairly large number of
> > > > > >> >> folks like me...armed, have pickuptrucks..and arent Christians.
>
> > > > > >> >> Im Buddhist, I have a number of similar friends who are Wiccans and
> > > > > >> >> so forth.
>
> > > > > >> >> It must simply drive the poor bastard batty.
>
> > > > > >> >Your Darwinism shows, but at least you are making sense.
>
> > > > > >> >But Darwinism --"dog eat dog" world-- doesn't explain why dogs still
> > > > > >> >want to play and have fun.
>
> > > > > >> Darwin ism? You mean :"the strong survive"?
>
> > > > > >Yes, that's only part of the picture. Kropotkin was another prince --
> > > > > >like Buddha-- that gave up wealth to help humanity and noticed that
> > > > > >Nature favors cooperation:
>
> > > > > >"Kropotkin's most famous book, Mutual Aid, maintains that cooperation
> > > > > >within a species has been an historical factor in the development of
> > > > > >social institutions, and in fact, that the avoidance of competition
> > > > > >greatly increases the chances of survival and raises the quality of
> > > > > >life. He contended that mutual aid is a factor that is both biological
> > > > > >and voluntary in nature, and is an enabler of progressive evolution.
> > > > > >Without it, life as we know it could not exist. This can be also seen
> > > > > >in the animal kingdom. Horses and deer unite to protect each from
> > > > > >their foe, wolves and lions gather to hunt, while bees and ants work
> > > > > >together in many different ways. Kropotkin said that mutual support is
> > > > > >an established fact within the feathered world, with eagles, pelicans,
> > > > > >vultures, sparrows, and other fowl, collectively searching for and
> > > > > >sharing food. Some species of birds even gather together at the end of
> > > > > >the day to sleep."
>
> > > > > >http://www.moyak.com/papers/peter-kropotkin.html
>
> > > > > >> >I'm still lost about your Buddhism though.
>
> > > > > >> What part of it do you not understand? What..you think all Buddhist
> > > > > >> are guys who walk around in saffron robes with a begging bowl?
>
> > > > > >> Really?
>
> > > > > >> Blink blink..you do..dont you?
>
> > > > > >You seem to be to Buddhism what Republicans are to Christianity. But
> > > > > >that's only my humble opinion.
>
> > > > > Its strongly suggest you do a little learning on the subject. So
> > > > > far..what little you know makes you look frankly stupid.
>
> > > > >http://www.wildmind.org/blogs/on-practice/the-buddha-as-warrior
>
> > > > > other terms to google are Shaolin, Rensi Buddhist and Buddhist
> > > > > Warriors
>
> > > > > Gunner
>
> > > > Religion and politics shouldn't mix. The Shaolin Temple was razed by
> > > > troops from Qing Dynasty because the Temple monks were harbouring
> > > > rebels from the remnant of the previous Ming Dynasty to try to
> > > > overthrow Qing Dynasty.
>
> > > Religion is politics. The myth that religion is in some way distinct
> > > from political considerations is little more than a gambit to
> > > segregate religious belief from rational political considerations.
>
> > > > Separation of Church and States has its advantages. The Vatican
> > > > survived more than a thousand years because it caters to both the good
> > > > guys and the bad guys. Don't you know Mafia are all Catholics?
>
> > > Rather unfortunate that the bad guys are in charge, eh?
>
> > > Regards,
>
> > > Uncle Steve
>
> > Picking winners and losers is bad for business in religion. If you
> > want to survive a thousand years you have to go with the flow. That is
> > why Pope Pius XII was accused of being a Nazi collaborator, but he was
> > only doing his job not to pick winners and losers.
>
> That isn't the only possible interpretation of the Church's success
> throughout the ages. I prefer to think that the church panders to the
> worst human impulses in such a way that it is both institutionalized
> and hidden behind otherwise quasi-reasonable doctrine. Religion is
> first and foremost about population control. It is no surprise that
> evil people would support a political system that hands them control
> over others, and who would work for the stability of the institution
> as a condition of their involvement.
>
> I think it is a well-established fact that the Church has fought
> reality and the reasoned advance of the human species for its entire
> existence. Someone will bring up so called "good works", such as
> ministrations to the poor, but it should be noted that Christians
> never work to support the independence of those in their care. Rather
> they invariably channel their charges towards dependency
> relationships that never end. They fake "miracles" to fool the
> sheeple, and in general entirely fail to practice what they preach.
I think it's pretty obvious by now what's the relationship between
GUNS, TRUCKS AND JESUS...
IT'S ALL ABOUT POWER.
They subdued whole populations in the Americas and Africa with the
magic pill: Jesus.
The gun was only used if they refused.
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 13, 2013, 12:48:20 PM1/13/13
to
On Jan 13, 8:22 am, Zero <z...@thebackofbeyond.com> wrote:
> On 09/01/2013 18:01, Wilson wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 1/9/2013 6:39 AM, Zero wrote:
> >> On 08/01/2013 15:04, Tang Huyen wrote:
> >>> On 1/7/2013 12:15 PM, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
> >>> wrote:
>
> >>>> Maybe Cambodia was a crude attempt at population
> >>>> control. Some experts say we should have half the
> >>>> world population to be sustainable, so that could
> >>>> be an example for those who don't have the nerve
> >>>> to propose population control BEFORE birth.
>
> >>> The Los Angeles Times repeatedly gives the
> >>> number of Cambodians killed as 1.7 million.
>
> >>> Was it wonderful to know right from wrong
> >>> on some moral deterministic bedrock, as
> >>> some fundamentum inconcussum? But morality
> >>> can well be variable, depending on
> >>> circumstances.
>
> >>> Even something as basic and fundamental
> >>> as killing other humans is not as certain
> >>> as evil as it might be taken at first.
> >>> Stoic masters already said that wars
> >>> were good for redressing overpopulation,
> >>> and they said so in pre-Christian times.
>
> >>> In prehistoric times, ice ages wiped out
> >>> goodly proportions of people living up
> >>> North at expectable intervals, and such
> >>> mass die-offs kept humans within earthly
> >>> sustainability. Now, with humans
> >>> exceeding earthly sustainability, and
> >>> doing so at faster and faster rates, it
> >>> might be nostalgic to wish for them
> >>> again. Mass murderers who are regularly
> >>> held up as the most evil of all humans,
> >>> like Stalin, Mao, Hitler, etc., might
> >>> have turned out to have helped humans
> >>> stay within earthly sustainability. Of
> >>> course it might be argued against them
> >>> that they had no idea of such, but we
> >>> humans are scarcely aware of what we do,
> >>> like in evolution.
>
> >>> Sustainability to me, is, should be top
> >>> priority for the planet, as we are
> >>> running out of resources. It seems that
> >>> the earth can only support half or so of
> >>> the present population. The main reason
> >>> for the resource exhaustion is
> >>> overpopulation, which is a direct
> >>> consequence of modern science (modern
> >>> medicine) and modern technology (as in
> >>> agriculture). The only ways, presently
> >>> accessible, of limiting overpopulation
> >>> (ah! the dream would be to turn it back!)
> >>> are war and famine, perhaps a plague. A
> >>> powerful flu virus that is hard to fight
> >>> could help reduce population, like in
> >>> the olden days. In the olden days there
> >>> were ice ages, but they do not seem
> >>> possible now, quite the contrary.
>
> >>> The other desirable priorities are
> >>> quite less urgent, to me. As I said
> >>> above, wars could help reduce the
> >>> population, so peace is not good for
> >>> reducing the population, but to some
> >>> theorists, like Steven Pinker,
> >>> violence is decreasing, both at the
> >>> level of individuals (like crimes) and
> >>> at the level of collectives (like
> >>> wars). Present trends seem to foster
> >>> income inequality, worldwide, so
> >>> equity seems to slip away.
>
> >>> To return to the topic, killing may or
> >>> may not be so bad, and mass killing
> >>> may help with earthly sustainability.
> >>> Yes, it sounds awful, but reality can
> >>> be awful. Yes, morality can well be
> >>> variable, depending on circumstances.
> >>> And if we need to leave a sustainable
> >>> earth to our children and grandchildren,
> >>> we really need to decrease population.
>
> >>> It is my pure fantasy, not reality.
>
> >>> Tang Huyen
>
> >> Good grief :-(
>
> >> We already have the levers for relatively humane population reduction!
>
> >> It's called Birth Control !!!!!!!!
>
> >> :-)
>
> >> ps And I agree with you about sustainability... I wonder what WILSON
> >> thinks about all this...
>
> > Mass killing? It's been done before and will unfortunately probably
> > be done again. What Tang wrote is not much different from what the
> > eugenicists said at the turn of the 19th century or what Fascists in
> > Europe who copied them said to excuse their thirst for killing the
> > Jews, Gypsies, gays and other "undesirables". Saying that you're
> > doing it "for the planet" is just another excuse.
>
> > If resources are running out, why are most of them not any more
> > expensive than they were 50 or 100 years ago when prices are adjusted
> > for general inflation? The truth is most resources are about the same
> > as they were then. And while population increases, poverty and
> > malnourishment has dropped.
>
> >http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/25/the-simon-erlich-wager-at-seven...
>
> > But the facts really don't matter. People who want to control, to
> > manipulate and to coerce and who choose killing people to achieve
> > their desired ends will not care about facts. If allowed, they will
> > always do as they please.
>
> Of course the road to hell is paved with good intentions but your quoted
> document looks like a manifesto to maintain the status quo which of
> course is exactly what many of the multinational corporations would
> like. Continuing population growth, continuing resources exploitation,
> continuing tax avoidance, continuing growth growth growth until the pips
> squeak. And in the mean time as the bosses know that in the longer term
> this mode of Capitalism is bankrupt (it is financially bankrupt already)
> they take and stash away the profits for themselves and share-holders
> whilst employees get squeezed out of jobs or into lower paid work...
>
> People want jobs, and a decent income and some hope for a sustainable
> future.
>
> Amoral capitalism is bankrupt, we need to give the levers of power over
> setting priorities, building infrastructure and setting an ethical
> framework for trade back to governments and away from multinationals.
> Companies need to pay their fair share of tax and governments need to
> build global infrastructure. Human ingenuity needs to be turned to
> constant improvement rather than constant expansion or creating markets
> such as force-feeding us high fructose corn syrup which is causing an
> obesity and diabetes epidemic.
>
> As I said amoral capitalism has proven itself to be bankrupt both
> morally and fiscally. We need a fairer 'ethical' or 'Caring Capitalism'
> where incentives are set by governments...
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jan/12/us-scientists-effec...
>
> Personally I think there is a lot to be said for setting
> government/trade rules to ensure that producers are not exploited. Also
> for a 'low energy' economy based on renewable sources and supported by a
> much uprated infrastructure (Water and Power grids etc). We make things
> that use less energy and rely more on renewables, insulation etc
> polluting the world less and reducing energy poverty...
>
> How quite the resource inequalities are addressed is beyond me (i.e. the
> fighting and deaths caused for access to water and conflict minerals)
>
> Most politicians and a lot of businesses are in it for a short term gain
> or fast buck. There seem to be few statesman around who look more to the
> long term, to a sustainable future... Of course one of the key roles of
> government should be to secure longer term security (e.g. to improve
> infrastructure).
>
> To me sustainability means:
> * Not just growth (i.e. creating demand) for growths sake
> * Continuous improvements (e.g. less energy waste, energy efficient
> house building programs, massive infrastructure investment)
> * A stable population
> * A more equitable distribution of resources
> * More local and medium sized enterprises including social enterprises,
> hydroponic food production etc
> * Less meat production
> * Less wages
> * More tax (but especially from corporations)
> * Smaller living bills (Lower energy bills, lower food bills)
> * Les use of petrochemicals for fuel and energy generation
> * Massive investment/improvements/incentives for alternative energy
> sources/micro-generation/energy-efficiency
> * improved energy and resource security
>
> fwiw
Great program there. I'd add to that list FIGHTING CORRUPTION. I mean
make corruption ENEMY #1. I'd estimate 95% of the public projects
around here are motivated by profit rather than make the public be
safer or feel better. Maybe I can't single out a single "improvement"
that works while millions are going down the drain. They call it
"beautification" but the streets are still littered and full of crap.
Anyway we need a revolution to fix it. Maybe Africa or Latin America
are best scenario for this. I think whether it's democratic or not,
the new system has to prove to work. Direct democracy though is a
must.
*You must be able to fix your community and not move to a gated
community.*
> On 09/01/2013 18:01, Wilson wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 1/9/2013 6:39 AM, Zero wrote:
> >> On 08/01/2013 15:04, Tang Huyen wrote:
> >>> On 1/7/2013 12:15 PM, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
> >>> wrote:
>
> >>>> Maybe Cambodia was a crude attempt at population
> >>>> control. Some experts say we should have half the
> >>>> world population to be sustainable, so that could
> >>>> be an example for those who don't have the nerve
> >>>> to propose population control BEFORE birth.
>
> >>> The Los Angeles Times repeatedly gives the
> >>> number of Cambodians killed as 1.7 million.
>
> >>> Was it wonderful to know right from wrong
> >>> on some moral deterministic bedrock, as
> >>> some fundamentum inconcussum? But morality
> >>> can well be variable, depending on
> >>> circumstances.
>
> >>> Even something as basic and fundamental
> >>> as killing other humans is not as certain
> >>> as evil as it might be taken at first.
> >>> Stoic masters already said that wars
> >>> were good for redressing overpopulation,
> >>> and they said so in pre-Christian times.
>
> >>> In prehistoric times, ice ages wiped out
> >>> goodly proportions of people living up
> >>> North at expectable intervals, and such
> >>> mass die-offs kept humans within earthly
> >>> sustainability. Now, with humans
> >>> exceeding earthly sustainability, and
> >>> doing so at faster and faster rates, it
> >>> might be nostalgic to wish for them
> >>> again. Mass murderers who are regularly
> >>> held up as the most evil of all humans,
> >>> like Stalin, Mao, Hitler, etc., might
> >>> have turned out to have helped humans
> >>> stay within earthly sustainability. Of
> >>> course it might be argued against them
> >>> that they had no idea of such, but we
> >>> humans are scarcely aware of what we do,
> >>> like in evolution.
>
> >>> Sustainability to me, is, should be top
> >>> priority for the planet, as we are
> >>> running out of resources. It seems that
> >>> the earth can only support half or so of
> >>> the present population. The main reason
> >>> for the resource exhaustion is
> >>> overpopulation, which is a direct
> >>> consequence of modern science (modern
> >>> medicine) and modern technology (as in
> >>> agriculture). The only ways, presently
> >>> accessible, of limiting overpopulation
> >>> (ah! the dream would be to turn it back!)
> >>> are war and famine, perhaps a plague. A
> >>> powerful flu virus that is hard to fight
> >>> could help reduce population, like in
> >>> the olden days. In the olden days there
> >>> were ice ages, but they do not seem
> >>> possible now, quite the contrary.
>
> >>> The other desirable priorities are
> >>> quite less urgent, to me. As I said
> >>> above, wars could help reduce the
> >>> population, so peace is not good for
> >>> reducing the population, but to some
> >>> theorists, like Steven Pinker,
> >>> violence is decreasing, both at the
> >>> level of individuals (like crimes) and
> >>> at the level of collectives (like
> >>> wars). Present trends seem to foster
> >>> income inequality, worldwide, so
> >>> equity seems to slip away.
>
> >>> To return to the topic, killing may or
> >>> may not be so bad, and mass killing
> >>> may help with earthly sustainability.
> >>> Yes, it sounds awful, but reality can
> >>> be awful. Yes, morality can well be
> >>> variable, depending on circumstances.
> >>> And if we need to leave a sustainable
> >>> earth to our children and grandchildren,
> >>> we really need to decrease population.
>
> >>> It is my pure fantasy, not reality.
>
> >>> Tang Huyen
>
> >> Good grief :-(
>
> >> We already have the levers for relatively humane population reduction!
>
> >> It's called Birth Control !!!!!!!!
>
> >> :-)
>
> >> ps And I agree with you about sustainability... I wonder what WILSON
> >> thinks about all this...
>
> > Mass killing? It's been done before and will unfortunately probably
> > be done again. What Tang wrote is not much different from what the
> > eugenicists said at the turn of the 19th century or what Fascists in
> > Europe who copied them said to excuse their thirst for killing the
> > Jews, Gypsies, gays and other "undesirables". Saying that you're
> > doing it "for the planet" is just another excuse.
>
> > If resources are running out, why are most of them not any more
> > expensive than they were 50 or 100 years ago when prices are adjusted
> > for general inflation? The truth is most resources are about the same
> > as they were then. And while population increases, poverty and
> > malnourishment has dropped.
>
> >http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/25/the-simon-erlich-wager-at-seven...
>
> > But the facts really don't matter. People who want to control, to
> > manipulate and to coerce and who choose killing people to achieve
> > their desired ends will not care about facts. If allowed, they will
> > always do as they please.
>
> Of course the road to hell is paved with good intentions but your quoted
> document looks like a manifesto to maintain the status quo which of
> course is exactly what many of the multinational corporations would
> like. Continuing population growth, continuing resources exploitation,
> continuing tax avoidance, continuing growth growth growth until the pips
> squeak. And in the mean time as the bosses know that in the longer term
> this mode of Capitalism is bankrupt (it is financially bankrupt already)
> they take and stash away the profits for themselves and share-holders
> whilst employees get squeezed out of jobs or into lower paid work...
>
> People want jobs, and a decent income and some hope for a sustainable
> future.
>
> Amoral capitalism is bankrupt, we need to give the levers of power over
> setting priorities, building infrastructure and setting an ethical
> framework for trade back to governments and away from multinationals.
> Companies need to pay their fair share of tax and governments need to
> build global infrastructure. Human ingenuity needs to be turned to
> constant improvement rather than constant expansion or creating markets
> such as force-feeding us high fructose corn syrup which is causing an
> obesity and diabetes epidemic.
>
> As I said amoral capitalism has proven itself to be bankrupt both
> morally and fiscally. We need a fairer 'ethical' or 'Caring Capitalism'
> where incentives are set by governments...
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jan/12/us-scientists-effec...
>
> Personally I think there is a lot to be said for setting
> government/trade rules to ensure that producers are not exploited. Also
> for a 'low energy' economy based on renewable sources and supported by a
> much uprated infrastructure (Water and Power grids etc). We make things
> that use less energy and rely more on renewables, insulation etc
> polluting the world less and reducing energy poverty...
>
> How quite the resource inequalities are addressed is beyond me (i.e. the
> fighting and deaths caused for access to water and conflict minerals)
>
> Most politicians and a lot of businesses are in it for a short term gain
> or fast buck. There seem to be few statesman around who look more to the
> long term, to a sustainable future... Of course one of the key roles of
> government should be to secure longer term security (e.g. to improve
> infrastructure).
>
> To me sustainability means:
> * Not just growth (i.e. creating demand) for growths sake
> * Continuous improvements (e.g. less energy waste, energy efficient
> house building programs, massive infrastructure investment)
> * A stable population
> * A more equitable distribution of resources
> * More local and medium sized enterprises including social enterprises,
> hydroponic food production etc
> * Less meat production
> * Less wages
> * More tax (but especially from corporations)
> * Smaller living bills (Lower energy bills, lower food bills)
> * Les use of petrochemicals for fuel and energy generation
> * Massive investment/improvements/incentives for alternative energy
> sources/micro-generation/energy-efficiency
> * improved energy and resource security
>
> fwiw
Great program there. I'd add to that list FIGHTING CORRUPTION. I mean
make corruption ENEMY #1. I'd estimate 95% of the public projects
around here are motivated by profit rather than make the public be
safer or feel better. Maybe I can't single out a single "improvement"
that works while millions are going down the drain. They call it
"beautification" but the streets are still littered and full of crap.
Anyway we need a revolution to fix it. Maybe Africa or Latin America
are best scenario for this. I think whether it's democratic or not,
the new system has to prove to work. Direct democracy though is a
must.
*You must be able to fix your community and not move to a gated
community.*
TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
Jan 15, 2013, 6:41:18 PM1/15/13
to
On Jan 15, 6:24 pm, AlleyCat <al...@aohell.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:47:44 -0800 (PST), In article <461219c5-d6bb-
> 42e0-86b7-f3da2cd41...@w8g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
> thetibetanmon...@gmail.com says...
>
> Mexico is #2 in obesity after America because they eat too much flour,
> corn and beans. Americans are obese because we have freedom of choice.
> fat American black women are the reason America has a ranking. Sure,
> there are plenty of fat white people, but ever see a skinny black women
> over the age of 30? VERY rare.
> If you idiots want to make drinking soda, a liberal vs. conservative
> thing, I'm going to inject race. Wanna talk about guns? Let's go.
Draw!!!
That's OK, we can discuss all issues, including race. We may say that
most minorities don't have much of an option to join a gym. They could
ride a bike but are not stupid to get hurt or die doing so in our
Darwinist roads. The shortest route to make money for them is crime.
Then they can live long and nice like the white. They probably have no
health insurance either.
Can we talk about healthcare to prove predatory capitalism?
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:47:44 -0800 (PST), In article <461219c5-d6bb-
> 42e0-86b7-f3da2cd41...@w8g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
> thetibetanmon...@gmail.com says...
>
> Mexico is #2 in obesity after America because they eat too much flour,
> corn and beans. Americans are obese because we have freedom of choice.
> fat American black women are the reason America has a ranking. Sure,
> there are plenty of fat white people, but ever see a skinny black women
> over the age of 30? VERY rare.
> If you idiots want to make drinking soda, a liberal vs. conservative
> thing, I'm going to inject race. Wanna talk about guns? Let's go.
Draw!!!
That's OK, we can discuss all issues, including race. We may say that
most minorities don't have much of an option to join a gym. They could
ride a bike but are not stupid to get hurt or die doing so in our
Darwinist roads. The shortest route to make money for them is crime.
Then they can live long and nice like the white. They probably have no
health insurance either.
Can we talk about healthcare to prove predatory capitalism?
0 new messages