Questioned at Canadian Border - Canada have for Islamic terrorists
Ray
> m...@mindspring.com (Plink) wrote in message news:<ajk8b3$ea2$1...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu>...
> > On Fri, 16 Aug 2002 13:41:24 +0000 (UTC), f...@cs.tulane.edu (Frank
> > Silbermann) wrote:
> >
> > #
> > #Guess Who? <DonLa...@webtv.net> : <ajh4rp$el3$1...@grapevine.wam.
> > #umd.edu>,
> > ## Canadian Border Guards see a "red flag" go up with a firearm
> > ##logo T-shirt. Both Canada and Mexico, view the US, as the main
> > ## source for illegal guns in their countries, and feel just about
> > ## the same way as the US does, about drugs. That's just the way
> > ## it is. If you don't like the way those Govs operate, then stay
> > ## out of those nations....
> > #
>
> Carman wrote:
> The Canadian Gov't has been asserting for many years that the US
> is the primary source for illegal guns in Canada. A few years ago
> they launched a major research effort to prove that, just ahead of
> new legislation to restrict firearms in Canada.
Canada is the #1 source of Islamic terrorists wandering into the
United States. Canada has become a magnet for this vermin.
Trace
<rayda...@yahoo.com> wrote:
You ever see the South Park Movie? Let's Blame Canada...
All of our problems are never caused by our actions. It's Canada's
fault. It's Mexico's fault. It's the American people's fault. After
all they have *too* many rights. If we take them all away, that will
solve one problem.
How pathetically simplistic... Remember, everyone. It is Canada's
Fault!
Trace
Thom
What a bunch of bunk! Canada attracts people because the US/Canada
border is the longest unguarded border in the world. Hell, between
the Great Lakes and the pacific cross border shopping is quite common
because in many many cases the town (and shopping) nearest you is on
the other side. If you shop in the border region you will find that
you can pay in either currency.
As far as people crossing, know who are the biggest illegal group??
The Northern Irish!!! Arabs are second followed by the Canadians
themselves. Many many Canadians are undocumented workers and go home
at night or after a working time period. The cultures nmerge at the
border, it not like the scenery changes either! Like the minute you
hit the Canadian border theres snow or something!!!
THOM
Jeffrey
>
> As far as people crossing, know who are the biggest illegal group??
> The Northern Irish!!! Arabs are second followed by the Canadians
> themselves. Many many Canadians are undocumented workers and go home
> at night or after a working time period. The cultures nmerge at the
> border, it not like the scenery changes either! Like the minute you
> hit the Canadian border theres snow or something!!!
>
> THOM
Well, that would make it that much more appealing. I mean, Canada's gotta
be good for SOMETHING... I thought it was snow. Shit, you mean it's not?!
--
---Jeffrey
"Only in silence the word,
only in dark the light,
only in dying, life;
Bright the hawk's flight on the empty sky."
Jos.Carman
> On 3 Sep 2002 07:08:38 -0700, rayda...@yahoo.com (Ray) wrote:
>
> >jca...@ec.rr.com (Jos.Carman) wrote in message news:<bcb86dd3.02081...@posting.google.com>...
> >> m...@mindspring.com (Plink) wrote in message news:<ajk8b3$ea2$1...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu>...
> >> > On Fri, 16 Aug 2002 13:41:24 +0000 (UTC), f...@cs.tulane.edu (Frank
> >> > Silbermann) wrote:
> >> >
> >> > #
> >> > #Guess Who? <DonLa...@webtv.net> : <ajh4rp$el3$1...@grapevine.wam.
> >> > #umd.edu>,
> >> > ## Canadian Border Guards see a "red flag" go up with a firearm
> >> > ##logo T-shirt. Both Canada and Mexico, view the US, as the main
> >> > ## source for illegal guns in their countries, and feel just about
> >> > ## the same way as the US does, about drugs. That's just the way
> >> > ## it is. If you don't like the way those Govs operate, then stay
> >> > ## out of those nations....
> >> > #
> >>
> >> Carman wrote:
> >> The Canadian Gov't has been asserting for many years that the US
> >> is the primary source for illegal guns in Canada. A few years ago
> >> they launched a major research effort to prove that, just ahead of
> >> new legislation to restrict firearms in Canada.
Carman wrote:
The Canadians never did release that "study". Perhaps it failed to
"prove" what it was intended to prove?
> >
> >Canada is the #1 source of Islamic terrorists wandering into the
> >United States. Canada has become a magnet for this vermin.
>
> What a bunch of bunk!
Carman wrote:
Which? The statement that "Canada is the #1 source of Islamic
terrorists wandering into the United States", or the statement
that, "Canada has become a magnet for this vermin"?
> Canada attracts people because the US/Canada border is the longest
> unguarded border in the world.
Carman wrote:
Is there something intrinsicly attractive to people about long,
unguarded borders? I think it depends on what's across those long
borders, don't you?
To people from other countries, Canada and the US appear nearly
identical. The major difference, from the viewpoint of prospective
immigrants, is that Canada is MUCH easier to enter. It's also MUCH
easier to remain in Canada, if one enters as an undocumented alien,
than it is to remain in the US in similar situations.
This situation, which is in the process of changing now, has made
Canada an attractive entry point to North America for those who have
no intention of either staying in Canada, or entering the US through
legal channels. The Canadian authorities have known this for quite
a long time. 9/11, and some hard words from the US State Department,
have been an incentive for the Canadians to alter their immigration
practices.
> Hell, between the Great Lakes and the pacific cross border shopping
> is quite common because in many many cases the town (and shopping)
> nearest you is on the other side.
Carman wrote:
The US has every intention of choking off much of the informal flow
of people across the border if the Canadians don't follow through on
their plans to tighten their imigration controls.
> If you shop in the border region you will find that you can pay in
> either currency.
Carman wrote:
Sure you can! And in the US Canadian currency will be discounted
to someting like 60 cents on the dollar, while in Canada they will
be more than pleased to take your, (relatively more valuable) US
dollar at par, and make 40% when they exchange it.
> As far as people crossing, know who are the biggest illegal group??
> The Northern Irish!!!
Carman wrote:
Cite please. To the best of my knowledge the largest group has
been Asians for many years.
> Arabs are second followed by the Canadians themselves.
Carman wrote:
Cites for these claims would be welcome as well.
> Many many Canadians are undocumented workers and go home at night
> or after a working time period.
Carman wrote:
This was the case, but about thirty years ago both countries
clampped down on the practice. The US was concerned about lost
jobs for legitimate American workers, and the Canadians were even
more concerned with lost tax revenue.
> The cultures merge at the border, (...)
Carman wrote:
Not in my experience. There is nothing vague about the border.
You are either on one side or the other; in Canada or in the US.
The rules are very plain and quite strictly enforced.
> (...) it's not like the scenery changes either!
Carman wrote:
That depends on where you are. Coming up through New York the
Niagara Gorge marks quite a visible change in the scenery. The
Niagara Peninsula of Ontario looks nothing like upstate New York.
> Like the minute you hit the Canadian border there's snow or
> something!!!
Carman wrote:
Only sometines there is!
I was returning to Manitoba from a visit to Minnesota in the
spring of 1986(?), and there was NO SNOW all the way up through
Minnesota and North Dakota.
Crossing the border at Emerson though, just behind the Canadian
customs and immigration checkpoint, was a snow drift two feet high.
From there on up to Winnipeg there was snow in all the fields and
deep snow in every ditch. Nature has a sense of humor.
Jos.Carman
> "Thom" <as...@freemail.com.au> wrote
> >
> > As far as people crossing, know who are the biggest illegal group??
> > The Northern Irish!!! Arabs are second followed by the Canadians
> > themselves. Many many Canadians are undocumented workers and go home
> > at night or after a working time period. The cultures nmerge at the
> > border, it not like the scenery changes either! Like the minute you
> > hit the Canadian border theres snow or something!!!
> >
> > THOM
>
> Well, that would make it that much more appealing. I mean, Canada's
> gotta be good for SOMETHING... I thought it was snow. Shit, you mean
> it's not?!
Carman wrote
What's REALLY funny, (and I've seen this), are Americans who come to
Manitoba, in the summertime, with skis.
First off, most of Manitoba is FLAT. Think of Kansas. Think of "miles
and miles of miles and miles". Second, southern Manitoba in the summer
is HOT. The summer doesn't last long, but it makes up for the lack of
duration with intensity.
Canada's most important function, for Americans, is as a Horrible
Example. I recommend to all Americans with "socialistic tendencies",
that they take a good, long look at what happens to a country that
actually tries to put Socialism into practice.
Thom
Depends on your social values doesn't it. If we had been in Canada or
Australia wghen my wife died she'd be alive today because an HMO
wouldn't have decided its more profitable to let her die than try and
save her.
If you like clean streets and safe cities, try Canada, if not go
south. No place is perfect but the US could learn alot from Australia
and Canada.
THOM
Thom
I do admit that 911 has changed the world alot.
>
>> Hell, between the Great Lakes and the pacific cross border shopping
>> is quite common because in many many cases the town (and shopping)
>> nearest you is on the other side.
>
> Carman wrote:
> The US has every intention of choking off much of the informal flow
>of people across the border if the Canadians don't follow through on
>their plans to tighten their imigration controls.
I want to see that. A huge fence or what??? I'm from the Rocky
Mountain region and around there unless you read a big sign on a major
road you don't even know what country your in!!
>
>> If you shop in the border region you will find that you can pay in
>> either currency.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Sure you can! And in the US Canadian currency will be discounted
>to someting like 60 cents on the dollar, while in Canada they will
>be more than pleased to take your, (relatively more valuable) US
>dollar at par, and make 40% when they exchange it.
Exchange rates are the curse the from the crooks at banks. The issue
with money is how much or what percentage of your take home does it
take to live that determines "value" If the average wage in the usa
is $15000 a year (Which I read last week) and the average wage is
"wherever" is 30,000 pazooties a year and the percentage of cost of
living is the same then the exchange rate should be $1-2p. But since
banks want to get richer and richer and richer they play around with
currency speculation and screw everybody!
>
>> As far as people crossing, know who are the biggest illegal group??
>> The Northern Irish!!!
>
> Carman wrote:
> Cite please. To the best of my knowledge the largest group has
>been Asians for many years.
By race I'm celtic and was in a large Irish Community in Denver. Over
half the people were illegals from Northern Ireland and we kept up on
the INS statistics. People in the community were mostly coming in
from Canada, crossing on a country road someplace and we partied alot
because we had a lot of "you got caught and are going away" parties.
>
>> Arabs are second followed by the Canadians themselves.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Cites for these claims would be welcome as well.
>
>> Many many Canadians are undocumented workers and go home at night
>> or after a working time period.
>
> Carman wrote:
> This was the case, but about thirty years ago both countries
>clampped down on the practice. The US was concerned about lost
>jobs for legitimate American workers, and the Canadians were even
>more concerned with lost tax revenue.
Both were into the tax thing.
>
>> The cultures merge at the border, (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Not in my experience. There is nothing vague about the border.
>You are either on one side or the other; in Canada or in the US.
>The rules are very plain and quite strictly enforced.
In terms of "who your are" your very right. We "yanks" need to learn
the difference between being proud to be American and arragant about
it.
>
>> (...) it's not like the scenery changes either!
>
> Carman wrote:
> That depends on where you are. Coming up through New York the
>Niagara Gorge marks quite a visible change in the scenery. The
>Niagara Peninsula of Ontario looks nothing like upstate New York.
Like I said, I'm from the west and you can't tell there. I once tried
to enter from Vermont and they wouldn't let me in. I was on a 4 month
sales and business trip and they didn't mind my gun they kept me out
because of my parachutes (which is what I was selling)!!! Protection
of the home industry thing... all one of them. But that was 1980.
>
>> Like the minute you hit the Canadian border there's snow or
>> something!!!
>
> Carman wrote:
> Only sometines there is!
What I meantw as the image that its dry and green right up to the
border and at the "fence" snow starts! :-)
THOM
Jos.Carman
Carman wrote:
I lived in Canada for most of thirty years. When my wife NEEDED high
quality medical care, we had to go to the US. We couldn't obtain the
services she needed in Canada at ANY price.
This is the famous "two tier" medical system. Sufficiently wealthy
Canadians simply go to the US and pay for the services they need.
Those Canadians who can't afford to do that, stay in Canada and take
whatever The State decides to let them have. Either way, you pay
through the nose, in taxes, for a system that makes the HMOs look
good by comparison.
You can't escape economics. The "managed care" manipulated by the
HMOs to yield them a profit, has it's exact counterpart in Socialized
Medicine where the "care" is "managed" by The State.
Information on the failure of socialized medicine in Canada and the
UK is very widely available.
> If you like clean streets and safe cities, try Canada, if not go
> south. No place is perfect but the US could learn alot from
> Australia and Canada.
Carman wrote:
I've lived in some of those so-called "clean cities", and paid the
taxes that keep them that way. I live in the US now, make almost
twice as much money, and get to keep a much greater percentage of my
income.
I like it this way, but you might prefer to let The State take 30%
to 50% of your income in taxes of one kind and another to pay hoards
of State functionaries to pick up litter.
Australia and Canada could learn a lot from the US. Unfortunately,
since the governments of both countries appear to believe they know
it all, I doubt they'll even try to learn better any time soon.
Joseph Hutcheon
> What's REALLY funny, (and I've seen this), are Americans who come to
>Manitoba, in the summertime, with skis.
>
> First off, most of Manitoba is FLAT. Think of Kansas. Think of "miles
>and miles of miles and miles". Second, southern Manitoba in the summer
>is HOT. The summer doesn't last long, but it makes up for the lack of
>duration with intensity.
>
> Canada's most important function, for Americans, is as a Horrible
>Example. I recommend to all Americans with "socialistic tendencies",
>that they take a good, long look at what happens to a country that
>actually tries to put Socialism into practice.
It goes flat like Kansas and gets hot in the summer?
Thom
I've been here in Australia 9 out of the last 14 years and the health
system is excellent. You pay 1.5% of your adjusted income to a
maximum of about US$250 a year for medical and it has been excellent.
Never had any delays or bad treatment, 100X's better than the USA.
Part of the problem in Canada and the USA is the outragious money
doctors get while nurses starve. Too bad these guys went out of the
business of providing health care and into the business of making
money. Here Dentists make the money and doctors don't
THOM
Jos.Carman
> On 5 Sep 2002 07:08:59 -0700, jca...@ec.rr.com (Jos.Carman) wrote:
>
> >as...@freemail.com.au (Thom) wrote in message news:<3d768b23...@news.melbpc.org.au>...
> >> On 4 Sep 2002 13:47:14 -0700, jca...@ec.rr.com (Jos.Carman) wrote:
> >>
> >> >"Jeffrey" <clearbl...@peoplepc.com> wrote in message news:<unasmag...@corp.supernews.com>...
> >> >> "Thom" <as...@freemail.com.au> wrote
> >> >> >
> >> >> > As far as people crossing, know who are the biggest illegal
Carman wrote:
This is fortunate for you. After all, you can't just nip across the
border into some place where you can find better care can you?
> You pay 1.5% of your adjusted income to a maximum of about US$250 a
> year for medical and it has been excellent. Never had any delays or
> bad treatment, 100X's better than the USA.
Carman wrote:
You have much experience with US healthcare?
> Part of the problem in Canada and the USA is the outragous money
> doctors get while nurses starve.
Carman wrote:
This is Capitalism at work. Normal, everyday, supply-and-demand
economics. Nurses are in high demand in the US, so they're leaving
low-paying jobs in Canada for better wages and job-satisfaction in
the US.
> Too bad these guys went out of the business of providing health care
> and into the business of making money.
Carman wrote:
Perhaps you have mistaken the intent of the person who goes to all
the trouble of obtaining an MD? Would you think the same of someone
practicing law or accounting?
Why would you object to people who have highly desirable skills
selling those skills for the most money they can obtain? This is what
I do. I'm not a physician, (for which we can all be grateful), but the
skills I do possess are for sale. Why should a physician's skills be
any different?
> Here Dentists make the money and doctors don't
Carman wrote:
From this I conclude you don't have Socialized Dentristry. Yet.
I'm actally quite happy to pay my physician for the services he
renders me. He's a first class physician, and makes a pile of money
as a result. (He lives in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, drives a far
better car than I'll ever own, went to school for six years longer
than I did, and he's smarter than I am to boot). He EARNS the money
I, and his other patients, pay him.
I'm equally happy to pay a very good dollar to my dentist, my
lawyer, my accountant, my plumber, and my gunsmith. All for the very
same reason: superior workmanship.
If any of these workmen lets me down, I have the option of going
to the many other people who have set up in competition with them to
service the same market.
If The State ever seizes control of these relationships, (all in
the name of "The Greatest Good, For the Greatest Number", of course),
I'll lose the option of seeking the services of the best workmen I
can afford. I don't WANT to hire "just any" plumber. I don't WANT to
take my guns to "just any" gunsmith. I don't WANT go to "just any"
physician.
Of course, The State doesn't care what I want. The State is always
certain it knows best. As often as not, The State is wrong about that.
Jos.Carman
Carman wrote:
If Canada doesn't get a handle on their immigration practices you
WILL see a huge fence, with the motion detectors, infrared cameras,
computer monitoring, and the rest of the entire panopoly of modern
area interdiction.
The biggest problems are going to be at the large border crossings.
The southern Ontario crossings with which I'm most familiar, (Sarnia/
Port Huron, Windsor/Detroit, Fort Erie/Buffalo),are already very slow.
Adding more security will choke them off completly, very much to the
detriment of Ontario's economy.
> >
> >> If you shop in the border region you will find that you can pay in
> >> either currency.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Sure you can! And in the US Canadian currency will be discounted
> >to someting like 60 cents on the dollar, while in Canada they will
> >be more than pleased to take your, (relatively more valuable) US
> >dollar at par, and make 40% when they exchange it.
>
> Exchange rates are the curse the from the crooks at banks.
Carman wrote:
Exchange rates are a function of the relative value of currency.
It has nothing to do with banks or crooks.
> The issue with money is how much or what percentage of your take
> home does it take to live that determines "value" If the average
> wage in the usa is $15000 a year (Which I read last week) and the
> average wage is "wherever" is 30,000 pazooties a year and the
> percentage of cost of living is the same then the exchange rate
> should be $1-2p.
Carman wrote:
You haven't studied much economics. You really NEED to do so.
Getting some idea of how the economy actually works will save you
from much needless worry. Or at least give you a different set of
things to worry about.
Most national currencies "float" on the international currency
markets these days. The value of each currency, at some moment in
time, is what some currency trader will give you for it in some
other currency, or in some other commodity like gold.
> But since banks want to get richer and richer and richer they
> play around with currency speculation and screw everybody!
Carman wrote:
You must not own any bank stock. Go out and buy some if you
think the bvanks are doing so well. then you can "get richer
and richer and richer", right along with your bank!
> >
> >> As far as people crossing, know who are the biggest illegal group??
> >> The Northern Irish!!!
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Cite please. To the best of my knowledge the largest group has
> >been Asians for many years.
> >
> By race I'm celtic and was in a large Irish Community in Denver. Over
> half the people were illegals from Northern Ireland and we kept up on
> the INS statistics. People in the community were mostly coming in
> from Canada, crossing on a country road someplace and we partied alot
> because we had a lot of "you got caught and are going away" parties.
Carman wrote:
In other words you have no cites.
> >
> >> Arabs are second followed by the Canadians themselves.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Cites for these claims would be welcome as well.
> >
Carman wrote:
I guess you've no cites for these claims either?
Carman wrote:
So sometimes the scenery changes at the border and sometimes it
doesn't?
> >> Like the minute you hit the Canadian border there's snow or
> >> something!!!
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Only sometines there is!
>
> What I meantw as the image that its dry and green right up to the
> border and at the "fence" snow starts! :-)
>
> THOM
Carman wrote:
As I mentioned in the part of my post that's inexplicably gone
missing, :^), sometimes that's exactly the case.
Thom
Actually I can. With the Green and Yellow card I can get free health
care in any commonwealth country on earth.
>
>> You pay 1.5% of your adjusted income to a maximum of about US$250 a
>> year for medical and it has been excellent. Never had any delays or
>> bad treatment, 100X's better than the USA.
>
> Carman wrote:
> You have much experience with US healthcare?
Yes it murdered my wife. She was the victim of an HMO. At the same
time she fell ill so did I and went to my HMO which wouldn't let me
see a doctor and threw a couple of pills at me left by some salesman.
It got worse and a week later I was put in the Denver VA hospital
which tested me to having 48% lung capacity, something missed by the
greed based system. In the process I was put on the Agent Orange
watch list and given and Agent Orange exam since my asthma is an agent
orange condition.
Shall I go on about greedy dentists too???
>
>> Part of the problem in Canada and the USA is the outragous money
>> doctors get while nurses starve.
>
> Carman wrote:
> This is Capitalism at work. Normal, everyday, supply-and-demand
>economics. Nurses are in high demand in the US, so they're leaving
>low-paying jobs in Canada for better wages and job-satisfaction in
>the US.
and leaving low paying jobs in the USA for better jobs in Australia
where all wages are double that of the US.
>
>> Too bad these guys went out of the business of providing health care
>> and into the business of making money.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Perhaps you have mistaken the intent of the person who goes to all
>the trouble of obtaining an MD? Would you think the same of someone
>practicing law or accounting?
Lawyers are a sore on the butt of civilization and accounts don't have
people's lives in their hands.
>
> Why would you object to people who have highly desirable skills
>selling those skills for the most money they can obtain? This is what
>I do. I'm not a physician, (for which we can all be grateful), but the
>skills I do possess are for sale. Why should a physician's skills be
>any different?
Because people are more important than money. This is the 21st
century not the greedy 19th or 20th. All human beings have equal
value and even the constitution says it. We hold these truths to be
selfevident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL.
>
>> Here Dentists make the money and doctors don't
>
> Carman wrote:
> From this I conclude you don't have Socialized Dentristry. Yet.
Sorta, its minimal and it costs about US$11 a visit but its basic.
>
> I'm actally quite happy to pay my physician for the services he
>renders me. He's a first class physician, and makes a pile of money
>as a result. (He lives in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, drives a far
>better car than I'll ever own, went to school for six years longer
>than I did, and he's smarter than I am to boot). He EARNS the money
>I, and his other patients, pay him.
I have 10 years of college and am out of work. Why? I'm 57 years old
and under the greed based system seem to have no value like millions
of other over 40's in the English speaking world.
>
> I'm equally happy to pay a very good dollar to my dentist, my
>lawyer, my accountant, my plumber, and my gunsmith. All for the very
>same reason: superior workmanship.
Given the experiences of myself and my wife I value my gunsmith more
than doctors.
>
> If any of these workmen lets me down, I have the option of going
>to the many other people who have set up in competition with them to
>service the same market.
>
> If The State ever seizes control of these relationships, (all in
>the name of "The Greatest Good, For the Greatest Number", of course),
>I'll lose the option of seeking the services of the best workmen I
>can afford. I don't WANT to hire "just any" plumber. I don't WANT to
>take my guns to "just any" gunsmith. I don't WANT go to "just any"
>physician.
>
> Of course, The State doesn't care what I want. The State is always
>certain it knows best. As often as not, The State is wrong about that.
The basic rights of man is the right to have rights. AND that
includes eqyal rights and equal access. A job is a right, equal pay
is a right, a gun is a right and not dieing at the hands of a greedy
health system is also a right.
Thom
Thom
Please educate us downunder. We heard that the whole northern half of
Canada broke off and is a country owned by the In-u-et peoples. Is
this the case or have they become another province or what? What is
their immigration policy, problems etc etc????
>
>> >
>> >> If you shop in the border region you will find that you can pay in
>> >> either currency.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Sure you can! And in the US Canadian currency will be discounted
>> >to someting like 60 cents on the dollar, while in Canada they will
>> >be more than pleased to take your, (relatively more valuable) US
>> >dollar at par, and make 40% when they exchange it.
>>
>> Exchange rates are the curse the from the crooks at banks.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Exchange rates are a function of the relative value of currency.
>It has nothing to do with banks or crooks.
We will have to agree to disagree there because BANKS set the rates,
not the US Government. Many countries know how distructive currency
specualtion is (its supposed to be illegal in America) and set the
exchange rate... For instance, Saudi Arabia is US$3.25 to the Reale
and has been that way for over 15 years.
Perhaps one needs a better understand of what money is, basically its
stored human energy. That's why I use the average wage vs average
wage method. Money in itself is worthless and is based on faith. You
used to be able to go to Ft Knox with your green backs and say give me
silver bars for this and get it but not anymore. Most countries don't
even back their currencies with precious metals anymore. That pack of
presidents in your wallet is worthless except as toilet paper or a
coaster, BUT! Because someone else sees value in it you can exchange
it for goods and services. In itself all money has no value so
therefore the issue of exchange rates based on the so called value of
money is moot.
>
>> The issue with money is how much or what percentage of your take
>> home does it take to live that determines "value" If the average
>> wage in the usa is $15000 a year (Which I read last week) and the
>> average wage is "wherever" is 30,000 pazooties a year and the
>> percentage of cost of living is the same then the exchange rate
>> should be $1-2p.
>
> Carman wrote:
> You haven't studied much economics. You really NEED to do so.
>Getting some idea of how the economy actually works will save you
>from much needless worry. Or at least give you a different set of
>things to worry about.
Why study 19th century concepts in the 21st century???? No two
economies work the same even today and given the misery the current
right wing methods have caused I look forward to the 21st century. I
had economics in college but I also took alternate economics courses
(well one at least) One admits that with any belief system there is
cause and effect in a society and when that belief changes so does the
economy or faulse economies. Look at ENRON, they got rich producing
what? They did NOTHING, they fiddled and wheeler dealed driving
energy prices in California thru the roof for theor own benifit. I
hope those bastards get the hell sued out of them for their larceny.
>
> Most national currencies "float" on the international currency
>markets these days. The value of each currency, at some moment in
>time, is what some currency trader will give you for it in some
>other currency, or in some other commodity like gold.
covered that above and I am on record as not believing in floating
currencies, its very distructive. Plus you have too many vultures in
on the kill. Time these people got real jobs and produced something
usefull for a living.
>
>> But since banks want to get richer and richer and richer they
>> play around with currency speculation and screw everybody!
>
> Carman wrote:
> You must not own any bank stock. Go out and buy some if you
>think the bvanks are doing so well. then you can "get richer
>and richer and richer", right along with your bank!
Considering the history of bankers like Rockafella (who produced the
gas used to murder 6 million jews and a million gypsies and others) I
choose not to be in with those pack of bastards. I own credit union
shares and my credit union has a social conscience and doesn't charge
for ATM use, pays 5% dividends and doesn't steal from its owners and
customers. It also refuses to get involved in currency speculation.
>
>> >
>> >> As far as people crossing, know who are the biggest illegal group??
>> >> The Northern Irish!!!
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Cite please. To the best of my knowledge the largest group has
>> >been Asians for many years.
>> >
>> By race I'm celtic and was in a large Irish Community in Denver. Over
>> half the people were illegals from Northern Ireland and we kept up on
>> the INS statistics. People in the community were mostly coming in
>> from Canada, crossing on a country road someplace and we partied alot
>> because we had a lot of "you got caught and are going away" parties.
>
> Carman wrote:
> In other words you have no cites.
Cites???
>
>> >
>> >> Arabs are second followed by the Canadians themselves.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Cites for these claims would be welcome as well.
>> >
>
> Carman wrote:
> I guess you've no cites for these claims either?
Please use standard English, are you trying to say sources or
statistical references???
THOM
Jos.Carman
> On 8 Sep 2002 15:06:12 -0700, jca...@ec.rr.com (Jos.Carman) wrote:
>
> >as...@freemail.com.au (Thom) wrote in message news:<3d768c62...@news.melbpc.org.au>...
> >> On 4 Sep 2002 13:36:48 -0700, jca...@ec.rr.com (Jos.Carman) wrote:
> >>
> >> >as...@freemail.com.au (Thom) wrote in message news:<3d756296...@news.melbpc.org.au>...
> >> >> On 3 Sep 2002 07:08:38 -0700, rayda...@yahoo.com (Ray) wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >jca...@ec.rr.com (Jos.Carman) wrote in message news:<bcb86dd3.02081...@posting.google.com>...
> >> >> >> m...@mindspring.com (Plink) wrote in message news:<ajk8b3$ea2$1...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu>...
> >> >> >> > On Fri, 16 Aug 2002 13:41:24 +0000 (UTC), f...@cs.tulane.edu
> >> >> >> > (Frank Silbermann) wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > #
> >> >> >> > #wam.umd.edu>,
> >> >> >> > ## Canadian Border Guards see a "red flag" go up with a
> >> >> >> > ##US, as the main source for illegal guns in their
> >> >> >> > ##countries, and feel just about the same way as the US
> >> >> >> > ##does, about drugs. That's just the way it is. If you
> >> >> >> > ##don't like the way those Govs operate, then stay out of
> >> >> >> > ##those nations....
Carman wrote:
Though I doubt it will be visible from Australia.
> > (...) with the motion detectors, infrared cameras, computer
> >monitoring, and the rest of the entire panopoly of modern
> >area interdiction.
> >
> > The biggest problems are going to be at the large border
> >crossings. The southern Ontario crossings, with which I'm
> >most familiar, (Sarnia/Port Huron, Windsor/Detroit, Fort
> >Erie/Buffalo),are already very slow. Adding more security
> >will choke them off completly, very much to the detriment
> >of Ontario's economy.
>
> Please educate us downunder. We heard that the whole northern
> half of Canada broke off and is a country owned by the In-u-et
> peoples. Is this the case or have they become another province
> or what? What is their immigration policy, problems etc etc????
> >
Carman wrote:
The name of Canada's newest Territory is Nunavut. It is a
huge area of the eastern and central arctic that has about 1%
of the Canadian population.
Nunavut has not seperated from Canada, and it has no seperate
immigration policy.
http://www.nunavut.com/home.html
> >> >
> >> >> If you shop in the border region you will find that you
> >> >> can pay in either currency.
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Sure you can! And in the US Canadian currency will be
> >> >discounted to someting like 60 cents on the dollar,
> >> >while in Canada they will be more than pleased to take
> >> >your, (relatively more valuable) US dollar at par, and
> >> >make 40% when they exchange it.
> >>
> >> Exchange rates are the curse the from the crooks at banks.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Exchange rates are a function of the relative value of
> >currency. It has nothing to do with banks or crooks.
>
> We will have to agree to disagree there because BANKS set the
> rates, not the US Government.
Carman wrote:
Of course the "BANKS set the rates"! They are the one's doing
the the exchange. They commonly charge a fractional percentage
point fee for the service too. If you don't want to use their
service, then don't exchange your currency.
> Many countries know how distructive currency specualtion is
> (...)
Carman wrote:
Currency trading and currency speculation are very different
things.
> (...) (its supposed to be illegal in America) and set the
> exchange rate... For instance, Saudi Arabia is US$3.25 to
> the Reale and has been that way for over 15 years.
>
Carman wrote:
State established currency exchange rates never did work very
well, which is why most countries have abandoned the practice.
It's no surprise to find a medieval political structure, like
the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, still using the similarly medieval
concept of a set exchange rate.
All it means is that no one but The State can legally trade
The State's currency within that nation. This results in a
brisk and risky black market currency exchange within the
afflicted nation. Outside, in the real world, Saudi currency is
traded at it's real world value, relative to the value of other
currencies.
> Perhaps one needs a better understand of what money is,
> basically its stored human energy.
Carman wrote:
Nonsense! Currency is a commodity like any other. As such,
it's subject to the laws of supply and demand like all other
comodities.
> That's why I use the average wage vs average wage method.
Carman wrote:
Use any "method" you like. The currency markets are still
going to be determining the value of currencies in relation
to each other and all other commodities.
> Money in itself is worthless and is based on faith.
Carman wrote:
Wishful thinking on the part of those without money.
It's kind of sad to see someone investing so much energy to
so little result. Your time and efforts would be better spent
defending heliocentrism, or flat earth theory.
> You used to be able to go to Ft Knox with your green backs
> and say give me silver bars for this and get it but not
> anymore.
Carman wrote:
Actually, such exchanges of currency for precious metals took
place at the banks. This was a holdover from the days before
national currencies, when banks issued their own currencies and
backed them up with gold.
> Most countries don't even back their currencies with precious
> metals anymore.
Carman wrote:
Of course not. Precious metals are commodities, and all of the
commodities are subject to fluctuations in value relative to all
other commodities. Having a gold-backed currency was redundant.
The extra step simply wasn't necessary.
> That pack of presidents in your wallet is worthless except
> as toilet paper or a coaster, BUT! Because someone else
> sees value in it you can exchange it for goods and services.
Carman wrote:
That's some serious exception.
> In itself all money has no value so therefore the issue of
> exchange rates based on the so called value of money is moot.
Carman wrote:
Most modern people are quite accustomed to things being much
more than they appear. A simple dry battery or a computer chip
for example, are valued not for what they are, but for what they
do. So, too, with currency. Value is as invisible as electricity,
yet both are real and potent forces. If you pretend either don't
exist, or are somehow "not real", you're in for a shock.
> >
> >> The issue with money is how much or what percentage of your
> >> take home does it take to live that determines "value" If the
> >> average wage in the usa is $15000 a year (Which I read last
> >> week) and the average wage is "wherever" is 30,000 pazooties a
> >> year and the percentage of cost of living is the same then the
> >> exchange rate should be $1-2p.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > You haven't studied much economics. You really NEED to do so.
> >Getting some idea of how the economy actually works will save you
> >from much needless worry. Or at least give you a different set of
> >things to worry about.
>
> Why study 19th century concepts in the 21st century????
Carman wrote:
I haven't suggested you do so. The study of history is usually
wasted on those who feel it's somehow easier to reinvent the wheel.
> No two economies work the same even today (...)
Carman wrote:
The underlying principles are the same. No two machines "work"
in exactly the same way, but the physics of how they work is a
constant.
> (...) and given the misery the current right wing methods have
> caused (...)
Carman wrote:
Just as there is no "right wing" celestial mechanics, physics,
or chemistry, there is no "right wing" economics. The term "right
wing", refers only to politics.
The stark misery you observe in the world results primarily from
religion, Totalitarianism, overpopulation, and interaction between
them.
If you feel some form of "blame" is necessary, then blame Modern
Medicine, the export of Death Control, and food aid to "the starving
millions" who can't grow enough foor for themselves.
These "humanitarian efforts" are primarily responsible for the
massive increases in population that have strssed many of the Third-
World countries well past the breaking point. Giving food to people
who can't support themselves, and who refuse to control their
populations is like throwing gasoline on burning house. In rapidly
accelerates the destruction.
> (...) I look forward to the 21st century.
Carman wrote:
Which, in the absense of any coherent understanding of what has
gone before, you will misunderstand quite as thoroughly as you now
misunderstand the present world. It's a pity, but without study
there's no cure possible.
> I had economics in college but I also took alternate economics
> courses (well one at least). One admits that with any belief
> system there is cause and effect in a society and when that
> belief changes so does the economy or false economies.
Carman wrote:
Reality can be defined as that which doesn't change if you stop
believing in it. The world won't change, nor will world's economic
interactions alter at all if you stop "believing" in supply and
demand.
All that will have changed is that you'll have substituted one
coherent set of understandings for economic functions, for some
other set of understandings that do not account for the factors
involved.
Either way, it's all right with me. If you'd come to some new
understanding of economics AFTER a careful study of the EXISTING
paradigm, I'd be more than happy to listen to it. As it is, you
have apparently rejected the understandings of modern economics
without ever knowing what they are.
> Look at ENRON, they got rich producing what? They did NOTHING,
> they fiddled and wheeler dealed driving energy prices in
> California thru the roof for theor own benifit. I hope those
> bastards get the hell sued out of them for their larceny.
Carman wrote:
This is embarrassing. Enron's core business was trading in
energy contracts. The trade is quite legitimate, and continues
in finincial markets today.
The officers of the company chose to run it in a thoroughly
unscrupulous and criminal manner. They're getting sued for that,
and may ultimately go to jail for their criminal misconduct; but
trading in energy contracts was not, is not, and will never be
illegal.
> > Carman wrote:
> > Most national currencies "float" on the international currency
> >markets these days. The value of each currency, at some moment in
> >time, is what some currency trader will give you for it in some
> >other currency, or in some other commodity like gold.
>
> covered that above and I am on record as not believing in floating
> currencies, its very distructive. Plus you have too many vultures
> in on the kill.
Carman wrote:
Covered above. It just doesn't matter if you believe in it or not.
People are going to trade commodities. Currency is just one more.
> Time these people got real jobs and produced something useful for a
> living.
Carman wrote:
The jobs are quite real, and very predictably create profits for
shareholders. A good, reliable, currency trader is a highly skilled
professional.
> >> But since banks want to get richer and richer and richer they
> >> play around with currency speculation and screw everybody!
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > You must not own any bank stock. Go out and buy some if you
> >think the bvanks are doing so well. Then you can "get richer
> >and richer and richer", right along with your bank!
>
> Considering the history of bankers like Rockafella (...)
Carman wrote:
I take it you mean John D. Rockefeller?
> (...)(who produced the gas used to murder 6 million jews and a
> million gypsies and others) (...)
Carman wrote:
Cite please.
> I choose not to be in with those pack of bastards. I own credit
> union shares (...)
Carman wrote:
Credit unions are just one of several kinds of banks.
> (...) and my credit union has a social conscience (...)
Carman wrote:
Which means whatever they want it to mean at the moment.
> (...) and doesn't charge for ATM use, pays 5% dividends and doesn't
> steal from its owners and customers.
Carman wrote:
Sounds like a good bank, but a bank it is.
> It also refuses to get involved in currency speculation.
Carman wrote:
A sound policy. They're probably unable to do currency exchange
as well, so they won't have that on their "social conscience" either.
> >> >> As far as people crossing, know who are the biggest illegal group??
> >> >> The Northern Irish!!!
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Cite please. To the best of my knowledge the largest group has
> >> >been Asians for many years.
> >> >
> >> By race I'm celtic and was in a large Irish Community in Denver.
> >> Over half the people were illegals from Northern Ireland and we
> >> kept up on the INS statistics. People in the community were mostly
> >> coming in from Canada, crossing on a country road someplace and we
> >> partied alot because we had a lot of "you got caught and are going
> >> away" parties.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > In other words you have no cites.
>
> Cites???
>
Carman wrote:
Unfamiliar with the concept?
cite, verb, transitive
cited, citing, cites
1.To quote as an authority or example.
2.To mention or bring forward as support, illustration, or proof:
cited several instances of insubordinate behavior.
3.a. To commend officially for meritorious action in military
service.
b. To honor formally.
4.To summon before a court of law.
Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English
Language,
Third Edition Copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic
version licensed from Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products N.V., further
reproduction and distribution restricted in accordance with the
Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved.
Carman wrote:
In this context, a "cite" is some authorative source for your
information, most often one that can be found, and checked, on
the net.
In this case, arrest records by the American INS showing a
preponderance of Northern Irish arrestees who claim to have
entered the US from Canada is a form of proof that would suffice
nicely.
The diametric opposite of a "cite" is the personal story,
or anecdote, such as you have provided above. It proves only
that you claim to have seen something and offers no objective
evidence.
> >> >
> >> >> Arabs are second followed by the Canadians themselves.
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Cites for these claims would be welcome as well.
> >> >
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > I guess you've no cites for these claims either?
>
> Please use standard English, are you trying to say sources or
> statistical references???
>
Carman wrote:
As you observe above, the term "cite" is available for reference
in a standard dictionary.
> >> >> Many many Canadians are undocumented workers and go home
> >> >> at night or after a working time period.
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > This was the case, but about thirty years ago both countries
> >> >clampped down on the practice. The US was concerned about lost
> >> >jobs for legitimate American workers, and the Canadians were even
> >> >more concerned with lost tax revenue.
>
> Both were into the tax thing.
>
Carman wrote:
That *is* where governments usually get their money.
> >> >
> >> >> The cultures merge at the border, (...)
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Not in my experience. There is nothing vague about the border.
> >> >You are either on one side or the other; in Canada or in the US.
> >> >The rules are very plain and quite strictly enforced.
> >> >
> >> In terms of "who your are" your very right. We "yanks" need to
> >> learn the difference between being proud to be American and
> >> arragant about it.
Carman wrote:
You learn it. I'll stick with arrogance, and be damned to anyone who
doesn't like it.
> >> >
> >> >> (...) it's not like the scenery changes either!
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > That depends on where you are. Coming up through New York the
> >> >Niagara Gorge marks quite a visible change in the scenery. The
> >> >Niagara Peninsula of Ontario looks nothing like upstate New York.
> >>
> >> Like I said, I'm from the west and you can't tell there. I once tried
> >> to enter from Vermont and they wouldn't let me in. I was on a 4 month
> >> sales and business trip and they didn't mind my gun they kept me out
> >> because of my parachutes (which is what I was selling)!!! Protection
> >> of the home industry thing... all one of them. But that was 1980.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > So sometimes the scenery changes at the border and sometimes it
> >doesn't?
> >
> >> >> Like the minute you hit the Canadian border there's snow or
> >> >> something!!!
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Only sometines there is!
> >>
> >> What I meant was the image that its dry and green right up to the
Jos.Carman
Carman wrote:
So Australia has a lot of land borders with it's near neighbors? So
those neighbors are likely to have better healthcare than Australia's?
> >
> >> You pay 1.5% of your adjusted income to a maximum of about US$250
> >> a year for medical and it has been excellent. Never had any delays
> >> or bad treatment, 100X's better than the USA.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > You have much experience with US healthcare?
>
> Yes it murdered my wife. She was the victim of an HMO. At the same
> time she fell ill so did I and went to my HMO which wouldn't let me
> see a doctor and threw a couple of pills at me left by some salesman.
> It got worse and a week later I was put in the Denver VA hospital
> which tested me to having 48% lung capacity, something missed by the
> greed based system. In the process I was put on the Agent Orange
> watch list and given an Agent Orange exam since my asthma is an agent
> orange condition.
Carman wrote:
Perhaps you weren't sufficiently careful in choosing your insurance
coverage? Maybe that sounds unduely harsh, but choosing healthcare
coverage is up to the individual in the US and it's possible to do it
wrong.
When I met my wife she was dying in Manitoba. Socialized healthcare
had, essentially, written her off as "unrecoverable". I took her to
specialists in Minneapolis, (and later to specialists in other places
in the US), and she survived. All this was more than 20 years ago,
when the Canadian system was still well funded from the Federal Gov't.
We watched as year after year the care available in Canada for our
healthcare dollar became worse and worse. When we needed care for my
wife, we had no realistic alternative but to go down to the US and
pay in cash for what she needed.
Effectively, we paid twice. We paid the ever increasing taxes the
Canadian system required for it's ever decreasing performance, and
then we paid again in the US to obtain the care she needed.
>
> Shall I go on about greedy dentists too???
>
Carman wrote:
Please do.
> >
> >> Part of the problem in Canada and the USA is the outragous money
> >> doctors get while nurses starve.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > This is Capitalism at work. Normal, everyday, supply-and-demand
> >economics. Nurses are in high demand in the US, so they're leaving
> >low-paying jobs in Canada for better wages and job-satisfaction in
> >the US.
>
> and leaving low paying jobs in the USA for better jobs in Australia
> where all wages are double that of the US.
Carman wrote;
The wages had better be double, as the mid-market currency exchange
rate, (mid-market rates are derived from mid-point between the buy and
sell rates of large-value transactions in the global currency
markets), Sept. 10, 2002 00:35:28, is $1 AUD = $0.548690 USD.
> >
> >> Too bad these guys went out of the business of providing health care
> >> and into the business of making money.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Perhaps you have mistaken the intent of the person who goes to all
> >the trouble of obtaining an MD? Would you think the same of someone
> >practicing law or accounting?
>
> Lawyers are a sore on the butt of civilization and accounts don't have
> people's lives in their hands.
>
Carman wrote:
I guess it was predictable you wouldn't value lawyers, until you
need one.
My accountant has my business in his hands. That IS my life.
> > Carman wrote:
> > Why would you object to people who have highly desirable skills
> >selling those skills for the most money they can obtain? This is what
> >I do. I'm not a physician, (for which we can all be grateful), but the
> >skills I do possess are for sale. Why should a physician's skills be
> >any different?
>
> Because people are more important than money.
Carman wrote:
Can you quote the part of the physician's oath that includes a vow
of poverty?
> This is the 21st century not the greedy 19th or 20th.
Carman wrote:
Did something change beside the date? I don't think so.
> All human beings have equal value and even the constitution says it.
Carman wrote:
Perhaps your Australian Constitution says that. The US Constitution
does not.
> We hold these truths to be selfevident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL.
Carman wrote:
The words you quote are from the Declaration of Independence. You
may wish to construe them to mean some kind of absolute metaphysical
"equality", but they only say that all men are "created" equal, not
that they remain so.
The "equality" spoken of in the Constitution is "Equality Before
The Law". No equality of value is mentioned or implied.
> >
> >> Here Dentists make the money and doctors don't
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > From this I conclude you don't have Socialized Dentristry. Yet.
>
> Sorta, its minimal and it costs about US$11 a visit but its basic.
>
Carman wrote:
Give it time then, the dentists will be reduced to employees of The
State, and the dental care available will deterioriate.
> > Carman wrote:
> > I'm actally quite happy to pay my physician for the services he
> >renders me. He's a first class physician, and makes a pile of money
> >as a result. (He lives in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, drives a far
> >better car than I'll ever own, went to school for six years longer
> >than I did, and he's smarter than I am to boot). He EARNS the money
> >I, and his other patients, pay him.
> >
> I have 10 years of college and am out of work. Why? I'm 57 years old
> and under the greed based system seem to have no value like millions
> of other over 40's in the English speaking world.
>
Carman wrote:
Why *are* you out of work, and why is it someone else's fault? For
that matter, what's wrong with Australia if it can't use every man
it has with skills and a willingness to work?
I'm 54, and into my third, or fourth, (depending on how you count),
career. I know no one here who is willing and able to work, who can't
find *some* employment. Perhaps not the *best* job, probably not at
*hallelujah* wages either, but something.
The hidden costs of Socialism are in individual drive and in the
overall productivity a nation can achieve.
> > Carman wrote:
> > I'm equally happy to pay a very good dollar to my dentist, my
> >lawyer, my accountant, my plumber, and my gunsmith. All for the
> >very same reason: superior workmanship.
>
> Given the experiences of myself and my wife I value my gunsmith
> more than doctors.
>
Carman wrote:
Australia must not have Socialized gunsmithing yet.
> > Carman wrote:
> > If any of these workmen lets me down, I have the option of going
> >to the many other people who have set up in competition with them to
> >service the same market.
> >
> > If The State ever seizes control of these relationships, (all in
> >the name of "The Greatest Good, For the Greatest Number", of course),
> >I'll lose the option of seeking the services of the best workmen I
> >can afford. I don't WANT to hire "just any" plumber. I don't WANT to
> >take my guns to "just any" gunsmith. I don't WANT go to "just any"
> >physician.
> >
> > Of course, The State doesn't care what I want. The State is always
> >certain it knows best. As often as not, The State is wrong about that.
>
> The basic rights of man is the right to have rights.
Carman wrote:
Sorry. People obtain Rights by seizing them. That's how Americans
came to have genuine Rights, while other people get, at best, some
few privileges grudgingly and temporarily bestowed upon them by The
State.
> AND that includes equal rights and equal access.
Carman wrote:
Equal rights? Before the law, certainly. I've no idea what you mean
by "equal access"
> A job is a right, (...)
Carman wrote:
Nowhere that I've ever seen.
> (...) equal pay is a right, (...)
Carman wrote:
Again, nowhere that I've ever seen. I've always had to work for
my money.
> (...) a gun is a right (...)
Carman wrote:
Definately NOT in Canada, and I doubt it is in Australia. In the
US we have this Second Amendment thing that we're working to force
The State to recognise.
> (...) and not dying at the hands of a greedy health system is
> also a right.
Carman wrote:
That's a lot of rights you've dreamed up. Not much of all that
bears any resemblence to reality though. Where are these "rights"
going to come from anyway. Are they going to be gifts from The
State? Why should The State give you anything you aren't willing
to take from it by force?
Thom
Australia is an island. All commonwealth countries have socialized
medicine. Any Australia with the card get get free health care in any
commonwealth country including Canada and they in Australia. In
America if you don't have insurance you get a free ride on a gurney
into the parking lot.
>
>> >
>> >> You pay 1.5% of your adjusted income to a maximum of about US$250
>> >> a year for medical and it has been excellent. Never had any delays
>> >> or bad treatment, 100X's better than the USA.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > You have much experience with US healthcare?
>>
>> Yes it murdered my wife. She was the victim of an HMO. At the same
>> time she fell ill so did I and went to my HMO which wouldn't let me
>> see a doctor and threw a couple of pills at me left by some salesman.
>> It got worse and a week later I was put in the Denver VA hospital
>> which tested me to having 48% lung capacity, something missed by the
>> greed based system. In the process I was put on the Agent Orange
>> watch list and given an Agent Orange exam since my asthma is an agent
>> orange condition.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Perhaps you weren't sufficiently careful in choosing your insurance
>coverage? Maybe that sounds unduely harsh, but choosing healthcare
>coverage is up to the individual in the US and it's possible to do it
>wrong.
>
Your not listening.... HMO! I didn't have a choice where I worked and
because she worked for the State she had to use the system they have.
AND at US wages, who the hell can afford much more. Remember the
number of Americans who can't afford even car insurance much less
health insurance!!
>
> Effectively, we paid twice. We paid the ever increasing taxes the
>Canadian system required for it's ever decreasing performance, and
>then we paid again in the US to obtain the care she needed.
>>
>> Shall I go on about greedy dentists too???
>>
>
> Carman wrote:
> Please do.
>
>> >
>> >> Part of the problem in Canada and the USA is the outragous money
>> >> doctors get while nurses starve.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > This is Capitalism at work. Normal, everyday, supply-and-demand
>> >economics. Nurses are in high demand in the US, so they're leaving
>> >low-paying jobs in Canada for better wages and job-satisfaction in
>> >the US.
>>
>> and leaving low paying jobs in the USA for better jobs in Australia
>> where all wages are double that of the US.
>
> Carman wrote;
> The wages had better be double, as the mid-market currency exchange
>rate, (mid-market rates are derived from mid-point between the buy and
>sell rates of large-value transactions in the global currency
>markets), Sept. 10, 2002 00:35:28, is $1 AUD = $0.548690 USD.
Average wage is $36,000 a year and the cost of living 40-60% lower
than the USA. A new 4 bedroom house in melbourne is US$ 65,000
according to the inserts in this mornings paper and the government
says that 94% of people who live in homes own them. New cars start at
US$7800 in todays paper though I get the impression used cars are
cheaper in the USA. Restaurants are a bit more (because of the fact
minimum wages for waiters is $26,000 a year) but food in the market is
much cheaper. Gas is about the same.
>
>http://www.xe.com/ucc/
>
>> >
>> >> Too bad these guys went out of the business of providing health care
>> >> and into the business of making money.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Perhaps you have mistaken the intent of the person who goes to all
>> >the trouble of obtaining an MD? Would you think the same of someone
>> >practicing law or accounting?
>>
>> Lawyers are a sore on the butt of civilization and accounts don't have
>> people's lives in their hands.
>>
>
> Carman wrote:
> I guess it was predictable you wouldn't value lawyers, until you
>need one.
>
> My accountant has my business in his hands. That IS my life.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Why would you object to people who have highly desirable skills
>> >selling those skills for the most money they can obtain? This is what
>> >I do. I'm not a physician, (for which we can all be grateful), but the
>> >skills I do possess are for sale. Why should a physician's skills be
>> >any different?
>>
>> Because people are more important than money.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Can you quote the part of the physician's oath that includes a vow
>of poverty?
Can you quote the part that says they can deny care if you can't pay??
Are they in the business if medicine or in the business of making
money off of the unfortunate.????
>
>> This is the 21st century not the greedy 19th or 20th.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Did something change beside the date? I don't think so.
>
>> All human beings have equal value and even the constitution says it.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Perhaps your Australian Constitution says that. The US Constitution
>does not.
We hold these truths to be selfevident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED
EQUAL. What next, its part of the communist manifesto???? Does it
matter which piece of paper the HEROS of PHILIDELPHIA put it?
>
>> We hold these truths to be selfevident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL.
>
> Carman wrote:
> The words you quote are from the Declaration of Independence. You
>may wish to construe them to mean some kind of absolute metaphysical
>"equality", but they only say that all men are "created" equal, not
>that they remain so.
Yes, with scumbags like bush in office, inequality, the rat race,
godless greed based capitalism and everything that oppresses Americans
will continue won't they???? WE REMAIN EQUAL FROM THE DAY WE ARE BORN
TO THE DAY WE DIE! All human beings have equal dignity, equal rights
and equal responsibilities regardless of their sex, race, religious
beliefs or economic status. That's what the guys freezing their asses
off at Valley Forge were fighting for. We fought a revolution to get
big government (The King), Big Business (British Capitalism) and Big
religion (church of england) off our backs. It wasn't a perfact place
in 1784 and the issue of slavary in the south a shamefull situation
but remember we had to compromise to the right wingers in the south on
this issue to form a country.
>
> The "equality" spoken of in the Constitution is "Equality Before
>The Law". No equality of value is mentioned or implied.
Bull
>
>> >
>> >> Here Dentists make the money and doctors don't
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > From this I conclude you don't have Socialized Dentristry. Yet.
>>
>> Sorta, its minimal and it costs about US$11 a visit but its basic.
>>
>
> Carman wrote:
> Give it time then, the dentists will be reduced to employees of The
>State, and the dental care available will deterioriate.
So you believe all dentists are greedy capitalists who refuse to work
for less than $200,000 a year???? What a negitive world you live in.
This is 2002, not 1902 or 1802.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > I'm actally quite happy to pay my physician for the services he
>> >renders me. He's a first class physician, and makes a pile of money
>> >as a result. (He lives in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, drives a far
>> >better car than I'll ever own, went to school for six years longer
>> >than I did, and he's smarter than I am to boot). He EARNS the money
>> >I, and his other patients, pay him.
>> >
>> I have 10 years of college and am out of work. Why? I'm 57 years old
>> and under the greed based system seem to have no value like millions
>> of other over 40's in the English speaking world.
>>
>
> Carman wrote:
> Why *are* you out of work, and why is it someone else's fault? For
>that matter, what's wrong with Australia if it can't use every man
>it has with skills and a willingness to work?
Jackboot Johnny Howard brought American style anti-union and
anti-older worker values to Australia. Older workers have been sacked
by the hundreds of thousands to put on cheaper younger workers who
have never belonged to a union or worked for a decent wage. SIMPLE AS
THAT.
>
> I'm 54, and into my third, or fourth, (depending on how you count),
>career. I know no one here who is willing and able to work, who can't
>find *some* employment. Perhaps not the *best* job, probably not at
>*hallelujah* wages either, but something.
>
> The hidden costs of Socialism are in individual drive and in the
>overall productivity a nation can achieve.
The hardest workers I have ever known are so calld socialists. I ran
a business for 17 years and I'm a GREEN and I worked 6 days a week
sometimes and paid my workers more than myself in bad times because I
don't believe in making other people take responsibility for my
problems.
If you had ever taken a psychology course you would know that
capitalism kills individual drive. Its a psychological condition
called "Response Outcome Independence" (look it up in any behavioral
psychology text book) and in poor people it causes psychotic behavior
and in right neurotic behavior. Its based on the things people suffer
when no matter what they do, it doesn't change their situation. The
ppor work there asses off and get no where and the rich stay right no
matter how lazy or hard working they are.
The situation applies down here and the government has had to hire
shrinks to work with older workers who suffer from it because no
matter what they do to find work, they don't.
Eventually we will topple this nazi right wing government and people
who descriminate on the basis of age, race or national origins will be
facing the law. Right now they get away with it.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > I'm equally happy to pay a very good dollar to my dentist, my
>> >lawyer, my accountant, my plumber, and my gunsmith. All for the
>> >very same reason: superior workmanship.
>>
>> Given the experiences of myself and my wife I value my gunsmith
>> more than doctors.
>>
>
> Carman wrote:
> Australia must not have Socialized gunsmithing yet.
The right wing government of Jackboot Johnny Howard did a big gun grab
when they got into office so the people could not fight back against
their nazi industrial relations laws about to be passed. BUT the
workers faced armed private thugs (with dogs, guns and clubs) at the
docks with the same bravery as the diggers who fought in Viet Nam,
WW1, WW2 etc. The Patricks Dock wars put a serious crimp in their
plans.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > If any of these workmen lets me down, I have the option of going
>> >to the many other people who have set up in competition with them to
>> >service the same market.
>> >
>> > If The State ever seizes control of these relationships, (all in
>> >the name of "The Greatest Good, For the Greatest Number", of course),
>> >I'll lose the option of seeking the services of the best workmen I
>> >can afford. I don't WANT to hire "just any" plumber. I don't WANT to
>> >take my guns to "just any" gunsmith. I don't WANT go to "just any"
>> >physician.
>> >
>> > Of course, The State doesn't care what I want. The State is always
>> >certain it knows best. As often as not, The State is wrong about that.
>>
>> The basic rights of man is the right to have rights.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Sorry. People obtain Rights by seizing them. That's how Americans
>came to have genuine Rights, while other people get, at best, some
>few privileges grudgingly and temporarily bestowed upon them by The
>State.
There's an old saying that I agree with that freedom comes from a
barrel of a gun. Notice that Bush refuses to repeal unconstitutional
guns laws and Thatcher and Howard took guns from the free, as did
Hitler and the boys in jackboot.
>
>> AND that includes equal rights and equal access.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Equal rights? Before the law, certainly. I've no idea what you mean
>by "equal access"
OK, I'll give you an example from another post of mine concerning the
draft.
"In 1993 I went back to college at Metropolitan State College in
Denver and was told I couldn't even register for classes unless I
registered for the draft.
AND, get this, men are required to register by Metro State but woman
aren't and the moron woman who was president of the college then
couldn't see where there was any sex descrimination in that!
I refused (even though I had a draft card in my pocket) and demanded
an appointment with this and that bureaucrat. I wore a suit and had
my airborne wings, chest full of ribbons and my 5 medals including 3
from Viet Nam including the Viet Nam Cross of Gallentry with palm
leaves. I also had my DD-214 and DD-215 with me and when I sat down
with this person who looked at my chest (funny that men can have their
chests stared at but not woman) when I asked why I, a decorated Viet
Nam Veteran who did my full 6 years honorably (unlike the current and
previous president) has to register for the draft for the draft to get
equal access to a public tax supported institution when woman do not."
THATS EQUAL ACCESS!!! Tell me why little yuppettes can get into
colorado colleges and not register for the draft but not men???
>
>> A job is a right, (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Nowhere that I've ever seen.
>
>> (...) equal pay is a right, (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Again, nowhere that I've ever seen. I've always had to work for
>my money.
Not a problem, work is good and nobal but not if your worked to the
bone for a fraction of what assholes like the ones at ENRON (who
wouldn't know hard work if it sat on their faces) then you have a
serious social problem.
>
>> (...) a gun is a right (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Definately NOT in Canada, and I doubt it is in Australia.
Not since a right wing coalition government took over its not, but
human rights aren't even considered under Jackboot Johnny Howard just
industrial relations laws.
>US we have this Second Amendment thing that we're working to force
>The State to recognise.
Easy to do, just get rid of the current crop of left and right wingers
and bring in people like the GREENS or reforms and other small parties
who still hold the moral high ground. The big two parties are
worthless.
>
>> (...) and not dying at the hands of a greedy health system is
>> also a right.
>
> Carman wrote:
> That's a lot of rights you've dreamed up. Not much of all that
>bears any resemblence to reality though.
Human rights have always been hard for capitalists, republicans,
communists and other ISTs to under stand.
>Where are these "rights"
>going to come from anyway. Are they going to be gifts from The
>State? Why should The State give you anything you aren't willing
>to take from it by force?
Government is people doing as a group what they can't do as
individuals, anything past that is oppression. You can walk with your
knuckles dragging on the groung and grunt about the free market or
stand erect and realize that in the 21st century the rights of man
kind are more important than social status, wealth and the like. We
have an over populated planet that is killing itself for the profits
of the few. 19th and 20th concepts of communism, capitalism or
whatever ISM will die this century and I feel assured that all the
problems of pollution, poverty, inequality, accesses of organized
religion etc will be solved if we come together and abandon the silly
tribalism and Balkanization of the planet.
THOM
Jeffrey C. Dege
>
>Australia is an island. All commonwealth countries have socialized
>medicine. Any Australia with the card get get free health care in any
>commonwealth country including Canada and they in Australia. In
>America if you don't have insurance you get a free ride on a gurney
>into the parking lot.
That's not even close to being true.
--
We can found no scientific discipline, nor a healthy profession on the
technical mistakes of the Department of Defense and IBM.
-- Edsger Dijkstra
Jos.Carman
> On 9 Sep 2002 19:18:02 -0700, jca...@ec.rr.com (Jos.Carman) wrote:
>
> >as...@freemail.com.au (Thom) wrote in message news:<3d7b4bab...@news.melbpc.org.au>...
> >> On 7 Sep 2002 14:56:16 -0700, jca...@ec.rr.com (Jos.Carman) wrote:
> >>
> >> >as...@freemail.com.au (Thom) wrote in message news:<3d77e6cf...@news.melbpc.org.au>...
> >> >> On 5 Sep 2002 07:08:59 -0700, jca...@ec.rr.com (Jos.Carman) wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >as...@freemail.com.au (Thom) wrote in message news:<3d768b23...@news.melbpc.org.au>...
> >> >> >> On 4 Sep 2002 13:47:14 -0700, jca...@ec.rr.com (Jos.Carman) wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >"Jeffrey" <clearbl...@peoplepc.com> wrote in message news:<unasmag...@corp.supernews.com>...
> >> >> >> >> "Thom" <as...@freemail.com.au> wrote
Carman wrote: (Big snip).
> >> >> >Carman wrote:
> >> >> > Australia and Canada could learn a lot from the US.
> >> >> >Unfortunately, since the governments of both countries
> >> >> >appear to believe they know it all, I doubt they'll
> >> >> >even try to learn better any time soon.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> I've been here in Australia 9 out of the last 14 years
> >> >> and the health system is excellent.
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > This is fortunate for you. After all, you can't just
> >> >nip across the border into some place where you can find
> >> >better care can you?
> >>
> >> Actually I can. With the Green and Yellow card I can get
> >> free health care in any commonwealth country on earth.
> >>
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > So Australia has a lot of land borders with it's near
> > neighbors? So those neighbors are likely to have better
> > healthcare than Australia's?
>
> Australia is an island.
Carman wrote:
(sarcasm ON)
No! Not really?
(sarcasm OFF)
> All commonwealth countries have socialized medicine.
Carman wrote:
Fairly expectable in Socialist countries.
> Any Australia with the card get get free health care in any
> commonwealth country including Canada and they in Australia.
Carman wrote:
For all the good it will do you.
> In America if you don't have insurance you get a free ride on
> a gurney into the parking lot.
Carman wrote;
As opposed to Canada where the put you on a waiting list until
you die.
> >> >> You pay 1.5% of your adjusted income to a maximum of about US$250
> >> >> a year for medical and it has been excellent. Never had any delays
> >> >> or bad treatment, 100X's better than the USA.
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > You have much experience with US healthcare?
> >>
> >> Yes it murdered my wife. She was the victim of an HMO. At the same
> >> time she fell ill so did I and went to my HMO which wouldn't let me
> >> see a doctor and threw a couple of pills at me left by some salesman.
> >> It got worse and a week later I was put in the Denver VA hospital
> >> which tested me to having 48% lung capacity, something missed by the
> >> greed based system. In the process I was put on the Agent Orange
> >> watch list and given an Agent Orange exam since my asthma is an agent
> >> orange condition.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Perhaps you weren't sufficiently careful in choosing your insurance
> > coverage? Maybe that sounds unduely harsh, but choosing healthcare
> > coverage is up to the individual in the US and it's possible to do
> > it wrong.
> >
> Your not listening.... HMO! I didn't have a choice where I
> worked and because she worked for the State she had to use
> the system they have.
Carman wrote:
Oh, I'm listening all right. What I'm hearing is someone intent
on blaming "the system" for failing to provide sufficiently for
their own healthcare.
You had the option to buy yourselves more and better insurance,
and you didn't do it. It's not a crime, until the illness or the
accident comes; then it might as well be a crime because you get
punished for your lack of foresight.
Did you spend the money on a house and a nice car? Poor choice,
as it turned out. You weren't to "know" you'd need the extra
insurance (if it would have helped), but that's the breaks!
I've made a few bad choices myself here and there, like staying
so long in Canada when I *knew* the place was going to hell in a
handbasket. But that was MY choice. I did that. So it was MY fault,
not someone else's.
In the US The State assumes no responsibility for providing you
with medical care. If you want it, you must take steps to obtain
it for yourself. If you don't obtain it, and keep up the payments,
the failure can radically effect the quality and length of your
life.
Now tell me you didn't know that at the time. Tell me it came as
a complete surprise to you that your insurance wasn't up to snuff.
Tough bounce. It's a hard old world and sometimes you screw up.
> AND at US wages, who the hell can afford much more.
Carman wrote;
I can, and so can most other people in the US.
Many of the people who *can't* pay for insurance, get their care
through welfare. from what I've seen here in NC, that care is
roughly the equivalent of the care I used to get under Socialized
Medicine in Canada. To wit, not so hot, but better than nothing.
> Remember the number of Americans who can't afford even car
> insurance much less health insurance!!
Carman wrote:
What should I remember about them?
> > Carman wrote:
> > Effectively, we paid twice. We paid the ever increasing taxes the
> >Canadian system required for it's ever decreasing performance, and
> >then we paid again in the US to obtain the care she needed.
> >>
> >> Shall I go on about greedy dentists too???
> >>
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Please do.
> >
> >> >
> >> >> Part of the problem in Canada and the USA is the outragous money
> >> >> doctors get while nurses starve.
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > This is Capitalism at work. Normal, everyday, supply-and-demand
> >> >economics. Nurses are in high demand in the US, so they're leaving
> >> >low-paying jobs in Canada for better wages and job-satisfaction in
> >> >the US.
> >>
> >> and leaving low paying jobs in the USA for better jobs in Australia
> >> where all wages are double that of the US.
> >
> > Carman wrote;
> > The wages had better be double, as the mid-market currency exchange
> >rate, (mid-market rates are derived from mid-point between the buy and
> >sell rates of large-value transactions in the global currency markets),
> > Sept. 10, 2002 00:35:28, is $1 AUD = $0.548690 USD.
>
> Average wage is $36,000 a year and the cost of living 40-60% lower
< than the USA. A new 4 bedroom house in melbourne is US$ 65,000
> according to the inserts in this mornings paper and the government
> says that 94% of people who live in homes own them. New cars start
> at US$7800 in todays paper though I get the impression used cars
> are cheaper in the USA. Restaurants are a bit more (because of the
> fact minimum wages for waiters is $26,000 a year) but food in the
> market is much cheaper. Gas is about the same.
>
Carman wrote:
Then you can start subtracting the cost of all that tax paid
healthcare, all that tax paid gun control, and all those tax paid
bureaucrats, to run all those wonderful tax paid social programs,
and when you get done you won't wonder why you're out of a job.
One of the reasons American society is so successful is that much
of the time the government lets the people get on with the work.
Every time the government starts regulating this, controling that,
addressing inequities and generally getting in the way, the overall
productivity suffers and the whole aparatus begins to slow down.
When this happens, the government climbs off, lets things speed up
again, until some bureaucrat gets the bright idea that he knows how
to make it all "fairer" and they start piling on again.
It's boring, but predictable.
> >> >
> >> >> Too bad these guys went out of the business of providing
> >> >> health care and into the business of making money.
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Perhaps you have mistaken the intent of the person who
> >> >goes to all the trouble of obtaining an MD? Would you
> >> >think the same of someone practicing law or accounting?
> >>
> >> Lawyers are a sore on the butt of civilization and accounts
> >> don't have people's lives in their hands.
> >>
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > I guess it was predictable you wouldn't value lawyers, until you
> >need one.
> >
> > My accountant has my business in his hands. That IS my life.
> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Why would you object to people who have highly desirable skills
> >> >selling those skills for the most money they can obtain? This is what
> >> >I do. I'm not a physician, (for which we can all be grateful), but the
> >> >skills I do possess are for sale. Why should a physician's skills be
> >> >any different?
> >>
> >> Because people are more important than money.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Can you quote the part of the physician's oath that includes a vow
> >of poverty?
> >
>
> Can you quote the part that says they can deny care if you can't pay??
Carman wrote:
So if you fail to provide for yourself, you demand that someone else
should step in and help you? Good luck!
> Are they in the business if medicine or in the business of making
> money off of the unfortunate.????
Carman wrote:
They're in business to make money, of course. Why would you think
otherwise?
If they wanted to dedicate their lives to helping "the unfortunate",
they'd be medical missionaries, or run free clinics for the indigent
or something, and more power to 'em.
Unfortunately, (especially for "the unfortunate") such people aren't
usually willing to go to work for members of the educated middle class
who have neglected to obtain sufficient insurance to defray the costs
of treatment. It's a bummer, but there it is.
> >> This is the 21st century not the greedy 19th or 20th.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Did something change beside the date? I don't think so.
> >
> >> All human beings have equal value and even the constitution says it.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Perhaps your Australian Constitution says that. The US Constitution
> >does not.
>
> We hold these truths to be selfevident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED
> EQUAL. What next, its part of the communist manifesto???? Does it
> matter which piece of paper the HEROS of PHILIDELPHIA put it?
Carman wrote:
You asserted "even the constitution says that". It doesn't.
> >
> >> We hold these truths to be selfevident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED
> >> EQUAL.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > The words you quote are from the Declaration of Independence. You
> >may wish to construe them to mean some kind of absolute metaphysical
> >"equality", but they only say that all men are "created" equal, not
> >that they remain so.
>
> Yes, with scumbags like bush in office, inequality, the rat race,
> godless greed based capitalism and everything that oppresses Americans
> will continue won't they????
Carman wrote:
This is priceless! Thanks for leaving the US, and I hope you never
come back. We've got enough whiners here. I wonder if they could be
induced to leave here and go to Australia?
> WE REMAIN EQUAL FROM THE DAY WE ARE BORN TO THE DAY WE DIE!
Carman wrote:
Utter nonsense. Equality "before the law", is the best you get.
> All human beings have equal dignity, (...)
Carman wrote:
I wonder what "equal dignity" is supposed to mean?
I see people working hard and smart at difficult jobs, making their
livings and providing for themselves and their families. I see these
people as possessed of "dignity", something they've worked for and
won.
I see other people working only when they must. I see them getting
by, when they do, on charity, on welfare, surviving off the labor of
other people like parasites. You'd assert they are possessed of "equal
dignity"? How distasteful.
> (...) equal rights, (...)
Carman wrote:
Among which is the right to fail, through no one's fault but their
own.
> (...) and equal responsibilities (...)
Carman wrote:
Like making their own livings and providing for themselves and
any children they choose to have?
> (...) regardless of their sex, race, religious beliefs or economic
> status.
Carman wrote:
Sounds good to me. I'm not going to prevent anyone from working for
a living because "of their sex, race, religious beliefs, or economic
status".
On the other hand, I'm not going to support them if they choose not
to work, and I'm not going to pay for their medical care either.
> That's what the guys freezing their asses off at Valley Forge
> were fighting for.
Carman wrote;
Nope. This is where an ignorance of history gets you. People end up
believing all kinds of nonsense.
The troops at Valley Forge were in a state of insurrection because
the British government refused to recognise their rights as
Englishmen.
The State embarked on a long series of acts of oppression in very
clear violation of The State's own law.
> We fought a revolution to get big government (The King), Big
> Business (British Capitalism) and Big religion (church of
> england) off our backs.
Carman wrote:
More garbage. Had The British State recognised and respected the
rights the American colonists had under law, there'd have been no
Revolution.
> It wasn't a perfect place in 1784 and the issue of slavary in the
> south a shamefull situation but remember we had to compromise to
> the right wingers in the south on this issue to form a country.
Carman wrote:
You've really sucked up a lot of nonsense haven't you?
> > The "equality" spoken of in the Constitution is "Equality Before
> >The Law". No equality of value is mentioned or implied.
>
> Bull
Carman wrote:
Cite me chapter and verse then, oh knowledgable one. Show me in the
US Constitution where it speaks of some sort of metaphysical "equality
of value". You can't, because no such exists.
> >> >
> >> >> Here Dentists make the money and doctors don't
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > From this I conclude you don't have Socialized Dentristry. Yet.
> >>
> >> Sorta, its minimal and it costs about US$11 a visit but its basic.
> >>
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Give it time then, the dentists will be reduced to employees of
> >The State, and the dental care available will deterioriate.
>
> So you believe all dentists are greedy capitalists who refuse to work
> for less than $200,000 a year???? What a negitive world you live in.
> This is 2002, not 1902 or 1802.
Carman wrote;
When you take the economic incentive out of any kind of work, the
creative, smart, and hardworking people are going to find themselves
employment that pays off in material rewards.
If you distort the entire economic system, (as Socialism does), to
the disadvantage of these same creative, smart, hardworking people,
they will quietly abandon your pathetic system and go elsewhere.
This is why the US gets so many intelligent, skilled, and highly
trained immigrants from Canada and the other countries playing with
Socialism.
'Are you very good at a job? Would you like to make a LOT more
money than you make in the UK, in Canada, in Europe, or some other
place where you're getting taxed to death to pay for other people's
healthcare? Come to the US and get RICH!'
Of course, it's understood that you can also go broke, and if
you no one but you will lose much sleep over it.
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > I'm actally quite happy to pay my physician for the services he
> >> >renders me. He's a first class physician, and makes a pile of money
> >> >as a result. (He lives in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, drives a far
> >> >better car than I'll ever own, went to school for six years longer
> >> >than I did, and he's smarter than I am to boot). He EARNS the money
> >> >I, and his other patients, pay him.
> >> >
> >> I have 10 years of college and am out of work. Why? I'm 57 years old
> >> and under the greed based system seem to have no value like millions
> >> of other over 40's in the English speaking world.
> >>
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Why *are* you out of work, and why is it someone else's fault? For
> >that matter, what's wrong with Australia if it can't use every man
> >it has with skills and a willingness to work?
>
> Jackboot Johnny Howard brought American style anti-union and
> anti-older worker values to Australia. Older workers have been sacked
> by the hundreds of thousands to put on cheaper younger workers who
> have never belonged to a union or worked for a decent wage. SIMPLE AS
> THAT.
Carman wrote:
What? You don't have a vote in The Worker's Paradise?
I'm one of these "older workers" too, and I've NO PROBLEM getting
work here. If America is the source of "anti-older worker values", it
must be something we exported. We probably made a profit on it too.
(Some of those foreigners will buy anything!)
> > Carman wrote;
> > I'm 54, and into my third, or fourth, (depending on how you count),
> >career. I know no one here who is willing and able to work, who can't
> >find *some* employment. Perhaps not the *best* job, probably not at
> >*hallelujah* wages either, but something.
> >
> > The hidden costs of Socialism are in individual drive and in the
> >overall productivity a nation can achieve.
>
> The hardest workers I have ever known are so called socialists.
Carman wrote:
Then you've never worked in a law firm or a brokerage.
> I ran a business for 17 years and I'm a GREEN and I worked 6 days a
> week sometimes and paid my workers more than myself in bad times
> because I don't believe in making other people take responsibility
> for my problems.
Carman wrote:
Yet that's just what you're doing. You screwed up in not getting
enough insurance, so it's the HMO's fault you lost your wife. You
screwed up by not getting retraining in time to make yourself utterly
indispensible, so it's "Jackboot Johnny Howard" and "American style
anti-union and anti-older worker values" that cost you your income!
>
> If you had ever taken a psychology course you would know that
> capitalism kills individual drive.
Carman wrote:
Now it's my turn to say "Bull".
> Its a psychological condition called "Response Outcome Independence"
> (look it up in any behavioral psychology text book) and in poor people
> it causes psychotic behavior and in right neurotic behavior. Its
> based on the things people suffer when no matter what they do, it
> doesn't change their situation. The poor work there asses off and get
> no where and the rich stay right no matter how lazy or hard working
> they are.
Carman wrote:
I entered the phrase "Response Outcome Independence" into the Google
Search Engine and got 10 responses.
1. http://www.hsu.edu/faculty/afo/2000-01/wiebers.htm
Helplessness and Spatial Memory in Swimming Rats
Todd Wiebers, Ph.D. & Brandy Cook, B.A.
Department of Psychology
"Our study describes behavioral procedures for inducing a form of
learned helplessness in swimming rats and also explores long-term
spatial memory".
2. http://www.uwsp.edu/psych/stat/14/HWnonparm.htm
Homework - Nonparametric Statistics
Copyright © 1997-2002 M. Plonsky, Ph.D.
"The learned helplessness is a phenomena whereby exposure to
inescapable, uncontrollable events leads to an expectation of
response-outcome independence. In other words, animals exposed to
aversive, uncontrollable events develop an expectation that nothing
they do matters. This phenomena
has served as an animal model of human depression. In one study, rats
were injected with tumorous cells. Half of the rats had been exposed
to the helplessness treatment and the other half received a similar
treatment, but one that they could control".
3. http://sirio.deusto.es/matute/publicaciones.htm
bibliographical list, in Spanish
4.http://www.csi-net.org/publications/dissertations/alpha/rich.htm
Title: The Effects of Two Behavioral Treatments and Locus of Control
on insomnia and Learned helplessness
Author Rich, Charles E. Degree: Ph.D. Date 1980
Advisor Melvin Witmer
"Abstract Insomnia is one of the most frequently reported
psychiatric disorders today, and the popular notion seems to be that
we are largely helpless to control the disorder without resorting to
sleep medications".
5.http://www.deusto.es/castellano/investigaciones/catalogoweb/equipos/
equip30s.htm
Laboratory psychology, (rat runners?) In Spanish
6. http://www.ku.edu/~stanton/abnormal/third/pp350mood.ppt.
MOOD DISORDERS
Normal vs. Clinical Depression
7.http://www.ku.edu/~stanton/abnormal/third/tsld047.htm
Learned Helplessness - Another Cognitive Theory
"Expectancy of response - outcome independence
Uncontrollable shocks to dogs"
8. http://www.positivepsychology.org/cvabs.htm
Following are most of the abstracts from Dr. Martin E.P. Seligman's
scientific articles. The numbering of these abstracts corresponds to
the numbering on Dr. Seligman's Curriculum Vitae. Megan Kozak typed
these abstracts. If you would like to thank her, please send her an
e-mail.
(These abstracts describe the research models, mostly animal
studies.
This is why I didn't go into "psychology" Jos. Carman)
9. http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bschwar1/helplessness.pdf
FROM HELPLESSNESS TO HOPE: The Seminal Career of Martin Seligman
10. http://www.cs.fiu.edu/~pasztora/women/texas97/draft2.txt
Construction of Alignment of Women
in Higher Education
Ana Pasztor, Ph.D, School of Computer Sciences, Florida
International
University University Park, Miami, FL 33199
(305) 348-2019 e-mail: pasztora@scs,fiu.edu
Judith J. Slater, Ed.D, College of Education, Florida
International
University, Miami, FL 33199 (305) 348-3214
e-mail: sla...@servms.fiu.edu
10th Annual International Conference Women in Higher Education
January 5, 1997
Fort Worth, Texas
Abstract
This study compares questionnaire interview data concerning the
cognitive factors used by women who have completed or are pursuing
post-secondary degrees in mathematics and science. Cognitive
alignment of background/environmental factors lead to successful
strategies, behaviors, beliefs and capabilities which are critical in
decision-making to work in these fields. The hypothesis investigated
in this study is that women cannot be in alignment to be successful in
the mathematics/science culture as it exists today. Further, these
women either stay unaligned or change careers to become aligned.
Carman wrote:
Not ONE mention of Capitalism that I saw. Laboratory psychologists
drowning rats and shocking dogs for the most part.
> The situation applies down here and the government has had to hire
> shrinks to work with older workers who suffer from it because no
> matter what they do to find work, they don't.
Carman wrote:
But Wait!
You attributed this psychological phenomenon to Capitalism, yet you
have it there in The Workers Paradise Where Everything Is So Much
Better
Than In The Nasty Old USA?
> Eventually we will topple this nazi right wing government and people
> who descriminate on the basis of age, race or national origins will be
> be facing the law. Right now they get away with it.
Carman wrote:
You simply CAN'T be talking about Australia, that place Where
Everything Is So Much Better Than In The Nasty Old USA?
> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > I'm equally happy to pay a very good dollar to my dentist, my
> >> >lawyer, my accountant, my plumber, and my gunsmith. All for the
> >> >very same reason: superior workmanship.
> >>
> >> Given the experiences of myself and my wife I value my gunsmith
> >> more than doctors.
> >>
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Australia must not have Socialized gunsmithing yet.
>
> The right wing government of Jackboot Johnny Howard did a big gun grab
> when they got into office so the people could not fight back against
> their nazi industrial relations laws about to be passed. BUT the
> workers faced armed private thugs (with dogs, guns and clubs) at the
> docks with the same bravery as the diggers who fought in Viet Nam,
> WW1, WW2 etc. The Patricks Dock wars put a serious crimp in their
> plans.
Carman wrote:
That's part of the whole Socialist package, I'm afraid.
"It starts with a plan to put in public toilets, then they bring
in the bully-boys to work a man over".
Once The State starts giving people "everything they want", pretty
soon it turns around and "takes everything they have". This is nothing
but normal.
> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > If any of these workmen lets me down, I have the option of going
> >> >to the many other people who have set up in competition with them to
> >> >service the same market.
> >> >
> >> > If The State ever seizes control of these relationships, (all in
> >> >the name of "The Greatest Good, For the Greatest Number", of course),
> >> >I'll lose the option of seeking the services of the best workmen I
> >> >can afford. I don't WANT to hire "just any" plumber. I don't WANT to
> >> >take my guns to "just any" gunsmith. I don't WANT go to "just any"
> >> >physician.
> >> >
> >> > Of course, The State doesn't care what I want. The State is always
> >> >certain it knows best. As often as not, The State is wrong about that.
> >>
> >> The basic rights of man is the right to have rights.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Sorry. People obtain Rights by seizing them. That's how Americans
> >came to have genuine Rights, while other people get, at best, some
> >few privileges grudgingly and temporarily bestowed upon them by The
> >State.
>
> There's an old saying that I agree with that freedom comes from a
> barrel of a gun. Notice that Bush refuses to repeal unconstitutional
> guns laws and Thatcher and Howard took guns from the free, as did
> Hitler and the boys in jackboot.
Carman wrote:
Note also that the Bush Administration has recognised that the
Second Amendment protects an Individual Right.
Bush can't repeal the firearms laws in the US. There simply aren't
the
votes in Congress. But what's it to you? You don't like it here
remember?
You went to Australia where no one has any real Rights, and now you're
complaining about it?
> >> AND that includes equal rights and equal access.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Equal rights? Before the law, certainly. I've no idea what you mean
> >by "equal access"
>
> OK, I'll give you an example from another post of mine concerning the
> draft.
>
> "In 1993 I went back to college at Metropolitan State College in
> Denver and was told I couldn't even register for classes unless I
> registered for the draft.
Carman wrote:
Wait a minute. You assert you're 57 now, which would make you
something
like 48 in 1993? They wanted you to register for the draft at 48 years
of
age?
And didn't you say something about exposure to Agent Orange and the
VA hospital? Something fishy here.
> AND, get this, men are required to register by Metro State but woman
> aren't and the moron woman who was president of the college then
> couldn't see where there was any sex descrimination in that!
Carman wrote:
Who gives a rats #$%^? At 48 they wanted you to register for the
Draft?
> I refused (even though I had a draft card in my pocket) and demanded
> an appointment with this and that bureaucrat. I wore a suit and had
> my airborne wings, chest full of ribbons and my 5 medals including 3
> from Viet Nam including the Viet Nam Cross of Gallentry with palm
> leaves. I also had my DD-214 and DD-215 with me and when I sat down
> with this person who looked at my chest (funny that men can have their
> chests stared at but not woman) when I asked why I, a decorated Viet
> Nam Veteran who did my full 6 years honorably (unlike the current and
> previous president) has to register for the draft for the draft to get
> equal access to a public tax supported institution when woman do not."
>
> THATS EQUAL ACCESS!!! Tell me why little yuppettes can get into
> colorado colleges and not register for the draft but not men???
Carman wrote:
Sorry. I didn't realize until now that I was addressing someone with
such serious psychological issues. Perhaps a newsgroup is not the
place
to be exposing your neurosis?
> >> A job is a right, (...)
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Nowhere that I've ever seen.
> >
> >> (...) equal pay is a right, (...)
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Again, nowhere that I've ever seen. I've always had to work for
> >my money.
>
> Not a problem, work is good and noble but not if you're worked to
> the bone for a fraction of what assholes like the ones at ENRON (who
> wouldn't know hard work if it sat on their faces) then you have a
> serious social problem.
Carman wrote:
Then where do you get this "equal pay is a right" garbage?
I can go along with "equal pay for equal work", provided "equal
work"
means "equal productivity". Anything else is Socialist wishful
thinking.
> >> (...) a gun is a right (...)
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Definately NOT in Canada, and I doubt it is in Australia.
>
> Not since a right wing coalition government took over its not, but
> human rights aren't even considered under Jackboot Johnny Howard just
> industrial relations laws.
>
> >In the US we have this Second Amendment thing that we're working to
> >force The State to recognise.
> >
> Easy to do, just get rid of the current crop of left and right wingers
> and bring in people like the GREENS or reforms and other small parties
> who still hold the moral high ground. The big two parties are
> worthless.
Carman wrote:
Riiiiiiiiiiiight!
You sit there in Australia telling me what a grand old place it is,
(save for "Jackboot Johnny Howard", gun bans, no work, no "human
rights"
and so on), then you want to tell the US how to manage the country
you've
left in high dudgeon?
Call us with advice when you get your own house in order.
> >
> >> (...) and not dying at the hands of a greedy health system is
> >> also a right.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > That's a lot of rights you've dreamed up. Not much of all that
> >bears any resemblence to reality though.
>
> Human rights have always been hard for capitalists, republicans,
> communists and other ISTs to under stand.
Carman wrote:
You mean like the Social-ISTs you've apparently chosen to live
under?
> >Where are these "rights" going to come from anyway. Are they going
> >to be gifts from The State? Why should The State give you anything
> >you aren't willing to take from it by force?
>
> Government is people doing as a group what they can't do as
> individuals, anything past that is oppression.
Carman wrote:
Then it sounds like you're oppressed.
> You can walk with your knuckles dragging on the groung and grunt
> about the free market (...)
Carman wrote:
Oh. Is *that* what I'm doing?
> (...) or stand erect and realize that in the 21st century the rights
> of man kind are more important than social status, wealth and the like.
Carman wrote:
Riiiiiiiiiiiight. You sit there without work, and whine about "the
rights of mankind". I'll go out and continue to earn my living, pay my
taxes and insurance, save some money, and still have cash left over
to finance my gun collection.
> We have an over populated planet that is killing itself for the profits
> of the few.
Carman wrote:
The planet is killing itself?
Or is it those people who are reproducing without limit who are
killing themselves with their numbers?
> 19th and 20th concepts of communism, capitalism or whatever ISM will
> die this century and I feel assured that all the problems of pollution,
> poverty, inequality, accesses of organized religion etc will be solved
> if we come together and abandon the silly tribalism and Balkanization
> of the planet.
Carman wrote:
You can tell yourself whatever comforting little stories help you
get
to sleep, but I call it fantasizing.
You mentioned 10 years of university education? What the hell did
you
study that you can talk such pathetic junk?
Jos.Carman
> On Wed, 11 Sep 2002 07:31:46 GMT, Thom <as...@freemail.com.au> wrote:
> >
> >Australia is an island. All commonwealth countries have socialized
> >medicine. Any Australia with the card get get free health care in any
> >commonwealth country including Canada and they in Australia. In
> >America if you don't have insurance you get a free ride on a gurney
> >into the parking lot.
>
> That's not even close to being true.
Carman wrote:
Oh, that won't worry Mr. Thom!
Thom
Dege) wrote:
>On Wed, 11 Sep 2002 07:31:46 GMT, Thom <as...@freemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>Australia is an island. All commonwealth countries have socialized
>>medicine. Any Australia with the card get get free health care in any
>>commonwealth country including Canada and they in Australia. In
>>America if you don't have insurance you get a free ride on a gurney
>>into the parking lot.
>
>That's not even close to being true.
So if Australia isn't an island, tell us what its connected to???
THOM
Thom
Carman doesn't think its an island either. Say guys I hate to fly can
you tell me when the AMTRAK train leaves Los Angeles for Sydney???
THOM
Jos.Carman
Carman wrote:
I always thought it was a continent, but if Mr. Thom says it's an
island, that's good enough for me!
Thom
Australia is an island. All commonwealth countries have socialized
medicine. Any Australia with the card get get free health care in any
commonwealth country including Canada and they in Australia. In
America if you don't have insurance you get a free ride on a gurney
into the parking lot.
>
>> >
>> >> You pay 1.5% of your adjusted income to a maximum of about US$250
>> >> a year for medical and it has been excellent. Never had any delays
>> >> or bad treatment, 100X's better than the USA.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > You have much experience with US healthcare?
>>
>> Yes it murdered my wife. She was the victim of an HMO. At the same
>> time she fell ill so did I and went to my HMO which wouldn't let me
>> see a doctor and threw a couple of pills at me left by some salesman.
>> It got worse and a week later I was put in the Denver VA hospital
>> which tested me to having 48% lung capacity, something missed by the
>> greed based system. In the process I was put on the Agent Orange
>> watch list and given an Agent Orange exam since my asthma is an agent
>> orange condition.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Perhaps you weren't sufficiently careful in choosing your insurance
>coverage? Maybe that sounds unduely harsh, but choosing healthcare
>coverage is up to the individual in the US and it's possible to do it
>wrong.
>
Your not listening.... HMO! I didn't have a choice where I worked and
because she worked for the State she had to use the system they have.
AND at US wages, who the hell can afford much more. Remember the
number of Americans who can't afford even car insurance much less
health insurance!!
>
> Effectively, we paid twice. We paid the ever increasing taxes the
>Canadian system required for it's ever decreasing performance, and
>then we paid again in the US to obtain the care she needed.
>>
>> Shall I go on about greedy dentists too???
>>
>
> Carman wrote:
> Please do.
>
>> >
>> >> Part of the problem in Canada and the USA is the outragous money
>> >> doctors get while nurses starve.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > This is Capitalism at work. Normal, everyday, supply-and-demand
>> >economics. Nurses are in high demand in the US, so they're leaving
>> >low-paying jobs in Canada for better wages and job-satisfaction in
>> >the US.
>>
>> and leaving low paying jobs in the USA for better jobs in Australia
>> where all wages are double that of the US.
>
> Carman wrote;
> The wages had better be double, as the mid-market currency exchange
>rate, (mid-market rates are derived from mid-point between the buy and
>sell rates of large-value transactions in the global currency
>markets), Sept. 10, 2002 00:35:28, is $1 AUD = $0.548690 USD.
Average wage is $36,000 a year and the cost of living 40-60% lower
than the USA. A new 4 bedroom house in melbourne is US$ 65,000
according to the inserts in this mornings paper and the government
says that 94% of people who live in homes own them. New cars start at
US$7800 in todays paper though I get the impression used cars are
cheaper in the USA. Restaurants are a bit more (because of the fact
minimum wages for waiters is $26,000 a year) but food in the market is
much cheaper. Gas is about the same.
>
>http://www.xe.com/ucc/
>
>> >
>> >> Too bad these guys went out of the business of providing health care
>> >> and into the business of making money.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Perhaps you have mistaken the intent of the person who goes to all
>> >the trouble of obtaining an MD? Would you think the same of someone
>> >practicing law or accounting?
>>
>> Lawyers are a sore on the butt of civilization and accounts don't have
>> people's lives in their hands.
>>
>
> Carman wrote:
> I guess it was predictable you wouldn't value lawyers, until you
>need one.
>
> My accountant has my business in his hands. That IS my life.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Why would you object to people who have highly desirable skills
>> >selling those skills for the most money they can obtain? This is what
>> >I do. I'm not a physician, (for which we can all be grateful), but the
>> >skills I do possess are for sale. Why should a physician's skills be
>> >any different?
>>
>> Because people are more important than money.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Can you quote the part of the physician's oath that includes a vow
>of poverty?
Can you quote the part that says they can deny care if you can't pay??
Are they in the business if medicine or in the business of making
money off of the unfortunate.????
>
>> This is the 21st century not the greedy 19th or 20th.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Did something change beside the date? I don't think so.
>
>> All human beings have equal value and even the constitution says it.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Perhaps your Australian Constitution says that. The US Constitution
>does not.
We hold these truths to be selfevident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED
EQUAL. What next, its part of the communist manifesto???? Does it
matter which piece of paper the HEROS of PHILIDELPHIA put it?
>
>> We hold these truths to be selfevident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL.
>
> Carman wrote:
> The words you quote are from the Declaration of Independence. You
>may wish to construe them to mean some kind of absolute metaphysical
>"equality", but they only say that all men are "created" equal, not
>that they remain so.
Yes, with scumbags like bush in office, inequality, the rat race,
godless greed based capitalism and everything that oppresses Americans
will continue won't they???? WE REMAIN EQUAL FROM THE DAY WE ARE BORN
TO THE DAY WE DIE! All human beings have equal dignity, equal rights
and equal responsibilities regardless of their sex, race, religious
beliefs or economic status. That's what the guys freezing their asses
off at Valley Forge were fighting for. We fought a revolution to get
big government (The King), Big Business (British Capitalism) and Big
religion (church of england) off our backs. It wasn't a perfact place
in 1784 and the issue of slavary in the south a shamefull situation
but remember we had to compromise to the right wingers in the south on
this issue to form a country.
>
> The "equality" spoken of in the Constitution is "Equality Before
>The Law". No equality of value is mentioned or implied.
Bull
>
>> >
>> >> Here Dentists make the money and doctors don't
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > From this I conclude you don't have Socialized Dentristry. Yet.
>>
>> Sorta, its minimal and it costs about US$11 a visit but its basic.
>>
>
> Carman wrote:
> Give it time then, the dentists will be reduced to employees of The
>State, and the dental care available will deterioriate.
So you believe all dentists are greedy capitalists who refuse to work
for less than $200,000 a year???? What a negitive world you live in.
This is 2002, not 1902 or 1802.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > I'm actally quite happy to pay my physician for the services he
>> >renders me. He's a first class physician, and makes a pile of money
>> >as a result. (He lives in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, drives a far
>> >better car than I'll ever own, went to school for six years longer
>> >than I did, and he's smarter than I am to boot). He EARNS the money
>> >I, and his other patients, pay him.
>> >
>> I have 10 years of college and am out of work. Why? I'm 57 years old
>> and under the greed based system seem to have no value like millions
>> of other over 40's in the English speaking world.
>>
>
> Carman wrote:
> Why *are* you out of work, and why is it someone else's fault? For
>that matter, what's wrong with Australia if it can't use every man
>it has with skills and a willingness to work?
Jackboot Johnny Howard brought American style anti-union and
anti-older worker values to Australia. Older workers have been sacked
by the hundreds of thousands to put on cheaper younger workers who
have never belonged to a union or worked for a decent wage. SIMPLE AS
THAT.
>
> I'm 54, and into my third, or fourth, (depending on how you count),
>career. I know no one here who is willing and able to work, who can't
>find *some* employment. Perhaps not the *best* job, probably not at
>*hallelujah* wages either, but something.
>
> The hidden costs of Socialism are in individual drive and in the
>overall productivity a nation can achieve.
The hardest workers I have ever known are so calld socialists. I ran
a business for 17 years and I'm a GREEN and I worked 6 days a week
sometimes and paid my workers more than myself in bad times because I
don't believe in making other people take responsibility for my
problems.
If you had ever taken a psychology course you would know that
capitalism kills individual drive. Its a psychological condition
called "Response Outcome Independence" (look it up in any behavioral
psychology text book) and in poor people it causes psychotic behavior
and in right neurotic behavior. Its based on the things people suffer
when no matter what they do, it doesn't change their situation. The
ppor work there asses off and get no where and the rich stay right no
matter how lazy or hard working they are.
The situation applies down here and the government has had to hire
shrinks to work with older workers who suffer from it because no
matter what they do to find work, they don't.
Eventually we will topple this nazi right wing government and people
who descriminate on the basis of age, race or national origins will be
facing the law. Right now they get away with it.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > I'm equally happy to pay a very good dollar to my dentist, my
>> >lawyer, my accountant, my plumber, and my gunsmith. All for the
>> >very same reason: superior workmanship.
>>
>> Given the experiences of myself and my wife I value my gunsmith
>> more than doctors.
>>
>
> Carman wrote:
> Australia must not have Socialized gunsmithing yet.
The right wing government of Jackboot Johnny Howard did a big gun grab
when they got into office so the people could not fight back against
their nazi industrial relations laws about to be passed. BUT the
workers faced armed private thugs (with dogs, guns and clubs) at the
docks with the same bravery as the diggers who fought in Viet Nam,
WW1, WW2 etc. The Patricks Dock wars put a serious crimp in their
plans.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > If any of these workmen lets me down, I have the option of going
>> >to the many other people who have set up in competition with them to
>> >service the same market.
>> >
>> > If The State ever seizes control of these relationships, (all in
>> >the name of "The Greatest Good, For the Greatest Number", of course),
>> >I'll lose the option of seeking the services of the best workmen I
>> >can afford. I don't WANT to hire "just any" plumber. I don't WANT to
>> >take my guns to "just any" gunsmith. I don't WANT go to "just any"
>> >physician.
>> >
>> > Of course, The State doesn't care what I want. The State is always
>> >certain it knows best. As often as not, The State is wrong about that.
>>
>> The basic rights of man is the right to have rights.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Sorry. People obtain Rights by seizing them. That's how Americans
>came to have genuine Rights, while other people get, at best, some
>few privileges grudgingly and temporarily bestowed upon them by The
>State.
There's an old saying that I agree with that freedom comes from a
barrel of a gun. Notice that Bush refuses to repeal unconstitutional
guns laws and Thatcher and Howard took guns from the free, as did
Hitler and the boys in jackboot.
>
>> AND that includes equal rights and equal access.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Equal rights? Before the law, certainly. I've no idea what you mean
>by "equal access"
OK, I'll give you an example from another post of mine concerning the
draft.
"In 1993 I went back to college at Metropolitan State College in
Denver and was told I couldn't even register for classes unless I
registered for the draft.
AND, get this, men are required to register by Metro State but woman
aren't and the moron woman who was president of the college then
couldn't see where there was any sex descrimination in that!
I refused (even though I had a draft card in my pocket) and demanded
an appointment with this and that bureaucrat. I wore a suit and had
my airborne wings, chest full of ribbons and my 5 medals including 3
from Viet Nam including the Viet Nam Cross of Gallentry with palm
leaves. I also had my DD-214 and DD-215 with me and when I sat down
with this person who looked at my chest (funny that men can have their
chests stared at but not woman) when I asked why I, a decorated Viet
Nam Veteran who did my full 6 years honorably (unlike the current and
previous president) has to register for the draft for the draft to get
equal access to a public tax supported institution when woman do not."
THATS EQUAL ACCESS!!! Tell me why little yuppettes can get into
colorado colleges and not register for the draft but not men???
>
>> A job is a right, (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Nowhere that I've ever seen.
>
>> (...) equal pay is a right, (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Again, nowhere that I've ever seen. I've always had to work for
>my money.
Not a problem, work is good and nobal but not if your worked to the
bone for a fraction of what assholes like the ones at ENRON (who
wouldn't know hard work if it sat on their faces) then you have a
serious social problem.
>
>> (...) a gun is a right (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Definately NOT in Canada, and I doubt it is in Australia.
Not since a right wing coalition government took over its not, but
human rights aren't even considered under Jackboot Johnny Howard just
industrial relations laws.
>US we have this Second Amendment thing that we're working to force
>The State to recognise.
Easy to do, just get rid of the current crop of left and right wingers
and bring in people like the GREENS or reforms and other small parties
who still hold the moral high ground. The big two parties are
worthless.
>
>> (...) and not dying at the hands of a greedy health system is
>> also a right.
>
> Carman wrote:
> That's a lot of rights you've dreamed up. Not much of all that
>bears any resemblence to reality though.
Human rights have always been hard for capitalists, republicans,
communists and other ISTs to under stand.
>Where are these "rights"
>going to come from anyway. Are they going to be gifts from The
>State? Why should The State give you anything you aren't willing
>to take from it by force?
Government is people doing as a group what they can't do as
individuals, anything past that is oppression. You can walk with your
knuckles dragging on the groung and grunt about the free market or
stand erect and realize that in the 21st century the rights of man
kind are more important than social status, wealth and the like. We
have an over populated planet that is killing itself for the profits
of the few. 19th and 20th concepts of communism, capitalism or
whatever ISM will die this century and I feel assured that all the
problems of pollution, poverty, inequality, accesses of organized
religion etc will be solved if we come together and abandon the silly
tribalism and Balkanization of the planet.
THOM
Thom
Or ones that give a damn about its people. Socialism being opposed to
capitalism and communism has systems that believe in the basic rights
of people to a minimum standard of living. The three countries that
have the highest standards of living (Australia, Norway and Denmark)
and who have the most liveable cities (same 3) hold to these values.
>
>> Any Australia with the card get get free health care in any
>> commonwealth country including Canada and they in Australia.
>
> Carman wrote:
> For all the good it will do you.
>
>> In America if you don't have insurance you get a free ride on
>> a gurney into the parking lot.
>
> Carman wrote;
> As opposed to Canada where the put you on a waiting list until
>you die.
Funny but the one time I needed it in Canada for a sporting accident
in BC (pre-tibial hemotoma) I waited no more than a half an hour in
the emergency room. They X-Rayed, found it wasn't fractured and
turned me loose with a crutch which is exactly what was required.
And how are people supposed to do that with the incredibly poor pay
Americans get and with the highest insurance rates in the world?
Australia has private health care if you want it and its 1/5th the
cost in the USA. When are you going to admit to yourself that
healthcare in the USA is outragiously expensive and if employers
weren't providing it most people couldn't afford it. Same with care
insurance. Colorado for instance says that about 1/3rd of drivers
aren't carrying manditory liability insurance because they can't
afford it.
>
> You had the option to buy yourselves more and better insurance,
>and you didn't do it.
Not on what I was making
>It's not a crime, until the illness or the
>accident comes; then it might as well be a crime because you get
>punished for your lack of foresight.
Or lack of honest employer
>
> Did you spend the money on a house and a nice car? Poor choice,
>as it turned out. You weren't to "know" you'd need the extra
>insurance (if it would have helped), but that's the breaks!
No I spent it on keeping from freezing during the winter and starving
all year around and putting a teenager thru school.
>
> I've made a few bad choices myself here and there, like staying
>so long in Canada when I *knew* the place was going to hell in a
>handbasket. But that was MY choice. I did that. So it was MY fault,
>not someone else's.
So you moved to America to become a target for AlQ???? Hope your
expensive health and life insurance is paid up! Why wait just stand
in line at the recruitment office with the kids of the Bush and Chaney
family to join up for the war!! Oh, sorry about that, you'll be on
line alone, those families don't believe in military obligations, they
just send your kids.
>
> In the US The State assumes no responsibility for providing you
>with medical care. If you want it, you must take steps to obtain
>it for yourself. If you don't obtain it, and keep up the payments,
>the failure can radically effect the quality and length of your
>life.
It also does nothing to prevent you from needing it. Like keeping
idiot arabs out of airliners or keeping greedy flight schools from
training them to commit unspeakable acts.
>
> Now tell me you didn't know that at the time. Tell me it came as
>a complete surprise to you that your insurance wasn't up to snuff.
It did, I believed their lies. Thank god I'm a vet and could access
the only decent health care system in the land, the VA Hospitals.
>
> Tough bounce. It's a hard old world and sometimes you screw up.
>
>> AND at US wages, who the hell can afford much more.
>
> Carman wrote;
> I can, and so can most other people in the US.
I can't type I'm laughing so hard. The USA has the second lowest
wages in the industrialized world according to the UN!!!
>
> Many of the people who *can't* pay for insurance, get their care
>through welfare. from what I've seen here in NC, that care is
>roughly the equivalent of the care I used to get under Socialized
>Medicine in Canada. To wit, not so hot, but better than nothing.
How about this, pass a law that every citizen gets the same access to
health care at the same price as Congresspersons.
We don't want to except for the right wing gun control. We get value
for money here. I don't mind paying 50% tax as long as I get the
services. I can walk anywhere in Melbourne at any time of night in
Melbourne and not feel scared, I can expect a lot of parks and
reserves and I get them, I get good public transport (unlike most
places in the USA) and I have a bus a block away and a tram line in
front of my house that runs every 7 minutes during the day and its
cost me about US$22 a month. Things aren't perfect here and like
everyplace on earth we have our little problems but all you have to
look at is the AUST/American emigration ration, for ever 28 Americans
that move here only one moves north and half of them come home!!!!
Whats the old saying about voting with your wallet or your feet???
>
> One of the reasons American society is so successful is that much
>of the time the government lets the people get on with the work.
>Every time the government starts regulating this, controling that,
>addressing inequities and generally getting in the way, the overall
>productivity suffers and the whole aparatus begins to slow down.
Just the crooked aparatus, decent clean and sound systems continue.
Anyway this isn't soviet Russia where success is measure by
production. People are more important.
>
> When this happens, the government climbs off, lets things speed up
>again, until some bureaucrat gets the bright idea that he knows how
>to make it all "fairer" and they start piling on again.
Given all the crooked capitalists that are being nailed left and right
ranging from Martha Stewart to the friendly folks at ENRON and
Anderson I'd say you should reasssess your position in the 21st
century.
As I help them in their time of need. Its called mateship and it was
taught to me by the US Government in the military..... YOU DON'T
DESERT YOUR MATES!!! But people like AWOL Bush didn't learn that part
did they???
>
>> Are they in the business if medicine or in the business of making
>> money off of the unfortunate.????
>
> Carman wrote:
> They're in business to make money, of course. Why would you think
>otherwise?
In a 19th century economy I have to agree with you.
>
> If they wanted to dedicate their lives to helping "the unfortunate",
>they'd be medical missionaries, or run free clinics for the indigent
>or something, and more power to 'em.
>
> Unfortunately, (especially for "the unfortunate") such people aren't
>usually willing to go to work for members of the educated middle class
>who have neglected to obtain sufficient insurance to defray the costs
>of treatment. It's a bummer, but there it is.
Neglected or can't afford insurance??? You act like this is a couple
of bucks a year!
>
>> >> This is the 21st century not the greedy 19th or 20th.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Did something change beside the date? I don't think so.
>> >
>> >> All human beings have equal value and even the constitution says it.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Perhaps your Australian Constitution says that. The US Constitution
>> >does not.
>>
>> We hold these truths to be selfevident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED
>> EQUAL. What next, its part of the communist manifesto???? Does it
>> matter which piece of paper the HEROS of PHILIDELPHIA put it?
>
> Carman wrote:
> You asserted "even the constitution says that". It doesn't.
I stand corrected, so does that mean you also disagree with the
declaration of independence??? Are you a TORY????
>
>> >
>> >> We hold these truths to be selfevident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED
>> >> EQUAL.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > The words you quote are from the Declaration of Independence. You
>> >may wish to construe them to mean some kind of absolute metaphysical
>> >"equality", but they only say that all men are "created" equal, not
>> >that they remain so.
>>
>> Yes, with scumbags like bush in office, inequality, the rat race,
>> godless greed based capitalism and everything that oppresses Americans
>> will continue won't they????
>
> Carman wrote:
> This is priceless! Thanks for leaving the US, and I hope you never
>come back. We've got enough whiners here. I wonder if they could be
>induced to leave here and go to Australia?
Don't ever come to Australia, we have enough greedy John Wayne style
cowboy capitalists screwing up things here now. Did it ever dawn on
you that attitudes like yours are the reasons nut cases fly airliners
into buildings???
>
>> WE REMAIN EQUAL FROM THE DAY WE ARE BORN TO THE DAY WE DIE!
>
> Carman wrote:
> Utter nonsense. Equality "before the law", is the best you get.
Maybe in your world but of course your world is coming to an end soon.
This is the 21st century and after we get over the BUSH hump in the
road of progress we will be moving towards many great things.
>
>> All human beings have equal dignity, (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> I wonder what "equal dignity" is supposed to mean?
It means that work has dignity and it doesn't mater if you sit on your
dead ass in a business suit or dig ditches, he who works should
prosper. The current system has the people who do the least work
getting the money. The ONE single reason capitalism is flawed is
because you can make more money (and quicker) being a crook than by
being honest.
>
> I see people working hard and smart at difficult jobs, making their
>livings and providing for themselves and their families. I see these
>people as possessed of "dignity", something they've worked for and
>won.
Do you have the same respect for fruit pickers, people at the car
wash, farmers, disabled veterans who can do nothing more than sell
news papers, and people at McDonalds???? If you do then pay them the
same as everyone else!
>
> I see other people working only when they must. I see them getting
>by, when they do, on charity, on welfare, surviving off the labor of
>other people like parasites. You'd assert they are possessed of "equal
>dignity"? How distasteful.
You forgot people at ENRON and Arthur Anderson who produce nothing and
just move money around and DO NOTHING USEFULL!!!! Lets throw in
futures traders, stock brokers, lawyers (especially corporate lawyers)
who do nothing usefull and are an enormous boil on the butt of
civilization. Lets throw in your right wing FAMILY VALUES rubbish.
If you and the million a year Rev Billy Bob TV preachers value
families so much how come you pay family men so little??? Why do 45%
of married woman HAVE TO WORK to make family neds meet???
>
>> (...) equal rights, (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Among which is the right to fail, through no one's fault but their
>own.
I will agree with you there, everyone has the right to fail at what
they do but they also have the right to have access to what they are
good at. Everyone has things they do well and do poorly.
>
>> (...) and equal responsibilities (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Like making their own livings and providing for themselves and
>any children they choose to have?
One thing I see in your whole thread is this John Wayne "real men fed
for themselves" thing from the 1800's. The world is too over crowded
for the rugged individual stuff anymore. You can't even fart in an
over populated world and not have an effect on someone else. That's
what this south african world conference was about. If I drive and
pollute rather than taking the tram today it effects the whole wold!!!
If you burn leaves in your back yard in NC it effects me here just as
much as the idiot slash and burn farmers in Indonesia effect you up
there. The 21st century will be a period of great social growth but
also one of dire consequence if we don't change our ways of thinking
and doing things.
>
>> (...) regardless of their sex, race, religious beliefs or economic
>> status.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Sounds good to me. I'm not going to prevent anyone from working for
>a living because "of their sex, race, religious beliefs, or economic
>status".
You left out age. Do you believe men should be sacked for younger
worker whent hey reach 40???
>
> On the other hand, I'm not going to support them if they choose not
>to work, and I'm not going to pay for their medical care either.
So what are you doing to provide jobs (and I'm not talking about
minimum wages slave jobs)???? The Republicans don't care about people
and the Democrats talk the talk but are increasingly looking more like
PUBS especially at campaign contribution time. Are you voting for
candidates that will do something?? And not just looking for the REP
tag on each ballot name and then go DAHHHHH!
>
>> That's what the guys freezing their asses off at Valley Forge
>> were fighting for.
>
> Carman wrote;
> Nope. This is where an ignorance of history gets you. People end up
>believing all kinds of nonsense.
So I should get a refund for my Bachelors' Degree in History????
(Metro State College 1981)
>
> The troops at Valley Forge were in a state of insurrection because
>the British government refused to recognise their rights as
>Englishmen.
>The State embarked on a long series of acts of oppression in very
>clear violation of The State's own law.
Typical simplistic answer, almost a buzz word. If you read all of the
papers of the period ranging from Thomas Paine (who also messed around
in England after 1789 with such papers as the RIGHTS of MAN) to the
writings of Jefferson you find a very very complex ethos that created
the revolution. Jefferson basically said in 1800 that the war was to
rid ourselves of Big Government (the King), Big Business (British
capitalism) and Big Religion but by 1800 all three had been put back
on the backs of the people by home grown versions of same and he
dispaired of this.
Other myths spewed by right wing rewriters of history say that the
founding fathers were all good Christians. What an incredible heap of
rubbish!!! The 13 colonies each had a separate religion except Penn.
which had three. Only Maryland was Christian, the rest were various
Protestant sects. I've studied each of the founding fathers and
signers of this and that and found that most were Diests or Free
Masons (notice the fact that theres Mason symbols on the $1 bill even
today and Washington DC is laid out according to Mason plans). The
representitive from my home state, the Rev. John Weitherspoon was the
most aspoused Protestant and most of these guys had mistrersses all
over the place especially the ones that owned black slaves.
BUT above all of this they were all one thing... LIBERALS!!! The
conservitives were called Tories and loyal to a foreign power. They
ahd liberal ideals of equality and fraternity, justice and the rights
of man because they are human, not because they are rich or connected.
>
>> We fought a revolution to get big government (The King), Big
>> Business (British Capitalism) and Big religion (church of
>> england) off our backs.
>
> Carman wrote:
> More garbage. Had The British State recognised and respected the
>rights the American colonists had under law, there'd have been no
>Revolution.
yes there would have. The Americans were so different than the
British people by 1780 they didn't even share the same values. By
1812 (you need to read about that war) the accents were totally
different too and in fact the issue of impressment of American sailors
was easily recognized because you could tell a yank from a Brit the
minute he opened his mouth.
The American revolution had a profound effect on England and France,
more so France and as I mentioned before the great thinkers of the
revolution were active in Europe after the war.
>
>> It wasn't a perfect place in 1784 and the issue of slavary in the
>> south a shamefull situation but remember we had to compromise to
>> the right wingers in the south on this issue to form a country.
>
> Carman wrote:
> You've really sucked up a lot of nonsense haven't you?
Your right I'm sorry, we should bring back slavary. I was drunk on
capitalism that night when I read about the debates in Philie where
Thomas Jefferson had to drop the anti-slavary clauses in the
constitution to get the southern deligates to sign. I'm sorry again,
slavary is in the bible and its OK.
>
>> > The "equality" spoken of in the Constitution is "Equality Before
>> >The Law". No equality of value is mentioned or implied.
>>
>> Bull
>
> Carman wrote:
> Cite me chapter and verse then, oh knowledgable one. Show me in the
>US Constitution where it speaks of some sort of metaphysical "equality
>of value". You can't, because no such exists.
How can I you obviously haven't got a copy to consult or a history
book to read. Perhaps a trip back to Canada would help where you can
worship the Queen???
>
>> >> >
>> >> >> Here Dentists make the money and doctors don't
>> >> >
>> >> > Carman wrote:
>> >> > From this I conclude you don't have Socialized Dentristry. Yet.
>> >>
>> >> Sorta, its minimal and it costs about US$11 a visit but its basic.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Give it time then, the dentists will be reduced to employees of
>> >The State, and the dental care available will deterioriate.
>>
>> So you believe all dentists are greedy capitalists who refuse to work
>> for less than $200,000 a year???? What a negitive world you live in.
>> This is 2002, not 1902 or 1802.
>
> Carman wrote;
> When you take the economic incentive out of any kind of work, the
>creative, smart, and hardworking people are going to find themselves
>employment that pays off in material rewards.
Maybe your friends are incapable of doing anything decent except for
big money but the rest of us can. I made $78 a month in my earlly
years in the air force and did great work simply because my ethos says
you do good work for the sake of good work. I fought and flew and
jumped in Viet Nam for $319 a month, are you saying the government
ownes me a couple of million???? You piss on the graves of every dead
soldier and insult every underpaid veteran in America with capitalist
shit like that!!! The guys that hit the beaches of Normandy or
islands in the pacific did their best for $41 a month!!! What's next
from your box of stock answers? That corporations took Normandy and
Okinawa or were surrounded during the battle of the bulge??? Or ENRON
executives too Pork Chop Hill in Korea or BUSH, CLINTON and RUSH
LIMBAUGH fought bravely in Viet Nam for big money!!! May I suggest
that you use some of your expensive health insurance to go see a
shrink for a reality check???
Professionals do their best regardless of the rewards and people like
BUSH and the republicans rarely have those kinds of professional
ethics.
>
> If you distort the entire economic system, (as Socialism does),
Capitalism, communism and socialism are DIFFERENT economic systems and
do not distort each other.
>the disadvantage of these same creative, smart, hardworking people,
>they will quietly abandon your pathetic system and go elsewhere.
Like I said REAL professionals do their best regardless of the system.
Greedy assholes follow the money no matter who gets hurt.
>
> This is why the US gets so many intelligent, skilled, and highly
>trained immigrants from Canada and the other countries playing with
>Socialism.
Funny but all the Canadians I knew in American went south because they
married an American or couldn't take the cold weather any more.
I remember reading an article in the Rocky Mountain News during the
period when the French thing was threatening to break up the
confederation and the US Government paid for a huge survey in each
provence to see if they would vote to join the USA. According to the
artical all but British Columbia (which had a socialist Premier at the
time and is the most prosperous of all the provences) said yes as long
as they could keep their social welfare system and medical benifits.
Given that I'd say you are not very in touch with the feelings of the
average Canadian.
When I came here in 1988 to be the American Coordinator of the Viet
Nam Veterans International Reunion (Nov 88 in Melbourne) I talked with
a lot of the Canadians who came for it and they don't agree with you
either.
>
> 'Are you very good at a job? Would you like to make a LOT more
>money than you make in the UK, in Canada, in Europe, or some other
>place where you're getting taxed to death to pay for other people's
>healthcare? Come to the US and get RICH!'
Right, the minute they see Viet Nam Vet on the resume the questions
start. Are you over your drug problems from Viet Nam yet??? This is
especially cute from some asshole who was a pot smoking drfat dodging
hippie in the 60's and 70's.
And taxed to death??? We pay lower taxes here than the USA!! Even
with the new right wing sales tax we pay less. For medical care you
pay 1.5% of your adjusted gross income (taxable) with a maximum of
A325 or US$178 a year!!!! AND we get better health care than even the
full paying people in the USA. Australia leads the world in HIV
research and treatments (though we actually have very little of it),
world class drugs you can't get there and we actually have a surplus
of CAT scan machines where in the USA they are hard to come by outside
the big cities.
We also don't have all the poison and crap in the food that makes you
ill in the first place. because the weather is better people get more
exercise and don't hid in the house all winter BUT we do have a
raising problem with child over weight problems due to too much
homework, TV, Video games (that keep kids inside and not outside
playing) and American style fatty fast foods. But we are woking on
that like not having soft drinks in school and more natural aussie
foods and not hamburgers and crap like that.
>
> Of course, it's understood that you can also go broke, and if
>you no one but you will lose much sleep over it.
And whats wrong with a world were everyone is rich??? The capitalist
and communist system depends on the few soaking off the many. The
middle roads says that if you work you should have a good life
regardless of what you do. The guy who drives a bus is just as
important as the paper pusher in some corporate board room.
The compassionate human being looses sleep over any person who is will
to work and can't find work. If your some druggie or drunk (inlcuding
a fat cat drunk) then fuck you and the white horse you rode in on.
>
>> >> > Carman wrote:
>> >> > I'm actally quite happy to pay my physician for the services he
>> >> >renders me. He's a first class physician, and makes a pile of money
>> >> >as a result. (He lives in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, drives a far
>> >> >better car than I'll ever own, went to school for six years longer
>> >> >than I did, and he's smarter than I am to boot). He EARNS the money
>> >> >I, and his other patients, pay him.
>> >> >
>> >> I have 10 years of college and am out of work. Why? I'm 57 years old
>> >> and under the greed based system seem to have no value like millions
>> >> of other over 40's in the English speaking world.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Why *are* you out of work, and why is it someone else's fault? For
>> >that matter, what's wrong with Australia if it can't use every man
>> >it has with skills and a willingness to work?
>>
>> Jackboot Johnny Howard brought American style anti-union and
>> anti-older worker values to Australia. Older workers have been sacked
>> by the hundreds of thousands to put on cheaper younger workers who
>> have never belonged to a union or worked for a decent wage. SIMPLE AS
>> THAT.
>
> Carman wrote:
> What? You don't have a vote in The Worker's Paradise?
yes I do, I'm a duel citizen like 100,000+ other yanks in this area.
The problem is coalition governments, the one major flaw in the
Parliamentry system. The current government sits with only about 33%
of the vote (same as Hitler and Reagan) but they have talked other
splinter right wing members to join them in exchange for a portfolio.
Last parliament Labour had 50.8% but couldn't sit. With the emerging
Greens they lost some of that this time as more Greens took Senate
seats and we are winning big time at the State Level. In Tasmania
last month we kicks the right wing Liberal Party in the butt and have
as many seats as they do. In the up coming Victorian State election
we will probably take our first lower House seat (I've been asked to
run in the seat of Cranbourne or Gembrooke but haven't decided yet).
In the last elections we took 7 local councils.
>
> I'm one of these "older workers" too, and I've NO PROBLEM getting
>work here. If America is the source of "anti-older worker values", it
>must be something we exported. We probably made a profit on it too.
Damned right its exported, just like all the other crap yuppie values
that have infected this culture. John Howard, the lapdog of George
Bush is doing everything he can to drive this country back to the 19th
century and replace the Australian culture with an American Economy.
The result is descrimination, unemployment, crime (well actually the
gun control laws he passed to disarm union members caused the 25%
increase in crime) and a growing sense of dispair among the people.
This government will have a hard time in the next national election
and Old Jackboot Johnny will NOT be in parliament after the next
election.
>(Some of those foreigners will buy anything!)
>
>> > Carman wrote;
>> > I'm 54, and into my third, or fourth, (depending on how you count),
>> >career. I know no one here who is willing and able to work, who can't
>> >find *some* employment. Perhaps not the *best* job, probably not at
>> >*hallelujah* wages either, but something.
>> >
>> > The hidden costs of Socialism are in individual drive and in the
>> >overall productivity a nation can achieve.
>>
>> The hardest workers I have ever known are so called socialists.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Then you've never worked in a law firm or a brokerage.
Nor do I wish to associate with such low lifes!!! Especially lawyers.
Where is the Bard now that we need you!!!
>
>> I ran a business for 17 years and I'm a GREEN and I worked 6 days a
>> week sometimes and paid my workers more than myself in bad times
>> because I don't believe in making other people take responsibility
>> for my problems.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Yet that's just what you're doing. You screwed up in not getting
>enough insurance, so it's the HMO's fault you lost your wife. You
>screwed up by not getting retraining in time to make yourself utterly
>indispensible, so it's "Jackboot Johnny Howard" and "American style
>anti-union and anti-older worker values" that cost you your income!
>
You need to see a shrink if you believe that. I have retrained 4
times mate! I have degrees in Professional Photography and ran a
studio, then degrees in History and Pshchology and worked with
veterans/PTSD in region 5 of the VA, also ran a parachute business
including designing my own gear and test jumping it myself since I
wouldn't ask anything of others I wouldn't do myself.... unlike
capitalists like BUSH etc etc. Now I do computer work, mostly support
and some programming.
>>
>> If you had ever taken a psychology course you would know that
>> capitalism kills individual drive.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Now it's my turn to say "Bull".
Read "Maslows Heirachy of Needs" and understand what drives the
greedy. Then read up on concepts like "Response Outcome Indepence"
where initiuative is killed by things like communism and capitalism.
You didn't include the human aspects but your getting there.
I'll snip does here to get to the point. Capitalism works only when
the rewards are consistant. What you seem to see is another disorder
called "intermittenet re-enforcement". For some reason the human mind
responds more readily to a reward granted for behavior when its
intermitten. Getting the reward every time has less of an effect.
This is part of the reasons slot machines are set up to pay you
occassionally, they found that people loose interest in the slots if
they win every time!!!
The same goes for the disorder of capitalism. If we were to "win" at
everything every time capitalism would implode just like communism
did. Capitalism, unlike socialism, is based on this disorder that IR
and ROI cause.
> Not ONE mention of Capitalism that I saw. Laboratory psychologists
>drowning rats and shocking dogs for the most part.
Nor did it mention socialism or communism. This is what the third way
is about. Coming up with a system that rewards hard and creative work
without leaving people by the wayside like the two C's do. It also
has to eliminate the blocks to progress that capitalism does because
of lack of capital or knowing the right people. Most good ideas never
get produced because of money. Good ideas should be acted on because
they are good ideas not because they are profitable. Lets take
non-polluting cars. The hydrogen and fuell cell vehicals on the roads
today were not sold at a profit. The solar powered cars that race
across the outback deserts of Australia were not made for profit.
Look there isn't a single person reading this newsgroup that wouldn't
love to be doing something they love and make a living at it but
capitalism and certainly not communism aren't about people being
happy. My dream is to see the day when artists paint or take photos
without worrying about money, when writers write, when builders build
and bakers bake.... all doing their best for the love of their
craft!!! That's when mankind really progresses!!! What do we have
now..... just a job to keep body and soul together.
By the way, my college courses and field work NEVER dealt with rats
and the like. Life is NOT a Skinner Box!
>
>> The situation applies down here and the government has had to hire
>> shrinks to work with older workers who suffer from it because no
>> matter what they do to find work, they don't.
>
> Carman wrote:
> But Wait!
>
> You attributed this psychological phenomenon to Capitalism, yet you
>have it there in The Workers Paradise Where Everything Is So Much
>Better
>Than In The Nasty Old USA?
I said communism and capitalism are the worst examples of ROI. The
third way is partially here but theres alot of damage to repair and
alot of new to build. Its still better here right now, ask any epat
yank or canadian that lives here.
>
>> Eventually we will topple this nazi right wing government and people
>> who descriminate on the basis of age, race or national origins will be
>> be facing the law. Right now they get away with it.
>
> Carman wrote:
> You simply CAN'T be talking about Australia, that place Where
>Everything Is So Much Better Than In The Nasty Old USA?
Yup, parts are corrupt and it starts at the top but there are
elections coming. We learned the hard way the right wingers are all
crooks and now we have taken back every State and Territory Government
from the liars. Everyone is Labour or Labour/Green coalition. Next
is the federal election. The Democrats are falling apart at the
seams, One Nation is all but dead, the Nationals are loosing members
like mad to the Greens (The greens ran more farmers in the last
election that the nationsl who are supposed to bea country party).
The LIBERALS can't sit without National support and more and more
Nationals are loosing to local indepents. By far the largest party is
Labour but even the union members are deserting the Labour Party for
the Greens who hold the moral high ground in this country.
>
>> >
>> >> > Carman wrote:
>> >> > I'm equally happy to pay a very good dollar to my dentist, my
>> >> >lawyer, my accountant, my plumber, and my gunsmith. All for the
>> >> >very same reason: superior workmanship.
>> >>
>> >> Given the experiences of myself and my wife I value my gunsmith
>> >> more than doctors.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Australia must not have Socialized gunsmithing yet.
>>
>> The right wing government of Jackboot Johnny Howard did a big gun grab
>> when they got into office so the people could not fight back against
>> their nazi industrial relations laws about to be passed. BUT the
>> workers faced armed private thugs (with dogs, guns and clubs) at the
>> docks with the same bravery as the diggers who fought in Viet Nam,
>> WW1, WW2 etc. The Patricks Dock wars put a serious crimp in their
>> plans.
>
> Carman wrote:
> That's part of the whole Socialist package, I'm afraid.
You afraid because strikers faced armed thugs with dogs and didn't
budge an inch????
>
> "It starts with a plan to put in public toilets, then they bring
>in the bully-boys to work a man over".
You should see our public Loos!!! Fully computerized! You push a
button to get in and the door opens if no one else is in there.
Inside is apanel with various functions and the place cleans and
flushes itself automatically and if your a dickhead who does drugs it
will also despose of your dirty needle so no one else can catch
anything you have. Brilliant stuff. We call them Cyber-loos!
>
> Once The State starts giving people "everything they want", pretty
>soon it turns around and "takes everything they have". This is nothing
>but normal.
You just don't undertand do you? Government is doing as a group what
you can't do as individuals. You can't build a road or an airport so
you do it collectively, you can't fight an invading army by yourself
so you do it collectively and raise an army as a group. Its not their
money its OUR money, its like a big family with family money.
Now as far as taking things I conceed in only one area, your stuff is
taken for unpaid taxes (as in a land tax) but that's an issue of you
not paying yourfair share like everyone else. BUT when else do they
do that. Yes Jackboot Johnny tried to steal all the guns around here
but the High Count said no and made him do a buy back (which is a joke
because 80% of the outlawed guns are hidden in gardens) but he'se a
right winger not a socialist and what about cororations STEALING your
labor with free over time and all the other crooked crap they pull???
I'd say that fat cats steal from the people 1000X's more than
governments. There is no entity on earth that tries to get something
for nothing more than corporations!!!
Now there is another side to this called survivalists. Right or left
wing governments (well what they call left wing since the USSR died)
hate people who want to live on their own and not use money (barter
and the like) The republicans are the worst at this and remember it
was the Bush adminstration that sent the BATF to wipe out Randy Weaver
and CO at Ruby Hill and planned WACO (and Janet Reno, the Butcher of
Waco picked up the mess from the BATF and made it even worse). My god
you can't have people living in communes working for the good of the
community without regard for personal gain!!! You can't have people
living in the mountains of Idaho and not contributing to the
capitalist system or paying taxes on the chicken they just traded!!!
Notice that when he had full controll of Congress he didn't lift a
single finger to repeal all the ZIG HEIL gun laws passed since the
Kennedy assination to protect that right. Actions speak louder than
words.
> Bush can't repeal the firearms laws in the US. There simply aren't
>the
>votes in Congress. But what's it to you? You don't like it here
>remember?
The republicans controlled congress and had they kept their promises
to the people in andout of the NRA would have had a repeal bill on the
table on day one. But because they are liars they didn't.
>You went to Australia where no one has any real Rights, and now you're
> complaining about it?
You don't understand the system here. Rights are codified in the USA,
here they are based on "The Right to Have Rights"!!!
>
>> >> AND that includes equal rights and equal access.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Equal rights? Before the law, certainly. I've no idea what you mean
>> >by "equal access"
>>
>> OK, I'll give you an example from another post of mine concerning the
>> draft.
>>
>> "In 1993 I went back to college at Metropolitan State College in
>> Denver and was told I couldn't even register for classes unless I
>> registered for the draft.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Wait a minute. You assert you're 57 now, which would make you
>something
>like 48 in 1993?
I was born in Jan 1945
>They wanted you to register for the draft at 48 years
>of
>age?
Yes, its required under the ACT up till 56 I believe and theres also a
federal law on the books and in effect that say you have to carry a
draft card till your out of the system. This is what they used to
nail the anti-war activists back then with and why draft cards were
burned, to flaunt the CARRY law. The bastards even busted some
nudists once at Cape May, New Jersey for that. They couldn'y bust um
for nudity so they harrassen them for not carrying their draft cards
on their person.
>
> And didn't you say something about exposure to Agent Orange and the
>VA hospital? Something fishy here.
I was in Viet Nam in 1966 and 67, I served 6 years in the Air Force
because 6 years is the total obligation at the time. I was in the
13th Recon and then the 6470th Recon in Nam and SAC and ADC the rest
of the time. I did my Reserve time in Colorado and I was also in the
Royal Air Force briefly as a flying officer. (thats the duel citizen
stuff) My asthma was caused by exposure to Agent Orange in "Martin
Manor" and other parts of "3 Corps". I was not allowed to have a RAAF
career because of my physical problems.
>
>> AND, get this, men are required to register by Metro State but woman
>> aren't and the moron woman who was president of the college then
>> couldn't see where there was any sex descrimination in that!
>
> Carman wrote:
> Who gives a rats #$%^? At 48 they wanted you to register for the
>Draft?
YUP! Look your dealing with people who blindly follow stupid laws
morons in congress pass. The right wing wants to keep a military body
of men (not woman, can't endanger your breeding stock) ready for a
war.
>
>> I refused (even though I had a draft card in my pocket) and demanded
>> an appointment with this and that bureaucrat. I wore a suit and had
>> my airborne wings, chest full of ribbons and my 5 medals including 3
>> from Viet Nam including the Viet Nam Cross of Gallentry with palm
>> leaves. I also had my DD-214 and DD-215 with me and when I sat down
>> with this person who looked at my chest (funny that men can have their
>> chests stared at but not woman) when I asked why I, a decorated Viet
>> Nam Veteran who did my full 6 years honorably (unlike the current and
>> previous president) has to register for the draft for the draft to get
>> equal access to a public tax supported institution when woman do not."
>>
>> THATS EQUAL ACCESS!!! Tell me why little yuppettes can get into
>> colorado colleges and not register for the draft but not men???
>
> Carman wrote:
> Sorry. I didn't realize until now that I was addressing someone with
>such serious psychological issues.
The issues are theirs not mine. They can't cope with people willing
to fight for what's right rather than just cowering and whimpering
yessa boss! Sexual equality is a must but with equality goes equal
responsibility and that means woman serving along with men. I see it
all over the world and even in nam in the 60's when the VC fielded 3
all woman fighting Battallons.
>
>> >> A job is a right, (...)
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Nowhere that I've ever seen.
>> >
>> >> (...) equal pay is a right, (...)
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Again, nowhere that I've ever seen. I've always had to work for
>> >my money.
>>
>> Not a problem, work is good and noble but not if you're worked to
>> the bone for a fraction of what assholes like the ones at ENRON (who
>> wouldn't know hard work if it sat on their faces) then you have a
>> serious social problem.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Then where do you get this "equal pay is a right" garbage?
From a deep sense of mroality, something republicans talk about but
rarely practice especially the con man TV Preachers who say "YESSSSS
its the Rev Billy Bob brinin yah savlavation for only $89
ninty-fivvvve!" But when they're caught the crook tears flow on TV "I
HAVE SINNED!" What they are really crying about is "I GOT CAUGHT!!!".
(I refer to Swaggart here)
The fact that you called equal pay "garbage" says it all doesn't it
folks.
>
> I can go along with "equal pay for equal work", provided "equal
>work"
>means "equal productivity". Anything else is Socialist wishful
>thinking.
So that means that assholes in suits at trendy board meetings that
produce nothing should make less money than the guy or gal at the
production like who turns outs goods all day long???
I agree with you that most bureaucrats produce nothing but the same
goes for the business types. The problem is rot at the top not the
guys welding bumpers to Fords!!! Look at Andersona nd ENRON. They
produced NOTHING!!!!! Take me to K-Mart and show me the products
these fat cats produced themselves and I'll buy it.
>
>> >> (...) a gun is a right (...)
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Definately NOT in Canada, and I doubt it is in Australia.
>>
>> Not since a right wing coalition government took over its not, but
>> human rights aren't even considered under Jackboot Johnny Howard just
>> industrial relations laws.
>>
>> >In the US we have this Second Amendment thing that we're working to
>> >force The State to recognise.
>> >
>> Easy to do, just get rid of the current crop of left and right wingers
>> and bring in people like the GREENS or reforms and other small parties
>> who still hold the moral high ground. The big two parties are
>> worthless.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Riiiiiiiiiiiight!
>
> You sit there in Australia telling me what a grand old place it is,
>(save for "Jackboot Johnny Howard", gun bans, no work, no "human
>rights"
>and so on), then you want to tell the US how to manage the country
>you've
>left in high dudgeon?
I love it your fur is getting up. By the way will you be standing in
line to join up for the war in Iraq. I'm sure the Bush and Chaney
kids will save you a spot in line!
If your going to attack me then attack the new world order too because
one of the reasons the US allows duel citizenship is because millions
of its people have done just like me, they have left for a better life
or they work in the thousands of multi-national corporation around the
world and we are CITIZENS OF THE WORLD and not tribal.
This state is the population of Colorado and the size of Utah and
there are over 50,000 registered yanks here alone! And that's the
ones we know of.
>
> Call us with advice when you get your own house in order.
Keep messing with Sadam and the nutty Arab work and you won't have a
house to get in order. My life is finetahnk you excpet for the
missing part of my life that I lost 5 years ago. I refuse to retire
and will work or try to work till the day I die and will continue with
all the volunteer work I do to fill my day and maybe if the gods are
good I'll sit in Parliament. But those are the ambitions of a GREEN,
social justice, a clean planet and a fair go for all. Probably hard
for a republican to understand???
>
>> >
>> >> (...) and not dying at the hands of a greedy health system is
>> >> also a right.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > That's a lot of rights you've dreamed up. Not much of all that
>> >bears any resemblence to reality though.
>>
>> Human rights have always been hard for capitalists, republicans,
>> communists and other ISTs to under stand.
>
> Carman wrote:
> You mean like the Social-ISTs you've apparently chosen to live
>under?
point is???
>
>> >Where are these "rights" going to come from anyway. Are they going
>> >to be gifts from The State? Why should The State give you anything
>> >you aren't willing to take from it by force?
>>
>> Government is people doing as a group what they can't do as
>> individuals, anything past that is oppression.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Then it sounds like you're oppressed.
In some ways yes, but that will change when the right wingers are
tossed out and a middle of the road government takes its place.
>
>> You can walk with your knuckles dragging on the groung and grunt
>> about the free market (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Oh. Is *that* what I'm doing?
Look for calouses and let us know.
>
>> (...) or stand erect and realize that in the 21st century the rights
>> of man kind are more important than social status, wealth and the like.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Riiiiiiiiiiiight. You sit there without work, and whine about "the
>rights of mankind".
Wrong, I sit here out of paid work. I work 30+ hours a week in
volunteer work and mutual obligation. Whats' that??? Well see here
there is no welfare as you understand it. If you take from the people
you are expected to give back. the WORK FOR THE DOLE program puts
welfare and unemployment people into community work to maintain
dignity and help them develop new skills unlike the US system designed
to keep poor people from stealing to live.
besides working for the GREEN party I do work for the PUTA, plus I
walk several miles every other day cleaning illegal advertising
posters and real estate agents signs from poles and the like (I choose
to do this for execise) to keep this community as clean as possible.
I also teach at 4 different Computer groups/SIGs
to help people increase their computer skills) especially for job
hunting). I also build web sites for community and chariety groups.
> I'll go out and continue to earn my living, pay my
>taxes and insurance, save some money, and still have cash left over
>to finance my gun collection.
>
>> We have an over populated planet that is killing itself for the profits
>> of the few.
>
> Carman wrote:
> The planet is killing itself?
Won't even consider that statement. Like volcanos spew auto exhusts
and fill up landfills with toner cartridges!!!
>
> Or is it those people who are reproducing without limit who are
>killing themselves with their numbers?
Well big families is the republican way!
>
>> 19th and 20th concepts of communism, capitalism or whatever ISM will
>> die this century and I feel assured that all the problems of pollution,
>> poverty, inequality, accesses of organized religion etc will be solved
>> if we come together and abandon the silly tribalism and Balkanization
>> of the planet.
>
> Carman wrote:
> You can tell yourself whatever comforting little stories help you
>get
>to sleep, but I call it fantasizing.
I call it the future
>
> You mentioned 10 years of university education? What the hell did
>you
>study that you can talk such pathetic junk?
250+ semester hours of undergarduate plus graduate. History,
Psyhcology, computer science and professional photography with side
bars of sociology, economics, art and political science. I also was
on student government at MSC in Denver between 1977 and 1981.
I also taught non-credit courses in Men's liberation there plus
history and men's lib (1980's) for credit courses at Univ of New
Mexico/Los Alamos Branch. I worked in Los Alamos 81-85, great place,
18,000 people including 4000+ PhD's (the national Lab is there).
Does that answer your question.?
THOM
Jos.Carman
Carman wrote:
Interesting that you should see a difference between a
country and its people. What you mean, of course, is that
you see a difference between The State, and the people.
This is THE Socialist perspective, and precisely the
reason Socialist countries become totalitarian.
The People *are* The State. When this is forgotten, and
the people become blind recipiants of The State's "wisdom",
the end is written in stone.
> Socialism being opposed to capitalism (...)
Carman wrote:
Socialism isn't opposed to capitalism, just incompetent
at it. This is why State Industries, (like National Coal
in the UK, and the Crown Corporations in Canada), founder
in seas of debt and mismanagement.
> (...) and communism (...)
Carman wrote:
Socialism IS communism. The only difference is that the
Socialists have modified the idea of "State ownership of
the means of production".
The modern Socialists, (having watched as the communist
experiment failed so utterly), have decided to "allow"
Corporations to manage themselves, within parameters set
by The State. Why bother with an abstract like "ownership
of the means of production" when you can set the ground
rules and get a "better" result?
> (...) has systems that believe in the basic rights of
> people to a minimum standard of living.
Carman wrote:
Dreaming up rights again. It takes more than dreaming
to create actual rights.
> The three countries that have the highest standards
> of living (Australia, Norway and Denmark) and who have
> the most liveable cities (same 3) hold to these values.
Carman wrote:
Good for them! You assert that the conditions in three
tiny little countries proves something about economic
systems? It's a big world out there!
> >> Any Australia with the card get get free health care
> >> in any commonwealth country including Canada and they
> >> in Australia.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > For all the good it will do you.
> >
> >> In America if you don't have insurance you get a free
> >> ride on a gurney into the parking lot.
> >
> > Carman wrote;
> > As opposed to Canada where the put you on a waiting
> >list until you die.
>
> Funny but the one time I needed it in Canada for a
> sporting accident in BC (pre-tibial hemotoma) I
> waited no more than a half an hour in the emergency
> room. They X-Rayed, found it wasn't fractured and
> turned me loose with a crutch which is exactly what
> was required.
>
Carman wrote:
I, on the other hand, was diagnosed by a physician
to have an acute appendicitis. As the surgery was
beyond the competence of his small clinic, he sent me
to a large one, Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto, with
a letter containing his diagnosis so I'd not have to
wait in the ER.
Four hours after I arrived at Sinai (just as I was
leaving for some other hospital), a nurse asked me
where I was going and looked at the letter. I had the
offending organ removed about an hour later.
"You pays your money and you takes your chances".
> >
> >> >> >> You pay 1.5% of your adjusted income to a maximum
> >> >> >> of about US$250a year for medical and it has been
> pay Americans get (...)
Carman wrote:
Nonsense! I make MORE money now , (after paying taxes AND health
insurance), than I ever made in Canada. The sheer quantity of MONEY
is why most of the Canadians who come here do so.
Perhaps you weren't able to make it economically here, but the
great majority of people do quite well.
> (...) and with the highest insurance rates in the world?
Carman wrote:
Living in Canada I had to pay for medical care twice. First I
had to pay the taxes that supported the poor and grossly
infficient system, then I had to pay AGAIN, for the care needed
that wasn't available for ANY money in Canada.
Here in the US I pay only once for healthcare, and this saves
quite a bit of money. It's the difference between being able to
save for our future, and not having any money left for savings at
the end of the month.
> Australia has private health care if you want it and its 1/5th
> the cost in the USA.
Carman wrote:
Of course it's cheaper. You've paid once already, your insurance
will never have to carry the full load, so the company can charge
less and still make a profit.
> When are you going to admit to yourself that healthcare in the
> USA is outragiously expensive (...)
Carman wrote:
It's cheaper than the Canadian equivalent, which is all I ask.
> (...) and if employers weren't providing it most people couldn't
> afford it.
Carman wrote:
I'm self-employed. I pay ALL my insurance costs myself, and STILL
pay less than I did in Canada.
If I went to work for someone else, I'd make a somewhat smaller
salary or wage, but I'd get fringe benefits which would make up for
*some* of the reduction. As I have it calculated, I make more by
working for myself. Besides, I prefer it this way.
> Same with care insurance.
Carman wrote:
You mean long term care as in retirement and nursing home care?
That's a BIG ticket item, unless you start paying when you're in
your 20s or 30s. In that case it's not too bad.
> Colorado for instance says that about 1/3rd of drivers aren't
> carrying manditory liability insurance because they can't afford
> it.
Carman wrote:
Oh, you mean "car" insurance! I pay less for that here in NC
than I did in Ontario. My car and repairs cost me less too.
You don't seem to grasp that if "...1/3rd of drivers aren't
carrying mandatory liability insurance", the other drivers who
are in compliance are paying the difference. This isn't really
an insurance problem, per se. It's more of an enforcement
problem on the part of DMV.
> > Carman wrote:
> > You had the option to buy yourselves more and better
> > insurance, and you didn't do it.
>
> Not on what I was making.
Carman wrote:
And whose fault is that? Some "Evil Capitalist" I suppose?
> > Carman wrote:
> >It's not a crime, until the illness or the accident comes;
> >then it might as well be a crime because you get punished
> >for your lack of foresight.
> Or lack of honest employer.
Carman wrote:
Were you forced to work for him? Did someone hold a gun to
your head? You chose your employment. You chose how you spent
your money. You chose wrong, and paid a terrible price for it.
Now you're choosing to hide from your responsibility for your
own actions and blaming other people.
Now you think The State should step in and make it impossible
for people to choose wrong? The State will be glad to take
choice right out of your hands. Instead of choice, you can have
obedience.
You don't sound too happy with some of the things The State
has done in Australia. But how can you complain? You wanted
The State to make the choices didn't you? Well, it has and now
you complain.
> >Carman wrote:
> > Did you spend the money on a house and a nice car? Poor
> >choice, as it turned out. You weren't to "know" you'd need
> >the extra insurance (if it would have helped), but that's
> >the breaks!
> >
> No I spent it on keeping from freezing during the winter and
> starving all year around and putting a teenager thru school.
Carman wrote:
All quite laudable, I'm sure.
Just who was it that selected your occupation? Just who was
it that chose to get married? Just who was it that chose to
have a child? Just whose life are we talking about?
Maybe The State should have made these choices for you. Maybe
The State should have selected your occupation?
(Now, now, Mr. Thom. We don't need any more basketweavers just
now. You have to enter the School of Sanitary Engineering!)
Perhaps The State should have told you not to marry?
(Now, now, Mr. Thom. On your income you really can't consider
marriage! It just isn't socially responsible!)
Perhaps The State should have made it impossible for you to
engender a child?
(Now, now, Mr. Thom. We really can't have you producing any
children on your meager income, can we? What were you thinking
of? Now this won't hurt, much.)
Doesn't Socialism sound like fun?
>
> > Carman wrote:
> > I've made a few bad choices myself here and there, like
> >staying so long in Canada when I *knew* the place was
> >going to hell in a handbasket. But that was MY choice. I
> >did that. So it was MY fault, not someone else's.
>
> So you moved to America to become a target for AlQ????
Carman wrote:
Better than cowering in Canada while the Canadian Government
plays at appeasement!
> Hope your expensive health and life insurance is paid up!
Carman wrote:
No problem there! That's what a good income and a comparitively
low tax rate does for you.
> Why wait just stand in line at the recruitment office with the
> kids of the Bush and Chaney family to join up for the war!!
Carman wrote:
If I was 24 instead of 54 I probably would have joined up on,
or just after, 9/11/01 like thousands of other Americans. My
work takes me to Washington frequently, and I've been driving
past the Pentagon a couple of times a week for almost a year.
> Oh, sorry about that, you'll be on line alone, those families
> don't believe in military obligations, they just send your kids.
Carman wrote:
Now you're sounding like the rest of tpg's anti-American trolls.
Can't think of anything germaine to say on the subject so you start
sneering at Bush. I guess you'd have preferred Algore.
On the other hand, you don't seem to like Australia's present
leadership very much either. Perhaps you have "issues" with
authority?
> > Carman wrote:
> > In the US, The State assumes no responsibility for providing
> >you with medical care. If you want it, you must take steps to
> >obtain it for yourself. If you don't obtain it, and keep up the
> >payments, the failure can radically effect the quality and
> >length of your life.
>
> It also does nothing to prevent you from needing it. Like
> keeping idiot arabs out of airliners or keeping greedy flight
> schools from training them to commit unspeakable acts.
Carman wrote:
Yup. Sounding more like Greg Procter all the time. I guess once
you learn to blame other people for your troubles the whining gets
easier?
> > Carman wrote:
> > Now tell me you didn't know that at the time. Tell me it came
> >as a complete surprise to you that your insurance wasn't up to
> >snuff.
>
> It did, I believed their lies.
Carman wrote:
Then you're a fool.
Now you compound your foolishness by failing to blame the one
person who could have done something about the state of your
health insurance. Want to see that guy? Just look in the mirror,
if you can stand to do so.
> Thank god I'm a vet and could access the only decent health
> care system in the land, the VA Hospitals.
Carman wrote:
Did God create the VA? Did God tell you to join the military?
Did God prevent you from buying more and better insurance
instead of spending your disposable income on other things?
> > Carman wrote:
> > Tough bounce. It's a hard old world and sometimes you screw
> > up.
> >
> >> AND at US wages, who the hell can afford much more.
> >
> > Carman wrote;
> > I can, and so can most other people in the US.
>
> I can't type I'm laughing so hard. The USA has the second
> lowest wages in the industrialized world according to the UN!!!
Carman wrote:
Cite please. What matters is not the wages, but what you have
left after the taxes.
> > Carman wrote:
> > Many of the people who *can't* pay for insurance, get their
> >care through welfare. from what I've seen here in NC, that
> >care is roughly the equivalent of the care I used to get under
> >Socialized Medicine in Canada. To wit, not so hot; but better
> >than nothing.
>
> How about this, pass a law that every citizen gets the same
> access to health care at the same price as Congresspersons.
Carman wrote:
No thanks. Someone, (like me), would have to pay for it.
> >> >value transactions in the global currency markets),
> >> >Sept. 10, 2002 00:35:28, is $1 AUD = $0.548690 USD.
> >> >http://www.xe.com/ucc/
> >>
> >> Average wage is $36,000 a year and the cost of living
> >> 40-60% lower than the USA. A new 4 bedroom house in
> >> melbourne is US$ 65,000 according to the inserts in
> >> this mornings paper and the government says that 94%
> >> of people who live in homes own them. New cars start
> >> at US$7800 in todays paper though I get the impression
> >> used cars are cheaper in the USA. Restaurants are a
> >> bit more (because of the fact minimum wages for waiters
> >> is $26,000 a year) but food in the market is much
> >> cheaper. Gas is about the same.
> >>
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Then you can start subtracting the cost of all that tax
> >paid healthcare, all that tax paid gun control, and all
> >those tax paid bureaucrats, to run all those wonderful tax
> >paid social programs, and when you get done you won't
> >wonder why you're out of a job.
>
> We don't want to except for the right wing gun control.
Carman wrote:
It doesn't matter what you want! You've yielded up your
ability to make such choices to The State. They aren't about
to give it back.
> We get value for money here.
Carman wrote:
You get exactly what The State chooses to give you. When
it starts getting too expensive, and The State starts
cutting your services, what are you going to do about it?
Whine? Beg? Hold your breath until your face turns blue?
It'll all work abou as well.
> I don't mind paying 50% tax as long as I get the services.
Carman wrote:
But you said you can't get work. What's fifty percent of
no income? When they cut your services, do you actually
believe they'll cut your taxes too?
> I can walk anywhere in Melbourne at any time of night in
> Melbourne and not feel scared, (...)
Carman wrote:
Whether or not you feel "scared" has something to do
with healthcare?
> (...)I can expect a lot of parks and reserves and I
> get them,(...)
Carman wrote:
That's nice, but I fail to see the relevance.
> (...)I get good public transport (unlike most places
> in the USA) and I have a bus a block away and a tram
> line in front of my house that runs every 7 minutes
> during the day and its cost me about US$22 a month.
Carman wrote:
I suppose if you can't afford a car that helps.
> Things aren't perfect here and like everyplace on
> earth we have our little problems (...)
Carman wrote:
You mean like "Jackboot Johnny" and the confiscation
of private property?
> but all you have to look at is the AUST/American
> emigration ration, for ever 28 Americans that move
> here only one moves north and half of them come home!!!!
Carman wrote:
Cite please.
The Americans who move to Australia are welcome to do so
for all I care. I've lived outside the US for most of my
life, in one place and another. It cost me a lot of low
wages and reduced savings, but it was good experience. I
value the US more for having other places with which to
compare it.
Some of the Americans that go there will probably stay.
Some people seem to actually *like* being told what to do.
The others will return to the US, like I did, wiser and
more experienced than they were when they left.
> Whats the old saying about voting with your wallet or
> your feet???
Carman wrote:
Since I couldn't vote in Canada, (not being a citizen),
voting with my feet and leaving the place is exactly what
I did. Now I vote with a ballot. Much more effective.
> > Carman wrote:
> > One of the reasons American society is so successful
> >is that much of the time the government lets the people
> >get on with the work. Every time the government starts
> >regulating this, controling that, addressing inequities
> >and generally getting in the way, the overall
> >productivity suffers and the whole aparatus begins to
> >slow down.
>
> Just the crooked aparatus, decent clean and sound systems
> continue.
Carman wrote:
Sorry, but that just isn't true.
The money that pays for all those nice "social programs"
The State has for you, comes out of the normal economic
cycle. The bureaucracy soaks up most of it, and the rest
is employed to support unproductive people and State
enterprises that can't support themselves.
This money is gone. You might as well have simply burned
it. In fact, as burning it would have the effect of
restricting the currency supply, burning it would have a
better effect than letting The State have it.
As a result of reduced reinvestment, the economy must
slow down. When economies slow, some people are going to
become under- and un-employed. This is very, very simple
economics.
> Anyway this isn't soviet Russia where success is measure
> by production. People are more important.
Carman wrote:
The Soviets failed because The State is inherently a bad
manager.
The skills necessary to run a business enterprise are
very different from the skills required of a State
bureaucrat. This is why The State, in most Socialist
countries, has gotten out of running businesses. What
they've done instead, and it's less harmful in the short
run, is to set the ground rules by which business is
allowed to operate.
In the long run, they simply can't compete with a
Capitalist economy. There are too many losses,
(analogous to friction losses in machinery),built into
the system.
> > Carman wrote:
> > When this happens, the government climbs off, lets
> >things speed up again, until some bureaucrat gets the
> >bright idea that he knows how to make it all "fairer"
> >and they start piling on again. It's boring, but
> >predictable.
>
> Given all the crooked capitalists that are being nailed
> left and right ranging from Martha Stewart to the
> friendly folks at ENRON and Anderson I'd say you should
> reasssess your position in the 21st century.
Carman wrote;
Very far from it. The criminals are a source of
significant "friction losses" in the system. Every one
that gets caught represents a genuine improvement in
the functioning of the whole system.
Look at Japan! Their economic criminals nearly brought
that country down. Because they can't/won't/don't dare,
attack their criminal problem at the root, they are
effectively crippled as an economy.
Catching the criminals, reducing the level of corruption
in the system,will have as much beneicial effect as
abandoning "maintainance welfare", and unlimited
"unemployment" benefits. The system is healthier for the
removal of corruption.
Carman wrote:
But you said you're out of work. So you have no means to
step in and help someone else even if you wanted to.
What you'd actually do first, would be to demand help for
yourself, and then you'd demand that someone else help the
other people that need it. That's The Socialist Way! Let
GEORGE Do It. Tax the people who create wealth, to support
the people who don't make anything but babies!
> Its called mateship and it was taught to me by the US
> Government in the military..... YOU DON'T DESERT YOUR
> MATES!!!
Carman wrote:
Garbage! Your "mates" are people who work as hard as you
do to support the whole enterprise. The whiners, the
malingerers, the people who are never there when the work
gets hard and dirty, are people you'll never call "mates".
> But people like AWOL Bush didn't learn that part did they???
Carman wrote;
You sound more and more like just another whining tpg troll.
> >
> >> Are they in the business if medicine or in the business
> >> of making money off of the unfortunate.????
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > They're in business to make money, of course. Why would
> >you think otherwise?
> >
> In a 19th century economy I have to agree with you.
>
> > If they wanted to dedicate their lives to helping "the
> >unfortunate", they'd be medical missionaries, or run free
> >clinics for the indigent or something, and more power to
> >'em.
> >
> > Unfortunately, (especially for "the unfortunate") such
> >people aren't usually willing to go to work for members
> >of the educated middle class who have neglected to obtain
> >sufficient insurance to defray the costs of treatment.
> >It's a bummer, but there it is.
>
> Neglected or can't afford insurance??? You act like this
> is a couple of bucks a year!
Carman wrote:
You claim 10 years of post-secondary education, (if I
understood you correctly). What did you study that you can't
earn a decent living? Basketweaving? How did you pay for
that education? What did you spend your income on that you
couldn't afford sufficient insurance to get you through the
hard times?
> >> >> This is the 21st century not the greedy 19th or 20th.
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Did something change beside the date? I don't think
> >> >so.
> >> >
> >> >> All human beings have equal value and even the
> >> >> constitution says it.
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Perhaps your Australian Constitution says that. The
> >> >US Constitution does not.
> >>
> >> We hold these truths to be selfevident, THAT ALL MEN
> >> ARE CREATEd EQUAL. What next, its part of the communist
> >> manifesto???? Does it matter which piece of paper the
> >> HEROS of PHILIDELPHIA put it?
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > You asserted "even the constitution says that". It doesn't.
>
> I stand corrected, so does that mean you also disagree with
> the declaration of independence??? Are you a TORY????
Carman wrote:
I told you what I meant, remember? It begins two lines down
if you've forgotten.
> >> >
> >> >> We hold these truths to be selfevident, THAT ALL MEN
> >> >> ARE CREATED EQUAL.
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > The words you quote are from the Declaration of
> >> >Independence. You may wish to construe them to mean some
> >> >kind of absolute metaphysical "equality", but they only
> >> >say that all men are "created" equal, not that they remain
> >> >so.
> >>
> >> Yes, with scumbags like bush in office, inequality, the rat
> >> race, godless greed based capitalism and everything that
> >> oppresses Americans will continue won't they????
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > This is priceless! Thanks for leaving the US, and I hope
> >you never come back. We've got enough whiners here. I wonder
> >if they could be induced to leave here and go to Australia?
>
> Don't ever come to Australia, we have enough greedy John
> Wayne style cowboy capitalists screwing up things here now.
Carman wrote:
You don't have to worry, I have no intention of ever setting
foot in another Socialist country, (unless I can make a profit
off the benighted natives of course). Living in Canada for as
long as I did was more than enough to develop a very profound
distaste for Socialism.
> Did it ever dawn on you that attitudes like yours are the
> reasons nut cases fly airliners into buildings???
Carman wrote:
You mean al Qaeda is "really" fighting the good fight for
The Socialist Way of Life? Please expound on this further.
> >
> >> WE REMAIN EQUAL FROM THE DAY WE ARE BORN TO THE DAY WE DIE!
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Utter nonsense. Equality "before the law", is the best you
> >get.
>
> Maybe in your world but of course your world is coming to an
> end soon.
Carman wrote:
Only in your dreams, little buddy. Oh yeah, in al Qaeda's
dreams too. You must be desperate (not to mention stupid and
sick)if you'd claim the terrorist murderers as your Socialist
Allies.
> This is the 21st century and after we get over the BUSH
> hump in the road of progress we will be moving towards
> many great things.
Carman wrote:
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
You Socialist ninnies are always promising "pie in the sky
by and by". When it doesn't materialize, (and it never does),
we begin to hear the usual garbage about how, "We must all
sacrifice for the Greater Good".
> >> All human beings have equal dignity, (...)
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > I wonder what "equal dignity" is supposed to mean?
>
> It means that work has dignity and it doesn't matter if you
> sit on your dead ass in a business suit or dig ditches, he
> who works should prosper.
Carman wrote:
"Workers of the World Unite", shouted Mr. Thom! Only about
eighty years too late.
The world doesn't run on "should", it never has and it never
will. If that ditch digger wants to prosper he'd better begin
saving his wages and investing his savings at a very early age.
> The current system has the people who do the least work
> getting the money.
Carman wrote;
Nonsense. Your definition of "work" as manual labor is
pathetic nonsense.
I personally know only one person who's what I'd call wealthy
who has not EARNED his money by working harder or smarter than
most. (He won a lottery in Canada). Most of the time it takes
working harder AND smarter.
> The ONE single reason capitalism is flawed is because you can
> make more money (and quicker) being a crook than by being honest.
Carman wrote:
Some criminals prosper, though I know of none personally. Most
do not, and end in jail if they persist in their criminality.
It may make you feel better regarding your apparent unsuccess
to pretend that successful people are "crooks", but it's just
another pathetic fiction you're trying to make yourself believe.
> >Carman wrote:
> > I see people working hard and smart at difficult jobs,
> >making their livings and providing for themselves and their
> >families. I see these people as possessed of "dignity",
> >something they've worked for and won.
>
> Do you have the same respect for fruit pickers, people at the
> car wash, farmers, disabled veterans who can do nothing more
> than sell newspapers, and people at McDonalds????
Carman wrote:
Of course not. Why should I "have the same respect" for
people who choose to remain manual laborers as I do for people
who've made some success of their lives?
I've noticed that when *I* do manual labor, (which I've spent
far too much of my life at), I don't get much respect either.
The respect comes later, when people who've seen me working on
the docks, or maybe humping cabinetry up the stairs in a
construction project, encounter me running my own business and
meeting them as an equal.
The "fruit pickers" I met in Ontario were Mennonite Mexicans,
the descendants of Canadian Mennonites who immigrated to Mexico.
(Very bad move!) The great and benovelent Socialist Government
of Canada "allowed" then to come to Ontario and work for wages
even the rural "Native Canadians", (First Peoples, you know,
Indians), wouldn't take. It kept the selling price of Ontario
Fruit competitive.
Most of the people at the car wash are ex-cons, (who are
largely unhireable for anything else), except in the summer
when they fire the ex-cons and hire students for less money.
I haven't seen any disabled veterans seling newspapers
here, but then I haven't looked either.
As for the people who work in McDonalds, I don't go to
McDonalds. Not even to use the washroom.
> If you do then pay them the same as everyone else!
Carman wrote:
No.
An individual's work is worth exactly what he can make
someone pay him to do it. It doesn't matter if he's a
"nice guy", it doesn't matter if he "needs" more than he
gets, it doesn't matter if he puts his whole heart and
soul into his work, his work remains worth exactly what
he can make someone pay him to do it.
Work is a commodity, like currency, like potatoes, like
computer chips, nuclear engineering, and everything else
that can be bought or sold. The value of a commodity is
what you can make someone pay you for it.
I know a lady who's a wonderful artist. She works in a
number of media and some of her work is astounding. The
most she's ever gotten for a painting is around $400. What
she sells for her living are her skills as an executive
secretary. She works hard, smart, and conststantly. She
makes more money than I do, but not at art.
> >Carman wrote:
> > I see other people working only when they must. I see
> >them getting by, when they do, on charity, on welfare,
> >surviving off the labor of other people like parasites.
> >You'd assert they are possessed of "equal dignity"? How
> >distasteful.
>
> You forgot people at ENRON and Arthur Anderson who
> produce nothing and just move money around and DO
> NOTHING USEFULL!!!!
Carman wrote:
As I told you before, Enron's core business was trading in
energy contracts. They did quite well at that, and if they'd
been content with it they'd probably still be a leader in the
field. As it is, their top traders, (who had no part in the
criminal stupidity of management) were in immediate demand for
their experience in a business which continues to make honest
profits today.
The accounting firm of Arthur Anderson apparently stepped
in it too. This doesn't mean that accounting is useless, or
that an accountant is a criminal who doesn't work. It means
that some individuals committed some criminal acts. So what?
Find and prosecute the criminals and we'll all be better off
for it.
> Lets throw in futures traders, stock brokers, lawyers
> (especially corporate lawyers) who do nothing useful and are
> an enormous boil on the butt of civilization.
Carman wrote:
In short, you'd discard all the work you don't understand.
You've demonstrated here repeatedly that you don't understand
much about how the world actually works, so you're ready to
discard quite a bit of work.
No one cares whether you understand it or not. the world is
going right on with it's business without taking the slightest
notice of your ignorance.
> Lets throw in your right wing FAMILY VALUES rubbish.
Carman wrote:
Which part of my values have you construed as "right wing
FAMILY VALUES rubbish"?
> If you and the million a year Rev Billy Bob TV preachers
> value families so much how come you pay family men so little???
Carman wrote:
I was unaware that "Rev Billy Bob TV preachers" were large
employers. I've no idea what they pay the people that work for
then, and very little interest.
I have no employees. I pay independent contractors for their
services when I need something like legal work, accounting,
medical care, dentistry, or plumbing. Most of the contractors
I pay make considerably more money than I ever will.
> Why do 45% of married woman HAVE TO WORK to make family ends
> meet???
Carman wrote:
Because the 55% of married women who *don't* " HAVE TO
WORK to make family ends meet" got all the well paid men?
> >
> >> (...) equal rights, (...)
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Among which is the right to fail, through no one's fault
> >but their own.
>
> I will agree with you there, everyone has the right to fail
> at what they do but they also have the right to have access
> to what they are good at.
Carman wrote:
More nonsence. All these "rights" you dream up are meaningless.
> Everyone has things they do well and do poorly.
Carman wrote:
So what? I used to be a pretty good dancer,but no one ever
offered to pay me for doing it.
> >> (...) and equal responsibilities (...)
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Like making their own livings and providing for themselves and
> >any children they choose to have?
>
> One thing I see in your whole thread is this John Wayne "real men
> fed for themselves" thing from the 1800's.
Carman wrote:
I think you meant "fend". As in "real men [fend] for themselves"?
fend, verb, intransitive
1.To make an effort to resist: fend against the cold.
2.To attempt to manage without assistance: The children
had to fend for themselves while their parents worked.
Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English
Language, Third Edition Copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin
Company. Electronic version licensed from Lernout & Hauspie
Speech Products N.V., further reproduction and distribution
restricted in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United
States. All rights reserved.
If my understanding of your intent is correct, then you are
correct when you assert that I believe that adults in general,
(not just "real men"), should fend ("manage without assistance")
for themselves whenever possible.
> The world is too over crowded for the rugged individual stuff
> anymore.
Carman wrote:
Yet more nonsense. You really are full of it.
> You can't even fart in an over populated world and not have
> an effect on someone else.
Carman wrote:
So what? Are you objecting to someone's gastric processes now?
> That's what this south african world conference was about.
Carman wrote:
The Johannasburg conference was a lot of have-not countries
demanding that someone give them the things they refuse to
create for themselves.
> If I drive and pollute rather than taking the tram today
> it effects the whole wold!!!
Carman wrote:
wold, noun
An unforested rolling plain; a moor.
Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary... (see above)
> If you burn leaves in your back yard in NC it effects me
> here just as much as the idiot slash and burn farmers in
> Indonesia effect you up there.
Carman wrote:
Which isn't very much.
> The 21st century will be a period of great social growth
> (...)
Carman wrote:
Whatever that means.
The 21st century will probably continue to be a period of
great population growth too. At least until the western
nations learn the folly of pouring food into the reproductive
fires of the "third world".
Once the flow of free food stops we can expect a population
crash of epic proportions. When the dust settles from that,
the "third world" survivors can begin trying to build a sane
alternative to unlimited reproduction.
> (...)but also one of dire consequence if we don't change our
> ways of thinking and doing things.
Carman wrote:
Frankly, I doubt anything will cause you to stop whining and
blaming other people for the results of your own poor choices.
> >
> >> (...) regardless of their sex, race, religious beliefs or
> >> economic status.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Sounds good to me. I'm not going to prevent anyone from
> >working for a living because "of their sex, race, religious
> >beliefs, or economic status".
> You left out age. Do you believe men should be sacked for
> younger worker when hey reach 40???
Carman wrote:
Oh my goodness! I *did* leave out age. How unbearably unPC
of me! I firmly believe that I "should" have retired to a life
of unrepentent luxury when I was 40. Unfortunately, I didn't.
As it is I'll probably be working for the rest of my life,
and very glad of the work too. I don't do well without work.
I become crabby and critical, much unlike my normal sunny
disposition as you see it displayed herein.
> >Carman wrote:
> > On the other hand, I'm not going to support them if
> >they choose not to work, and I'm not going to pay for
> >their medical care either.
>
> So what are you doing to provide jobs (and I'm not talking
> about minimum wages slave jobs)????
Carman wrote:
What am I doing to provide jobs? I'm making money just as
hard as I can. My economic activity means jobs for the people
who make the products and services I sell. It means jobs for
the people whose products and services I buy, and it means
jobs for all the people who depend on the economic activity
of all the people who have the jobs they have as a result of
my economic activity. (whew!)
> The Republicans don't care about people and the Democrats
> talk the talk but are increasingly looking more like PUBS
> especially at campaign contribution time.
Carman wrote:
Does any of this surprise you? Is it actually news to you
that politicians care most about power, and not very much
about anything else?
This is precisely why politicians can't be trusted with
the power that Socialism gives them. They WILL abuse it.
Every time.
You know, you haven't mentioned anything about living in
a monastery for the last 40 years, (quite the contrary, in
fact), but you do strike me as quite the unworldly fellow
every now and then.
> Are you voting for candidates that will do something??
> And not just looking for the REP tag on each ballot
> name and then go DAHHHHH!
Carman wrote:
I can honestly say I have never once looked "for the REP
tag on each ballot name" and then gone "DAHHHHH". Not once.
Ever. Nor do I expect to.
> >
> >> That's what the guys freezing their asses off at Valley
> >> Forge were fighting for.
> >
> > Carman wrote;
> > Nope. This is where an ignorance of history gets you.
> >People end up believing all kinds of nonsense.
> >
> So I should get a refund for my Bachelors' Degree in History????
> (Metro State College 1981)
>
Carman wrote:
You should sue them. It won't do any good, but at least you
can make them aware of their abject failure to impart the basic
rudiments of an education to you.
> >Carman wrote:
> > The troops at Valley Forge were in a state of insurrection
> >because the British government refused to recognise their
> >rights as Englishmen. The State embarked on a long series of
> >acts of oppression in very clear violation of The State's own
> >law.
> >
> Typical simplistic answer, almost a buzz word. If you read all
> of the papers of the period ranging from Thomas Paine (who also
> messed around in England after 1789 with such papers as the
> RIGHTS of MAN) to the writings of Jefferson you find a very very
> complex ethos that created the revolution.
Carman wrote:
That business of "complex ethos" does sound very scholarly.
I'll give you marks for raising the tone of the discussion
above the level to which you degraded it before.
The origins of ALL conflicts are complex, but you spoke
specifically of "the guys freezing their asses off at Valley
Forge".
These would be the common soldiers of the Continental Army.
Mostly they were farmers, who wanted and, (in many cases) really
"needed" to get home to their families and farms.
Some of them stayed for money, (what there was of it), but the
majority stayed because they believed they had no real choice but
to fight the British, because the British Army was going to take
everything they had and might kill them too.
The philosophers of the Revolution weren't at Valley Forge.
> Jefferson basically said in 1800 that the war was to rid ourselves
> of Big Government (the King), Big Business (British capitalism)
> and Big Religion but by 1800 all three had been put back on the
> backs of the people by home grown versions of same and he
> despaired of this.
Carman wrote:
Like I said, you should sue your alma mater. Jefferson's ideas
in 1800 had little or nothing to do with why the men of the
Continental Army were in Valley Forge in the winter of 1777/78.
>
> Other myths spewed by right wing rewriters of history say
> that the founding fathers were all good Christians.
Carman wrote:
Cite please. I don't recall any historian, ("right wing
rewriters of history" or not), ever saying anything like this.
> What an incredible heap of rubbish!!!
Carman wrote:
Who has claimed that? Cite a name, a date, a source for
your claim. If you can't provide a cite I'll conclude that
its YOUR "heap of rubbish".
> The 13 colonies each had a separate religion except Penn.
> which had three. Only Maryland was Christian, the rest
> were various Protestant sects.
Carman wrote:
The Protestants in the other twelve colonies weren't
Christian? Be certain to mention this peculiar belief
in your suit against whatever institution granted you
a degree in history. It will lend weight to your claim
against them for fraud.
> I've studied each of the founding fathers and signers
> of this and that and found that most were Diests or
> Free Masons (notice the fact that theres Mason symbols
> on the $1 bill even today and Washington DC is laid out
> according to Mason plans).
Carman wrote:
So what? I don't have much time for religion myself,
and since I'm not a Christian of any description, the
religion or lack of it among people a couple of hundred
years ago isn't something I worry about much. Ever, in
fact.
> The representitive from my home state, the Rev. John
> Weitherspoon was the most aspoused Protestant (...)
Carman wrote:
The only "Weitherspoon" I found in a quick look was
one "Albert Weitherspoon Pegues (1859-1929), born a
slave near Cheraw, South Carolina". You probably don't
mean him.
Perhaps you mean Rev. John Witherspoon, of Princeton,
New Jersey? (His home was actually in Tusculum NJ).
You use the term "aspoused", by which I assume you
mean "espoused" or married. As far as I know the Rev.
Witherspoon was only married twice.
> and most of these guys had mistrersses all over the
> place especially the ones that owned black slaves.
Carman wrote:
So what?
>
> BUT above all of this they were all one thing...
> LIBERALS!!!
Carman wrote:
Again, so what?
> The conservitives were called Tories and loyal to a foreign
> power.
Carman wrote:
Words and their meanings change over time, Is this news to
you?
> They had liberal ideals of equality and fraternity, justice
> and the rights of man because they are human, not because
> they are rich or connected.
Carman wrote;
They had lots of ideas, all right. Some of those ideas led
to the American Revolution, while others led to the French
Revolution. In fear and trembling I'll wait to see which
revolution you find more successful.
> >> We fought a revolution to get big government (The King), Big
> >> Business (British Capitalism) and Big religion (church of
> >> england) off our backs.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > More garbage. Had The British State recognised and respected
> >the rights the American colonists had under law, there'd have
> >been no Revolution.
>
> yes there would have. The Americans were so different than the
> British people by 1780 they didn't even share the same values.
Carman wrote:
Nonsense. Had the British government maintained their policy
of benign neglect the 13 colonies would have had no more reason
to revolt than Canada.
> By 1812 (you need to read about that war) the accents were
> totally different too and in fact the issue of impressment of
> American sailors was easily recognized because you could tell
> a yank from a Brit the minute he opened his mouth.
Carman wrote:
So what? Just about anyone could tell a Welchman from a
Londoner too.
> The American revolution had a profound effect on England
> and France, more so France and as I mentioned before the
> great thinkers of the revolution were active in Europe
> after the war.
Carman wrote:
And just look at all the wonderful advances that came out
of the French Revolution! The National Razor for example.
> >
> >> It wasn't a perfect place in 1784 and the issue of
> >> slavary in the south a shamefull situation but
> >> remember we had to compromise to the right wingers
> >> in the south on this issue to form a country.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > You've really sucked up a lot of nonsense haven't you?
> >
> Your right I'm sorry, we should bring back slavary.
Carman wrote;
I'm not surprised you think so. Your attachment to the
ideology of Socialism is the short route to just that.
> I was drunk on capitalism that night when I read about
> the debates in Philie where Thomas Jefferson had to drop
> the anti-slavary clauses in the constitution to get the
> southern deligates to sign.
Carman wrote:
Since Jefferson owned slaves I guess he was awfully
wrought up over the issue. Now when was it he gave Sally
Hemmings her freedom?
> I'm sorry again, slavary is in the bible and its OK.
Carman wrote;
I can understand, (in a sick sort of way) why someone
would find the slavery of other people acceptable, or at
least useful; what I can't understand is someone who
actually wants to BE a slave.
> >> > The "equality" spoken of in the Constitution is
> >> >"Equality Before The Law". No equality of value is
> >> >mentioned or implied.
> >>
> >> Bull
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Cite me chapter and verse then, oh knowledgable one.
> >Show me in the US Constitution where it speaks of some
> >sort of metaphysical "equality of value". You can't,
> >because no such exists.
>
> How can I you obviously haven't got a copy to consult or
> a history book to read.
Carman wrote:
I have the world's largest reference library quite
literally at my fingertips. So have you.
If you can't come up with a cite for your ridiculous
contention, (and you can't, because none exists), try
and find the courage to admit your error.
> Perhaps a trip back to Canada would help where you can
> worship the Queen???
Carman wrote:
What's this supposed to mean? Is this as close as you
can come to an admission of error? Are you really so
completly craven that you can't simply admit to making
a mistake?
> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Here Dentists make the money and doctors don't
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> >> > From this I conclude you don't have Socialized
> >> >> >Dentristry. Yet.
> >> >>
> >> >> Sorta, its minimal and it costs about US$11 a visit
> >> >> but its basic.
> >> >>
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Give it time then, the dentists will be reduced to
> >> >employees of The State, and the dental care available
> >> >will deterioriate.
> >>
> >> So you believe all dentists are greedy capitalists who
> >> refuse to work for less than $200,000 a year???? What
> >> a negitive world you live in. This is 2002, not 1902 or
> >> 1802.
> >
> > Carman wrote;
> > When you take the economic incentive out of any kind of
> >work, the creative, smart, and hardworking people are
> >going to find themselves employment that pays off in
> >material rewards.
>
> Maybe your friends are incapable of doing anything decent
> except for big money but the rest of us can.
Carman wrote:
Good for you. But of course, it wasn't good for you was it?
You couldn't even afford sufficient insurance even though you
had VA benefits for yourself.
> I made $78 a month in my early years in the air force and
> did great work simply because my ethos says you do good
> work for the sake of good work. I fought and flew and
> jumped in Viet Nam for $319 a month, are you saying the
> government ownes me a couple of million????
Carman wrote:
You're the one saying The State owes you all these big
wonderful "rights". "Access", "a job", "equal pay", and
I don't know what all else.
Personally, I'm happy with "Equality before the law".
Canada doesn't have that concept, and I became lonesome
for it.
> You piss on the graves of every dead soldier and insult
> every underpaid veteran in America with capitalist shit
> like that!!!
Carman wrote;
You sit whining on your dead posterior in Australia and
wrap yourself in the American flag? I don't have to ask if
you have no shame. I can see you don't.
> Thee guys that hit the beaches of Normandy or islands in
> the pacific did their best for $41 a month!!!
Carman wrote;
And when they came home they went to work and made the
US the most successful world power in history.
What did you do when you came home? You screwed up. You
got married and had a child without the income to support
a family, that's what you did. Then you blamed it all on
the big nasty old Capitalists and ran away to vegetate in
Australia, where you sit and whine about how bad you've
got it. I wonder how you can stand yourself?
> What's next from your box of stock answers?
Carman wrote:
Answers to what? Did you ask a question? All I heard was
more whining.
> That corporations took Normandy and Okinawa or were
> surrounded during the battle of the bulge??? Or ENRON
> executives too Pork Chop Hill in Korea or BUSH, CLINTON
> and RUSH LIMBAUGH fought bravely in Viet Nam for big
> money!!!
Carman wrote:
Has anyone told you recently how pathetic you are?
> May I suggest that you use some of your expensive health
> insurance to go see a shrink for a reality check???
Carman wrote:
Hey there Mr. Thom? I'm not the one sitting on his dead
behind in Australia without a job, or a clue, or a hope of
getting either one. I'm not the one sitting there howling
"Victim!", while blaming the whole world and everyone in it
for my misfortunes.
> Professionals do their best regardless of the rewards and
> people like BUSH and the republicans rarely have those
> kinds of professional ethics.
Carman wrote:
More sad nonsense. You just don't get it do you? If you
want people to do good work, you simply MUST reward them.
Call it "EVIL", call it "WRONG, call it "19th century",
or call it anything you like. But if you call a plumber,
you'd better be prepared to pay the man for his work.
> >Carman wrote:
> >If you distort the entire economic system, (as Socialism
> >does), to the disadvantage of these same creative, smart,
> >hardworking people, they will quietly abandon your pathetic
> >system and go elsewhere.
> >
> Capitalism, communism and socialism are DIFFERENT economic
> systems and do not distort each other.
Carman wrote:
Socialism is a deliberate distortion of the working economy
that benefits no one but the totalitarians.
> Like I said REAL professionals do their best regardless of
> the system. Greedy assholes follow the money no matter who
> gets hurt.
Carman wrote:
Why does the US consistantly get the best of the best of
all the professionals in the world? Because the US PAYS the
best for their work.
Are there exceptions? Certainly. There are always people
who find reasons to stay where they are and struggle on.
For some it's patriotism. For others it's the knowledge that
their parients, clients, customers, NEED them, and that gives
them the reward they require. All well and good.
The problem remains that such altruistic people are in very
short supply. If you're counting on altruism to keep you well
supplied with first class professionals, then you can expect
disappointment. It isn't going to happen.
> > This is why the US gets so many intelligent, skilled, and
> >highly trained immigrants from Canada and the other countries
> >playing with Socialism.
>
> Funny but all the Canadians I knew in American went south
> because they married an American or couldn't take the cold
> weather any more.
Carman wrote:
That's how many Canadians giving you those excuses?
>
> I remember reading an article in the Rocky Mountain News
> during the period when the French thing was threatening
> to break up the confederation and the US Government paid
> for a huge survey in each provence to see if they would
> vote to join the USA.
Carman wrote:
I don't suppose you have a cite for either the article
or the survey?
> According to the article all but British Columbia (which had a
> socialist Premier at the time and is the most prosperous of all
> the provences) said yes as long as they could keep their social
> welfare system and medical benifits.
Carman wrote:
I've never heard of such a study. I'd be interested to read it
if you can provide a cite. (I'm not going to hold my breath).
> Given that I'd say you are not very in touch with the feelings
> of the average Canadian.
Carman wrote:
I don't think I've ever claimed to be. Anyway, "the average
Canadian", can't immigrate to the US. It's only the considerably
above average who can seriously consider it. US immigration laws
are deliberately designed to exclude the vast majority of people.
> When I came here in 1988 to be the American Coordinator of the
> Viet Nam Veterans International Reunion (Nov 88 in Melbourne)
> I talked with a lot of the Canadians who came for it and they
> don't agree with you either.
Carman wrote:
So what? Who cares if the people you claim to have spoken with
agree with me?
> >Carman wrote:
> > 'Are you very good at a job? Would you like to make a LOT
> >more money than you make in the UK, in Canada, in Europe, or
> >some other place where you're getting taxed to death to pay
> >for other people's healthcare? Come to the US and get RICH!'
>
> Right, the minute they see Viet Nam Vet on the resume the
> questions start. Are you over your drug problems from Viet
> Nam yet??? This is especially cute from some asshole who
> was a pot smoking draft dodging hippie in the 60's and 70's.
Carman wrote:
More whining. Do you ever run down?
I know a fellow in Washington DC who employs ONLY veterans.
In order to work for him you need a slightly higher security
clearance than Colin Powell. (I might be exagerating, slightly).
He's a contractor with only one customer: The Whitehouse. The
owner of the company and all his employees make out like Jack
the Bear!
> And taxed to death??? We pay lower taxes here than the
> USA!!
Carman wrote:
You do? Then what am I to make of your earlier statement:
"I don't mind paying 50% tax as long as I get the services".
Of course, if you're unemployed then 50% of zilch is still
zilch. Paying zilch and still continuing to "get the services",
probably doesn't hurt much at all. It certainly won't affect
your pride, as you seem to lack that facet of character.
If I ever have to pay 50% tax on my income in the US I'll
think I've died and gone to heaven! In order to get into the
50% tax bracket I'd have to make something like a hundred
grand, after expenses! I should live so long!
> Even with the new right wing sales tax we pay less.
Carman wrote:
Sales taxes are "right wing"? Please tell the Government
of Canada this wonderful news. In 2000 the combined Federal
and Porvincial sales tax in Ontario was 13.5%.
> For medical care you pay 1.5% of your adjusted gross income
> (taxable) with a maximum of A325 or US$178 a year!!!!
Carman wrote:
Of course the national expediture for health care is MUCH
greater than $325 a year X the number of people who pay into
the fund each year. So where does the rest of the money come
from Mr. Thom? It comes out of taxes doesn't it? Who pays the
taxes Mr. Thom?
"There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch". TANSTAAFL,
Mr. Thom.
> AND we get better health care than even the full paying
> people in the USA.
Carman wrote:
Dreams, Mr. Thom. They *are* pleasant aren't they?
> Australia leads the world in HIV research and treatments
> (though we actually have very little of it), world class
> drugs you can't get there (...)
Carman wrote:
You mean because they aren't FDA approved yet?
> (...) and we actually have a surplus of CAT scan machines
> where in the USA they are hard to come by outside the big
> cities.
Carman wrote:
In this area there are semis that take a complete MRI unit
around to the small towns so the people don't have to travel
to the larger centers, (towns of 20,000 or more, County Seats
and the like) for diagnostic services.
>
> We also don't have all the poison and crap in the food that
> makes you ill in the first place.
Carman wrote:
You have some cite for the safety of Australian food relative
to that of the US? (I'll just bet you do!)
> (...) because the weather is better people get more exercise
> and don't hid in the house all winter (...)
Carman wrote:
Sub-tropical where I live. Nothing that I'd call winter.
> (...) BUT we do have a raising problem with child over
> weight problems due to too much homework, TV, Video
> games (that keep kids inside and not outside playing)
> and American style fatty fast foods.
Carman wrote:
There's that tasty American Culture running rampant in the
Third World again. Those simple natives just can't get enough
of it!
> But we are woking on that like not having soft drinks in
> school and more natural aussie foods and not hamburgers
> and crap like that.
Carman wrote:
Do let us know how you get on with all that. I'm sure
someone here will be very interested in what your little
porkers weigh.
> >Carman wrote:
> > Of course, it's understood that you can also go broke,
> >and if you no one but you will lose much sleep over it.
>
> And whats wrong with a world were everyone is rich???
Carman wrote:
The only thing I can think of that might be "wrong" with
it is that the idea is completly insane. "Rich" is one of
those contrast terms. In order for such a term to have any
meaning, you need the complementary contrasting term. In
this case the term is "Poor".
> The capitalist and communist system depends on the few
> soaking off the many.
Carman wrote:
More of the same nonsense. I wish you'd study some
modern economics. It gets boring reading the same
nonsense over and over.
> The middle roads says that if you work you should have
> a good life regardless of what you do.
Carman wrote:
Now we get taoism mixed with misunderstood economics?
> The guy who drives a bus is just as important as the
> paper pusher in some corporate board room.
Carman wrote:
Perhaps in some metaphysical sense, but no one ever
paid the rent with metaphysics. It won't work paying
the insurance either.
>
> The compassionate human being looses sleep over any
> person who is will to work and can't find work.
Carman wrote:
You probably mean "willing". and you probably mean
"loses".
I sure don't lose sleep over that. In my experience,
someone who is actually "willing to work" here in NC,
has only to get himself down to the casual labor
office by 5AM, to pick up a job for the day. I did so
when I first moved here. Six to eight dollars an hour
for unskilled labor. Permanent work is somewhat more
difficult to find, but not much.
I guess I'm just not a "compassionate" human being,
(by your definition anyway).
> If your some druggie or drunk (inlcuding a fat cat drunk)
> then fuck you and the white horse you rode in on.
Carman wrote:
Such intemperate language Mr. Thom! And you being such a
"compassionate human being" and all. Aren't you afraid you
might be committing "hate crime" by expressing contempt for
some "drunk or druggie"? You might cause them to feel bad!
Now *that* wouldn't be very compassionate, now wourd it?
Carman wrote:
It makes me sick to see you call yourself a "yank". How dare
you speak of the US in the sickening manner you've chosen and
still retain your citizensip. Please stay in your fetid little
Socialist dump. You are not nedded here.
> The problem is coalition governments, the one major flaw in
> the Parliamentry system. The current government sits with
> only about 33% of the vote (same as Hitler and Reagan) but
> they have talked other splinter right wing members to join
> them in exchange for a portfolio.
Carman wrote:
Always something to whine about, ins't that right Mr. Thom.
> Last parliament Labour had 50.8% but couldn't sit. With
> the emerging Greens they lost some of that this time as
> more Greens took Senate seats and we are winning big time
> at the State Level.
Carman wrote:
Gee. If your guys win enough seats maybe they can invent
some more new "rights" for you. Or maybe you could run for
office on a "Right to Whine" platform!
> In Tasmania last month we kicks the right wing Liberal Party
> in the butt and have as many seats as they do.
Carman wrote:
Good for you, I guess.
> In the up coming Victorian State election we will probably take
> our first lower House seat (I've been asked to run in the seat
> of Cranbourne or Gembrooke but haven't decided yet).
Carman wrote:
There you go. Unemployable, completly innocent of any knowledge
economics, political science, government, history, or business with
a knack for blaming other peoplke for what's gone wrong in your life.
You're a natural! A shoo-in on the "Right ot Whine" platform. You're
obviously just what Australia needs in politics!
> In the last elections we took 7 local councils.
Carman wrote:
Did you get caught? Did they make you give them back?
> >Carman wrote:
> > I'm one of these "older workers" too, and I've NO PROBLEM
> >getting work here. If America is the source of "anti-older
> >worker values", it must be something we exported. We probably
> >made a profit on it too. (Some of those foreigners will buy
> >anything!)
> >
>
> Damned right its exported, just like all the other crap
> yuppie values that have infected this culture.
Carman wrote:
Australia does sound like an infected culture, all right.
On the origin of the subsubstance which was cultured I am
not prepared to speculate.
> John Howard, the lapdog of George Bush is doing everything
> he can to drive this country back to the 19th century and
> replace the Australian culture with an American Economy.
Carman wrote:
Does he think gun control is somehow uniquely American?
> The result is descrimination, unemployment, crime (well
> actually the gun control laws he passed to disarm union
> members caused the 25% increase in crime) and a growing
> sense of dispair among the people.
Carman wrote:
Sounds like Socialism all right.
> This government will have a hard time in the next national
> election and Old Jackboot Johnny will NOT be in parliament
> after the next election.
Carman wrote:
But is he is it won't be Your fault, will it? It'll be
Capitalism, or Bush, or "anti-older-worker-prejudice" or
something else. Right?
> >> > Carman wrote;
> >> > I'm 54, and into my third, or fourth, (depending on how
> >> >you count), career. I know no one here who is willing and
> >> >able to work, who can't find *some* employment. Perhaps
> >> >not the *best* job, probably not at *hallelujah* wages
> >> >either, but something.
> >> >
> >> > The hidden costs of Socialism are in individual drive
> >> >and in the overall productivity a nation can achieve.
> >>
> >> The hardest workers I have ever known are so called socialists.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Then you've never worked in a law firm or a brokerage.
> >
> Nor do I wish to associate with such low lifes!!! Especially
> lawyers. Where is the Bard now that we need you!!!
Carman wrote:
Dead for some time now.
> >
> >> I ran a business for 17 years and I'm a GREEN and I worked
> >> 6 days a week sometimes and paid my workers more than myself
> >> in bad times because I don't believe in making other people
> >> take responsibility for my problems.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Yet that's just what you're doing. You screwed up in not
> >getting enough insurance, so it's the HMO's fault you lost
> >your wife. You screwed up by not getting retraining in time
> >to make yourself utterly indispensible, so it's "Jackboot
> >Johnny Howard" and "American style anti-union and anti-older
> >worker values" that cost you your income!
> >
> You need to see a shrink if you believe that.
Carman wrote;
That's exactly what you've been saying. You've been telling
me over and over how all your misfortunes have been someone
else's fault.
> I have retrained 4 times mate!
Carman wrote:
Then I guess you needed retraining five times, because you're
still out of a job!
> I have degrees in Professional Photography and ran a studio,
> then degrees in History and Pshchology and worked with
> veterans/PTSD in region 5 of the VA, also ran a parachute
> business including designing my own gear and test jumping
> it myself since I wouldn't ask anything of others I wouldn't
> do myself.... unlike capitalists like BUSH etc etc. Now I
> do computer work, mostly support and some programming.
Carman wrote:
I care? Who cares what you did? With all that "wonderful
experience", (which I strongly doubt), you still can't find
a job? You'd rather sit there on your behind in Australia
whining about it than go somewhere you can find work? You
probably wouldn't take a job if someone offered you one!
Mind you, I sure don't want you coming back here. There
are more than enough whiners here already.
> >>
> >> If you had ever taken a psychology course you would
> >> know that capitalism kills individual drive.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Now it's my turn to say "Bull".
>
> Read "Maslows Heirachy of Needs" and understand what
> drives the greedy.
Carman wrote;
Abraham Maslow has been dead for more than thirty years.
The Hierarchy was out of fashion long before his death.
http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/maslow.html
"The most common criticism concerns his methodology:
Picking a small number of people that he himself declared
self-actualizing, then reading about them or talking with
them, and coming to conclusions about what self-
actualization is in the first place does not sound like
good science to many people".
> >nothing they do matters. This phenomenahas served as an animal
> >model of human depression. In one study, rats were injected
> >with tumorous cells. Half of the rats had been exposed to the
> >helplessness treatment and the other half received a similar
> >treatment, but one that they could control".
>
> You didn't include the human aspects but your getting there.
>
> I'll snip does here to get to the point. Capitalism works only
> when the rewards are consistant. What you seem to see is another
> disorder called "intermittenet re-enforcement". For some reason
> the human mind responds more readily to a reward granted for
> behavior when its intermitten. Getting the reward every time has
> less of an effect. This is part of the reasons slot machines are
> set up to pay youoccassionally, they found that people loose
> interest in the slots if they win every time!!!
Carman wrote:
Behavorist nonsense. Maslow would have your hide off for spouting
such garbage.
> The same goes for the disorder of capitalism.
Carman wrote:
Wow! Right out of Soviet Psychology! I never thought I'd see
anyone actually saying such garbage in public! But then you've
aleady proven you have no shame.
> If we were to "win" at everything every time capitalism would
> implode just like communism did. Capitalism, unlike socialism,
> is based on this disorder that IR and ROI cause.
Carman wrote:
You could give Alan Yu a run for his money with this garbage.
>
> > Not ONE mention of Capitalism that I saw. Laboratory
> >psychologists drowning rats and shocking dogs for the most part.
>
> Nor did it mention socialism or communism.
Carman wrote:
No mention of economics at all. You cited "Response Outcome
Independence", and claimed references to it would show "where
initiuative is killed by things like communism and capitalism".
The references to "Response Outcome Independence" I located
showed nothing of the kind. Unless you actually cite some other
reference, I have no choice but to assume you've attempted a
snow-job, and botched it.
> This is what the third way is about.
Carman wrote:
Alan Yu had better look to his laurals. from Behaviorism to
Maslow to taoist mysticism. You really are full of it.
> Coming up with a system that rewards hard and creative work
> without leaving people by the wayside like the two C's do.
Carman wrote:
I've always found paying for food quite rewarding. I get to
eat some of the food, and feed my family too!
> It also has to eliminate the blocks to progress that capitalism
> does (...)
Carman wrote:
Exactly what "blocks to progress" are eliminated by capitalism?
> (...) because of lack of capital or knowing the right people.
Carman wrote:
And your taoist idea has some means of inventing capital and
friends in convenient places? Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.
> Most good ideas never get produced because of money.
Carman wrote:
And you know this because you have a compendium of all the
"good ideas" in history and can prove that the majority were
never acted upon "because of money". Riiiiiiiiiiiight.
> Good ideas should be acted on because they are good ideas
> not because they are profitable.
Carman wrote:
If they aren't profitable, then what's so good about these
so-called "good ideas"?
> Lets take non-polluting cars. The hydrogen and fuell cell
> vehicles on the roads today were not sold at a profit.
Carman wrote:
Yet the search for some method of propulsion that creates
less, or at least different, undesirable byproducts is driven
by the possibility of tremendous profits.
> The solar powered cars that race across the outback deserts
> of Australia were not made for profit.
Carman wrote:
See above.
> Look there isn't a single person reading this newsgroup that
> wouldn't love to be doing something they love and make a
> living at it but capitalism and certainly not communism aren't
> about people being happy.
Carman wrote;
Economics isn't about happiness. Economics is about economics.
> My dream is to see the day when artists paint or take photos
> without worrying about money, when writers write, when builders
> build and bakers bake.... all doing their best for the love of
> their craft!!! That's when mankind really progresses!!! What
> do we have now..... just a job to keep body and soul together.
Carman wrote:
Unfortunately, maybe because you were dreaming too much, you
neglected to obtain the insurance that might have kept your wife's
body and soul from parting company.
This money stuff...! It's far too crass for a poetic soul such
as yourself; I see that now. What you need is not a job, not an
*ocupation* whereby you can gain for yourself the necessities of
quotidian existance. You need a keeper.
Give you a nice cell, and throw food through the bars. Then you
can spend the rest of your useless life spinning theories of no
conceivable use to anyone for your own entertainment.
> By the way, my college courses and field work NEVER dealt with
> rats and the like. Life is NOT a Skinner Box!
> >
> >> The situation applies down here and the government has had
> >> to hire shrinks to work with older workers who suffer from
> >> it because no matter what they do to find work, they don't.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > But Wait!
> >
> > You attributed this psychological phenomenon to Capitalism,
> >yet you have it there in The Workers Paradise Where Everything
> >Is So Much Better Than In The Nasty Old USA?
>
> I said communism and capitalism are the worst examples of ROI.
> The third way is partially here but theres alot of damage to
> repair and alot of new to build. Its still better here right
> now, ask any epat yank or canadian that lives here.
Carman wrote:
No, thanks. I'll leave the "epats" to themselves. The only thing
that really matters to me is that you STAY there.
> > Carman wrote:
> > "It starts with a plan to put in public toilets, then
> >they bring in the bully-boys to work a man over".
>
> You should see our public Loos!!! Fully computerized! You
> push a button to get in and the door opens if no one else
> is in there.Inside is a panel with various functions and the
> place cleans and flushes itself automatically and if your a
> dickhead who does drugs it will also despose of your dirty
> needle so no one else can catch anything you have. Brilliant
> stuff. We call them Cyber-loos!
Carman wrote:
Did you hear that fluttering noise above you? That was the
entire quotation going right over your head.
> >Carman wrote:
> > Once The State starts giving people "everything they want",
> >pretty soon it turns around and "takes everything they have".
> >This is nothing but normal.
>
> You just don't undertand do you? Government is doing as a group
> what you can't do as individuals. You can't build a road or an
> airport so you do it collectively, you can't fight an invading
> army by yourself so you do it collectively and raise an army as
> a group. Its not theirmoney its OUR money, its like a big family
> with family money.
Carman wrote;
Generally though, even really BIG families with LOTS of money
don't kill other family members who decide to go off and try some
other kind of life. Governments though, are known for taking a
really dim view of disenters.
> Now as far as taking things I conceed in only one area, your
> stuff is taken for unpaid taxes (as in a land tax) but that's
> an issue of you not paying your fair share like everyone else.
Carman wrote:
And of course if you object to having your property taken, and
object to The State's assessment of "your fair share" then The
State is just going to have to wait until you come to agree with
them before taking your property right? Right?
> BUT when else do they do that.
Carman wrote:
You post gibberish like this and still claim 10 years of post-
secondary education?
> Yes Jackboot Johnny tried to steal all the guns around here
> but the High Count said no and made him do a buy back (...)
Carman wrote:
Oh, Gee! A "buyback" under threat of several years in prison.
Oh yes, Mr. Thom. I see, that's ever so much better!
> (...) (which is a joke because 80% of the outlawed guns are
> hidden in gardens) (...)
Carman wrote:
And you know this because you have inside knowledge of how
many of the newly prohibited guns there were in Australia
before the "buyback" and you know how many they "bought back"?
> but he'se a right winger not a socialist and what about
> cororations STEALING your labor with free over time and
> all the other crooked crap they pull???
Carman wrote:
You probably mean "corporations". Some of them do, apparently,
steal from their employees. Some have been caught at it, forced
to make restitution, pay fines and so forth. Some managers have
lost their jobs as a result.
> I'd say that fat cats steal from the people 1000X's more than
> governments.
Carman wrote:
Generally the corporatins won't kill you. Governments, on the
other hand, have a long track record of killing people they
dislike on some very slim pretexts.
> There is no entity on earth that tries to get something for
> nothing more than corporations!!!
Carman wrote:
I disagree. I think lazy Socialists rip off much more than
corporations.
> Now there is another side to this called survivalists. Right or left
> wing governments (well what they call left wing since the USSR died)
> hate people who want to live on their own and not use money (barter
> and the like) The republicans are the worst at this and remember it
> was the Bush adminstration that sent the BATF to wipe out Randy Weaver
> and CO at Ruby Hill and planned WACO (and Janet Reno, the Butcher of
> Waco picked up the mess from the BATF and made it even worse). My god
> you can't have people living in communes working for the good of the
> community without regard for personal gain!!! You can't have people
> living in the mountains of Idaho and not contributing to the
> capitalist system or paying taxes on the chicken they just traded!!!
Carman wrote:
I think you really are insane.
Carman wrote:
Just when did the Republicans have a two thirds majority in both
houses of Congress Mr. Thom? That's just what it takes to have "full
control of Congress". Two thirds majority. This assumes that no
Congresspeople "break ranks" and vote across the aisle.
> >Carman wrote:
> > Bush can't repeal the firearms laws in the US. There simply
> >aren't the votes in Congress. But what's it to you? You don't
> >like it here remember?
> >
> The republicans controlled congress and had they kept their
> promises to the people in and out of the NRA would have had
> repeal bill on the table on day one. But because they are
> iiars they didn't.
Carman wrote:
Please post a cite for such a promise. Even if such a
promise was made, (and *I* never heard of it), the Republican
Party never had the votes to enact any such legislation.
> >Carman wrote:
> >You went to Australia where no one has any real Rights, and
> >now you're complaining about it?
>
> You don't understand the system here. Rights are codified in
> the USA, here they are based on "The Right to Have Rights"!!!
Carman wrote:
A meaningless phrase that ensures the concept of "rights" is
meaningless as well.
> >
> >> >> AND that includes equal rights and equal access.
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Equal rights? Before the law, certainly. I've no idea
> >> >what you mean by "equal access"
> >>
> >> OK, I'll give you an example from another post of mine
> >> concerning the draft.
> >>
> >> "In 1993 I went back to college at Metropolitan State College in
> >> Denver and was told I couldn't even register for classes unless I
> >> registered for the draft.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Wait a minute. You assert you're 57 now, which would make you
> >something like 48 in 1993?
> >
> I was born in Jan 1945
>
> >Carman wrote:
> >They wanted you to register for the draft at 48 years of age?
> >
> Yes, its required under the ACT up till 56 I believe and theres
> also a federal law on the books and in effect that say you have
> to carry a draft card till your out of the system.
Carman wrote:
I think this is more garbage. Post a cite for it if you can.
> This is what they used to nail the anti-war activists back then
> with and why draft cards were burned, to flaunt the CARRY law.
> The bastards even busted somenudists once at Cape May, New
> Jersey for that. They couldn'y bust um for nudity so they
> harassed them for not carrying their draft cards on their person.
Carman wrote:
More garbage. Cite please
Carman wrote:
It was a nice way of saying I think you're crazy.
> >> >> A job is a right, (...)
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Nowhere that I've ever seen.
> >> >
> >> >> (...) equal pay is a right, (...)
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Again, nowhere that I've ever seen. I've always had to work for
> >> >my money.
> >>
> >> Not a problem, work is good and noble but not if you're worked to
> >> the bone for a fraction of what assholes like the ones at ENRON (who
> >> wouldn't know hard work if it sat on their faces) then you have a
> >> serious social problem.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Then where do you get this "equal pay is a right" garbage?
> >
> From a deep sense of mroality, something republicans talk about but
> rarely practice especially the con man TV Preachers who say "YESSSSS
> its the Rev Billy Bob brinin yah savlavation for only $89
> ninty-fivvvve!" But when they're caught the crook tears flow on TV "I
> HAVE SINNED!" What they are really crying about is "I GOT CAUGHT!!!".
> (I refer to Swaggart here)
>
> The fact that you called equal pay "garbage" says it all doesn't it
> folks.
> >
> >Carman wrote:
> > I can go along with "equal pay for equal work", provided "equal
> >work" means "equal productivity". Anything else is Socialist wishful
> >thinking.
> >
> So that means that assholes in suits at trendy board meetings that
> produce nothing should make less money than the guy or gal at the
> production like who turns outs goods all day long???
Carman wrote:
You can hire hundreds of people who can work in the factory. You
can weed out the lazy, the fools, the bullies, and those without
the requisite intellect for the job quite easily. The remainder will
do a good job and make production.
Perhaps one out of five of the production workers can learn enough
to be a Lead Hand. The job is more demanding than production worker,
requiring better interpersonal skills, better communications skills,
and the intelligence to keep several facets of the poeration in mind
at the same time.
Perhaps one out of five Lead Hands can rise to be a good Foreman.
He has to understand the technical aspects of the job, and to be
able to manage considerably larger numbers of people than the Lead
Hand. In addition, the Foreman's work interfaces with the office.
There is a considerable amount of paperwork that MUST be done if the
operation is to remain in compliance with State and Federal Law, as
well as Quality Assurance standards set by ISO and the similar
organizations in that field.
This is as high as most of the working men can ever get without
specialized training. From here on up the corporate ladder requires
formal and intensive education, much of it in Business, Accounting,
or Law. No worker from the factory floor can learn enough to rise
without formal, specialized training.
The training is expensive. I'd estimate an MBA from a good school
(not Ivy League), costs between 75 and 100 thousand USD. A Law degree
will probably run another 25 to 50 thousand, and Accounting (Masters)
perhaps close to the same.
Even a BBA, the lower limit of entry into managerial training, will
cost at least 40 thousand USD, and likely more.
For an MD, people should be prepared to part with upwards of 150
thousand USD. Forget about the student thinking of working his way
through med school. It just isn't possible any more, and hasn't been
practical for thirty years or more.
Now just who's going to pay costs like that to earn a factory
worker's wages? It isn't going to happen.
> I agree with you that most bureaucrats produce nothing but the same
> goes for the business types.
Carman wrote:
If you actually believe that you're not only insane, you're stupid.
> The problem is rot at the top not the guys welding bumpers to Fords!!!
> Look at Anderson and ENRON. They produced NOTHING!!!!!
Carman wrote:
You are mistaken.(or crazy and stupid, or all three)
> Take me to K-Mart and show me the products these fat cats produced
> themselves and I'll buy it.
Carman wrote:
No business can exist without trained people to run it.
> >> >> (...) a gun is a right (...)
> >> >
> >> > Carman wrote:
> >> > Definately NOT in Canada, and I doubt it is in Australia.
> >>
> >> Not since a right wing coalition government took over its not, but
> >> human rights aren't even considered under Jackboot Johnny Howard
> >> just industrial relations laws.
> >>
> >> >Carman wrote:
> >> >In the US we have this Second Amendment thing that we're working to
> >> >force The State to recognise.
> >> >
> >> Easy to do, just get rid of the current crop of left and right wingers
> >> and bring in people like the GREENS or reforms and other small parties
> >> who still hold the moral high ground. The big two parties are
> >> worthless.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > Riiiiiiiiiiiight!
> > You sit there in Australia telling me what a grand old place it is,
> >(save for "Jackboot Johnny Howard", gun bans, no work, no "human
> >rights" and so on), then you want to tell the US how to manage the
> >country you've left in high dudgeon?
>
> I love it your fur is getting up.
Carman wrote:
Sounding more like just another troll all the time.
> By the way will you be standing in line to join up for the war in
> Iraq. I'm sure the Bush and Chaney kids will save you a spot in line!
Carman wrote:
Crazy, stupid, and boring.
> If your going to attack me then attack the new world order too
> because one of the reasons the US allows duel citizenship (...)
Carman wrote:
That's "dual" citizenship, moron. 10 years of post secondary ed
and you still can't spell? No wonder you're unemployed.
> is because millions of its people have done just like me, they
> have left for a better life or they work in the thousands of multi-
> national corporation around the world and we are CITIZENS OF THE
> WORLD and not tribal.
Carman wrote:
While you're sitting there rotting in Australia. Who pays for
your food? They're getting a bad deal.
> This state is the population of Colorado and the size of Utah and
> there are over 50,000 registered yanks here alone! And that's the
> ones we know of.
> >
> >Carman wrote:
> > Call us with advice when you get your own house in order.
> >
> Keep messing with Sadam and the nutty Arab work and you won't have a
> house to get in order. My life is fine thank you excpet for the
> missing part of my life that I lost 5 years ago.
Carman wrote:
You mean your self-respect?
> I refuse to retire and will work or try to work till the day I die (...)
Carman wrote:
Why don't you try being a night watchman? It shouldn't strain your
intellect, though perhaps the resposibility would wear on you.
> (...) and will continue with all the volunteer work I do to fill my
day (...)
Carman wrote:
What do you volunteer as? A weight?
> (...) and maybe if the gods are good I'll sit in Parliament.
Carman wrote:
I *do* hope you make it! Australia certainly *deserves* a man of
your (tiny) caliber.
> But those are the ambitions of a GREEN, social justice, a clean
> planet and a fair go for all. Probably hard for a republican to
> understand???
Carman wrote:
No. I've encountered insanity before.
Carman wrote:
So you do precisely nothing of value and they pay you for it. No
wonder you've lost your mind.
> besides working for the GREEN party I do work for the PUTA, plus I
> walk several miles every other day cleaning illegal advertising
> posters and real estate agents signs from poles and the like (I choose
> to do this for execise) to keep this community as clean as possible.
> I also teach at 4 different Computer groups/SIGs
> to help people increase their computer skills) especially for job
> hunting). I also build web sites for community and chariety groups.
>
> > Carman wrote:
> > I'll go out and continue to earn my living, pay my taxes and
> >insurance, save some money, and still have cash left over to
> >finance my gun collection.
> >
> >> We have an over populated planet that is killing itself for the profits
> >> of the few.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > The planet is killing itself?
>
> Won't even consider that statement. Like volcanos spew auto exhusts
> and fill up landfills with toner cartridges!!!
> >
> >Carman wrote:
> > Or is it those people who are reproducing without limit who are
> >killing themselves with their numbers?
>
> Well big families is the republican way!
> >
> >> 19th and 20th concepts of communism, capitalism or whatever ISM will
> >> die this century and I feel assured that all the problems of pollution,
> >> poverty, inequality, accesses of organized religion etc will be solved
> >> if we come together and abandon the silly tribalism and Balkanization
> >> of the planet.
> >
> > Carman wrote:
> > You can tell yourself whatever comforting little stories help you
> >get to sleep, but I call it fantasizing.
>
> I call it the future
> >
> > You mentioned 10 years of university education? What the hell did
> >you study that you can talk such pathetic junk?
> 250+ semester hours of undergarduate plus graduate. History,
> Psyhcology, computer science and professional photography with side
> bars of sociology, economics, art and political science. I also was
> on student government at MSC in Denver between 1977 and 1981.
Carman wrote:
And with all that you STILL can't earn a living? I flatly don't
believe it.
> I also taught non-credit courses in Men's liberation there plus
> history and men's lib (1980's) for credit courses at Univ of New
> Mexico/Los Alamos Branch. I worked in Los Alamos 81-85, great place,
> 18,000 people including 4000+ PhD's (the national Lab is there).
>
> Does that answer your question.?
Carman wrote:
When did you lose your mind?
Melissa in Colorado
...
> medicine. Any Australia with the card get get free health care in any
> commonwealth country including Canada and they in Australia.
Free health care. Ahahahahahahah!!
> In
> America if you don't have insurance you get a free ride on a gurney
> into the parking lot.
There's no such thing as "free health care"!
What you really mean is that some people form a mob and vote to force other
people to pay for it!
Is slavery ok in your mind?
--
- Melissa Somewhere In Colorado, USA. Member GOA, JPFO
Butt Kickin', Straight Shootin', Chess Playin',
Rock n Rollin' libertarian, Objectivist Warrior Woman. ;-)
http://www.a-human-right.com/introduction.html
I won't compromise with the burglar.I won't compromise with the rapist.
And I DEMAND an end to the compromise of my 2nd Amendment human rights.
Salivate over my SKS: http://www.dimensional.com/~melissa/SKS.HTM
Jeffrey C. Dege
>as...@freemail.com.au (Thom) said, and I quote:
>...
>> Australia is an island. All commonwealth countries have socialized
>> medicine. Any Australia with the card get get free health care in any
>> commonwealth country including Canada and they in Australia.
>
>Free health care. Ahahahahahahah!!
Like the guy in New Zealand who cut off his own fingers when they had
turned gangrenous after heart surgery?
He didn't want to wait six months for his appointment.
--
These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the
sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their
country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of
man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we
have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more
glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly:
it is dearness only that gives everything its value. Heaven knows how
to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed,
if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.
--Thomas Paine
Jos.Carman
> as...@freemail.com.au (Thom) said, and I quote:
> ...
> > Australia is an island. All commonwealth countries have socialized
> > medicine. Any Australia with the card get get free health care in any
> > commonwealth country including Canada and they in Australia.
>
> Free health care. Ahahahahahahah!!
>
> > In
> > America if you don't have insurance you get a free ride on a gurney
> > into the parking lot.
>
> There's no such thing as "free health care"!
>
> What you really mean is that some people form a mob and vote to force other
> people to pay for it!
>
> Is slavery ok in your mind?
Carman wrote:
If you really want a look into Mr. Thom's mind, you'll need
a strong stomach and considerable time to read his most recent
response to me in this thread.
I confess to teasing morons as a form of entertainment, but
it stops being fun when I find the person I've been drubbing
is genuinely afflicted. Sadly, this is the case with Mr. Thom.
Doug
<jca...@ec.rr.com> writes
Too blummin' right they can't. No one can,
They can emigrate to the US though. Tee-hee!.
Doug.
--
Thom
Looks like you don't know the difference between capitalism, communism
and the middle road socialism. Socialism isn't totalitarian.
Socialism depends on a partial market economy and the freedom of its
people. It believes that basic services should be assured at a low
price (here in OZ it used to be power, gas, public transport and the
like) plus a social safety net. Business is better off in a
socialistic country because it too uses these low cost services to cut
its' cost.
1. With socialized bedicine business doesn't have to pay for employee
health insurence
2. With socialized utilities business pays very low prices for power
and light and the means of production
3. With socialism business doesn't have to pay 8% social security tax
or unemployment insurance.
NOW if you look at the USA that means you/we are closer to communism
than Australia is/was!!!
Until they were privatized the utilities here in Victoria were making
scads of money (the power company, the SEC, whom I worked for) turned
over $140 to 190 million a year in profits which went to the State to
lower taxes of all kinds and provide services PLUS we had the lowest
electricity prices in the world. The greedy fat cats wanted all these
well run State businesses and they got them when a crooked Premier
named Jeff Kennette got it. Now that same power company is claiming
its loosing money, employs 12,000 less people and the price of power
wentright up!!
TELSTRA was called Telecom and was in the same boat. Now its 49%
privatized and the phone rates went way up and only half as much money
goes to the government to provide services. And my phone bill is up
28% and just went up anout $3 a month. I paid an outragious US$16 a
month for service last time!!!
>> Socialism being opposed to capitalism (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Socialism isn't opposed to capitalism, just incompetent
>at it. This is why State Industries, (like National Coal
>in the UK, and the Crown Corporations in Canada), founder
>in seas of debt and mismanagement.
See above comments.
>
>> (...) and communism (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Socialism IS communism. The only difference is that the
>Socialists have modified the idea of "State ownership of
>the means of production".
This is the right wing lie thats been told since the end of WW2. The
republicans have been lieing all along saying that any system that
doesn't make corporations rich is communism. Even President
Eisenhower warned us against these people especially the Military
Industrial Complex (his terms).
Look at South America. Half of them are TOTALITARIAN right wing!!
Left and right has NOTHING to do with TOTALITARIAN. Both the right
wing Hitler and the left wing Stalin were TOTALITARIAN as was Japan at
one time. What about Right wing FRANCO and Right Wing Mussolini???
Oppression is a defect in mankind not economic systems. TOTALITARIAN
has been around for 4000 years!
>
> The modern Socialists, (having watched as the communist
>experiment failed so utterly), have decided to "allow"
>Corporations to manage themselves, within parameters set
>by The State. Why bother with an abstract like "ownership
>of the means of production" when you can set the ground
>rules and get a "better" result?
That's been proven wrong here. Formally very profitable state run
business have been floundering once privatized. The electricity
system is the best example, Gas and Fuel seem to be doing OK, Water
Systems are having problems and get this, they are now trying to
charge farmers for the rain that falls on their farms saying that that
water should have run off into their for profit system!!!! Public
transport is loosing money too.
>
>> (...) has systems that believe in the basic rights of
>> people to a minimum standard of living.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Dreaming up rights again. It takes more than dreaming
>to create actual rights.
So you believe theres no such thing as human rights???? You don't
believe in the right to life liberty and the persuit of happiness???
You sound like a TOTALITARIAN!
>
>> The three countries that have the highest standards
>> of living (Australia, Norway and Denmark) and who have
>> the most liveable cities (same 3) hold to these values.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Good for them! You assert that the conditions in three
>tiny little countries proves something about economic
>systems? It's a big world out there!
>
yes and the smart man learns from the successful systems.
>> >> Any Australia with the card get get free health care
>> >> in any commonwealth country including Canada and they
>> >> in Australia.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > For all the good it will do you.
>> >
>> >> In America if you don't have insurance you get a free
>> >> ride on a gurney into the parking lot.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote;
>> > As opposed to Canada where the put you on a waiting
>> >list until you die.
>>
>> Funny but the one time I needed it in Canada for a
>> sporting accident in BC (pre-tibial hemotoma) I
>> waited no more than a half an hour in the emergency
>> room. They X-Rayed, found it wasn't fractured and
>> turned me loose with a crutch which is exactly what
>> was required.
>>
>
> Carman wrote:
> I, on the other hand, was diagnosed by a physician
>to have an acute appendicitis. As the surgery was
>beyond the competence of his small clinic, he sent me
>to a large one, Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto, with
>a letter containing his diagnosis so I'd not have to
>wait in the ER.
And speaking of Toronto did you know their public transport system is
used as a worlds best practice example around the world!!!
>
> Four hours after I arrived at Sinai (just as I was
>leaving for some other hospital), a nurse asked me
>where I was going and looked at the letter. I had the
>offending organ removed about an hour later.
At least they did something. My HMO wouldn't even let me see a
doctor!!! I got a stupid nurse who took no tests and gave me some
sample drugs left by a salesman. It wasn't till I went to the
socialized medicine called the Veterans administration hospital that I
was seen (in 15 minutes) and treated properly.
And is the cost of living lower in the DC area??? Me thinks not. The
issue is NEVER how much you make, the issue is how much yu have left
over after taxes and cost of living. That's why Americans and
Canadians come here, not the other way around.
>
> Perhaps you weren't able to make it economically here, but the
>great majority of people do quite well.
Sorry but they don't If you look at the stats you see the average
familiy is just getting by, has huge mortages if they own and the
credit card debt is scary! And Under bush unemployment is raising,
real jobs are being replaced with part time and casual and the largest
employer in the world is a TEMP Agency!!!
>
>> (...) and with the highest insurance rates in the world?
>
> Carman wrote:
> Living in Canada I had to pay for medical care twice. First I
>had to pay the taxes that supported the poor and grossly
>infficient system, then I had to pay AGAIN, for the care needed
>that wasn't available for ANY money in Canada.
>
> Here in the US I pay only once for healthcare, and this saves
>quite a bit of money. It's the difference between being able to
>save for our future, and not having any money left for savings at
>the end of the month.
>
>> Australia has private health care if you want it and its 1/5th
>> the cost in the USA.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Of course it's cheaper. You've paid once already, your insurance
>will never have to carry the full load, so the company can charge
>less and still make a profit.
The largest private health care plan (Medi-Bank Private) is government
owned.
>
>> When are you going to admit to yourself that healthcare in the
>> USA is outragiously expensive (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> It's cheaper than the Canadian equivalent, which is all I ask.
>
>> (...) and if employers weren't providing it most people couldn't
>> afford it.
>
> Carman wrote:
> I'm self-employed. I pay ALL my insurance costs myself, and STILL
>pay less than I did in Canada.
>
> If I went to work for someone else, I'd make a somewhat smaller
>salary or wage, but I'd get fringe benefits which would make up for
>*some* of the reduction. As I have it calculated, I make more by
>working for myself. Besides, I prefer it this way.
>
>> Same with care insurance.
>
> Carman wrote:
> You mean long term care as in retirement and nursing home care?
>
> That's a BIG ticket item, unless you start paying when you're in
>your 20s or 30s. In that case it's not too bad.
>
>> Colorado for instance says that about 1/3rd of drivers aren't
>> carrying manditory liability insurance because they can't afford
>> it.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Oh, you mean "car" insurance! I pay less for that here in NC
>than I did in Ontario. My car and repairs cost me less too.
Car insurance is sold by the State here and that way you get 100% of
the people with it. Your car registration fee has your insurance with
it. I don't use a car (don't need one with all the public transport
around here) but I'm told car rego and liability insurance is about
US$67 a year!!! The state collects the money then distributes it to
the various under writers. EVERYBODY WINS!
>
> You don't seem to grasp that if "...1/3rd of drivers aren't
>carrying mandatory liability insurance", the other drivers who
>are in compliance are paying the difference. This isn't really
>an insurance problem, per se. It's more of an enforcement
>problem on the part of DMV.
Makes more sense to up the wages so everyone can pay. Or use the
Australian system at Australian prices.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > You had the option to buy yourselves more and better
>> > insurance, and you didn't do it.
>>
>> Not on what I was making.
>
> Carman wrote:
> And whose fault is that? Some "Evil Capitalist" I suppose?
Looking down on the little people are we?
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> >It's not a crime, until the illness or the accident comes;
>> >then it might as well be a crime because you get punished
>> >for your lack of foresight.
>
>> Or lack of honest employer.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Were you forced to work for him? Did someone hold a gun to
>your head? You chose your employment.
What a joke that is!!! You don't choose employment, working is a
necessity of life!!! And you don't choose an employer, they choose
you!!! Are you trying to tell me that I can walk into any place I
want and ask what time I start in the morning??? Do you really
believe that. If that were true there would be ZERO unemployment in
the world!
> You chose how you spent
>your money. You chose wrong, and paid a terrible price for it.
>Now you're choosing to hide from your responsibility for your
>own actions and blaming other people.
>
> Now you think The State should step in and make it impossible
>for people to choose wrong? The State will be glad to take
>choice right out of your hands. Instead of choice, you can have
>obedience.
No thats what you get under the right wingers SHUT UP AND SHOP!!!
SHUT UP AND SEND YOU KIDS TO VIET NAM OR IRAQ!!! Mine have better
things to do!!
>
> You don't sound too happy with some of the things The State
>has done in Australia. But how can you complain? You wanted
>The State to make the choices didn't you? Well, it has and now
>you complain.
I moved here before it swung from the center to the evil right (and
would have objected if it went to the evil left too) Things will get
better, slowly the people are taking back their country from the
multi-nationals and the coalition. Theres another election (with no
election fraud like in Florida) in NOV and the right wing is expected
to loose yet more seats!!! to the Greens and Independents in the
center.
>
>> >Carman wrote:
>> > Did you spend the money on a house and a nice car? Poor
>> >choice, as it turned out. You weren't to "know" you'd need
>> >the extra insurance (if it would have helped), but that's
>> >the breaks!
>> >
>> No I spent it on keeping from freezing during the winter and
>> starving all year around and putting a teenager thru school.
>
> Carman wrote:
> All quite laudable, I'm sure.
>
> Just who was it that selected your occupation? Just who was
>it that chose to get married? Just who was it that chose to
>have a child? Just whose life are we talking about?
I never had a child, its a step son. AND who was it that chose to
send me to VIET NAM? Not me! Who was it that chose to take 6 years
of my life for military service? NOT ME! Who was it that chose to
spay me with Agent Orange? NOT ME! Who was it chose to shoot me in
the back in Nam? NOT ME! Who was it that chose to saddle my life
with Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush? NOT ME, I VOTE GREEN!
Life is not about choices, its about making the best of the shit
that's put on your plate and growing from it.
>
> Maybe The State should have made these choices for you. Maybe
>The State should have selected your occupation?
They did for six years.... called SOLDIER, Airman or whatever you want
to call it.
And what about people like Randy Weaver who made those decisions to
drop out and live free. Fuckwit Bush and his BATF didn't like people
who wanted to live outside the system, his system, and they sent goons
to kill him. But since the BATF is incompetent they lost more men
than Weaver did. Same with WACO and the Mt Caramel Mission. Can't
have these people living in communes if they choose, its against
government policy so we'll make up all kinds of lies so we can go kill
them. They didn't choose to have a BATF assault on their Mission!!!
>
> (Now, now, Mr. Thom. We don't need any more basketweavers just
>now. You have to enter the School of Sanitary Engineering!)
And what do you do, work for the republican party in the ministry of
propaganda and tired old values???? I have not seen one word out of
you that address the 21st century, that says a kind thing, that is
even in the 19th century much less the 20th! Did you not learn
anything from 9/11? Sure those were nut cases butthey sent a message
that an awful lot of the world is unhappy with the very American
values and guess what mate. There were no communists, nudists,
socialists, swingers, welfare mothers, Australians, athiests, or
people on unemployment insurance, they were all YOUR LOT!!! The
Religious ultra right wingers!!!!
>
> Perhaps The State should have told you not to marry?
>
> (Now, now, Mr. Thom. On your income you really can't consider
>marriage! It just isn't socially responsible!)
>
> Perhaps The State should have made it impossible for you to
>engender a child?
Are you drunk???
NOPE what I'm sounding like is millions of Americans, Brits and
Australians who are sick of fat cat politicians who send every other
man's kids to war and keeps theirs safe at home. The papers have a
letter almost every day here saying that if you send our kids, yours
go first and I agree with that. In a democracy all men are created
equal and all have the same responsibilities to their country.
Churchill lost a son in Yugoslavia, Kennedy (the old man) lost one in
the air over France (and almost a second in PT-109) etc etc etc but
I'll bet you won't see a single BUSH kid or the kids of his cabinette
even in the military much less in Iraq!!!
Do I porefer GORE, hell now, Tweedle dumber vs Tweedle dumber in the
last election. McCain I would have voted for had be not been so
viciously attacked by the Bush camp and run out.
>
> On the other hand, you don't seem to like Australia's present
>leadership very much either. Perhaps you have "issues" with
>authority?
The problem here is that the majority doesn't get into government.
Its a flaw in the Westminister System. I like the preferential system
of voting but not the fact you can have coalition governments even
though the GREENS are in Government in Germany in a coalition.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > In the US, The State assumes no responsibility for providing
>> >you with medical care. If you want it, you must take steps to
>> >obtain it for yourself. If you don't obtain it, and keep up the
>> >payments, the failure can radically effect the quality and
>> >length of your life.
>>
>> It also does nothing to prevent you from needing it. Like
>> keeping idiot arabs out of airliners or keeping greedy flight
>> schools from training them to commit unspeakable acts.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Yup. Sounding more like Greg Procter all the time. I guess once
>you learn to blame other people for your troubles the whining gets
>easier?
You mean like the republicans do??? They have been blaming the worlds
problems on the communists since 1917 and guess what? Communism and
the Evil Empire all gone and nothing has changed has it!!! Gotta find
a new boggie man to blame everything on now! Whats the new one?? Oh,
yes LIBERAL Democrats, the GREENS, flying suacers who make crop
circles and cut production of corn????
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Now tell me you didn't know that at the time. Tell me it came
>> >as a complete surprise to you that your insurance wasn't up to
>> >snuff.
>>
>> It did, I believed their lies.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Then you're a fool.
>
> Now you compound your foolishness by failing to blame the one
>person who could have done something about the state of your
>health insurance. Want to see that guy? Just look in the mirror,
>if you can stand to do so.
And the system is perfect right??? Your god laid down a perfect
republican plan and everything is your fault if you don't follow
it???? By the way have you been taking any flying lessions lately?
You sound like the guys who saved money not learning to land. Do you
yell capitalism is good capitalism is great SLAME!!! on the freeway???
You can spout to tired old republican lines all you want but the wold
changed on 911. Your world is crumbling and your president is helping
that alone nicely. South Africa saw the other countries unit against
poverty and pollution even if Oil Man Bush won't grow up and realize
it.
>
>> Thank god I'm a vet and could access the only decent health
>> care system in the land, the VA Hospitals.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Did God create the VA? Did God tell you to join the military?
No the devil did and threaten jail if I didn't go!! :-)
>Did God prevent you from buying more and better insurance
>instead of spending your disposable income on other things?
No I was stupid and believed all the lies the republians tell about
HMO's being the total answer to all your health problems. BUT I never
believe liars and con men now. One learns from ones mistakes.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Tough bounce. It's a hard old world and sometimes you screw
>> > up.
>> >
>> >> AND at US wages, who the hell can afford much more.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote;
>> > I can, and so can most other people in the US.
>>
>> I can't type I'm laughing so hard. The USA has the second
>> lowest wages in the industrialized world according to the UN!!!
>
> Carman wrote:
> Cite please. What matters is not the wages, but what you have
>left after the taxes.
Nope its what you have left after cost of living and taxes.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Many of the people who *can't* pay for insurance, get their
>> >care through welfare. from what I've seen here in NC, that
>> >care is roughly the equivalent of the care I used to get under
>> >Socialized Medicine in Canada. To wit, not so hot; but better
>> >than nothing.
>>
>> How about this, pass a law that every citizen gets the same
>> access to health care at the same price as Congresspersons.
>
> Carman wrote:
> No thanks. Someone, (like me), would have to pay for it.
Here we go again, the republicans just pay and pay while the democrats
just suck and suck??? What pages of the republican handbook of BS is
that out of??? If everyone made the same wage, everyone would pay the
same tax and the republicans wouldn't have anything to bitch about any
more would they???
If you don't agree with F-wit politicians in the above instance, why
not make them use the same HMO as I did and not suck off the people
with their FREE health insurance???? Why can they go to Besthesda and
I can't (well actually I can as a Vet but you see what I'm saying).
Oh really? They got nothing from me in the great right wing gun grab
mate! And since I refuse to sign contracts as part of their
industrial relations reforms I've lost nothing there either. I have
no bought into a single one of the right wing reforms they have put
thru because I choose not to. I choose to belong to a union and not
be on a contract. I believe part of the American revolution was
fought over the issue of employment contracts (called indentured
contracts then I believe).
>
>> We get value for money here.
>
> Carman wrote:
> You get exactly what The State chooses to give you. When
>it starts getting too expensive, and The State starts
>cutting your services, what are you going to do about it?
>Whine? Beg? Hold your breath until your face turns blue?
>It'll all work abou as well.
Your getting totally far a field here and look, well I don't have a
word for it.
>
>> I don't mind paying 50% tax as long as I get the services.
>
> Carman wrote:
> But you said you can't get work. What's fifty percent of
>no income? When they cut your services, do you actually
>believe they'll cut your taxes too?
Nice try you knew what I meant. If I was working (for pay) I'd pay
50% if I got services for it. Again you look down at anyone who is
out of work, very 19th century of you.
>
>> I can walk anywhere in Melbourne at any time of night in
>> Melbourne and not feel scared, (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Whether or not you feel "scared" has something to do
>with healthcare?
Stop taking things out of context. I dare you to walk in Wash DC in
the middle of the night with money in your pocket!!! Go ahead,
capitalism will keep you safe! Bush will keep you safe, Clinton will
keep you safe!! Adam Smith will keep you safe!!!
>
>> (...)I can expect a lot of parks and reserves and I
>> get them,(...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> That's nice, but I fail to see the relevance.
>
>> (...)I get good public transport (unlike most places
>> in the USA) and I have a bus a block away and a tram
>> line in front of my house that runs every 7 minutes
>> during the day and its cost me about US$22 a month.
>
> Carman wrote:
> I suppose if you can't afford a car that helps.
Real men take public transport and don't smog up the air. Anyway I
have a tram going by my house every 7 minutes during the day and every
20 minutes at night so what do I need a car for???? I have no need of
the "Detroit Penis Subsitute". I can get to almost everyplace I need
to go much cheaper than in a car.
>
>> Things aren't perfect here and like everyplace on
>> earth we have our little problems (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> You mean like "Jackboot Johnny" and the confiscation
>of private property?
>
>> but all you have to look at is the AUST/American
>> emigration ration, for ever 28 Americans that move
>> here only one moves north and half of them come home!!!!
>
> Carman wrote:
> Cite please.
cite what???? The emigration figures??? Look at the Australian
governments Ministry for Immigration data.
>
> The Americans who move to Australia are welcome to do so
>for all I care. I've lived outside the US for most of my
>life, in one place and another. It cost me a lot of low
>wages and reduced savings, but it was good experience. I
>value the US more for having other places with which to
>compare it.
The issue then is where your happy but I'm afraid that things are
changing since 911 and you may find your not happy there anymore if
Bush gets you into a slugging war. There's an awful lot of nut case
right wingers out there willing to fly to the arms of whatever silly
god at your expense.
>
> Some of the Americans that go there will probably stay.
>Some people seem to actually *like* being told what to do.
>The others will return to the US, like I did, wiser and
>more experienced than they were when they left.
First of all since the culture is so different telling an Australian
what to do isn't a terribly great idea if you don't want a broken
nose. (especially in a pub) What you will find is tha your just
ignored. Jackboot Johnny wanted to lower corporate taxes and taxes
for the right by introducing a sales tax and in doing so he created a
huge black market!!! Why? Because X amount of people refuse to wear
the tax and just go around it. I'm not in favor of illegal activities
but at least these people have the guts to stand up to an oppressive
right wing government. Stand up in America and you get WACO'ed or
Ruby Hilled!
>
>> Whats the old saying about voting with your wallet or
>> your feet???
>
> Carman wrote:
> Since I couldn't vote in Canada, (not being a citizen),
>voting with my feet and leaving the place is exactly what
>I did. Now I vote with a ballot. Much more effective.
Some of us are luckier than others. and I can vote in three countries
because of my Irish Parents and my multiple citizenship. This comes
in very handy and I wouldn't be caught flying anywhere in the world on
an American Passport. No one has ever messed with an Australian or
Irishman in a hijacking so far.
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > One of the reasons American society is so successful
>> >is that much of the time the government lets the people
>> >get on with the work. Every time the government starts
>> >regulating this, controling that, addressing inequities
>> >and generally getting in the way, the overall
>> >productivity suffers and the whole aparatus begins to
>> >slow down.
>>
>> Just the crooked aparatus, decent clean and sound systems
>> continue.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Sorry, but that just isn't true.
>
> The money that pays for all those nice "social programs"
>The State has for you, comes out of the normal economic
>cycle.
Not the STATE, THE PEOPLE. In a democracy (and remember America is
not a democracy its a republic) the people are the State. Government
is people doing as a group what they can't as individuals!!!
>The bureaucracy soaks up most of it, and the rest
>is employed to support unproductive people and State
>enterprises that can't support themselves.
sort of like the huge salaries unproductive corporate board members
soak out of corporations???? Has ENRON dropped from your mind yet or
Arthur Anderson, niether of which produced a single product or good?
They just shuffled paper. I get sick of people moaning about hard
working people wanting a decent wage while Paracites like Anderson and
ENRON get rich.
>
> This money is gone. You might as well have simply burned
>it. In fact, as burning it would have the effect of
>restricting the currency supply, burning it would have a
>better effect than letting The State have it.
>
> As a result of reduced reinvestment, the economy must
>slow down. When economies slow, some people are going to
>become under- and un-employed. This is very, very simple
>economics.
Getting into capitalis theory will get no one anyplace because its
changing. One thing doesn't change, capitalism is like religion,
people believe in a system and react to it as they are supposed to.
Change that belief and you change the system either way. Its like
money. Money is worthless but it has value (its actually stored human
energy) because we believe it does and are willing to accept it in
exchange for goods and services. In actuality its good for toilet
paper, coasters in a bar or note paper by the phone or in the case of
coins its value as a piece of metal that can be made into something
else. It only has value because we believe it does.
>
>> Anyway this isn't soviet Russia where success is measure
>> by production. People are more important.
>
> Carman wrote:
> The Soviets failed because The State is inherently a bad
>manager.
The soviets failed because the country was too huge to manage on any
kind of a scale, had too many different cultures (26 republics and 52
languages) and it was trying to controll too many outside countries.
Also it was much like America where most of the goodies went to the
few at the top. The fat cat politicians are no different between the
two places. Basically communism is unworkable but it was better than
what it replaced, much like China. Chinese communism sucked but it
was far better than what it replaced and as such as an adiquate
intermediate step. The time for russian or chinese communism are now
gone and they need to move to the middle road. Unfortunately Russia
went to far to the right and got the resulting corruption and the
worlds biggest MAFIA.
>
> The skills necessary to run a business enterprise are
>very different from the skills required of a State
>bureaucrat. This is why The State, in most Socialist
>countries, has gotten out of running businesses. What
>they've done instead, and it's less harmful in the short
>run, is to set the ground rules by which business is
>allowed to operate.
If these business were so poor why was big business so interested in
aquiring them??? In the case around here theyw ere making more money,
costing the consumer less and employing more people when the State ran
them.... but maybe we are unique.
>
> In the long run, they simply can't compete with a
>Capitalist economy. There are too many losses,
>(analogous to friction losses in machinery),built into
>the system.
But the middle road IS NOT INTERESTED IN COMPETING!! It is
interested in paying the highest wages and selling at the lowest
prices there fore giving more goods and services to people and leaving
them more to invest in their retirement.
>
>
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > When this happens, the government climbs off, lets
>> >things speed up again, until some bureaucrat gets the
>> >bright idea that he knows how to make it all "fairer"
>> >and they start piling on again. It's boring, but
>> >predictable.
>>
>> Given all the crooked capitalists that are being nailed
>> left and right ranging from Martha Stewart to the
>> friendly folks at ENRON and Anderson I'd say you should
>> reasssess your position in the 21st century.
>
> Carman wrote;
> Very far from it. The criminals are a source of
>significant "friction losses" in the system. Every one
>that gets caught represents a genuine improvement in
>the functioning of the whole system.
>
> Look at Japan! Their economic criminals nearly brought
>that country down. Because they can't/won't/don't dare,
>attack their criminal problem at the root, they are
>effectively crippled as an economy.
Again ,each system depends on belief not reality and these people
tried to rip off that system and its belief system for their own
benifit. It just proves what I said. The problem with Capitalism is
that you can get richer being a crook than an honest business man.
>
> Catching the criminals, reducing the level of corruption
>in the system,will have as much beneicial effect as
>abandoning "maintainance welfare", and unlimited
>"unemployment" benefits. The system is healthier for the
>removal of corruption.
All systems depend on honesty
With time and effort. Money isn't the only thing you can contribute.
Giving money is lazy chariety.
>
> What you'd actually do first, would be to demand help for
>yourself, and then you'd demand that someone else help the
>other people that need it. That's The Socialist Way! Let
>GEORGE Do It. Tax the people who create wealth, to support
>the people who don't make anything but babies!
But the fat cats don't create the WEALTH, the people who for them do.
The parasites just site back and let other people do all the dirty
work, die in the mines etc etc. And what is wealth? Since theres
only so much money in the USA, it just a matter of taking it from one
person or persons for the benifit of the few.
Lets take Bill Gates. In the paper yesterday he was moaning that
hewas doen to his last $78 billion!!! Poor baby, got rich by selling
buggy underperforming software then having the balls to sell you an
upgrade to repair the original problem!!
But does Gates have $78 BILLION in cash? Hell no, most of his wealth
is vapor, a belief that his Mircoshit stock is worth that much, yet it
lost 20% of his so called wealth lately. How much cash does he
actually have??? How much precious metals does he have? How much
food that people need does he have?? So Called WEALTH is part of a
belief system. Most so called wealthy people are very cash poor.
>
>> Its called mateship and it was taught to me by the US
>> Government in the military..... YOU DON'T DESERT YOUR
>> MATES!!!
>
> Carman wrote:
> Garbage! Your "mates" are people who work as hard as you
>do to support the whole enterprise. The whiners, the
>malingerers, the people who are never there when the work
>gets hard and dirty, are people you'll never call "mates".
>
>> But people like AWOL Bush didn't learn that part did they???
>
> Carman wrote;
> You sound more and more like just another whining tpg troll.
I sound like a Veteran who hates people like Clinton, Quayle, Reagan
and Bush who talk about patriotism but when it comes to them serving
their country put their yellow tails between their legs are get out of
being in harms way anyway they can.
Bush's politics (and this is ALT.POLITICS.BUSH afterall) have nothing
to do with my feelings on draft/service evading. I don't care what
you are in the political spectrum, in our day we had an obligation of
6 years and right now I don't see any of the fat cat leaders
(including Jackboot Johnny or Clinton) having done their duty. Yet
they have the balls to be the head cheeses! Theres an old saying that
you can't give orders till you learn to take them and I find it
totally offensive that scum like Clinton and Bush have the gaul to be
the head of the military considering their records.
>
>> >
>> >> Are they in the business if medicine or in the business
>> >> of making money off of the unfortunate.????
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > They're in business to make money, of course. Why would
>> >you think otherwise?
>> >
>> In a 19th century economy I have to agree with you.
>>
>> > If they wanted to dedicate their lives to helping "the
>> >unfortunate", they'd be medical missionaries, or run free
>> >clinics for the indigent or something, and more power to
>> >'em.
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, (especially for "the unfortunate") such
>> >people aren't usually willing to go to work for members
>> >of the educated middle class who have neglected to obtain
>> >sufficient insurance to defray the costs of treatment.
>> >It's a bummer, but there it is.
>>
>> Neglected or can't afford insurance??? You act like this
>> is a couple of bucks a year!
>
> Carman wrote:
> You claim 10 years of post-secondary education, (if I
>understood you correctly). What did you study that you can't
>earn a decent living? Basketweaving? How did you pay for
>that education? What did you spend your income on that you
>couldn't afford sufficient insurance to get you through the
>hard times?
It has nothing to do with it, its called being over 40 years old.
There are millions like me, tossed our because we are so called too
old or have politically uncorrect indeas like remembering what a
family wage was like or belonging to a union (I was a short stewart at
one time too). The fat cats today want stupid children who will work
80 hours a week for peanuts and not complain. They are the ones that
will bring down capitalism, not people like me. The people in Russia
got fed up with being poor in Russia while the communist leaders got
fat and brought down the system and the same will happen in North
America. Plus if we go to war in Iraq and get nuked and gased, I
don't see the Republican Party surviving that.
So why did you saty there? Evading the draft???
>
>> Did it ever dawn on you that attitudes like yours are the
>> reasons nut cases fly airliners into buildings???
>
> Carman wrote:
> You mean al Qaeda is "really" fighting the good fight for
>The Socialist Way of Life? Please expound on this further.
Nope they are right wingers.
Thats old commie stuff and I'm not a commie. I'm sure its very hard
to break away from the old cold war lies that every thing is black and
white. And I'm sure that it was very confusing when RIGHT WINGERS (no
socialists, communists, nudists, swingers, negros, secular humanists
etc) brough down the WTC and all the right wing could do is try and
change the subject or create a new enemy (Islam). Right wing/Left
wing.... they are both the WRONG WINGS!
>
> The world doesn't run on "should", it never has and it never
>will. If that ditch digger wants to prosper he'd better begin
>saving his wages and investing his savings at a very early age.
How can you save anything on a ditch diggers wage??? This is what I
can't underatnd about right wingers.... where do you get this idea
that everyone has all this money you keep talking about. 11 million
Americans (government stats) live on minimum wage of $5.25 an hour.
There is NO suyrplus money to save.
>
>> The current system has the people who do the least work
>> getting the money.
>
> Carman wrote;
> Nonsense. Your definition of "work" as manual labor is
>pathetic nonsense.
To a capitalist it is. That's why theres so many poor people and why
the fat cats love to look down on honest labour.
>
> I personally know only one person who's what I'd call wealthy
>who has not EARNED his money by working harder or smarter than
>most. (He won a lottery in Canada).
Which means he probably has more real wealth than My Gates!!!
>
>> The ONE single reason capitalism is flawed is because you can
>> make more money (and quicker) being a crook than by being honest.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Some criminals prosper, though I know of none personally. Most
>do not, and end in jail if they persist in their criminality.
The stupid ones do. Corporate America is full of crooks, ENRON, VP
Chaney, Bush, Arthur Anderson is just the tip of the iceberg!!!
>
> It may make you feel better regarding your apparent unsuccess
>to pretend that successful people are "crooks", but it's just
>another pathetic fiction you're trying to make yourself believe.
Yah right, I'm so deluded caring about people and the world. I should
just go out and slit my competitions throat in an ally someplace.
>
>> >Carman wrote:
>> > I see people working hard and smart at difficult jobs,
>> >making their livings and providing for themselves and their
>> >families. I see these people as possessed of "dignity",
>> >something they've worked for and won.
>>
>> Do you have the same respect for fruit pickers, people at the
>> car wash, farmers, disabled veterans who can do nothing more
>> than sell newspapers, and people at McDonalds????
>
> Carman wrote:
> Of course not. Why should I "have the same respect" for
>people who choose to remain manual laborers as I do for people
>who've made some success of their lives?
So you believe labourers are below you??? That you are better than
they are and they should shut up and keep their place like good little
spicks, niggers and white trailer trash (apologies in advance to the
minority communities but you see my point)
And what is success??? Money??? I don't consider rich people
successful... Some are, most aren't I see a Buddhest Monk as more
successful than Bill Gates and I see the average Viet Nam vet slugging
it out every day to make a living as much more a success than George
AWOL Bush. If being unelmpyed for the rest of my life yet helping
people doing volunteer work is my lot then I see myself as successful
if I help the people or causes that I work for. My bank account or
positions of powerh as NOTHING to do with success. The key is to be a
successful human being and that has nothing to do with limos and bank
accounts or power.
>
> I've noticed that when *I* do manual labor, (which I've spent
>far too much of my life at), I don't get much respect either.
Probably because of attitudes like yours. If you disliked them
looking down on you why do you do the same to others in the boat you
were once in??? Plus what does it matter what idiots think of you???
Loving yourself is all that matters. I have met some wonderful people
out in the Bush of Australia, people who care about their neighbors
and couldn't give a dmaned less what society thinks of them, they live
their lives in a manner that suits them as long as they don't hurt
other people.
Good example is the opal miners in Cober Pedy. I have a small claim
up there and every winter I go up for a couple of months. Everyone of
the other blokes would leave their mine is a second to help you in a
pinch and I them since accidents can happen. What's in it for them?
Nothing! You stick together as a community and speaking of that COBER
PEDY is powered by community wind generators and Lightning Ridge is
powered by community solar cells. Theses are successful people in a
successful community.
>The respect comes later, when people who've seen me working on
>the docks, or maybe humping cabinetry up the stairs in a
>construction project, encounter me running my own business and
>meeting them as an equal.
Respect is what you deserve as a human being, not because you have
money or power.
>
> The "fruit pickers" I met in Ontario were Mennonite Mexicans,
>the descendants of Canadian Mennonites who immigrated to Mexico.
>(Very bad move!) The great and benovelent Socialist Government
>of Canada "allowed" then to come to Ontario and work for wages
>even the rural "Native Canadians", (First Peoples, you know,
>Indians), wouldn't take. It kept the selling price of Ontario
>Fruit competitive.
Cheap labor is a big problem isn't it. Keep everyone working for the
same wages and no one is abused like that are they!
>
> Most of the people at the car wash are ex-cons, (who are
>largely unhireable for anything else),
And who have paid their debt to society and should be abused like
that.
>except in the summer
>when they fire the ex-cons and hire students for less money.
Greedy capitalists don't get my car wash business that's for sure.
But then again, I choose not to smog the air up with a car.
>
> I haven't seen any disabled veterans seling newspapers
>here, but then I haven't looked either.
Look at the stats from Region Five of the Veterans Administration
(where I did volunteer PTSD counciling) A 6 or 7 years ago the local
VA in Denver swept the shelters and lower city area and talked to
every one they could. They found out that at least 60% of homess were
VN Vets. All started own this road when they came back from the war
and couldn't get work because of the draft dodging yuppies not wanting
them around or the republivans wouldn't hire "loosers". We of course
lost their war against the godless communists (which of course they
didn't send their kids to). And thats the facts!!
Woman complain that they don't make as much money as mnen for the same
or equal work yet the VA ststa show that VN Vets make on 62% of what
woman do!!!
Down here I have NEVER had a problem with being a Veteran and every
year on ANZAC Day and NOV 11th I proudly march in the parade (The
ANZAC Day Parade is at least 3 hourse long) with the other veterans
wearing a suit (the only time I wear it) my wings, medals and ribbons.
Down here Veterans are respected no spit on.
>
> As for the people who work in McDonalds, I don't go to
>McDonalds. Not even to use the washroom.
>
>> If you do then pay them the same as everyone else!
>
> Carman wrote:
> No.
>
> An individual's work is worth exactly what he can make
>someone pay him to do it. It doesn't matter if he's a
>"nice guy", it doesn't matter if he "needs" more than he
>gets, it doesn't matter if he puts his whole heart and
>soul into his work, his work remains worth exactly what
>he can make someone pay him to do it.
I believe that the right wing disagrees with you see they have been
slowly destroying unions for years and diminishing the ability to get
decent wages. We also have a minimum wage plus we have a history of
capitalists stealing human beings from Africa and forceing free labor
out of them. Slavary alone is a total condemnation of the system!!!
>
> Work is a commodity, like currency, like potatoes, like
>computer chips, nuclear engineering, and everything else
>that can be bought or sold. The value of a commodity is
>what you can make someone pay you for it.
>
> I know a lady who's a wonderful artist. She works in a
>number of media and some of her work is astounding. The
>most she's ever gotten for a painting is around $400. What
>she sells for her living are her skills as an executive
>secretary. She works hard, smart, and conststantly. She
>makes more money than I do, but not at art.
Many a secretary will say they are more valuable than their bosses and
I have seen many cases where thats true! :-)
>
>> >Carman wrote:
>> > I see other people working only when they must. I see
>> >them getting by, when they do, on charity, on welfare,
>> >surviving off the labor of other people like parasites.
>> >You'd assert they are possessed of "equal dignity"? How
>> >distasteful.
>>
>> You forgot people at ENRON and Arthur Anderson who
>> produce nothing and just move money around and DO
>> NOTHING USEFULL!!!!
>
> Carman wrote:
> As I told you before, Enron's core business was trading in
>energy contracts. They did quite well at that, and if they'd
>been content with it they'd probably still be a leader in the
>field. As it is, their top traders, (who had no part in the
>criminal stupidity of management) were in immediate demand for
>their experience in a business which continues to make honest
>profits today.
yes and as useless middle men they baically did nothing but run the
price of energy thru the roof, hurting people and businesses for their
own gain. They are PARASITES and produce nothing of value. One of
the main reasons prices in American and the UK are so high is there
are too many middle men in there who produce nothing.
>
> The accounting firm of Arthur Anderson apparently stepped
>in it too. This doesn't mean that accounting is useless, or
>that an accountant is a criminal who doesn't work. It means
>that some individuals committed some criminal acts. So what?
>Find and prosecute the criminals and we'll all be better off
>for it.
First of all ACCOUNTING is useless, book keeping is what is needed.
We don't need all these fancy ways of hiding and manipulating things
and we certainly don't need tax laws that make businesses change they
way they act. Two column, ins and outs is all that's needed. I
totally disgree with Tax depreciation policies, if a buck goes out in
2002 a buck should come off the taxes, not 20 cents for the next 5
years. Its unfair to business.
>
>> Lets throw in futures traders, stock brokers, lawyers
>> (especially corporate lawyers) who do nothing useful and are
>> an enormous boil on the butt of civilization.
>
> Carman wrote:
> In short, you'd discard all the work you don't understand.
>You've demonstrated here repeatedly that you don't understand
>much about how the world actually works, so you're ready to
>discard quite a bit of work.
NO I just don't think we need all these people clogging up the system.
Lawyers especially. What honest company whould want a lawyer on the
staff unless they were into something shady?
>
> No one cares whether you understand it or not. the world is
>going right on with it's business without taking the slightest
>notice of your ignorance.
Or yours because the world DOES NOT revolve around America and the
sooner we realize that the sooner airliners will stop slamming into
buildings. America is a pin prick in total world population.
>
>> Lets throw in your right wing FAMILY VALUES rubbish.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Which part of my values have you construed as "right wing
>FAMILY VALUES rubbish"?
Right wing employers seem to talk alot about family values and the
John Wayne crap of the bread winner at home and the woman at home well
hows about we start paying wages to male bread winners where they can
ALL afford to keep a wife and kids at home AND limiting the working
day to 8 hours X 5 a week so Daddy can be home with them. I say raise
the minimum wage to $30000 a year!
>
>> If you and the million a year Rev Billy Bob TV preachers
>> value families so much how come you pay family men so little???
>
> Carman wrote:
> I was unaware that "Rev Billy Bob TV preachers" were large
>employers. I've no idea what they pay the people that work for
>then, and very little interest.
That's the point they're not. They are con men, all talk and no
action, say one thing and do another. When;'s the last time you heard
one of these family values preachers demanding a living family wage
from their republican friends???? Or from a Protestant pulpit????
>
> I have no employees. I pay independent contractors for their
>services when I need something like legal work, accounting,
>medical care, dentistry, or plumbing. Most of the contractors
>I pay make considerably more money than I ever will.
Why do you need an accountant? One of those TIME LIFE brown
accounting books is perfectly adiquate. Why give your hard earned
money to someone to do unneeded things????
>
>> Why do 45% of married woman HAVE TO WORK to make family ends
>> meet???
>
> Carman wrote:
> Because the 55% of married women who *don't* " HAVE TO
>WORK to make family ends meet" got all the well paid men?
So you think Its ok for a minority to be in that boat while the rest
aren't plus are the other 45% doing OK or not???
>
>> >
>> >> (...) equal rights, (...)
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Among which is the right to fail, through no one's fault
>> >but their own.
>>
>> I will agree with you there, everyone has the right to fail
>> at what they do but they also have the right to have access
>> to what they are good at.
>
> Carman wrote:
> More nonsence. All these "rights" you dream up are meaningless.
OK what if I were to say you have no right to live and since we
disagree and your totally wrong I should be able to kill you... Don't
you have the right to Life? Or are you making that up???? That's how
the commies think, (well did think) that no one has rights.
>
>> Everyone has things they do well and do poorly.
>
> Carman wrote:
> So what? I used to be a pretty good dancer,but no one ever
>offered to pay me for doing it.
>
same with me and sex
>> >> (...) and equal responsibilities (...)
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Like making their own livings and providing for themselves and
>> >any children they choose to have?
>>
>> One thing I see in your whole thread is this John Wayne "real men
>> fed for themselves" thing from the 1800's.
>
> Carman wrote:
> I think you meant "fend". As in "real men [fend] for themselves"?
sorry, I've got a sticky keyboard sometimes.
>
> fend, verb, intransitive
> 1.To make an effort to resist: fend against the cold.
> 2.To attempt to manage without assistance: The children
> had to fend for themselves while their parents worked.
>
>Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English
>Language, Third Edition Copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin
>Company. Electronic version licensed from Lernout & Hauspie
>Speech Products N.V., further reproduction and distribution
>restricted in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United
>States. All rights reserved.
>
> If my understanding of your intent is correct, then you are
>correct when you assert that I believe that adults in general,
>(not just "real men"), should fend ("manage without assistance")
>for themselves whenever possible.
>
>> The world is too over crowded for the rugged individual stuff
>> anymore.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Yet more nonsense. You really are full of it.
My point is that in an over crowed world you can fart without having
some kind of effect on others. The John Wayne trip was most
appropriate in the 1800's though you will notice that the right
wingers of the day did everything toey could to destroy the totally
self-reliant indian way of life.
One issue is that the John Wayne trip isn't terribly efficient. I am
perfectly capable of living in the mountains of Colorado (and did so
for many years) and hunt and fish and skin and cook what I caught or
shot, make cloths etc etc but why should I??? In a society I can sit
here and write programs and in exhange for that people will do my
killing and skinning for me. BUT even Adam Smith Himself talks about
a point of diminish returns, where in this case too many people put
demands on the system and its takes more labour, effort, money or what
ever to do X, Y or Z. I mean it was fun getting up in the mountains
for a couple of weeks away from the "woman folk" where you can fart
and scratch your balls at will and not have someone rag at you. But
that's not the reality of large populations. If I went down to
Flinders Street Station tomorrow and sat there in public scratching my
nuts, farting and skinning a possum I'd be a very unpopular fellow if
not in jail (possums are protected) yet the same behavior would be
unnoticed and not a problem up on Marshall or Alpine Pass in the
Rockies.
The number of people in any given environment changes the freedoms and
options you have in that enviroment. Up at base camp if I wanted a
little practice I could pull out the Ruger M77/22 and take a couple of
shots at some cans before I strapped on the 6.5mm Remington Mag for
the meat hunt but how long do you think I could do that in Central
Park in NYC???
Same with auto's. If there were only 1 million cars on earth there
would be no brown cloud because the environment is capable of
absorbing the emissions from that many cars but it can't cope with the
number of cars we have now. Been to Asia lately? There is a 2000
miles long smog and smoke cloud that spans from Thailand to Malaysia
because of autos, factories and slash and burning of the forests
there.
>
>> You can't even fart in an over populated world and not have
>> an effect on someone else.
>
> Carman wrote:
> So what? Are you objecting to someone's gastric processes now?
Like I said, do it on Alpine Pass in Colorado and its one thing. Do
it in an elevator and its a different story.
>
>> That's what this south african world conference was about.
>
> Carman wrote:
> The Johannasburg conference was a lot of have-not countries
>demanding that someone give them the things they refuse to
>create for themselves.
Right that's why all the REPs Bush sent to JB were oil and mining
executives with hidden agendas and who DID NOT represent the feelings
of Americans. America was not represented there, corporate America
was and all of us got kicked in the teeth for it.
>
>> If I drive and pollute rather than taking the tram today
>> it effects the whole wold!!!
>
> Carman wrote:
> wold, noun
> An unforested rolling plain; a moor.
>
>Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary... (see above)
is there a catlytic converter on your dictionary????
>
>> If you burn leaves in your back yard in NC it effects me
>> here just as much as the idiot slash and burn farmers in
>> Indonesia effect you up there.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Which isn't very much.
>
>> The 21st century will be a period of great social growth
>> (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Whatever that means.
>
> The 21st century will probably continue to be a period of
>great population growth too. At least until the western
>nations learn the folly of pouring food into the reproductive
>fires of the "third world".
I expect Bush will get the world into a war that will greatly reduce
world population unless the UN gets some balls for a change and gets
Sadam Whosucks intow.
>
> Once the flow of free food stops we can expect a population
>crash of epic proportions. When the dust settles from that,
>the "third world" survivors can begin trying to build a sane
>alternative to unlimited reproduction.
>
>> (...)but also one of dire consequence if we don't change our
>> ways of thinking and doing things.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Frankly, I doubt anything will cause you to stop whining and
>blaming other people for the results of your own poor choices.
and this has to do with progress in the 21st century how? oorrrr have
you run out of responses???
>
>> >
>> >> (...) regardless of their sex, race, religious beliefs or
>> >> economic status.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Sounds good to me. I'm not going to prevent anyone from
>> >working for a living because "of their sex, race, religious
>> >beliefs, or economic status".
>
>> You left out age. Do you believe men should be sacked for
>> younger worker when hey reach 40???
>
> Carman wrote:
> Oh my goodness! I *did* leave out age. How unbearably unPC
>of me! I firmly believe that I "should" have retired to a life
>of unrepentent luxury when I was 40. Unfortunately, I didn't.
>
> As it is I'll probably be working for the rest of my life,
>and very glad of the work too. I don't do well without work.
>I become crabby and critical, much unlike my normal sunny
>disposition as you see it displayed herein.
>
In that case if the government did the same thing as business and
sacked people for being too old I suspect you would be screaming like
a Banshie!!!
>> >Carman wrote:
>> > On the other hand, I'm not going to support them if
>> >they choose not to work, and I'm not going to pay for
>> >their medical care either.
>>
>> So what are you doing to provide jobs (and I'm not talking
>> about minimum wages slave jobs)????
>
>> The Republicans don't care about people and the Democrats
>> talk the talk but are increasingly looking more like PUBS
>> especially at campaign contribution time.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Does any of this surprise you? Is it actually news to you
>that politicians care most about power, and not very much
>about anything else?
same as corporate types, power and money, that's all. No balance, no
personal growth, no actualization.
>
> This is precisely why politicians can't be trusted with
>the power that Socialism gives them. They WILL abuse it.
>Every time.
Exactly the opposite, socialism is the loss of power for big
government and big business!!! Social says there is a base of
responsibility. Its says we live in a world were people have basic
rights AND responsibilites and its also shows that doing things as a
group is more efficient than doing things alone.
Did you build the road you drive on?? If not Thats Socialsm and the
road should be torn up!!! Did you build the runways or the airport
buildings? If not thats socialism and they have to be closed down and
torn up. If you want real communism and marginal socialism go to a
good right wing convent or monestary. These people are totally
Marxists!!!! They live communaly, have no wages etc etc. Why do you
not rage against those people????
>
> You know, you haven't mentioned anything about living in
>a monastery for the last 40 years, (quite the contrary, in
>fact), but you do strike me as quite the unworldly fellow
>every now and then.
When my wife died I suddenly regretted every second I spent working
over time and not with her. I have also spent time with the Taywah
indian peoples in new Mexico and absorbing their philosophies,
Buddhist monks in Viet Nam (not to mention many audiences with the
Dali Lama over the years when he comes to Melbourne) and the
aboriginals here in Australia.
Things are accessories to me now, they serve ME, I do not serve them.
I tore up the credit cards 10 years ago and feel if I can't pay cash
for something, I shouldn't have it. I am 100% debt free. The House
Pam and I lived in went to her son free and clear. Unlike too many
people in the world I don't worry about bill collectors, creditors and
my only expenses are the phone and my rent. I am a very FREE man.
>
>> Are you voting for candidates that will do something??
>> And not just looking for the REP tag on each ballot
>> name and then go DAHHHHH!
>
> Carman wrote:
> I can honestly say I have never once looked "for the REP
>tag on each ballot name" and then gone "DAHHHHH". Not once.
>Ever. Nor do I expect to.
>
>> >
>> >> That's what the guys freezing their asses off at Valley
>> >> Forge were fighting for.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote;
>> > Nope. This is where an ignorance of history gets you.
>> >People end up believing all kinds of nonsense.
>> >
>> So I should get a refund for my Bachelors' Degree in History????
>> (Metro State College 1981)
>>
>
> Carman wrote:
> You should sue them. It won't do any good, but at least you
>can make them aware of their abject failure to impart the basic
>rudiments of an education to you.
I'm sure all the good republicans in the State House will love to hear
that the history they trach in schools is wrong. But then again some
right wingers say the Holacost didn't happen either. Poland invaded
germany, the Luftwaffe dropped flowers on London in the Blitz, George
Washington was a Republican, General Grant was a prohabitonist, FDR
ran in the 1933 Olympics and Lincoln was a midget with a very tall
hat. Oh and the Palistians were there before the Jews were.
>
>> >Carman wrote:
>> > The troops at Valley Forge were in a state of insurrection
>> >because the British government refused to recognise their
>> >rights as Englishmen. The State embarked on a long series of
>> >acts of oppression in very clear violation of The State's own
>> >law.
>> >
>> Typical simplistic answer, almost a buzz word. If you read all
>> of the papers of the period ranging from Thomas Paine (who also
>> messed around in England after 1789 with such papers as the
>> RIGHTS of MAN) to the writings of Jefferson you find a very very
>> complex ethos that created the revolution.
>
> Carman wrote:
> That business of "complex ethos" does sound very scholarly.
>I'll give you marks for raising the tone of the discussion
>above the level to which you degraded it before.
>
> The origins of ALL conflicts are complex, but you spoke
>specifically of "the guys freezing their asses off at Valley
>Forge".
Yes, I grew up not far from there.
>
> These would be the common soldiers of the Continental Army.
>Mostly they were farmers, who wanted and, (in many cases) really
>"needed" to get home to their families and farms.
>
> Some of them stayed for money, (what there was of it), but the
>majority stayed because they believed they had no real choice but
>to fight the British, because the British Army was going to take
>everything they had and might kill them too.
>
> The philosophers of the Revolution weren't at Valley Forge.
True and oddly enough Franklin got the idea of joining the 13 colonies
into a single contry from the various indian federations such as the 5
nations in New York State so theres a good amount of Native American
philosophy in there too.
Hamilton I need to read up on being more prone to Jeffersonian tones
plus being down here you get to read the stuff Thomas Paine wrote
after the war concening the French Revolution and the effects of the
American Revolution on English society and law. I would say its hard
to understand the roots of America's beginnings without reading THE
RIGHTS OF MAN by Paine in reference to the French revolution.
>
>> Jefferson basically said in 1800 that the war was to rid ourselves
>> of Big Government (the King), Big Business (British capitalism)
>> and Big Religion but by 1800 all three had been put back on the
>> backs of the people by home grown versions of same and he
>> despaired of this.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Like I said, you should sue your alma mater. Jefferson's ideas
>in 1800 had little or nothing to do with why the men of the
>Continental Army were in Valley Forge in the winter of 1777/78.
I speak generally and do agree that there was no contact between the
winter campaigns in NJ vs the same period in the south. These common
experinces came together in 1784-89 when the constituion was
formulized and written.
>
>>
>> Other myths spewed by right wing rewriters of history say
>> that the founding fathers were all good Christians.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Cite please. I don't recall any historian, ("right wing
>rewriters of history" or not), ever saying anything like this.
I refer to the contant ramblings of the right about this being a
Christian Country founded on those principals though I might be more
inclined to listen if they said Protestant since there was only one
Christian colony, Maryland.
the founding fathers where not teathered by dogma of the day and being
liberals depended on thought to address concepts. I have no idea why
but historians in general and protestants in particular have done a
very good job of burying Deism from the history books and I even admit
to knowing little about it. The Freemason Influence is certainly more
visable ranginf from the layout of Washington DC to the back of the
dollar bill.
>
>
>> The 13 colonies each had a separate religion except Penn.
>> which had three. Only Maryland was Christian, the rest
>> were various Protestant sects.
>
> Carman wrote:
> The Protestants in the other twelve colonies weren't
>Christian? Be certain to mention this peculiar belief
>in your suit against whatever institution granted you
>a degree in history. It will lend weight to your claim
>against them for fraud.
I prefer to use the terms of the day. If you go to England today it
is still used in the exact same way and people are proud to say they
are protestants. The term Christian refers to the Catholic or
Orthodox churches, protestant refering to the break aways of Henry the
8th, Luther, Calvin and the like. The term Crhistian shifted over to
the protest secs after ROME started to us the Latin term catholic
which means universal. It is not meant to demean anyone but to make
people see the thought of the day rather than the more simplistics way
we see it now. Back then you couldn't not even move from one colony
to another (except for PA) and expect to find work if you didn't
convert to the local religion.
Only morons deny that the colonies were founded by various religions
fleeing Chruch of England oppression though many of the land grants
had nothing to do with religion and were issues of giving 2nd and 3rd
sons a future since there weren't about to get a chunk of the family
estate.
What I do object to is the teaching these were all pius people. They
were people of their times and didn't have half the sexual hang ups of
todays protestants. In 1980 I was in NY doing some research on the
Onieda Colony (which was a free love commune of about 500 people in
upper new York State in the 1800's). Some how in reaseaching sexual
moores as a comparison I ended up in Mass. researching the Pilgrams
after some great skydiving in Orange Mass. at Parachutes Incoproated
(I also am doing a research program on them which can be found at
http://projectpi.skydiveworld.com )
When I started to look at marriage records and the like on microfilm I
found that 42% of Puritant woman were pregnant on their wedding days
and when I researched further found that over 70% of woman in general
were pregnant on their wedding days in 1776 thru out the colonies!!
There is no way that figure now.
>
>> I've studied each of the founding fathers and signers
>> of this and that and found that most were Diests or
>> Free Masons (notice the fact that theres Mason symbols
>> on the $1 bill even today and Washington DC is laid out
>> according to Mason plans).
>
> Carman wrote:
> So what? I don't have much time for religion myself,
>and since I'm not a Christian of any description, the
>religion or lack of it among people a couple of hundred
>years ago isn't something I worry about much. Ever, in
>fact.
it would if you were the victim of a religious progrome!!!
>
>> The representitive from my home state, the Rev. John
>> Weitherspoon was the most aspoused Protestant (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> The only "Weitherspoon" I found in a quick look was
>one "Albert Weitherspoon Pegues (1859-1929), born a
>slave near Cheraw, South Carolina". You probably don't
>mean him.
I'm mispelling it then, look on the bloody document, he signed it. He
was the rep from NJ.
>
> Perhaps you mean Rev. John Witherspoon, of Princeton,
>New Jersey? (His home was actually in Tusculum NJ).
>
> You use the term "aspoused", by which I assume you
>mean "espoused" or married. As far as I know the Rev.
>Witherspoon was only married twice.
Perhaps my phrases are too classical for you. By the way I think it
was Johanthan not John.
>
>> and most of these guys had mistrersses all over the
>> place especially the ones that owned black slaves.
>
> Carman wrote:
> So what?
>>
>> BUT above all of this they were all one thing...
>> LIBERALS!!!
>
> Carman wrote:
> Again, so what?
>
>> The conservitives were called Tories and loyal to a foreign
>> power.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Words and their meanings change over time, Is this news to
>you?
yes like the world capitalism meaning a different thing in the1700 and
1800's than today.
>
>> They had liberal ideals of equality and fraternity, justice
>> and the rights of man because they are human, not because
>> they are rich or connected.
>
> Carman wrote;
> They had lots of ideas, all right. Some of those ideas led
>to the American Revolution, while others led to the French
>Revolution. In fear and trembling I'll wait to see which
>revolution you find more successful.
Odd but the French Revolution was hijacked just like the Russian
Revolution was Both ended up going down a path not intended. Mr
Rouso (gotta learn to spell that some day) was as mad as you can get.
A deeply troubled man.
>
>> >> We fought a revolution to get big government (The King), Big
>> >> Business (British Capitalism) and Big religion (church of
>> >> england) off our backs.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > More garbage. Had The British State recognised and respected
>> >the rights the American colonists had under law, there'd have
>> >been no Revolution.
>>
>> yes there would have. The Americans were so different than the
>> British people by 1780 they didn't even share the same values.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Nonsense. Had the British government maintained their policy
>of benign neglect the 13 colonies would have had no more reason
>to revolt than Canada.
The Brish managed to keep Australia because they learned their
lessions in America. If you look at the complaints and the
constitution you see they avoided those same issues here like quarting
of troops, tax and stamp issues etc etc.
It is odd how American and Australian history are entwined like that.
When the Miners at Ballarat revolted (Ballart is near here) and raised
the "Southern Cross" (a blue flag with the constallation only seen in
the south called the Southern Cross) the English snapped right back to
the revolutionary war and changed tactics and Australia did not beome
a commonwealth till 1901.
But also remember that at the end of the revolution the congress and
government was faced with the problem that 1/3rd favored independence,
1/3rd not and the rest either because they were too far out in the
sticks to be involved or just sat back to see who would win and that
is very devicive indeed.
>
>> By 1812 (you need to read about that war) the accents were
>> totally different too and in fact the issue of impressment of
>> American sailors was easily recognized because you could tell
>> a yank from a Brit the minute he opened his mouth.
>
> Carman wrote:
> So what? Just about anyone could tell a Welchman from a
>Londoner too.
But the British Navy wasn't impressing Welchman from American Ships
into the British Navy were they. They were stopping American ships
and press ganging Americans to work on British ships. But of course
that is a way of keeping labour costs down.
>
>> The American revolution had a profound effect on England
>> and France, more so France and as I mentioned before the
>> great thinkers of the revolution were active in Europe
>> after the war.
>
> Carman wrote:
> And just look at all the wonderful advances that came out
>of the French Revolution! The National Razor for example.
>
>> >
>> >> It wasn't a perfect place in 1784 and the issue of
>> >> slavary in the south a shamefull situation but
>> >> remember we had to compromise to the right wingers
>> >> in the south on this issue to form a country.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > You've really sucked up a lot of nonsense haven't you?
>> >
>> Your right I'm sorry, we should bring back slavary.
>
> Carman wrote;
> I'm not surprised you think so. Your attachment to the
>ideology of Socialism is the short route to just that.
do you not recognize sarcasm???
>
>> I was drunk on capitalism that night when I read about
>> the debates in Philie where Thomas Jefferson had to drop
>> the anti-slavary clauses in the constitution to get the
>> southern deligates to sign.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Since Jefferson owned slaves I guess he was awfully
>wrought up over the issue. Now when was it he gave Sally
>Hemmings her freedom?
Jefferson was from a slave state and couldn't release his slaves. He
tried to get an amancipation ammendment thru but the southern states
said if you put that in there's no country. At least he tried. No
one is perfect including the founding fathers.
First of all you have never said why you went to Canada. Was it to
doge the draft? Why you stayed when it was so terrible or are you a
Canadian come south. If you disliked the system and came to America
to escpate it then I have no problems until you rubbish me for doing
the same thing coming here! Next is that you are not a duel or triple
citizen, I am! I file taxes to both countries and because I believe
that voting is a responsibility and not a right I vote in all
elections that I'm entitled to. I retract the sarcasm about the queen
and ask you to put your cards on the table. I am of Irish parents and
was born by chance in New Jersey. I joined the US and Australian Air
Forces over time and served honorably in Viet Nam in 66 and 67. I
hold wings and decorations from two different countries and am
classied as partially disableed (20%) by the VA. I live int he USA
and Australia and have citizenship in both. Whats your story?
>
>> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Here Dentists make the money and doctors don't
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Carman wrote:
>> >> >> > From this I conclude you don't have Socialized
>> >> >> >Dentristry. Yet.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Sorta, its minimal and it costs about US$11 a visit
>> >> >> but its basic.
>> >> >>
>> >> > Carman wrote:
>> >> > Give it time then, the dentists will be reduced to
>> >> >employees of The State, and the dental care available
>> >> >will deterioriate.
>> >>
>> >> So you believe all dentists are greedy capitalists who
>> >> refuse to work for less than $200,000 a year???? What
>> >> a negitive world you live in. This is 2002, not 1902 or
>> >> 1802.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote;
>> > When you take the economic incentive out of any kind of
>> >work, the creative, smart, and hardworking people are
>> >going to find themselves employment that pays off in
>> >material rewards.
>>
>> I made $78 a month in my early years in the air force and
>> did great work simply because my ethos says you do good
>> work for the sake of good work. I fought and flew and
>> jumped in Viet Nam for $319 a month, are you saying the
>> government ownes me a couple of million????
>
> Carman wrote:
> You're the one saying The State owes you all these big
>wonderful "rights". "Access", "a job", "equal pay", and
>I don't know what all else.
>
> Personally, I'm happy with "Equality before the law".
>Canada doesn't have that concept, and I became lonesome
>for it.
>
>> You piss on the graves of every dead soldier and insult
>> every underpaid veteran in America with capitalist shit
>> like that!!!
>
> Carman wrote;
> You sit whining on your dead posterior in Australia and
>wrap yourself in the American flag? I don't have to ask if
>you have no shame. I can see you don't.
Nice try, whats your military record. We know cowards like Bush and
Chaney's records.
>
>> Thee guys that hit the beaches of Normandy or islands in
>> the pacific did their best for $41 a month!!!
>
> Carman wrote;
> And when they came home they went to work and made the
>US the most successful world power in history.
Because they were welcomed home not descrimninated against like 3
million VN Vets and some Korean War vets. AND lets not forget the
Gulf War illness problems from thatw ar the Mr Bush and co wants to
dodge.
>
> What did you do when you came home? You screwed up. You
>got married and had a child without the income to support
>a family, that's what you did.
No, paul is a step son.
>Then you blamed it all on
>the big nasty old Capitalists and ran away to vegetate in
>Australia, where you sit and whine about how bad you've
>got it. I wonder how you can stand yourself?
Since I'm not a capitalist I can sleep at night. And as far as
vegittation, I have never had better jobs at higher pay than here. I
work an opal mine (by hand) in the outback when its cold and I
mentioned all the volunteer work I do cause I want to and the issue of
mutual oblication I've covered before.
>
>> What's next from your box of stock answers?
>
> Carman wrote:
> Answers to what? Did you ask a question? All I heard was
>more whining.
another stock answer, by the way were the colonist whining in 1776?
Were the slaves int he south whining? Were the child workers
whining??? Its old, no one believes it so why keep trying to play
that card.
>
>> That corporations took Normandy and Okinawa or were
>> surrounded during the battle of the bulge??? Or ENRON
>> executives too Pork Chop Hill in Korea or BUSH, CLINTON
>> and RUSH LIMBAUGH fought bravely in Viet Nam for big
>> money!!!
>
> Carman wrote:
> Has anyone told you recently how pathetic you are?
Just greedy capitalist who don't like being outed for being the
worthless parasites that they are. But most of them are going to jail
soon anyway.
>
>> May I suggest that you use some of your expensive health
>> insurance to go see a shrink for a reality check???
>
> Carman wrote:
> Hey there Mr. Thom? I'm not the one sitting on his dead
>behind in Australia without a job, or a clue, or a hope of
>getting either one. I'm not the one sitting there howling
>"Victim!", while blaming the whole world and everyone in it
>for my misfortunes.
I'm not the one in some ultra right wingers from the middle east GUN
SIGHT either ! Funny but we haven't had any anthrax or crashed
airliners etc etc. And as far as a clue???? Your living in the 19th
century. Grow up and drop the dogma. The world changed on 911, cope
with it. If I'm clueless why are you the one so close to ground
zero???? We have our problems but we only have a fool as head of
state not a complete mad man.
>
>> Professionals do their best regardless of the rewards and
>> people like BUSH and the republicans rarely have those
>> kinds of professional ethics.
>
> Carman wrote:
> More sad nonsense. You just don't get it do you? If you
>want people to do good work, you simply MUST reward them.
>Call it "EVIL", call it "WRONG, call it "19th century",
>or call it anything you like. But if you call a plumber,
>you'd better be prepared to pay the man for his work.
Yes and I'll pay him Australian wages, not low American wages and I'll
send him packing if he'se not a union member. But of course the first
option is to get my hands dirty and do it myself when its legal to do
so.
>
>> >Carman wrote:
>> >If you distort the entire economic system, (as Socialism
>> >does), to the disadvantage of these same creative, smart,
>> >hardworking people, they will quietly abandon your pathetic
>> >system and go elsewhere.
>> >
>> Capitalism, communism and socialism are DIFFERENT economic
>> systems and do not distort each other.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Socialism is a deliberate distortion of the working economy
>that benefits no one but the totalitarians.
Republican party stock answer number 52, circa cold war, change word
communism to socialism, create new enemy, keep military industrial
complex rich and don't envoke war clause in US LAW limiting coproate
profits on government contracts during time of war.
>
>> Like I said REAL professionals do their best regardless of
>> the system. Greedy assholes follow the money no matter who
>> gets hurt.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Why does the US consistantly get the best of the best of
>all the professionals in the world? Because the US PAYS the
>best for their work.
I can't type laughing!!!! Americans are the second worst paid workers
in the industrialized world (according the the UN) Minimum wage for a
waitress here is $26,000 a year (tipping is not allowed). What is in
in the USA??? $1.75 an hour!!! Dept of Labor stats say 11 million
people work at minimum wage.... which is what $5.25 an hour???? Offer
that here and you might get a possum and a parrot to apply!!! Same
with England, same with Germany.
>
> Are there exceptions? Certainly. There are always people
>who find reasons to stay where they are and struggle on.
>For some it's patriotism. For others it's the knowledge that
>their parients, clients, customers, NEED them, and that gives
>them the reward they require. All well and good.
>
> The problem remains that such altruistic people are in very
>short supply. If you're counting on altruism to keep you well
>supplied with first class professionals, then you can expect
>disappointment. It isn't going to happen.
I stand by my position, you do your best as a matter of personal pride
and professionalism. not for money.
>
>> > This is why the US gets so many intelligent, skilled, and
>> >highly trained immigrants from Canada and the other countries
>> >playing with Socialism.
>>
>> Funny but all the Canadians I knew in American went south
>> because they married an American or couldn't take the cold
>> weather any more.
>
> Carman wrote:
> That's how many Canadians giving you those excuses?
11, 3 in Florida, 7 in Colorado 2 in California
>
>>
>> I remember reading an article in the Rocky Mountain News
>> during the period when the French thing was threatening
>> to break up the confederation and the US Government paid
>> for a huge survey in each provence to see if they would
>> vote to join the USA.
>
> Carman wrote:
> I don't suppose you have a cite for either the article
>or the survey?
Were you toilet trained at gun point??? You getting so pandantic one
gets the feeling your using it to dodge the issues. Prove that you
lived in canada, cite your sources, prove that you make alot of money
independently and don't work as a janitor some place, post your
taxes!!! If you want sources go to the Rocky Mountain News in Denver
Colorado and demand that info from them please.
>
>> According to the article all but British Columbia (which had a
>> socialist Premier at the time and is the most prosperous of all
>> the provences) said yes as long as they could keep their social
>> welfare system and medical benifits.
>
> Carman wrote:
> I've never heard of such a study. I'd be interested to read it
>if you can provide a cite. (I'm not going to hold my breath).
I've given you the source about.
>
>> Given that I'd say you are not very in touch with the feelings
>> of the average Canadian.
>
> Carman wrote:
> I don't think I've ever claimed to be. Anyway, "the average
>Canadian", can't immigrate to the US. It's only the considerably
>above average who can seriously consider it. US immigration laws
>are deliberately designed to exclude the vast majority of people.
Or ones who marry Americans.
>
>> When I came here in 1988 to be the American Coordinator of the
>> Viet Nam Veterans International Reunion (Nov 88 in Melbourne)
>> I talked with a lot of the Canadians who came for it and they
>> don't agree with you either.
>
> Carman wrote:
> So what? Who cares if the people you claim to have spoken with
>agree with me?
Thats the probl;m, you don't care, especially about righting wrongs.
>
>> >Carman wrote:
>> > 'Are you very good at a job? Would you like to make a LOT
>> >more money than you make in the UK, in Canada, in Europe, or
>> >some other place where you're getting taxed to death to pay
>> >for other people's healthcare? Come to the US and get RICH!'
>>
>> Right, the minute they see Viet Nam Vet on the resume the
>> questions start. Are you over your drug problems from Viet
>> Nam yet??? This is especially cute from some asshole who
>> was a pot smoking draft dodging hippie in the 60's and 70's.
>
> Carman wrote:
> More whining. Do you ever run down?
>
> I know a fellow in Washington DC who employs ONLY veterans.
Tell him the next time I'm in DC I owe him a drink.
>In order to work for him you need a slightly higher security
>clearance than Colin Powell. (I might be exagerating, slightly).
>He's a contractor with only one customer: The Whitehouse. The
>owner of the company and all his employees make out like Jack
>the Bear!
He isn't in Arlington is he??? There's a couple of them there
including one company that trains the Saudi Nationla Guard at a base
north of Reaud (spelling???) Its a bit islotaed bu they have great
facilities for the employees, air condition, great pool etc etc.
But the next question is how many VIET NAM vets does he employ.
>
>> And taxed to death??? We pay lower taxes here than the
>> USA!!
>
> Carman wrote:
> You do? Then what am I to make of your earlier statement:
>
>"I don't mind paying 50% tax as long as I get the services".
I'm willing to pay, I didn't say I did. Theres no state income tax
and until recently there were no sales taxes (called a GST here). I
like all duel citizen have the legal right to pay taxes to only one
country so I have a choice and I choose Australia because they are
much lower.
>
> Of course, if you're unemployed then 50% of zilch is still
>zilch. Paying zilch and still continuing to "get the services",
>probably doesn't hurt much at all. It certainly won't affect
>your pride, as you seem to lack that facet of character.
Actually the threshold is quite high before anyone here starts to pay
taxes. and theres only 3 levels. Its a very simple system compared to
home.
>
> If I ever have to pay 50% tax on my income in the US I'll
>think I've died and gone to heaven! In order to get into the
>50% tax bracket I'd have to make something like a hundred
>grand, after expenses! I should live so long!
Well there is no 50% bracket here so its moot.
>
>> Even with the new right wing sales tax we pay less.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Sales taxes are "right wing"? Please tell the Government
>of Canada this wonderful news. In 2000 the combined Federal
>and Porvincial sales tax in Ontario was 13.5%.
I don't believe in sales taxes but remember Thatacher and Major put a
17% sales tax on their people and they were ultra right wingers.
>
>> For medical care you pay 1.5% of your adjusted gross income
>> (taxable) with a maximum of A325 or US$178 a year!!!!
>
> Carman wrote:
> Of course the national expediture for health care is MUCH
>greater than $325 a year X the number of people who pay into
>the fund each year. So where does the rest of the money come
>from Mr. Thom? It comes out of taxes doesn't it? Who pays the
>taxes Mr. Thom?
Well theres a sales tax on all goods and services now so EVERYONE
does. Including tourests....
>
> "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch". TANSTAAFL,
>Mr. Thom.
>
>> AND we get better health care than even the full paying
>> people in the USA.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Dreams, Mr. Thom. They *are* pleasant aren't they?
Yes especially the one where I had my tumor out in 1991, didn't wait
on a list or get jocked around by an expensive HMO or greedy insurance
company. I plopped down my green and yellow card and got treated.
>
>> Australia leads the world in HIV research and treatments
>> (though we actually have very little of it), world class
>> drugs you can't get there (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> You mean because they aren't FDA approved yet?
Probably, we have drugs much quicker here plus any drug OKed by the
USA is automatically approved here. The non-profit CSIRO also
perfects alot of our drugs too so there's no hidden agendas.
>
>> (...) and we actually have a surplus of CAT scan machines
>> where in the USA they are hard to come by outside the big
>> cities.
>
> Carman wrote:
> In this area there are semis that take a complete MRI unit
>around to the small towns so the people don't have to travel
>to the larger centers, (towns of 20,000 or more, County Seats
>and the like) for diagnostic services.
Thats quite good actually.
>
>>
>> We also don't have all the poison and crap in the food that
>> makes you ill in the first place.
>
> Carman wrote:
> You have some cite for the safety of Australian food relative
>to that of the US? (I'll just bet you do!)
Its not by law its by custom. Lets take for example Burger King.
here theres no feed lots for domestic cattle (only export) so the beef
is many times leaner. An 80 cent cheese burger is so lean here its
actually tastes good! If your curious about price, today at lunch I
had two large cheese burgers, large fries and a bottomless drink for
US$2.64. I have no idea if that's cheaper or more than your paying
but its what I pay. Sunday night we went out for a steak dinner in a
high class pub. I had a 16 oz porterhouse, salid, vegies and desert
for US$9.97. Again that's what I paid. Only you know if thats more
or less and by the way remember that the employees there aren't making
$1.75 an hour there either.
>
>> (...) because the weather is better people get more exercise
>> and don't hid in the house all winter (...)
>
> Carman wrote:
> Sub-tropical where I live. Nothing that I'd call winter.
>
>> (...) BUT we do have a raising problem with child over
>> weight problems due to too much homework, TV, Video
>> games (that keep kids inside and not outside playing)
>> and American style fatty fast foods.
>
> Carman wrote:
> There's that tasty American Culture running rampant in the
>Third World again. Those simple natives just can't get enough
>of it!
yep, the good and the bad. The fast food, the sitting on your ass etc
etc. But you said you don't like people sitting on their dead
asses???? Doesn't that include kids not vegitating in front of the TV
or video games???
>
>> But we are woking on that like not having soft drinks in
>> school and more natural aussie foods and not hamburgers
>> and crap like that.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Do let us know how you get on with all that. I'm sure
>someone here will be very interested in what your little
>porkers weigh.
Well its up to 20% and the people'se government is up in arms. Soon
there will be no junk food or even soft drinks in school cafs.
Keeping the people healthy also keeps the cost of medical care down,
>
>> >Carman wrote:
>> > Of course, it's understood that you can also go broke,
>> >and if you no one but you will lose much sleep over it.
>>
>> And whats wrong with a world were everyone is rich???
>
> Carman wrote:
> The only thing I can think of that might be "wrong" with
>it is that the idea is completly insane. "Rich" is one of
>those contrast terms. In order for such a term to have any
>meaning, you need the complementary contrasting term. In
>this case the term is "Poor".
>
>> The capitalist and communist system depends on the few
>> soaking off the many.
>
> Carman wrote:
> More of the same nonsense. I wish you'd study some
>modern economics. It gets boring reading the same
>nonsense over and over.
I have which is why I disagree with it. It anarchy at its worst! It
doesn't promote creativity just competition and cut throat tactics
rather than cooperation for the good of all.
>
>> The middle roads says that if you work you should have
>> a good life regardless of what you do.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Now we get taoism mixed with misunderstood economics?
No with greed based economics.
>
>> The guy who drives a bus is just as important as the
>> paper pusher in some corporate board room.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Perhaps in some metaphysical sense, but no one ever
>paid the rent with metaphysics. It won't work paying
>the insurance either.
Ever been to Switzerland, two things hit you first is the number of
people running around with SIG assualt rifles over their shoulders and
pride in work. The rifles are because all males up to 55 years old ar
in the military and they have to report every two weeks to shoot and
people value bus drivers because they have a position of
responsibility keeping people safe from accidents and getting them
places without harm or smogging up the countryside.
There is NO poverty among the Swiss and virtually no crime (escept for
corporate crime) and the CLAIM that all the crime is found in the
migrant worker communities. You can believe the government or not its
up to you and I can't prove anything about what tyhey say but I didn
personally see the first two items with my own eyes. The fact theres
no slums in Switzerland it that its a socialist country with a free
market economy like Australia does
>
>>
>> The compassionate human being looses sleep over any
>> person who is will to work and can't find work.
>
> Carman wrote:
> You probably mean "willing". and you probably mean
>"loses".
>
> I sure don't lose sleep over that. In my experience,
>someone who is actually "willing to work" here in NC,
>has only to get himself down to the casual labor
>office by 5AM, to pick up a job for the day. I did so
>when I first moved here. Six to eight dollars an hour
>for unskilled labor. Permanent work is somewhat more
>difficult to find, but not much.
They are commonly called "hiring Halls" and the current right wing
government here abolished them 6 years ago.
>
> I guess I'm just not a "compassionate" human being,
>(by your definition anyway).
>
>> If your some druggie or drunk (inlcuding a fat cat drunk)
>> then fuck you and the white horse you rode in on.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Such intemperate language Mr. Thom! And you being such a
>"compassionate human being" and all. Aren't you afraid you
>might be committing "hate crime" by expressing contempt for
>some "drunk or druggie"? You might cause them to feel bad!
>Now *that* wouldn't be very compassionate, now wourd it?
If you need help you go get it, if you continue your drug or booze
habit to the detriment of the populace that's another story. Drugs
are responsible for almost all crimes of theift here and I have NO
COMPASSION for pushers. If that's a fault of mine then so be it.
First of all since I'm not from New England I'm technically not a yank
or yankee. Australia a dump!!! Now I know you know noithing of the
real world! Surely you saw something of the world in the military or
was your trip to Canada to pull a Clinton or Bush and avoid your
responsibilites.
If you think Australia is a dump and prefer the palacial palaces of
East LA, South Chicago, 5-points Denver, Appalacia, the Tinderloin of
San Francisco, Little Havan/Miami, Spanish Harlem/NYC, Perth Amboy.
NJ, The north side of Jacksonville/Florida, and all the rich indian
reservations in the Dekotas, Arizona and New Mexico then you'll just
hate the gold coast, the outback, the fact that all beachesare legally
topless or nude and dobn't have the moral police running a much and
those beaches, you'll hate the 1200 mile long one on the east coast.
And you'll hate the fact there's more origianl Victorian Architecture
in Melbourne than in London.. You''ll hate Cains or Sydey, Aires Rock,
Broome, Tasmania etc etc. And the waether is so bad! We're as far
south the the equator as NY City is north of it yet I have NEVER seen
it freeze or snow here and I had 3' of it in New Jeresy.
Oh and you'll hate my apartment in a great neighborhood with public
transport a half a block away for US$178 a month with all utilities
and full maid service twice a week!!! And my awful phone bill of
US$16.32 with all my toll calls!!! Things are just so bad here!!!
And I also won't throw in that Australia produces more new
millionaires per year than any other nation on earth!!! And of course
the 100,000 or so of Americans who live in this state are held here
against our will. And of course its so hard having an average life
span of 84 years old and a great retirement to look forward too.
>
>> The problem is coalition governments, the one major flaw in
>> the Parliamentry system. The current government sits with
>> only about 33% of the vote (same as Hitler and Reagan) but
>> they have talked other splinter right wing members to join
>> them in exchange for a portfolio.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Always something to whine about, ins't that right Mr. Thom.
So you believe that everyone should just shut up and never question
anything? Never hope to improve things or make things better?
>
>> Last parliament Labour had 50.8% but couldn't sit. With
>> the emerging Greens they lost some of that this time as
>> more Greens took Senate seats and we are winning big time
>> at the State Level.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Gee. If your guys win enough seats maybe they can invent
>some more new "rights" for you. Or maybe you could run for
>office on a "Right to Whine" platform!
By the way do you think woman should vote??? or is that too liberal??
>
>> In Tasmania last month we kicks the right wing Liberal Party
>> in the butt and have as many seats as they do.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Good for you, I guess.
>
>> In the up coming Victorian State election we will probably take
>> our first lower House seat (I've been asked to run in the seat
>> of Cranbourne or Gembrooke but haven't decided yet).
>
> Carman wrote:
> There you go. Unemployable,
Very employable. Don't blame b;indness on those who can not be seen.
Next you will be denyng that age, sex and race descrimination doesn't
exist, that's its always their fault for being old, black or whatever.
>completly innocent of any knowledge
>economics, political science, government, history, or business with
>a knack for blaming other peoplke for what's gone wrong in your life.
>You're a natural! A shoo-in on the "Right ot Whine" platform. You're
>obviously just what Australia needs in politics!
Yes its always the victims fault!!! Woman especially, if their raped
its their fault right??? My god you should be an aide in the white
house!!! After all Osoma Bin liner is Sadam Whosucks fault right!!!
Oh by the way , its been a year now and of course down here we don't
have news papers, television or radio and I missed the news that about
where Bin Laden is being held after your hero George Bush personally
captured him. Is he being held in Cuba or the Harlem Hilton??? He
has got him hasn't he????
>
>> In the last elections we took 7 local councils.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Did you get caught? Did they make you give them back?
>
>> >Carman wrote:
>> > I'm one of these "older workers" too, and I've NO PROBLEM
>> >getting work here. If America is the source of "anti-older
>> >worker values", it must be something we exported. We probably
>> >made a profit on it too. (Some of those foreigners will buy
>> >anything!)
>> >
>>
>> Damned right its exported, just like all the other crap
>> yuppie values that have infected this culture.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Australia does sound like an infected culture, all right.
>On the origin of the subsubstance which was cultured I am
>not prepared to speculate.
Its infected with a spirit of freedom and rights.
>
>> John Howard, the lapdog of George Bush is doing everything
>> he can to drive this country back to the 19th century and
>> replace the Australian culture with an American Economy.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Does he think gun control is somehow uniquely American?
No, he needed to disarm the unions before starting his draconian
industrial relations policies.
>
>> The result is descrimination, unemployment, crime (well
>> actually the gun control laws he passed to disarm union
>> members caused the 25% increase in crime) and a growing
>> sense of dispair among the people.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Sounds like Socialism all right.
No its sounds like a socialist country is governed by a right wing
government. You take guns away from honest people only criminals have
guns.
>
>> This government will have a hard time in the next national
>> election and Old Jackboot Johnny will NOT be in parliament
>> after the next election.
>
> Carman wrote:
> But is he is it won't be Your fault, will it? It'll be
>Capitalism, or Bush, or "anti-older-worker-prejudice" or
>something else. Right?
Your ignorant of the Westminster system. The Pm is not elected by the
people. Jackboot will not win the next local election to put him in
Parliament to be elected PM. In fact he probably won't run risking
the chance of his party loosing that seat because he'se in it. He
also has wolves in his own party thatw ant to topple him and get his
position, especially the current treasurer.
Blame the victim. By your logic everything that happened to the USA
on 911 was fully deserved and our fault, right???
>
>> I have degrees in Professional Photography and ran a studio,
>> then degrees in History and Pshchology and worked with
>> veterans/PTSD in region 5 of the VA, also ran a parachute
>> business including designing my own gear and test jumping
>> it myself since I wouldn't ask anything of others I wouldn't
>> do myself.... unlike capitalists like BUSH etc etc. Now I
>> do computer work, mostly support and some programming.
>
> Carman wrote:
> I care? Who cares what you did? With all that "wonderful
>experience",
Thats right,capitalists don't care about anyone but themselves!!! MY
is your favorite word.
>(which I strongly doubt), you still can't find
>a job? You'd rather sit there on your behind in Australia
>whining about it than go somewhere you can find work? You
>probably wouldn't take a job if someone offered you one!
Keep those big lies rolling in, Dr Goerbl;es would be proud of your!
Say the same lie over and over and over and matbe even you will
believe it! Its the victims fault over and over, if your in a
descriminated class its your fault, if you were killed in 911 its your
fault for not getting a better job in new Jersey!!! Why is full
employment a four letter word in the republican vocabulary???
>
> Mind you, I sure don't want you coming back here. There
>are more than enough whiners here already.
Not to mention too many real Americans! We make republicans nervous
don't we???
>
>> >>
>> >> If you had ever taken a psychology course you would
>> >> know that capitalism kills individual drive.
>> >
>> > Carman wrote:
>> > Now it's my turn to say "Bull".
>>
>> Read "Maslows Heirachy of Needs" and understand what
>> drives the greedy.
>
> Carman wrote;
> Abraham Maslow has been dead for more than thirty years.
>The Hierarchy was out of fashion long before his death.
Oh, thats why he is still taught. I would actually say the same for
Marx and Adam Smith myself.
>
> http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/maslow.html
>
> "The most common criticism concerns his methodology:
>Picking a small number of people that he himself declared
>self-actualizing, then reading about them or talking with
>them, and coming to conclusions about what self-
>actualization is in the first place does not sound like
>good science to many people".
I don't know where you got that crap but self-actualization is not a
goal and when your tyhere a big light doesn't turn on. The Heirachy
explains stages in people motivations ranging from basic survivle
(basic needs) up thru love etc etc. Capitalists tend to wallow in
Malows Basment since they see money as the answer to all their other
needs. They fear people who because of actualization don't NEED money
for happiness, its very threatening to them. All schools of
psychology recognize greed as a social disorder or a form of mental
illness. Most religions see it as a moral disorder or downright sin.
Money is nice, I love money but I don't need it for happiness.
Employment in a society that has a monitary system is society's
responsibility, happiness is TOTALLY MY RESPONSIBILITY!
Yes, Behavioral psychology. Not that Siggy crap. And where do you
think I studied Maslow? In Behavioral classes! Where do you think I
stuidied Shackter and Singer? All these guys, unlike Siggy, can walk
into a grave yard without fainting you know!
>
>> The same goes for the disorder of capitalism.
>
> Carman wrote:
> Wow! Right out of Soviet Psychology! I never thought I'd see
>anyone actually saying such garbage in public! But then you've
>aleady proven you have no shame.
If the truth is same then I am guilty. GREED is a major disorder be
it in the Kremlin or the White House. And by the way there is no such
thing as Soviet Psychology! False systems can not have a psychology
attached to them. And you continue your republican/McCarthy style
attempts at putting knee jerk labels on people with different ideas.
Everyone that doesn't agree with you must be a Godless Communist,
Fellow Traveler and a minyon of Satan!!! Quick put a label on that
man before someone starts to listen to him. Who else to you hate and
label, the Dali Lama, Karl Marx, Groucho Marx, The Pope (who condemned
capitalism several years ago), and if the pope didn't pass the
collection plate he could definately be classified as a commie. After
all he has all those people living in convents and missions which are
forms of communes and everyone that lives in a commune is a
COMMUNEist!!! (source: Archy Bunker, CBS TV, All in the Family, 1974)
I'm not going to continue with you any more. You seriously need to
talk to someone about your problem. Your living in the 1950's and
that's not healthy. The world is changing around you and you do not
see. Madmen are crashing airliners into buildings in NYC and Wash DC
and you won't admit that its all our problem. Its not Islam vs
protestanism or the capitalists vs the communists (what commies? they
went away years ago). This is a whole new world man! And the pat
answers and mass produced slogans of the cold war don't apply here.
Economics is blurred with culture and philosophy and religion poisons
it further and your at ground zero not me!
The concept of money and its place in society is seriously being
questioned as the pursuit of money pollutes family life. And even
having a monitary system at all is being discussed. You need to look
farther than simplistic ideas and come to the realization that the
abstract universal ideal that "All Men Are Created Equal" is much on
the minds of free men today and many many of us are looking back to
1776 at those liberal ideals that founded the first great Republic.
You also have to relaize that free and accountable citizens not only
have the right but the responsibility to question policies and even
authority itself. To shut people up calling them Whiners is to give
into oppression and a famine of usefull intelligence. To let the
right wing or any wing have its head is to encourage more WACOS, Ruby
Hills or 911's. And most of all you have to realize there is more
than just America out there. The Europen Economic Union has more
people and more money than the USA has!!!
THOM