<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And hey Skulkbait, my parents are Christians and they're more tolerant than you are. They know about my bisexuality and they haven't freaked out at all. I don't bring people into the house, and they respect my choices. They don't rail on me about "going to hell" or any crap like that. They love me and respect me more than almost anyone else I know. It's a non-issue for them.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm glad to hear that not all Christians are intollerant. But I don't see how that makes your parents more tollerant than me. You might be taking my tongue in cheek comments about christianity too seriously, if you read my other posts about religion you'll find that I don't believe that all christians are ****-bashing intollerant fundamentalist, its just that the ones who are are quite vocal about it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> That's standard Christian decisionmaking process - its not "I have a mandate, all kneel before me, I am the Lord's mouthpiece!'<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats exactly the point I make in B. He is not supposed be representing God on earth, he is supposed to be representing the people of the United States of America. He should stop asking himself "Is this what God wants?" and start asking himself "Will this benefit the people of the United States of America?".
<!--QuoteBegin-Star+Nov 4 2004, 11:34 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Star @ Nov 4 2004, 11:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Marine - And the terrorists ask Allah if what they're doing is right, and they hear 'yes'. Bush is no better then them. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Bush also drinks water, and so does the terrorists - looks like he's no better than them on multiple counts!
Just because you think God is on your side, doesnt automatically follow that everything you do is right. If you believe in a God, then you cant really throw your heart into anything unless you think he wants you to do it. How does he determine what God wants him to do? Prayer, and the application of all the "gifts" God has given him - rationality, intelligence, life experience etc. Bascially, he just adds an extra step to what most people do when making decisions.
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Nov 3 2004, 06:36 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Nov 3 2004, 06:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And hey Skulkbait, my parents are Christians and they're more tolerant than you are. They know about my bisexuality and they haven't freaked out at all. I don't bring people into the house, and they respect my choices. They don't rail on me about "going to hell" or any crap like that. They love me and respect me more than almost anyone else I know. It's a non-issue for them.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm glad to hear that not all Christians are intollerant. But I don't see how that makes your parents more tollerant than me. You might be taking my tongue in cheek comments about christianity too seriously, if you read my other posts about religion you'll find that I don't believe that all christians are ****-bashing intollerant fundamentalist, its just that the ones who are are quite vocal about it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually man, most aren't. I do know that many Christians are bothered when "*** bashers" represent them. The thing you have to realize is that the media is fairly wary of Christians, and many times portrays "Christians" as the gun toting rednecks with the "burn in hell" signs. Many Christians are quite intelligent (for example Christian scientists who battle standard scientists over creation vs evolution). However, most of them are fundamentalists. Remember, a fundamentalist simply is a person who believes the bible in an entirely literal sense. The majority of Christians in America are fundamentalists. A person who sort-of-kind-of believes in the Christian god doesn't count. Christian = "Christ's ones."
But honestly Skulk Bait, you may be joking, but many people aren't. I've some sort of hippie liberal friends, and their opinion on most Christians is fairly demeaning. I certainly hope you are a truly tolerant liberal, and if so, you gain my respect. Good to see that they do indeed exist. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Actually man, most aren't.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I didn't say most were. I just said that the ones who are are very vocal, which you seem to agree with. And there are plenty of christians out there who believe in Christ as their savior, but don't believe the bible is true in its entirety. You can't call them fundamentalist, but they do count as Christians.
You can complain about "fundies" all you want, but there aren't 59,000,000 of them in America. In actuality the Religious Right vote probably composes 5,000,000 tops. It's just that Falwell and Robertson are vocal to the point of being pedantic about how the world works. When Falwell said that feminists were responsible for 9/11, I seriously doubt that is the standard Christian view.
This election wasn't about religion. Perhaps a small segment voted based on the candidates religion, but that segment generally has very similar views to the candidate they vote for.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I've gotta ask...what failures exactly are you referring to?
-The Recession started at the end of Clinton's term. -We're climbing out of Recession.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In all honesty, it wasn't much of a recession. I don't blame Bush for the economic troubles that we recently stared down. The dot-com bubble burst and the market was overheated. There was no place to go but down. I know that Bush likes to say that his tax cuts are responsible for the recovery, but he's no more responsible for the recovery than he is for the drop.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->-Afghanistan just had its first election, with problems yes, but it's a vast improvement.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I actually agree with the actions taken in Afghanistan. The Taliban was providing direct support to Al-Qaida.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->-Iraq is progressing forward into the new millenium for the first time in 40 years. -Saddam Heussein is no longer a threat. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Iraq wasn't some podunk banana republic. We invaded a nation on bad information and the only real ally we have there is England (You forgot Poland! OMGROFLBBQ!) Now we're fighting a guerilla war in cities and hemoraging money. Iraq was our whipping boy. Saying that Saddam was a threat after the first Gulf War is preposterous.
We should have finished our work in Afghanistan before even looking at Iraq. Even then, there are other governments that fund terrorist groups like Syria. The amount of support they give Hezbollah and Hamas is quite high.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->-The world is beginning to move forward in dealing with North Korea and Iran.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Where's Bush's "Bring 'em on" tag with these two? Oh, that's right. NK is a nuclear power and Iran is going for the gold. We haven't done squat to deal with North Korea or Iran, and both are far more dangerous than Iraq ever was. Saying that we're "dealing" with the two is a bit deceptive. It's more like we're ignoring them and hoping they go away.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->-Everyone, including the rich (who honestly deserve a cut more than me or you) got taxes cut. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hey, I'm a Libertarian. I'm all for tax cuts. Tax cuts are a great idea... when they go with a cut in spending. However, Bush and the Republican Congress haven't cut spending. They've increased it. By an obscene amount. Bush is asking Congress to raise the debt limit because we're spending so much. With debt this heavy, it wil drive the dollar down. I love tax cuts and Bush is right that it is my money, but I also like to have a fiscally responsible government that looks beyond the short-term. When we get hosed because baby boomers start retiring like gangbusters, then I'll blame Bush for the economic malaise.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And I'm dismayed by how immature some of you are acting in this thread. It's funny how elitist atheist cookiecutter kiddies can be. I've known too many successful, intelligent, thoughtful Christians to believe that most of them are ignorant retarded rednecks. Get off your fake high horses. We whooped you, took you out, and spanked you with 4 million votes and now you're mad about it. THe river you're crying is enough to disrupt ocean currents. Suck it up, knock it off, and make your party more acceptable to mainstream America. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You know, if you're going to lecture people about being mature, you probably shouldn't call people who disagree with you "elitist cookiecutter kiddies." My positions are thought out and presented in a calm, organized manner. I haven't attacked Christianity and frankly I think it has little place in this thread. If you want a mature debate, stick to the issues. Saying that "We whooped you" and "Suck it up, knock it off" isn't helping your position.
Finch, I wasn't referring to you, I was referring to the stupid crap being said all over the internet and somewhat on these forums about Bush and many of his core constituents. This thread is a catch all, and if people are going to start crying about religious rednecks in the most stereotypical and spoonfed ways, I'm going to treat them exactly how they are: elitist cookiecutter kiddies. I saw a fantastic Liberal last night on MSNBC talking about what the Democrats have done wrong and he was the first person to say on network TV that Bush had won. That was a top notch guy. The kiddies should have taken some notes.
Thankfully, you're not one of them. A cookiecutter kid, that is.
And by the way I don't include Falwell on my list of the real religious right.
Now, with Iraq/Saddam, we took down a guy who had some pretty big confirmed terrorist connections, who had used WMD's in the past, and who was planning on restarting his weapons program as soon as he got the chance. We're also nationbuilding, which costs money. We are building a potentially powerful trading partner, so I look at Iraq as an investment for us.
With N.K./Iran, I said we are beginning to move forward. As in we are starting to move forward. Not "we're mostly there" or "we're taking major action." Nope. We have acknowledged the threat contained in those two places and are beginning to actively deal with those nations.
Onto the subject of being fiscally responsible: I'd like to see many social services that the government provides cut so that the war can be funded without killing us with a severe deficit. I also dig the idea of passing a constitutional amendment forcing congress to pass a balanced budget every year.
In the immortal (paraphrased, cannot find it's real form anywhere on the web) words of Tony Blair:
"I'm confidant that invading and no finding of weapons of mass destruction is something history will forgive, but to not invade and there existing weapons of mass destruction is something history will not."
Quote got butchered, but basically, yeah that's pretty much it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Whats the deal with NK? Just because it has nukes doesnt mean you have to invade them. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know what your trying to insinuate. Please be pragmatic, no nation sets up a defense policy aimed at not creating a hypocrisy. Drawing similarities between a war in Iraq and a potential war with North Korea is foolish. Even if the north did not have nukes and go to war with NK, Seoul would be flattened with about 2 million dead within the first 10 min.
Oh and don’t expect the "empire" as you so eloquently put it to fall anytime soon. I would take the time to try and discuss with you why, but considering that you buy into all the hard left anti-American rubbish, it would be a waste of time.
If it's not too much to ask, I'd like to see Talesin's response to all of this, as I'm sure it'd be most entertaining, seeing as how he has been quite possibly one of the most out-spoken, name calling, Bush-bashers in previous Discussions.
<!--QuoteBegin-Torgo+Nov 4 2004, 10:48 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Torgo @ Nov 4 2004, 10:48 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If it's not too much to ask, I'd like to see Talesin's response to all of this, as I'm sure it'd be most entertaining, seeing as how he has been quite possibly one of the most out-spoken, name calling, Bush-bashers in previous Discussions. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> 2nd-d
Besides I think that if I were Talesin I'd find that some labeling me Bush-bashing (actually you are being a hypocrite for name calling yourself) simply because I disagree with them on politics is degrading and insulting.
Yet more evidence of why the discussion forums have become a place of rampant disrespect... now I remember why I hate politics...
Why is it so inconceivable to imagine 10 years down the road Iraq becoming a terrorist hub. Every piece of money Saddam gets that isn't put into building one of his new palaces or to give to families of fathers that blow themselves up to defend it would go to terrorists. The terrorists defend Iraq, and suddenly becomes a much harder country to attack. Not only this, but with a little black marketting, Russia gives a nuke to Iraq to which they use this nuke to threaten to blow up the nation's capital. Since the nuke could be anywhere within several miles, it makes finding the bomb nearly impossible.
We can't do anything at that point against terrorists with a gun against our heads. It's called a preliminary strike, and it might have actually saved lives in the long run. Then, lets just pretend that Iraq was just minding its business doing good things for the world when Bush bombed the hell out of them.
You ask, why didn't we attack North Korea? Simple. Opening negotiations or even attacking would be exactly what they want. Why else would they declare this information that they had it? I don't doubt Bush's global policy. He knows what he's doing, and it is always the right course of action given the intelligence he has.
<!--QuoteBegin-Hawkeye+Nov 4 2004, 11:49 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hawkeye @ Nov 4 2004, 11:49 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> He knows what he's doing, and it is always the right course of action given the intelligence he has. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Given the intelligence it was the right decision.
<!--QuoteBegin-milton friedman+Nov 4 2004, 10:32 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (milton friedman @ Nov 4 2004, 10:32 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Oh and don’t expect the "empire" as you so eloquently put it to fall anytime soon. I would take the time to try and discuss with you why, but considering that you buy into all the hard left anti-American rubbish, it would be a waste of time. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I just ask questions and try to get as many info as I can. But here in South-America we only have the pro republicans (fox , CNN , etc.).(is there anyone against Bush? From te big ones I mean..)
I dont <i>buy into all the hard left anti-American rubbish</i> , I just live it... Bush policy to South-America is one of the worst for us in your history.
Nafta is gonna make our industries to dissapear and we will only be able to sell primary products.
But I forgot that you , living in the <i>greatest and more powerful </i>country in the world has a point...
I guess many of you should get out of the PC and ask yourself many questions. And dont look answers in your TV : its one of the more partial minded I have ever seen
<!--QuoteBegin-Iron Maiden+Nov 4 2004, 02:08 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Iron Maiden @ Nov 4 2004, 02:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-milton friedman+Nov 4 2004, 10:32 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (milton friedman @ Nov 4 2004, 10:32 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Oh and don’t expect the "empire" as you so eloquently put it to fall anytime soon. I would take the time to try and discuss with you why, but considering that you buy into all the hard left anti-American rubbish, it would be a waste of time. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I just ask questions and try to get as many info as I can. But here in South-America we only have the pro republicans (fox , CNN , etc.).(is there anyone against Bush? From te big ones I mean..)
I dont <i>buy into all the hard left anti-American rubbish</i> , I just live it... Bush policy to South-America is one of the worst for us in your history.
Nafta is gonna make our industries to dissapear and we will only be able to sell primary products.
But I forgot that you , living in the <i>greatest and more powerful </i>country in the world has a point...
I guess many of you should get out of the PC and ask yourself many questions. And dont look answers in your TV : its one of the more partial minded I have ever seen <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I am upset that we have not formed a stronger alliance with the South American nations. I feel that they could become some of our strongest allies and are capable of tremendous economic growth and prosperity.
Judging by your avatar, I'll assume you are from Argentina? One of the detriments to more favorable relations between the US and South America is the corruption that is everywhere in SA goverments. It is the number 1 reason why not much gets done.
I used to work for a Venezuelan company (I left shortly after striking workers took 3 hostages and blew up half the plant). Good ole Hugo Chavez has nearly destroyed any hope for their country getting on the good side of the US due to his political cronyism and penchant for popular appeasement.
I am all for extending a helping hand to South America but at the same time we are going to have to see some sort of attempt to shed the corruption.
<!--QuoteBegin-Iron Maiden+Nov 4 2004, 02:08 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Iron Maiden @ Nov 4 2004, 02:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-milton friedman+Nov 4 2004, 10:32 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (milton friedman @ Nov 4 2004, 10:32 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Oh and don’t expect the "empire" as you so eloquently put it to fall anytime soon. I would take the time to try and discuss with you why, but considering that you buy into all the hard left anti-American rubbish, it would be a waste of time. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I just ask questions and try to get as many info as I can. But here in South-America we only have the pro republicans (fox , CNN , etc.).(is there anyone against Bush? From te big ones I mean..)
I dont <i>buy into all the hard left anti-American rubbish</i> , I just live it... Bush policy to South-America is one of the worst for us in your history.
Nafta is gonna make our industries to dissapear and we will only be able to sell primary products.
But I forgot that you , living in the <i>greatest and more powerful </i>country in the world has a point...
I guess many of you should get out of the PC and ask yourself many questions. And dont look answers in your TV : its one of the more partial minded I have ever seen <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Hint Hint:
<!--QuoteBegin-illuminex+Nov 3 2004, 03:43 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (illuminex @ Nov 3 2004, 03:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Nov 3 2004, 06:36 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Nov 3 2004, 06:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I'm glad to hear that not all Christians are intollerant.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually man, most aren't. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I will disagree with you merely because I was recently instructed (by the Christians) on these boards that tolerance is certainly <i>not</i> a Christian virtue. I'm not sure this is the thread to discuss this though, so apart from saying that I'll leave it alone.
Also a point of fact, the best word to describe "fundamentalist" Christians (the kind you're talking about) is evangelism. There are many different interpretations of what sorts of ideas are fundamental to Christianity.
<!--QuoteBegin-wizard@psu+Nov 4 2004, 02:33 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (wizard@psu @ Nov 4 2004, 02:33 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I am upset that we have not formed a stronger alliance with the South American nations. I feel that they could become some of our strongest allies and are capable of tremendous economic growth and prosperity.
Judging by your avatar, I'll assume you are from Argentina? One of the detriments to more favorable relations between the US and South America is the corruption that is everywhere in SA goverments. It is the number 1 reason why not much gets done.
I am all for extending a helping hand to South America but at the same time we are going to have to see some sort of attempt to shed the corruption. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> But the problem is that SA countries (third world ones <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> ) can get so easily in a liberal market with EEUU. It would be like the relationship between England and its colonies al around the world back in 250 years ago.
<!--QuoteBegin-x5+Nov 4 2004, 12:15 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (x5 @ Nov 4 2004, 12:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There's two sides in every conflict...
Besides I think that if I were Talesin I'd find that some labeling me Bush-bashing (actually you are being a hypocrite for name calling yourself) simply because I disagree with them on politics is degrading and insulting.
Yet more evidence of why the discussion forums have become a place of rampant disrespect... now I remember why I hate politics...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> 1 - Two Sides in every conflict? Yes, I know this...thus why I requested his side.
2 - Calling him a "Bush-basher" isn't something offensive, in fact, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say he's proud of it - thus I'm not being hypocritical for "name calling" seeing as how...
<!--QuoteBegin-Talesin+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Talesin)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Bush is a moronic, twitheaded, pull-string-so-I-can-talk-Mr.-Cheney, prezel-choking, Enron-buddy MONKEY. The discussions forum is designed toward a discussion. The words used were quite succinct at describing how I, as well as a large portion of the US citizenry, feel about having a moron in the office of 'nation's leader'.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That was in a PM, however, if you want more examples, just search through his posts...it should be pretty easy to find similar stuff.
3 - I agree. People got along a lot more back when they were shut down, seeing as how almost all of these "Discussions" don't go anywhere.
For the record, I deeply lose respect for anyone on these forums without the sense of mind to read carefully someone's post and respecting their right to say it. Bush bashers and Kerry bashers are among these seeing how they typically have nothing to say about presidential candidates other than bad words. I may disagree, but I am careful never to insult the other person or say that they are an idiot for thinking it no matter wrong I might think they are.
Surprisingly, a lot of people are this way, and would probably rather live in a world where everyone believed the same opinion as themselves (*coughegocentriccough*). I, for one, am a firm believer in the power of two heads are greater than one. I expect more from this forum in the future.
<!--QuoteBegin-Iron Maiden+Nov 4 2004, 07:40 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Iron Maiden @ Nov 4 2004, 07:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> But the problem is that SA countries (third world ones <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> ) can get so easily in a liberal market with EEUU. It would be like the relationship between England and its colonies al around the world back in 250 years ago. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I am sorry. I do not understand what you said here. I think we may be having a bit of a language barrier. Would it be possible for you to rephrase your statement?
Were you saying: The south american countries can get easily abused in a free market situation with the United States. The situation would be similar to that which existed between England and its colonies. ?
That is a possibility which would need to be worked out. I'm not denegrading the South American countries. I just feel that if they reduced the amount of corruption in their systems they would be able to compete on more stable footing with the United States.
<!--QuoteBegin-wizard@psu+Nov 5 2004, 12:43 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (wizard@psu @ Nov 5 2004, 12:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Iron Maiden+Nov 4 2004, 07:40 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Iron Maiden @ Nov 4 2004, 07:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> But the problem is that SA countries (third world ones <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> ) can get so easily in a liberal market with EEUU. It would be like the relationship between England and its colonies al around the world back in 250 years ago. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I am sorry. I do not understand what you said here. I think we may be having a bit of a language barrier. Would it be possible for you to rephrase your statement?
Were you saying: The south american countries can get easily abused in a free market situation with the United States. The situation would be similar to that which existed between England and its colonies. ?
That is a possibility which would need to be worked out. I'm not denegrading the South American countries. I just feel that if they reduced the amount of corruption in their systems they would be able to compete on more stable footing with the United States. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> For th record : FC Exam sucks , im the living proof <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Thats my point , maybe my example was a bit unclear. I agree that the is a lot of corruption in SA , but thats not the only factor that is important : even with a "good" goverment , our industry couldnot support a fair "competition" in a liberal market with EEUU industries.... that would lead to an economical rape.
I ll tell you what happened in Argentina in the 90s. After a big Inflation in the 80s and the loss of value of our former ""cash"" (the Austral) , the president sold all the industries that belonged to the state (which actualy made money , there was no point in selling them). With that money they supported the "Peso" , which had a relation 1 Peso = 1 U$D. With this , all companies came to Argentina , made a lot of profits and then they took that into other countries. With these companies , al our national industries "bankrupted" , so we were reduced to the production of food , and specially, meat.
Then , when all th money from selling the former national companies run out , the peso went to a relation 3 Pesos = 1U$D. All industries went away and now we are coming out of the crisis that happened in 2001 .
Liberal markets may be benefitial to some countries (the developed) , but for the most (3? world ones) , it is a pain in the ****.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I just ask questions and try to get as many info as I can. But here in South-America we only have the pro republicans (fox , CNN , etc.).(is there anyone against Bush? From te big ones I mean..)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> CNN isnt pro-bush. Yes we do get alot of anti-bush media up here. Publication companies, elite media, theaters (im sure ur aware of Mr Moore), New york times, LA times, The progressive, Salon.com etc.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Nafta is gonna make our industries to disappear and we will only be able to sell primary products.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, NAFTA will drive down prices increasing efficiency and competition thus driving out monopolies. Free trade is good for everyone. It seems you buy into protectionism. I can tell you, thought out my readings of the 3rd world (and being child of immigrants who left the 3rd world) the economic problems are not free trade/capitalism, its institutions within government that inhibit the majority of the population (mostly poor) to escape the grip of poverty. (i.e. dysfunctional property rights). A good book I suggest you read is by Hernando De Soto "why capitalism succeeds in the west but fails everywhere else".
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->But I forgot that you , living in the greatest and more powerful country in the world has a point... I guess many of you should get out of the PC and ask yourself many questions. And dont look answers in your TV : its one of the more partial minded I have ever seen <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Don't patronize or tell me what to do when studing the issues concerning the world; I have various sources of information when it comes to problems that my generation will have to solve. I do not depend on the mass media as my primary source
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I ll tell you what happened in Argentina in the 90s. After a big Inflation in the 80s and the loss of value of our former ""cash"" (the Austral) , the president sold all the industries that belonged to the state (which actualy made money , there was no point in selling them). With that money they supported the "Peso" , which had a relation 1 Peso = 1 U$D. With this , all companies came to Argentina , made a lot of profits and then they took that into other countries. With these companies , al our national industries "bankrupted" , so we were reduced to the production of food , and specially, meat.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I believe inflation was caused by government pumping funds into highly inefficient industries driving up inflation as well as simply printing money to pay of its debt. I will have to refer to some books about the specifics, but i believe that is why the government sold of state owned industries. State owned industries = Highly inefficient production = stagflation (rising unemployment and inflation)
Someone should start a thread on free trade. It would seem to spark some interesting discussion.
Comments
Marine - And the terrorists ask Allah if what they're doing is right, and they hear 'yes'. Bush is no better then them.
I'm glad to hear that not all Christians are intollerant. But I don't see how that makes your parents more tollerant than me. You might be taking my tongue in cheek comments about christianity too seriously, if you read my other posts about religion you'll find that I don't believe that all christians are ****-bashing intollerant fundamentalist, its just that the ones who are are quite vocal about it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
That's standard Christian decisionmaking process - its not "I have a mandate, all kneel before me, I am the Lord's mouthpiece!'<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats exactly the point I make in B. He is not supposed be representing God on earth, he is supposed to be representing the people of the United States of America. He should stop asking himself "Is this what God wants?" and start asking himself "Will this benefit the people of the United States of America?".
Bush also drinks water, and so does the terrorists - looks like he's no better than them on multiple counts!
Just because you think God is on your side, doesnt automatically follow that everything you do is right. If you believe in a God, then you cant really throw your heart into anything unless you think he wants you to do it. How does he determine what God wants him to do? Prayer, and the application of all the "gifts" God has given him - rationality, intelligence, life experience etc. Bascially, he just adds an extra step to what most people do when making decisions.
I'm glad to hear that not all Christians are intollerant. But I don't see how that makes your parents more tollerant than me. You might be taking my tongue in cheek comments about christianity too seriously, if you read my other posts about religion you'll find that I don't believe that all christians are ****-bashing intollerant fundamentalist, its just that the ones who are are quite vocal about it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually man, most aren't. I do know that many Christians are bothered when "*** bashers" represent them. The thing you have to realize is that the media is fairly wary of Christians, and many times portrays "Christians" as the gun toting rednecks with the "burn in hell" signs. Many Christians are quite intelligent (for example Christian scientists who battle standard scientists over creation vs evolution). However, most of them are fundamentalists. Remember, a fundamentalist simply is a person who believes the bible in an entirely literal sense. The majority of Christians in America are fundamentalists. A person who sort-of-kind-of believes in the Christian god doesn't count. Christian = "Christ's ones."
But honestly Skulk Bait, you may be joking, but many people aren't. I've some sort of hippie liberal friends, and their opinion on most Christians is fairly demeaning. I certainly hope you are a truly tolerant liberal, and if so, you gain my respect. Good to see that they do indeed exist. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I didn't say most were. I just said that the ones who are are very vocal, which you seem to agree with. And there are plenty of christians out there who believe in Christ as their savior, but don't believe the bible is true in its entirety. You can't call them fundamentalist, but they do count as Christians.
BUSH WON! BUSH WON! Now I have some serious face-rubbing to do. BBL!
This election wasn't about religion. Perhaps a small segment voted based on the candidates religion, but that segment generally has very similar views to the candidate they vote for.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I've gotta ask...what failures exactly are you referring to?
-The Recession started at the end of Clinton's term.
-We're climbing out of Recession.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In all honesty, it wasn't much of a recession. I don't blame Bush for the economic troubles that we recently stared down. The dot-com bubble burst and the market was overheated. There was no place to go but down. I know that Bush likes to say that his tax cuts are responsible for the recovery, but he's no more responsible for the recovery than he is for the drop.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->-Afghanistan just had its first election, with problems yes, but it's a vast improvement.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I actually agree with the actions taken in Afghanistan. The Taliban was providing direct support to Al-Qaida.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->-Iraq is progressing forward into the new millenium for the first time in 40 years.
-Saddam Heussein is no longer a threat. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Iraq wasn't some podunk banana republic. We invaded a nation on bad information and the only real ally we have there is England (You forgot Poland! OMGROFLBBQ!) Now we're fighting a guerilla war in cities and hemoraging money. Iraq was our whipping boy. Saying that Saddam was a threat after the first Gulf War is preposterous.
We should have finished our work in Afghanistan before even looking at Iraq. Even then, there are other governments that fund terrorist groups like Syria. The amount of support they give Hezbollah and Hamas is quite high.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->-The world is beginning to move forward in dealing with North Korea and Iran.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Where's Bush's "Bring 'em on" tag with these two? Oh, that's right. NK is a nuclear power and Iran is going for the gold. We haven't done squat to deal with North Korea or Iran, and both are far more dangerous than Iraq ever was. Saying that we're "dealing" with the two is a bit deceptive. It's more like we're ignoring them and hoping they go away.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->-Everyone, including the rich (who honestly deserve a cut more than me or you) got taxes cut. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hey, I'm a Libertarian. I'm all for tax cuts. Tax cuts are a great idea... when they go with a cut in spending. However, Bush and the Republican Congress haven't cut spending. They've increased it. By an obscene amount. Bush is asking Congress to raise the debt limit because we're spending so much. With debt this heavy, it wil drive the dollar down. I love tax cuts and Bush is right that it is my money, but I also like to have a fiscally responsible government that looks beyond the short-term. When we get hosed because baby boomers start retiring like gangbusters, then I'll blame Bush for the economic malaise.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And I'm dismayed by how immature some of you are acting in this thread. It's funny how elitist atheist cookiecutter kiddies can be. I've known too many successful, intelligent, thoughtful Christians to believe that most of them are ignorant retarded rednecks. Get off your fake high horses. We whooped you, took you out, and spanked you with 4 million votes and now you're mad about it. THe river you're crying is enough to disrupt ocean currents. Suck it up, knock it off, and make your party more acceptable to mainstream America. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You know, if you're going to lecture people about being mature, you probably shouldn't call people who disagree with you "elitist cookiecutter kiddies." My positions are thought out and presented in a calm, organized manner. I haven't attacked Christianity and frankly I think it has little place in this thread. If you want a mature debate, stick to the issues. Saying that "We whooped you" and "Suck it up, knock it off" isn't helping your position.
Thankfully, you're not one of them. A cookiecutter kid, that is.
And by the way I don't include Falwell on my list of the real religious right.
Now, with Iraq/Saddam, we took down a guy who had some pretty big confirmed terrorist connections, who had used WMD's in the past, and who was planning on restarting his weapons program as soon as he got the chance. We're also nationbuilding, which costs money. We are building a potentially powerful trading partner, so I look at Iraq as an investment for us.
With N.K./Iran, I said we are beginning to move forward. As in we are starting to move forward. Not "we're mostly there" or "we're taking major action." Nope. We have acknowledged the threat contained in those two places and are beginning to actively deal with those nations.
Onto the subject of being fiscally responsible: I'd like to see many social services that the government provides cut so that the war can be funded without killing us with a severe deficit. I also dig the idea of passing a constitutional amendment forcing congress to pass a balanced budget every year.
Edited for clarification.
"I'm confidant that invading and no finding of weapons of mass destruction is something history will forgive, but to not invade and there existing weapons of mass destruction is something history will not."
Quote got butchered, but basically, yeah that's pretty much it.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
*breathe*
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I know what your trying to insinuate. Please be pragmatic, no nation sets up a defense policy aimed at not creating a hypocrisy. Drawing similarities between a war in Iraq and a potential war with North Korea is foolish. Even if the north did not have nukes and go to war with NK, Seoul would be flattened with about 2 million dead within the first 10 min.
Oh and don’t expect the "empire" as you so eloquently put it to fall anytime soon. I would take the time to try and discuss with you why, but considering that you buy into all the hard left anti-American rubbish, it would be a waste of time.
2nd-d
...and fully backed.
Besides I think that if I were Talesin I'd find that some labeling me Bush-bashing (actually you are being a hypocrite for name calling yourself) simply because I disagree with them on politics is degrading and insulting.
Yet more evidence of why the discussion forums have become a place of rampant disrespect... now I remember why I hate politics...
We can't do anything at that point against terrorists with a gun against our heads. It's called a preliminary strike, and it might have actually saved lives in the long run. Then, lets just pretend that Iraq was just minding its business doing good things for the world when Bush bombed the hell out of them.
You ask, why didn't we attack North Korea? Simple. Opening negotiations or even attacking would be exactly what they want. Why else would they declare this information that they had it? I don't doubt Bush's global policy. He knows what he's doing, and it is always the right course of action given the intelligence he has.
Given the intelligence it was the right decision.
I just ask questions and try to get as many info as I can. But here in South-America we only have the pro republicans (fox , CNN , etc.).(is there anyone against Bush? From te big ones I mean..)
I dont <i>buy into all the hard left anti-American rubbish</i> , I just live it...
Bush policy to South-America is one of the worst for us in your history.
Nafta is gonna make our industries to dissapear and we will only be able to sell primary products.
But I forgot that you , living in the <i>greatest and more powerful </i>country in the world has a point...
I guess many of you should get out of the PC and ask yourself many questions. And dont look answers in your TV : its one of the more partial minded I have ever seen
I just ask questions and try to get as many info as I can. But here in South-America we only have the pro republicans (fox , CNN , etc.).(is there anyone against Bush? From te big ones I mean..)
I dont <i>buy into all the hard left anti-American rubbish</i> , I just live it...
Bush policy to South-America is one of the worst for us in your history.
Nafta is gonna make our industries to dissapear and we will only be able to sell primary products.
But I forgot that you , living in the <i>greatest and more powerful </i>country in the world has a point...
I guess many of you should get out of the PC and ask yourself many questions. And dont look answers in your TV : its one of the more partial minded I have ever seen <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I am upset that we have not formed a stronger alliance with the South American nations. I feel that they could become some of our strongest allies and are capable of tremendous economic growth and prosperity.
Judging by your avatar, I'll assume you are from Argentina? One of the detriments to more favorable relations between the US and South America is the corruption that is everywhere in SA goverments. It is the number 1 reason why not much gets done.
I used to work for a Venezuelan company (I left shortly after striking workers took 3 hostages and blew up half the plant). Good ole Hugo Chavez has nearly destroyed any hope for their country getting on the good side of the US due to his political cronyism and penchant for popular appeasement.
I am all for extending a helping hand to South America but at the same time we are going to have to see some sort of attempt to shed the corruption.
I just ask questions and try to get as many info as I can. But here in South-America we only have the pro republicans (fox , CNN , etc.).(is there anyone against Bush? From te big ones I mean..)
I dont <i>buy into all the hard left anti-American rubbish</i> , I just live it...
Bush policy to South-America is one of the worst for us in your history.
Nafta is gonna make our industries to dissapear and we will only be able to sell primary products.
But I forgot that you , living in the <i>greatest and more powerful </i>country in the world has a point...
I guess many of you should get out of the PC and ask yourself many questions. And dont look answers in your TV : its one of the more partial minded I have ever seen <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hint Hint:
Problems often start at the source
Actually man, most aren't. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I will disagree with you merely because I was recently instructed (by the Christians) on these boards that tolerance is certainly <i>not</i> a Christian virtue. I'm not sure this is the thread to discuss this though, so apart from saying that I'll leave it alone.
Also a point of fact, the best word to describe "fundamentalist" Christians (the kind you're talking about) is evangelism. There are many different interpretations of what sorts of ideas are fundamental to Christianity.
Judging by your avatar, I'll assume you are from Argentina? One of the detriments to more favorable relations between the US and South America is the corruption that is everywhere in SA goverments. It is the number 1 reason why not much gets done.
I am all for extending a helping hand to South America but at the same time we are going to have to see some sort of attempt to shed the corruption. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
But the problem is that SA countries (third world ones <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> ) can get so easily in a liberal market with EEUU. It would be like the relationship between England and its colonies al around the world back in 250 years ago.
Besides I think that if I were Talesin I'd find that some labeling me Bush-bashing (actually you are being a hypocrite for name calling yourself) simply because I disagree with them on politics is degrading and insulting.
Yet more evidence of why the discussion forums have become a place of rampant disrespect... now I remember why I hate politics...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1 - Two Sides in every conflict? Yes, I know this...thus why I requested his side.
2 - Calling him a "Bush-basher" isn't something offensive, in fact, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say he's proud of it - thus I'm not being hypocritical for "name calling" seeing as how...
<!--QuoteBegin-Talesin+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Talesin)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Bush is a moronic, twitheaded, pull-string-so-I-can-talk-Mr.-Cheney, prezel-choking, Enron-buddy MONKEY.
The discussions forum is designed toward a discussion. The words used were quite succinct at describing how I, as well as a large portion of the US citizenry, feel about having a moron in the office of 'nation's leader'.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That was in a PM, however, if you want more examples, just search through his posts...it should be pretty easy to find similar stuff.
3 - I agree. People got along a lot more back when they were shut down, seeing as how almost all of these "Discussions" don't go anywhere.
Surprisingly, a lot of people are this way, and would probably rather live in a world where everyone believed the same opinion as themselves (*coughegocentriccough*). I, for one, am a firm believer in the power of two heads are greater than one. I expect more from this forum in the future.
But the problem is that SA countries (third world ones <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> ) can get so easily in a liberal market with EEUU. It would be like the relationship between England and its colonies al around the world back in 250 years ago. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I am sorry. I do not understand what you said here. I think we may be having a bit of a language barrier. Would it be possible for you to rephrase your statement?
Were you saying: The south american countries can get easily abused in a free market situation with the United States. The situation would be similar to that which existed between England and its colonies. ?
That is a possibility which would need to be worked out. I'm not denegrading the South American countries. I just feel that if they reduced the amount of corruption in their systems they would be able to compete on more stable footing with the United States.
But the problem is that SA countries (third world ones <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> ) can get so easily in a liberal market with EEUU. It would be like the relationship between England and its colonies al around the world back in 250 years ago. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I am sorry. I do not understand what you said here. I think we may be having a bit of a language barrier. Would it be possible for you to rephrase your statement?
Were you saying: The south american countries can get easily abused in a free market situation with the United States. The situation would be similar to that which existed between England and its colonies. ?
That is a possibility which would need to be worked out. I'm not denegrading the South American countries. I just feel that if they reduced the amount of corruption in their systems they would be able to compete on more stable footing with the United States. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
For th record : FC Exam sucks , im the living proof <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Thats my point , maybe my example was a bit unclear. I agree that the is a lot of corruption in SA , but thats not the only factor that is important : even with a "good" goverment , our industry couldnot support a fair "competition" in a liberal market with EEUU industries.... that would lead to an economical rape.
I ll tell you what happened in Argentina in the 90s.
After a big Inflation in the 80s and the loss of value of our former ""cash"" (the Austral) , the president sold all the industries that belonged to the state (which actualy made money , there was no point in selling them). With that money they supported the "Peso" , which had a relation 1 Peso = 1 U$D. With this , all companies came to Argentina , made a lot of profits and then they took that into other countries. With these companies , al our national industries "bankrupted" , so we were reduced to the production of food , and specially, meat.
Then , when all th money from selling the former national companies run out , the peso went to a relation 3 Pesos = 1U$D. All industries went away and now we are coming out of the crisis that happened in 2001 .
Liberal markets may be benefitial to some countries (the developed) , but for the most (3? world ones) , it is a pain in the ****.
CNN isnt pro-bush. Yes we do get alot of anti-bush media up here. Publication companies, elite media, theaters (im sure ur aware of Mr Moore), New york times, LA times, The progressive, Salon.com etc.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Nafta is gonna make our industries to disappear and we will only be able to sell primary products.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, NAFTA will drive down prices increasing efficiency and competition thus driving out monopolies. Free trade is good for everyone. It seems you buy into protectionism. I can tell you, thought out my readings of the 3rd world (and being child of immigrants who left the 3rd world) the economic problems are not free trade/capitalism, its institutions within government that inhibit the majority of the population (mostly poor) to escape the grip of poverty. (i.e. dysfunctional property rights). A good book I suggest you read is by Hernando De Soto "why capitalism succeeds in the west but fails everywhere else".
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->But I forgot that you , living in the greatest and more powerful country in the world has a point...
I guess many of you should get out of the PC and ask yourself many questions. And dont look answers in your TV : its one of the more partial minded I have ever seen <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Don't patronize or tell me what to do when studing the issues concerning the world; I have various sources of information when it comes to problems that my generation will have to solve. I do not depend on the mass media as my primary source
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I ll tell you what happened in Argentina in the 90s.
After a big Inflation in the 80s and the loss of value of our former ""cash"" (the Austral) , the president sold all the industries that belonged to the state (which actualy made money , there was no point in selling them). With that money they supported the "Peso" , which had a relation 1 Peso = 1 U$D. With this , all companies came to Argentina , made a lot of profits and then they took that into other countries. With these companies , al our national industries "bankrupted" , so we were reduced to the production of food , and specially, meat.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I believe inflation was caused by government pumping funds into highly inefficient industries driving up inflation as well as simply printing money to pay of its debt. I will have to refer to some books about the specifics, but i believe that is why the government sold of state owned industries. State owned industries = Highly inefficient production = stagflation (rising unemployment and inflation)
Someone should start a thread on free trade. It would seem to spark some interesting discussion.