OT: Cartoon

[Dennis M. O'Connor]

again, too literal. First DMO'C implies Dems are socialists because they
promote mandatory service, and forced servitude is common in socialist
countries. Pretty feeble argument. So I point out Israel has compulsory
military service (and sure as shit aint socialist; there are plenty of
european countries that do too IIRC), easily flattening the weak
implication. So DMO'C turns around with his "just because socialists do it
doesnt mean non-socialist cant" argument.

Bullshit. Especially that last, which someone else posted.

If I thought you were anything but an idiot troll,
I'd pull up the posts from the archives and prove
what a pathetic liar you are.

 

[Rich Grise]

So, you really think the whole world should be destroyed?

I didn't know you were _that_ fanatical.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

This isn't necessarily true. It would be extremely difficult to literally
starve to death in the US, unless one were to set out to do so, which
would be suicidal, so doesn't count.

Unless, of course, you categorize "standing on the street corner waiting
for alms" or "dumpster-diving" as "work."

It _does_ pay surprisingly well, however. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

Not entirely accurate. In the not-so-distant past,
there was a concept called "noblis oblige" (nobility obligates)
where the richest guy in town was also the most generous,
using his money and influence to promote the general welfare.
The sharpest guys realized that if it wasn't for the serfs, little would get done.
http://www.google.com/search?&q=noblis-oblige

Well, this is actually a pretty good idea, and in general, people
are pretty generous when their "cup runneth over." But, of course,
it's when the liars, cheats, and thieves found out that they could get
into government and steal with impunity, in the name of noblesse
oblige, that the system starts getting f'ed up.

i.e., when Da Gubmint takes by threat of force, that which would
have gone to charity, it seems to damp the impulse to generosity.

This social pressure (along with social graces??) has fallen by the wayside,
it appears.

It appears so. I'd say the dividing line is, is coercion necessary
to implement a given plan?

I'm wondering how far the divide will have to get
before the Poor realize that the Wealthy are edible.

Pretty far - you can eat surprisingly well dumpster-diving in Palos
Verdes.



Cheers!
Rich

 

[Tom MacIntyre]

Of course not. But if something happens in socialist countries, as well
as non-socialist countries in not-too-dis-similar amounts, then blaming
it on socialism is ingenuous to say the least. The list of non-socialist
countries that have cmt might surprise you.

To paraphrase you:
banning homosexuality is a common thing in Islamic countries so it is no
surprise the Republicans are pushing it.

now do you see how silly your socialism comment is? there is no
cause-and-effect, its just pointless verbal posturing.

No...it is pointing out a flawed logical argument.

Tom

 

[Tom MacIntyre]

reverse your argument, and apply it to your statement re. forced servitude.

To paraphrase you:
banning gay marriage is a common thing in islamic countries,
so it is no surprise that the Republicans are pushing it.

there is no causal relationship, its just pointless rhetoric.

No, it is pointing out that mutual exclusivity is rare.

Tom

 

[Mark Fergerson]

You really ought to know better than that, especially
after all our previous discussions.

Maybe I compacted it a bit too far; I tend to see
cascades of consequences, like the fact that dentists would
just love all the potential work in such a case, like they
have now with "Officially Approved" dentifrices containing
massive amounts of sugar. Not to mention the other health
consequences of excess sugar consumption making work for
other branches of the "drug 'n' cut" medical types.

Besides, where does all the sugar come from? Don't
answer, as we all know that "banana republics" aren't built
solely on bananas.

Of course, that's a literal interpretation, but I meant
my statement to be taken allegorically. "Sugar water"
alludes to the Right's habit of painting everything in
shades of rose, while downplaying all the thorny
consequences of their agenda.

I won't bother explaining what I meant by the Left's
desires since you refuse to see their faults.

Mark L. Fergerson

 

[Terry Given]

-------------
That's merely fuzzy thinking. "Involuntary Servitude" is slavery
without pay. Everyone has to work to eat, and to do one's equal
share of the work. If you're paid, it doesn't matter if you HAVE
to or not, you have to work to afford to live, even in the simplest
human society or situation, the earth extracts that, and we merely
decide socially how the burden is divided! The Rich want the rest
of us to do THEIR work FOR them so THEY don't HAVE to, this is the
essence of slavery! They want you to do their work for NO PAYMENT,
in other words, as well as your own for the usual rate. Thus if they
pay you only for yours, then they pay you half what they should,
and pay themselves what they DO NOT EARN!! This is the meaning of
ALL wealth, NOT HAVING TO WORK BECAUSE YOU HAVE SLAVES! NO person
does not have to work merely because they have some magical "money",
they ALL rely on the rest of us doing ALL THEIR WORK *FOR* THEM AS
THEIR SLAVES!! Anyone who wants to be able to "not have to work again"
ACTUALLY means that they wish to ENSLAVE some of the RESt of us who
DO HAVE TO WORK! Thus ALL striving after wealth so that one does not
have to work is actually the desire and intent to ENSLAVE OTHERS!!




--------------------------------
Israel DOES have a Socialist system! They have nationalized health,
education, retirement, vacations, and support for those who cannot
work. And MOST of Europe certainly *IS* Socialist!




-----------------------------
Few would be so stupid as to assume that. The implied allusion was
clearly that those two religions are both sexually backward Fundy
religions of the Abrahamic stripe, well known for being sexually
insipid and moronic. Only someone like I heard on a radio show the
other day ranting that the Mormons should all be taken to Guantanamo
because he assumed that "Mormons" were some kind of American "Muslim"
would assume something like that, and only out of abyssmal ignorance,
despite the totally accidental aptness of that claim against Mormonism,
because they are quite nearly as Fundy as the nuttyist Islamics!!

Funny, I could have sworn I knew what I meant when I wrote that sentence.

 

[Terry Given]

No, it is pointing out that mutual exclusivity is rare.

this is quite correct (sorry for the screw up in which I mistook you for
DMO'C). My entire point is that the original argument (basically
socialist countries do it therefore dems are socialist) was stupid - for
exactly the reason you pointed out, and clarified nicely here. My
mis-reading the name led me to argue that DMO'C contradicted himself
when in fact he did not - you pointed out the fallacious argument.

I'll try to read harder next time....

Tom

Cheers
Terry

 

[Terry Given]

I forget where I ran across those numbers, but the US is not all of the
worlds economy - not even half. But they still sound wrong.

If I was a terrorist, I'd go for biological warfare against those crops.
I'd also take out airliners with a bottle of rubbing alcohol and a
cigarette lighter (they burn really well).

-------------------
The Myth called "Social Darwinism" is not in any way, shape, or form
based on Darwin's Evolution of Species or natural selection.

NO competent theory of evolution suggests that advanced species such
as ours evolved by the strongest guys winning out, or we'd all look
like Neanderthal SwarzeNazi's, and you know what happened to the
Neanderthals!! They ain't here now! Humans evolved to be chief species
by being a hundred times MORE group-cooperative and group-coordinated
than any other species on this rock, and NOT by fighting amongst
ourselves AT ALL! Our superiority resides in keeping the brightest of
our nerds supported by the collective so they could innovate. It
resides in everybody running at danger to one of our weak, not running
away from it. We scared the shit out of every predator on earth because
we did things they didn't evolve to counter, like running at them en
masse, throwing things, and stabbing with sharp spears all at once!
NO other animal does anything like that, the non-victims flee, they
don't counter-attack en masse instantly as we do!

thats just semantics - how you define "strong." Survival of the
fittest....not the strongest. Nevertheless Darwin did get many ideas
from prevailing economic theory. And I care not a jot about "social
darwinism" whatever that may be.

The ratio of foxes to sheep is quite small. Soma = TV

maybe. Israel/palestine looks exactly like this, but the wealthy,
well-armed Israelis can flatten the palestinians no matter how pissed
off the palestinians get - hence the almost 4:1 casualty rate, and the
israelis havent even got nasty. Can 10,000,000 angry serfs with sticks
beat one ruthless bastard with a nuke? nope.

I think the argument here is that, eventually, nasty rulers will give up
before they wipe out all the serfs. or their minions will decide that
the serfs are right, and help take out the dictator. Or perhaps the
dictator simply runs out of bullets.

------------------------
There are not enough soldiers under a nobility who will be able to take
on a Majority, and any larger army has to be raised from those slaves
themselves! As in Russia, the kids in the tanks do not fire on their
parents!!

only time can tell.

Cheers
Terry

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

Funny, I could have sworn I knew what I meant when I wrote that sentence.

ROFL!

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

You really ought to know better than that, especially
after all our previous discussions.

Maybe I compacted it a bit too far; I tend to see
cascades of consequences, like the fact that dentists would
just love all the potential work in such a case, like they
have now with "Officially Approved" dentifrices containing
massive amounts of sugar....
Of course, that's a literal interpretation, but I meant
my statement to be taken allegorically. "Sugar water"
alludes to the Right's habit of painting everything in
shades of rose, while downplaying all the thorny
consequences of their agenda.

This is wry. I was talking about how the society is organized,
R Steve Walz seems to be talking about food, albeit I do think
I grasp his symbolism, and you appear to be talking about
information distribution.

Verrry interesting....

;^j
Rich

 

[Terry Given]

ROFL!

As did I. Actually thats precisely why I did not take English as a
subject in 7th form (final year in high school). In 6th form we studied
a poem by NZ poet Sam Hunt. Like all of his poems, it was simple and
direct, but our teacher disagreed with the entire class as to what the
poem was about. That year Sam Hunt visited our school (he is a great
live show - hilarious, with a unique, captivating voice) and spent 1/4
an hour with our 6th form class. Naturally we asked about the poem, and
he duly agreed with us - much to our delight, and our teachers chagrin.
Nevertheless after Sam Hunt left, when we begin to take the teacher to
task, he let rip with something along the lines of:

"well thats what he might think he meant, but subconsciously...."

which was greeted with hoots of derision, IIRC I got caned for saying
"**** off" or words to that effect. But we wrote what the teacher wanted
to hear, and passed, and I concluded that it was all a load of bollocks
and concentrated on physics instead, leading me to a career of blowing
things up rather than that of a wordsmith.

Cheers
Terry

 

[R. Steve Walz]

I forget where I ran across those numbers, but the US is not all of the
worlds economy - not even half. But they still sound wrong.

----------------------
No, my figures are for the USA.
But the US economy is a major part of the world economy.
In Europe it takes nearly 40% of the people to own half of everything.
Wealth is MUCH more concentrated in few hands in the USA!

http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/WealthDist_TheNation.pdf

thats just semantics - how you define "strong." Survival of the
fittest....not the strongest. Nevertheless Darwin did get many ideas
from prevailing economic theory. And I care not a jot about "social
darwinism" whatever that may be.

------------------------------------
The Group is always stonger/fitter than the individual. It took an
improvement in the brain to permit this to be utilized. A cooperating
group is more fit than the same number of individuals each for themself.

The ratio of foxes to sheep is quite small. Soma = TV

 

[R. Steve Walz]

So, you really think the whole world should be destroyed?

I didn't know you were _that_ fanatical.

Thanks,
Rich

----------------------------
It wouldn't take a quarter of our early air-burst nuclear tests to
turn Islam into a meaningless religion of a few impoverished bedouins.
We survived those pretty well.

-Steve

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Re-posted because you deleted it:
-------------
That's merely fuzzy thinking. "Involuntary Servitude" is slavery
without pay. Everyone has to work to eat, and to do one's equal
share of the work. If you're paid, it doesn't matter if you HAVE
to or not, you have to work to afford to live, even in the simplest
human society or situation, the earth extracts that, and we merely
decide socially how the burden is divided! The Rich want the rest
of us to do THEIR work FOR them so THEY don't HAVE to, this is the
essence of slavery! They want you to do their work for NO PAYMENT,
in other words, as well as your own for the usual rate. Thus if they
pay you only for yours, then they pay you half what they should,
and pay themselves what they DO NOT EARN!! This is the meaning of
ALL wealth, NOT HAVING TO WORK BECAUSE YOU HAVE SLAVES! NO person
does not have to work merely because they have some magical "money",
they ALL rely on the rest of us doing ALL THEIR WORK *FOR* THEM AS
THEIR SLAVES!! Anyone who wants to be able to "not have to work again"
ACTUALLY means that they wish to ENSLAVE some of the RESt of us who
DO HAVE TO WORK! Thus ALL striving after wealth so that one does not
have to work is actually the desire and intent to ENSLAVE OTHERS!!

Pretty feeble argument. So I point out Israel has compulsory
military service (and sure as shit aint socialist; there are plenty of
european countries that do too IIRC), easily flattening the weak
implication. So DMO'C turns around with his "just because socialists do
it doesnt mean non-socialist cant" argument. In other words, doing
something a socialist does, does not necessarily make you a socialist,
which is pretty much in direct contradiction to his first statement.

--------------------------------
Israel DOES have a Socialist system! They have nationalized health,
education, retirement, vacations, and support for those who cannot
work. And MOST of Europe certainly *IS* Socialist!

too literal Steve. The implication (a-la DMO'Cs feeble argument) is that
republicans must therefore be islamic, which they are not. ergo its a
stupid thing to imply. see above

-----------------------------
Few would be so stupid as to assume that. The implied allusion was
clearly that those two religions are both sexually backward Fundy
religions of the Abrahamic stripe, well known for being sexually
insipid and moronic. Only someone like I heard on a radio show the
other day ranting that the Mormons should all be taken to Guantanamo
because he assumed that "Mormons" were some kind of American "Muslim"
would assume something like that, and only out of abyssmal ignorance,
despite the totally accidental aptness of that claim against Mormonism,
because they are quite nearly as Fundy as the nuttyist Islamics!!

Your comments about islam are however correct. It was perhaps not the
best example I could have chosen.

Cheers
Terry

-------------
Yup.
------------------------------------
Repost of deleted material ends.

This isn't necessarily true. It would be extremely difficult to literally
starve to death in the US, unless one were to set out to do so, which
would be suicidal, so doesn't count.

--------------------------------------
I just reviewed all that I wrote which you deleted and then responded to
and I see little about starving to death in the USA. Why are you
delusional?

Unless, of course, you categorize "standing on the street corner waiting
for alms" or "dumpster-diving" as "work."

It _does_ pay surprisingly well, however. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

----------------
In any decent Communism it would be required that everyone work and
prove it to obtain access to food and that no one feed them under
penalty of law. So if they refused to work they had better learn
to eat bugs.

-Steve

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

Re-posted because you deleted it:

I deleted the rest of it because I wasn't responding to the rest of it.

I was responding to "Everyone has to work to eat."

That is not true, unless you consider begging or dumpster-diving to
be "work."

The rest is conversation, which becomes irrelevant since it's based
on a fallacy.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

Re-posted because you deleted it:
-------------
That's merely fuzzy thinking. "Involuntary Servitude" is slavery
without pay. Everyone has to work to eat, and to do one's equal
share of the work. If you're paid, it doesn't matter if you HAVE
to or not, you have to work to afford to live, even in the simplest
human society or situation, the earth extracts that, and we merely
decide socially how the burden is divided! The Rich want the rest
of us to do THEIR work FOR them so THEY don't HAVE to,

So who gives a **** what they want? Are they holding you at
gunpoint?

Slavery depends on the consent of the slave.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

As did I. Actually thats precisely why I did not take English as a
subject in 7th form (final year in high school). In 6th form we studied
a poem by NZ poet Sam Hunt. Like all of his poems, it was simple and
direct, but our teacher disagreed with the entire class as to what the
poem was about. That year Sam Hunt visited our school (he is a great
live show - hilarious, with a unique, captivating voice) and spent 1/4
an hour with our 6th form class. Naturally we asked about the poem, and
he duly agreed with us - much to our delight, and our teachers chagrin.
Nevertheless after Sam Hunt left, when we begin to take the teacher to
task, he let rip with something along the lines of:

"well thats what he might think he meant, but subconsciously...."

which was greeted with hoots of derision, IIRC I got caned for saying
"**** off" or words to that effect. But we wrote what the teacher wanted
to hear, and passed, and I concluded that it was all a load of bollocks
and concentrated on physics instead, leading me to a career of blowing
things up rather than that of a wordsmith.

ROFLMAOPIMP<*gasp*>LOL<*gasp*>ROFLMAOA<*gasp*>


Whew!
Rich

 

[Terry Given]

ROFLMAOPIMP<*gasp*>LOL<*gasp*>ROFLMAOA<*gasp*>


Whew!
Rich

Hi Rich,

I hope you dont mind if I pinch your
"ROFLMAOPIMP<*gasp*>LOL<*gasp*>ROFLMAOA<*gasp*>" line and claim it as my
own

Honest though, thats what the guy said. We didnt get on very well. Once
after I got caned (6 of the best) for being disruptive, as I walked back
in somebody asked if it hurt - nah, I said, and was promptly marched
back outside for 6 more. I kept my mouth shut when I came back in, it
was starting to hurt by then

Still, it could have been worse. One of the woodwork teachers used to
take you outside, and make you bend over with your head sticking thru
the doorway whilst being caned, so the whole class looked at your face.
Another would make you bend over and stick your head underneath a desk,
so when you got caned you also smacked your head on the underside of the
desk. One teacher in particular, Harrison Ngatai (we used to call him
Nasty Harry) was banned from caning after managing to draw blood on one
poor bastard - big arms, thin cane. And my buddy Diz(zy Gillespie) got
caned in the back of the head, when Stock missed his arse. A week later
Diz was writing "stock is a wanker" on the blackboard when, unbeknownst
to Diz, Mr Stock walked in, and whacked Diz in the back of the head,
breaking his nose on the blackboard. That was 3rd form french, a real
fun class. One earthquake drill, instead of getting under our desks
(which Stock did) we threw our desks ontop of his, burying him under a
large pile. He used to swear underhis breath at the students, and
eventually left to take up a job at the all-girls school down the road.
6 months later he had a nervous breakdown, apparently the girls made us
look like amateurs

The summer break between my 6th and 7th form years, the government
banned corporal punishment in schools. A shame i think - I certainly
learned consequences - do what you must, but pay the price

Cheers
Terry