Conquer Club

what the f*ck is going on here... are you fucking with me?!? I agree completely. Our government is working overtime to steal power over people from the very people they mean to rule. Notice that I didn't say govern... rule.

anyway, I agree with everything that you said there snoori... weird. this is starting to happen quite a bit lately

black elk speaks wrote::shock:

what the f*ck is going on here... are you fucking with me?!? I agree completely. Our government is working overtime to steal power over people from the very people they mean to rule. Notice that I didn't say govern... rule.

anyway, I agree with everything that you said there snoori... weird. this is starting to happen quite a bit lately

Seriously though, you guys need to cut that out. Yelling at each other about how much you agree is starting to creep the rest of us out.

Frigidus wrote:

black elk speaks wrote::shock:

what the f*ck is going on here... are you fucking with me?!? I agree completely. Our government is working overtime to steal power over people from the very people they mean to rule. Notice that I didn't say govern... rule.

anyway, I agree with everything that you said there snoori... weird. this is starting to happen quite a bit lately

Seriously though, you guys need to cut that out. Yelling at each other about how much you agree is starting to creep the rest of us out.

well... I completely disagree on his point about people wanting to have a beer with bush though... but i just wrote it off on account of his being trashed right now

black elk speaks wrote:

Frigidus wrote:

black elk speaks wrote::shock:

what the f*ck is going on here... are you fucking with me?!? I agree completely. Our government is working overtime to steal power over people from the very people they mean to rule. Notice that I didn't say govern... rule.

anyway, I agree with everything that you said there snoori... weird. this is starting to happen quite a bit lately

Seriously though, you guys need to cut that out. Yelling at each other about how much you agree is starting to creep the rest of us out.

well... I completely disagree on his point about people wanting to have a beer with bush though... but i just wrote it off on account of his being trashed right now

Well I did read from a few people during the 2004 election that the thought Bush was a great guy. Not because of what he thought but because he acted likeable and they totally knew someone like that who they always enjoyed having a beer with. It's not the majority of people who vote that way, but even in the last election I swear to you that people voted for either Obama or McCain because of shit like that. (Oooh, Obama seems to love his family, I love my family to! He got my vote! Or: Mccain was a POW in Vietnam? He must totally love the military and veterans. I'm a veteran too and I love the military! He got my vote!)

The problem is that people are allowed to vote despite their reasons for doing so. And the media is not helping by giving them those exact reasons. Seriously, they ask political candidates who their favorite artists are and what colours they like! And that actually gives them votes!


(Also, BES, you should totally read "The assault on reason" by Al Gore. No matter what you think of the guy, he does say some very thought-provoking shit, especially in the early chapters where he assesses the causes of all this. He isn't even afraid of saying that the democrats are doing the same thing. He may be optimistic about how to solve this shit, but at least he sees what the problems are.)

I actually voted for Gore. I voted for Kerry too... I also saw Gore's documentary on global warming. I thought at the time that his data was pretty sound... but recently, I have learned that other planets in our solar system are experiencing global warming as well... which makes me think that something else is is causing global warming.

I know its off topic, but I actually do have an open mind... I just think that BO is a fraud and has an alternative motive for his presidency. I think it will be revealed in short order though.

black elk speaks wrote:I actually voted for Gore. I voted for Kerry too... I also saw Gore's documentary on global warming. I thought at the time that his data was pretty sound... but recently, I have learned that other planets in our solar system are experiencing global warming as well... which makes me think that something else is is causing global warming.

I know its off topic, but I actually do have an open mind... I just think that BO is a fraud and has an alternative motive for his presidency. I think it will be revealed in short order though.

We'll see... I definitely don't have as much confidence in him as so many apparently do. But from where I'm standing, he's a better gamble than McCain was. "I'll take what's behind door B..."

Ditocoaf wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:I actually voted for Gore. I voted for Kerry too... I also saw Gore's documentary on global warming. I thought at the time that his data was pretty sound... but recently, I have learned that other planets in our solar system are experiencing global warming as well... which makes me think that something else is is causing global warming.

I know its off topic, but I actually do have an open mind... I just think that BO is a fraud and has an alternative motive for his presidency. I think it will be revealed in short order though.

We'll see... I definitely don't have as much confidence in him as so many apparently do. But from where I'm standing, he's a better gamble than McCain was. "I'll take what's behind door B..."

but isn't it obvious that there is no change coming to washington? The monetary policies are the same, the economic policies aren't going to change. All BO did was moan and bitch about how terrible that the Bush tax cuts are... but now, he isn't going to repeal them after all... All the same people are coming back from the Clinton era? but I thought that you couldn't put just shuffle the same old people around and expect change... that is just what he said!

People need to look beyond these fools and actually vote in change. I would have taken Nader over McCain or BO... but I would have rather had McCain over BO.

black elk speaks wrote:I actually voted for Gore. I voted for Kerry too... I also saw Gore's documentary on global warming. I thought at the time that his data was pretty sound... but recently, I have learned that other planets in our solar system are experiencing global warming as well... which makes me think that something else is is causing global warming.

His date is pretty sound though it might not be completely accurate.

Global warming is a natural phenenomon too. The question Gore posed was more of a "do we wan't to speed this thing up or slow it down?". The end-result will be the same, but we can postpone it. I mean, you realise that the universe will die sometime too. You can't avoid the inevitable, eventually everything will end and we will all be dead. Humanity will be dead. But we can either speed up that process or slow it down.

I know its off topic, but I actually do have an open mind... I just think that BO is a fraud and has an alternative motive for his presidency. I think it will be revealed in short order though.

But any president could have an alternative motive. I would've never predicted that Bush and Cheney would use disgusting tactics to lead you guys into a war against a relatively innocent counrty. (Innocent in that what they told their people was a far cry from what Iraq was doing, not that it wasn't a shitty country to be in.)

I don't think that Obama can really deliver on what he promised, neither could McCain. Hell any politician promises far more than they could reasonably do. I do however think that the US needs a new direction. I would rather see Nader in office, but the way your system works ensures that he will never accomplish that. So I will just have to accept Obama, and I think he can certainly do some good.

If he turns out to be a fraud, so be it. McCain would've been worse, not because he is a bad guy but because he would be easily swayed by the lobby that is controlling the white house now. At least Obama will not fall for it out of weakness. (Though I must say his appointment of all those people from the Clinton-administration is fucking sad. What kind of change is that?)

Snorri1234 wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:I actually voted for Gore. I voted for Kerry too... I also saw Gore's documentary on global warming. I thought at the time that his data was pretty sound... but recently, I have learned that other planets in our solar system are experiencing global warming as well... which makes me think that something else is is causing global warming.

His date is pretty sound though it might not be completely accurate.

Global warming is a natural phenenomon too. The question Gore posed was more of a "do we wan't to speed this thing up or slow it down?". The end-result will be the same, but we can postpone it. I mean, you realise that the universe will die sometime too. You can't avoid the inevitable, eventually everything will end and we will all be dead. Humanity will be dead. But we can either speed up that process or slow it down.

I know its off topic, but I actually do have an open mind... I just think that BO is a fraud and has an alternative motive for his presidency. I think it will be revealed in short order though.

But any president could have an alternative motive. I would've never predicted that Bush and Cheney would use disgusting tactics to lead you guys into a war against a relatively innocent counrty. (Innocent in that what they told their people was a far cry from what Iraq was doing, not that it wasn't a shitty country to be in.)

I don't think that Obama can really deliver on what he promised, neither could McCain. Hell any politician promises far more than they could reasonably do. I do however think that the US needs a new direction. I would rather see Nader in office, but the way your system works ensures that he will never accomplish that. So I will just have to accept Obama, and I think he can certainly do some good.

If he turns out to be a fraud, so be it. McCain would've been worse, not because he is a bad guy but because he would be easily swayed by the lobby that is controlling the white house now. At least Obama will not fall for it out of weakness. (Though I must say his appointment of all those people from the Clinton-administration is fucking sad. What kind of change is that?)

this is weird... we are like in agreement and stuff

Frigidus wrote:Seriously though, you guys need to cut that out. Yelling at each other about how much you agree is starting to creep the rest of us out.

No doubt. Did you fall down drunk and hit your head Snorri?

black elk speaks wrote:
precisely what the constitution says. But the way that the government (which is really just the power mongers at the top anymore) sucks power and responsibility up from the people, its only a matter of time before our government collapses like the Soviet Union did. Only a matter of time.

So have charges been lobbed since the beginning of this country. Yet, here we are.

Still, to get back to my assertion. It is not the size of the government that matters, it is the effectiveness. And we do need an effective government if we are not to be bullied by the few who happen to find themselves at the top for whatever reason.

I put forward a couple of examples.

I know you hunt. Maybe you hunt solely on private land, but unless your last name happens to be "King" and you are in Texas ... or perhaps over in Hawaii with a similar stretch of acreage, the animals on your land almost certainly take part of their existance on public lands. Why is that so? Because a few years ago somone .. perhaps Gifford Pinchot (National Forests) perhaps John Muir (Parks out west (mostly parks, ... though he also was instrumental in other land use designations). Or perhaps the many hunters and fishermen who lobbied for the wildlife refuges of all sorts (some are specifically NOT for hunting, but many are for that purpose).

And yes, I know that some timber companies are quick to point out how "mismanaged" and "inefficient" the federal forests, etc are. There is truth to that assertion. (believe me, if there is one issue I know well, it is the complicated mess of particularly western government lands). HOWEVER, part of that "complication" is the "inconvenience" of planning for such folks as yourself who would like to see viable, huntable populations of deer, elk, etc etc.

Are there mismanagement issues at times? Certainly. Not many people like what has been done with deer here in the Allegheny. The population here is now so low that some people living by the forest don't even have to fence their apple trees! (though again, there are "hidden" issues such as threat of wasting disease and such that many hunter's organizations neatly sidestep .. .not to say what has been done is correct, just that its not simple). BUT, had this all been left to solely private enterprise ... we would not have an Allegheny at all, nor would we have any of the other parks, recreation areas or forests.


The other example I already brought up, was school. Essentially, we need public schools because an educated population is beneficial to us ALL. You dismissed this as a "free lunch", but neatly sidestepped the point that education, while free to the child, is a net benefit to society. THAT is why we need well funded and supported schools. AND, they must be independent of private industry (to a poitn) because else, what kids are taught is more likely to be what some CEO thinks will make a decent workforce rather than what will truly benefit the kids and society as a whole. Bottom line .. who pays more taxes, who contributes more to our country .. the uneducated illiterate or the person with a degree/trade certificate or certified apprentiship.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:I also think our highway system works better than our rail system. The first is public. The second is private. Granted, there have been a few notable failures in recent years ... but compare that to the many failures rail has experienced due to poor maintenance, etc.

.

Our passenger rail system, which does suck, is not private. AmTrak is a hideous public/private hybrid with the worst features of each. In the days of private railroads, before government surface roads drove them out of business, they were an excellent service. Today, America's freight rail roads, which are private, are the best in the world and getting more efficient every year.

Zeppflyer wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:I also think our highway system works better than our rail system. The first is public. The second is private. Granted, there have been a few notable failures in recent years ... but compare that to the many failures rail has experienced due to poor maintenance, etc.

.

Our passenger rail system, which does suck, is not private. AmTrak is a hideous public/private hybrid with the worst features of each. In the days of private railroads, before government surface roads drove them out of business, they were an excellent service. Today, America's freight rail roads, which are private, are the best in the world and getting more efficient every year.

Amtrak has never been fully funded and, in fact, has been very intentionally sabotaged by the likes of GM, etc. GM is, for example why Los Angeles has no subway system.

But I disagree with your assertion that we have the best freight system in the world. Some areas are well run, but many fail. They fail at a higher rate than roads and European rails.

When I look at the European system, I see something that works well and is used often and it IS supported by the government. There was hardly a town without a rail station when I was in Denmark, for example. Now, I have to drive almost 2 hours to get to a passenger rail system. We have plenty of tracks, but no working station. Many of the tracks were converted to trails. I have to drive a 45 minutes to get to a bus, even. The US is not Europe, but we would do well to borrow from their rail systems.

PLAYER57832 wrote: Now, I have to drive almost 2 hours to get to a passenger rail system. We have plenty of tracks, but no working station. Many of the tracks were converted to trails. I have to drive a 45 minutes to get to a bus, even. The US is not Europe, but we would do well to borrow from their rail systems.

Yes, this always strikes me as clearly retarded. The train station for us is nearly always 10 to 15 minutes driving away here. No matter where you live. (Unless you live in the forest in a wooden shack, but who does that?) And you can easily get a bus to it.)

National rails are private though, but that has been a very recent change and nearly all of the stations had already been built by that time. And a lot of people want to make it non-private again because of the mismanagment and the ridiculous prices now.


I think that free-market advocates sometimes miss the significane of certain services. Some things don't need to be run like a bussiness because they serve a public purpose. Business are about making profit, but things like transport and mail-delivery and stuff like that provide a service to the people. Everyone benefits from having more acces to public transport or being able to send mail to others.

The benefit from these things is not the profit they make, but the service they provide. I don't care if the bus and train company make a profit of me (and they certainly don't because it's basically free for me to use public transport) but they are the only real way for me to get to college and back and therefore means I can complete my education and become a valuable member of society.

I'm going to jump in here to disagree about the efficiency and usefulness of government's services. In my opinion, all government, but especially the federal government, is horribly corrupt and inefficient at doing anything, especially giving the public services. If the government operated the postal service well, then FedEx, UPS, and all the other private mail services wouldn't need to exist. They do, and they are profitable, because they do it better than the public service. Private rail came before public rail, and 100 years worked well. Amtrak didn't come along until 1971, and hasn't been run well by the government as it is. Private freight, as you've said, runs must better. I don't think you can really fairly compare European rail to U.S. rail, because the cultures are far different. Americans like to be independent, so they prefer cars, and we are also far more suburban than urban, which is why the rail system is inefficient anyway. Plus, the United States is much bigger, so flying makes more sense. It would be tough for any kind of rail system to succeed in the here, public or private.

I drive through Toronto relatively often, and there is almost always a ton of traffic, especially during rush hours. It can sometimes take hours to get through on the major highway, the 401. The Canadian government tried to build a road around downtown to prevent backups, but for some reason stopped building, and sold it to a private entrepreneur, who completed it, and now operates it as a toll road, for a lot of money. But, it's a great road, works well, and is much faster than taking the regular highway. It works far better than the public roads in Canada, especially when it comes to paying tolls. They have incentive to charge fair tolls, give a good product, and operate everything well. For the government, there is far less incentive to do any service well.

Anyway, everybody complains that politicians are all corrupt and waste public money on stupid projects. McCain, among others, like to talk about the bad influence of lobbyists. Well, if the government stopped giving money away, started with $700 billion for a bank bailout to earmarks and anything else, then the influence of lobbyists would be far less, because there would be no money for which to lobby. The government, especially the federal government, needs to stop spending money on everyone who asks for it.

Finally, I've seen multiple posts referencing Governor Sarah Palin's stupidity. I know that she was not educated in foreign policy before the election, so she didn't know much about that, but I found no evidence that she was not as mentally apt as any other politician. To me, she seemed quite intelligent, as well as able to articulate her ideas. Why does everyone think she's such an idiot? Remember, it was Tiny Fey who said that she could see Alaska from her house, not Palin.

sammy324 wrote:

Finally, I've seen multiple posts referencing Governor Sarah Palin's stupidity. I know that she was not educated in foreign policy before the election, so she didn't know much about that, but I found no evidence that she was not as mentally apt as any other politician. To me, she seemed quite intelligent, as well as able to articulate her ideas. Why does everyone think she's such an idiot? Remember, it was Tiny Fey who said that she could see Alaska from her house, not Palin.

She firmly believes the Earth is only 6000 years old. That requires willfully and intentionally ignoring real scientific evidence. It is actually worse than stupidity. It is actively ignoring real information because it does not fit with your world view... and that is EXTREMELY scary for anyone in power.

PLAYER57832 wrote:I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.

Tax all the nasty behatted capitalists with big cigars, eh? Well, that's not crass economic demagogy at all now, is it? Then turn over revenue raised to bureaucrats, because hell, other than maybe the Swiss, who better to trust to in investing our money for us?

But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!

She's not, and wouldn't be able to do anything about it whilst in power, so who gives a flying f*ck? Obama on the other hand seems to think that taxing imports won't have a symmetrical effect on exports, which is probably worse than creationism in terms of its sheer stupidity, and he is in fact going to translate his absurd views into actual policy.

It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.

And it worries me based on these sorts of comments that Americans get to choose who ends up in charge of the free world for the rest of us.

Obama will be in charge of the free world?

Snorri1234 wrote:Obama will be in charge of the free world?

No way! Obviously it will be Jan Peter Balkenende.

Napoleon Ier wrote:And it worries me based on these sorts of comments that Americans get to choose who ends up in charge of the free world for the rest of us.

Hey, you can move to America. Nothing's stopping you. Or, if you're feeling contrary, go join China or Russia. Which would you rather have in charge of the free world?

Inhuman14 wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:And it worries me based on these sorts of comments that Americans get to choose who ends up in charge of the free world for the rest of us.

Hey, you can move to America. Nothing's stopping you. Or, if you're feeling contrary, go join China or Russia. Which would you rather have in charge of the free world?

He wants the french in power.

Napoleon Ier wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.

Tax all the nasty behatted capitalists with big cigars, eh? Well, that's not crass economic demagogy at all now, is it? Then turn over revenue raised to bureaucrats, because hell, other than maybe the Swiss, who better to trust to in investing our money for us?

Not even close. I am all for profit, but it has to be legitimate profit. GM keeps increasing the bonuses its executives have gotten, all the while it complains that it needs more tax breaks and now... wants even more tax payer bail outs.

Walmart stockholders do well, but employees do not.

The cry is always that those types of aid creates jobs. Well, welfare creates jobs, too, ironically. Food stamps help support a lot of grocery stores. Rental assistance aids many a landlord .. some big guys, but many pretty small. Folks who own a home they could not sell.. so they try renting. Etc. Furthermore, when those food stamps or rental assistance or childcare assistance go to someone who is working a 40 hour week and still cannot afford health care, food, housing for her 1 or 2 kids (not 10 kids by 7 fathers or any such thing.) .. it really means that we are helping to prop up that business. If that business is a "mom and pop" where the owners are barely able themselves to pay a small mortgage, etc. ... that's one thing, but far too often, it is Walmart, Kmart, McDonald, etc.. .hardly small time companies without the means to pay more. Those companies could pay employees more, if they were willing to cut executive pay a little or to drop stockholder dividends. And yes, I DO think that the person who clocks in to work at any job deserves to be paid enough to live. Getting rich comes AFTER you have paid all your expenses, including employee pay. Not before.

Bush & his cronies aided the big guys in ways that made absolutely no real sense. He allowed deregulation of the banks, which is part of why we are in this mess. He stonewalled support of alternative energy programs, while giving lip service to the opposite. ETC/

Napoleon Ier wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!

She's not, and wouldn't be able to do anything about it whilst in power, so who gives a flying f*ck?

She could have been president. As an American citizen, I did find that thought disturbing.

Obama on the other hand seems to think that taxing imports won't have a symmetrical effect on exports, which is probably worse than creationism in terms of its sheer stupidity, and he is in fact going to translate his

We had a time of unbridled, unlimited capitalism already. Dickens exaggerated a bit, but not as much as many wish to pretend today. Same with Upton Sinclair, etc.

It sounds nice to say "no regulation". But you have to remember that the main reason Americans and Europeans were not even worse off back then was expansion into Africa and South America, plus development of the western U.S. There just aren't huge swatches of untapped resources laying relatively "unclaimed" (or, more to the point claimed by people who have not the slightest ability to keep them) ready to line the pockets of those who wish to take them. Now, every dollar that moves upward comes very much from those of us at the bottom. And, for all it is easy to assert those there just don't have the skills or abilities of those at the top... circumstance and chance have FAR more to do with it.

That said, I don't know that I agree with everything Obama has or will put forward. I only feel that his plans seemed much better for me, my family and my country than those McCain put forward.

Napoleon Ier wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote: It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.

And it worries me based on these sorts of comments that Americans get to choose who ends up in charge of the free world for the rest of us.

I am not so egotistical as to think our country rules the world. U.S. companies do have a lot of sway. The U.S. government certainly impacts the world, but we hardly act alone and are hardly "in charge" of anything but this country (and sometimes maybe not even that).

I'm American, and I get pissed at people who think that we all think that we own the world. I think that the world needs a leader, though, and at the moment, the USA is that leader, whether you like it or not. Whether the USA is a good leader or not, well, that's not my department.

Beyond your pay grade?

Once you go black, you never go back.